Just what we need is spark-gap radios on 6 and 2 meters. We just got through
fighting this a few years back.
Since 223 is little used and it's legal whats the problem with going up there ?
Chuck is right why is it that SS users feel they need to go on widely used
bands ? Even if legal the chance of causing problems when 6 is open out weights
any advantages or technology advances you might be looking to gain.
i have been on 223 for 35 years it's a good but little used band .... give it a
try.
--- On Tue, 8/24/10, charles standlee <ac5p...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: charles standlee <ac5p...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Anyone For 6 Meter ROS ??
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, August 24, 2010, 10:50 AM
Keith,
While ROS is not legal on HF it still is not legal on 6 or 2 meters here in the
states, it is legal on 1.25cm and above. Please see Part 97.305 it clearly
states where spread spectrum is authorized.
This issue has been hashed out on numerous threads and I wouldn't want to put
my license on the line for this software.
73, Chuck AC5PW
From: n4zq <n...@yahoo.com>
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, August 24, 2010 8:16:19 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Anyone For 6 Meter ROS ??
Here is a response I got from Dan Henderson, N1ND, ARRL Regulatory Information
Manager about the legality of ROS here in the states. My question was very
simple. Is ROS a legal mode under FCC rules and if not, what would it take to
make it so. Here is what Dan had to say.
From: dhender...@arrl.org
To: n...@hotmail.com
Keith
ROS is a spread spectrum technique. FCC rules allow Spread Spectrum above 50
MHz. It is not currently legal on the HF bands in the US. There has been quite
a controversy about ROS since it was introduced. The original documentation
from the developer clearly stated it was SS which was confirmed by the FCC.
When the developer was notified SS was not legal in the US below 30 MHz, he
changed his documentation then posted a forged email claiming it was from the
FCC and that they had changed their opinion. Long story short, it uses a
frequency hopping SS technique, regardless of what the author later claimed
when the controversy erupted. This was verified by FCC engineers in their labs.
Yes, it is a narrow bandwidth SS technique but it is still SS.
The FCC would have to change Part 97 in order for it to be allowed on the HF
bands in the US. They would either have to amend the rules to allow SS on all
amateur bands (something that would probably be strongly opposed because many
SS techniques are far wider than this mode and would create major problems on
the relatively small HF band allocations) or they would have to specifically
approve it for use. That is something that they have not been inclined to do
because they do not wish to be constantly adding individual modes as they are
developed. They provide a broad framework in the rules for what is allowed or
prohibited and the mode either meets those criteria or it doesn't.
73
Dan Henderson, N1ND
ARRL Regulatory Information Manager
So it is what it is and I wouldn't look forward to being able to use it on HF
any time soon here in the good old USA. But it might be a great weak signal
mode on 6 meters in this very late E season. Anyone up to beaconing on 50.295
or 144.160 MHz, the frequencies suggested within the program? I'll be on 6
myself...
Keith N4ZQ
