Proceeding: RM-11306 Type Code: CO
Date Received/Adopted: 01/10/06 Date Released/Denied:
Document Type: COMMENT Total Pages: 1
File Number/Community: DA/FCC Number:
Filed on Behalf of: Richard L. Tannehill
Filed By:
Attorney/Author Name: Document Date:
Complete Mailing Address:
5410 W. diana Ave.
Glendale, AZ 85302 -4870
Brief Comment
I agree with the ARRL petition for regulation by bandwidth, and support it,
with one major exception.
The League claims that their plan does not favor one mode over another. Not
true. It favors AM-DSB
operators. It would allow for 9 KHz AM modulation, in bands which otherwise
are limited to 3.5 KHz.
These include the lower HF bands, which are quite crowded at times. The
solution is simply to
restrict AM-DSB to above 28.5 MHz. (10 meters & above) Amateurs and the
league have been
upset in the past over wide-SSB modulation, meant to improve audio quality.
AM is no different from
this. It is an old modulation that adds nothing to advancing the
technological art, and should be
confined to bands where there is ample spectrum available.
Richard L. Tannehill P.E. - W7RT
ARRL Life Member
(45-years amateur licensed)
_______________________________________________________________
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout. Try it - you'll
like it.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/
http://gigliwood.com/abcd/
