----- Original Message ----- From: "KV9U" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <digitalradio@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 10:08 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: ARRL proposal removes baud rate limitations on HF
> Danny, > > Even if the CW subbands shrink, it does not mean that there will be any > shortage of spectrum for CW. From what I have read of the proposals, any > narrow mode can always be used in a wider mode subband. Just like you > can today. No one loses anything. In fact, it is the exact opposite > because other hams will gain the privelege to use more modes over a > wider area. Particularly voice modes since they are the overwelmingly > most popular modes and use the most bandwidth for a given amount of > communication intelligence. > XXXXXX Yes, we CW ops have always pretty much had the whole band in which to operate, but that means little since the mixing of CW and SSB just isnt good, causes inteference to both modes. Giving more bandwidth to SSB takes away the width of the present sub-band we now have for cw and digital modes, meaning the digital will wind up lower down the band, into what is now mostly cw ops. > And I do agree with you that we may see an influx of new HF hams if we > do away with the CW requirement for the General class. I am not sure if > it will have as big an effect as some suggest. For example, my wife and > daughter, who are both Technican class hams, have no interest at all in > operating HF even if they were grandfathered in. XXXX I am not so worried about NEW HF hams as I am the SSB only tyupes that will move down into what is now set aside for CW and digital. In fact we need more new HF people, we just need to insure they are well trained, and I believe they should show their capability in CW before being allowed to operate CW. It is a skill set, unlike other modes that are plug and play. > > It is people like myself and I am sure many others on this group who did > "work their tails off" to get their code speed up to 20 wpm to pass the > exams at the FCC examining station. Today you only need 5 wpm of CW for > the HF licenses and yet this still does not seem to be causing a huge > flood of new HF operators. I think that is significant. XXXX I have noticed a number of very poor CW ops working down in the DX portion (which after all- is the lower 25 kc of the bands). They have to get experience somehow, but the rest of us got it up in the Novice or General sections of the CW bands. I think most of these are the same people we would have eventually seen there with 13 or even 20 wpm tested speed. > > If you read a recent ARRL editorial you know that even ARRL realizes > that they should have kept some kind of entry level license (some kind > of Novice) to get new entrants access to HF. It really is quite > different to operate HF compared to the higher bands and if you don't > get to do it, your experiences as a ham are not the same as those of us > who operate on both. XXXX Right, I just wonder why it took them so long to realize that, especially after so many of us commented against dropping the Novice license to start with. Its like they dont look at their own history, and ignored the reason the Novice ticket was first offered. I started several hundred new young hams off, over the years, with the Novice ticket, and stopped teaching when they dropped the Novice tests. At the time they did that, several foreign adminstrations were adding a Novice Like license. It was odd to say the least. > > If you look at the current amateur band allocations, the only special CW > allocations are for the Extra class hams at the bottom of some of the > bands. The Advanced class hams have some extra area for voice modes. > Because we are not going to be able to have many license classes (FCC > won't support it), it is probably best to keep the allocations > simplified with at most three classes of licenses. I suppose you can > look at it as a loss of priveleges if other lower classes can use what > was once considered exclusive portions of the band. XXX Both the General and the Advanced did have additional CW subbands for their use, compared to Novice holders. Personally I dont think it should be up to the FCC to decide to support/or not. It should be the citizens who set the standards, and the FCC to uphold them. They are servants to the law, not the masters. And yes I do consider it a loss of privelege, when others are given what I had to earn. I earned a certifiied electonics technician certificate by study and taking a test, just as I did my Extra license. Both give me certain rights or priveleges, and to have the same organizations that issued those, come back and say "well they are really not worth much " and to give same to others with less qualifications, smacks of politics. The commerical organization has not, but the government has. Won't we still have some segregation by class though? Otherwise there > would be no incentive to upgrade. XXXX I feel we lost that incentive when they decided to drop Advance and Novice tickets, and we will loose more when they expand the subbands and drop cw from all tests, which is where we are headed. Danny > > > Danny Douglas wrote: > > > ">>I think most members are not going to be all that upset with what is in > > effect a shrinking of the CW exclusive subbands (although they could be > > used for other narrow band modes such as PSK31 and maybe some others > > that have not been invented yet to fit in that size of bandwidth), a > > shrinking of the fully automatic subbands, and allowing wider modes to > > have a much larger subband area. > > > > This means that analog voice can be expected to expand downward as well > > but based upon the ARRL statements from the Executive Director, I " > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I and many others have been saying since day one when > > this whole idea came up. Many worked their tails off to earn the > > subbands, > > and to be able to work in the CW bands, as part of the Incentive licensing > > procedure, and now they will take it awa by narrowing those bands. . > > > > If " most members are not going to be all that upset", is correct; the > > reason is the influx of non-code amateurs, at the expense of those of us > > already in place before this change began. An organization can easily > > change its own rules, by simply recruiting new members who have neve lived > > under the old rule, or have not had to earn privileges in order to obtain > > them. It seems to be typical of the ARRLs thinking. Novice was an > > outstanding idea, to get more involved in Amateur radio, then it fell > > out of > > favor and its gone. Incentive licensing was to be the savior of ham > > radio, > > and used to encourage and award amateurs to learn more about electroncis, > > operating procedures, etc, and it worked, until it became "too hard" to > > learn a lousy 5 wpm code speed, and now that has been attacked and will > > dissappear. > > > > I have read a couple of articles that the digital operators are using the > > bands so well that they "dont need the entire sub-band they have" so > > these > > bands are too large and should be shrunk. Lets give them to the Single > > Sideband operators - of ource there are more of them now. > > > > They kept saying that no one would loose anything. Bullllllll . We will > > loose having the lower portion of the bands where only Extra or Advanced > > could operate,and that is not only CW but also in the SSB sub-bands. Just > > at the time when the narrow digital modes are becoming more and more > > popular > > and have resulted in many hams coming back on the air, they now will > > decide > > to remove large portions of the bands to those operations, and intend to > > allow the mixing of incompatable modes in most of the band width. > > > > On top of all this , we have Winlink and other forces coming out and > > wanting > > more and more and more. Gentlemen, and Gentlefem, there just aint > > that much > > bandwidth in the HF bands. If you give something to someone, you are > > taking > > it away from someone else. Hence Taxes. > > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > > > Other areas of interest: > > > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy > > discussion) > > > > > > > > > > > > SPONSORED LINKS > > Ham radio > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Ham+radio&w1=Ham+radio&w2=Craft+hobby&w 3=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w4=Icom+ham+radio&w5=Yaesu+ham+radio&c=5&s=101&.sig =NStjWgsFtXmQaGrYd1LT5w> > > Craft hobby > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Craft+hobby&w1=Ham+radio&w2=Craft+hobby &w3=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w4=Icom+ham+radio&w5=Yaesu+ham+radio&c=5&s=101&.s ig=RIfve-PXBTtOVJV48uzEVQ> > > Hobby and craft supply > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w1=Ham+radio&w2= Craft+hobby&w3=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w4=Icom+ham+radio&w5=Yaesu+ham+radio&c =5&s=101&.sig=Qz1juq9z5gSL9A5AR8aLNA> > > > > Icom ham radio > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Icom+ham+radio&w1=Ham+radio&w2=Craft+ho bby&w3=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w4=Icom+ham+radio&w5=Yaesu+ham+radio&c=5&s=101 &.sig=_InABMy_m6lCJHFiWobT2w> > > Yaesu ham radio > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Yaesu+ham+radio&w1=Ham+radio&w2=Craft+h obby&w3=Hobby+and+craft+supply&w4=Icom+ham+radio&w5=Yaesu+ham+radio&c=5&s=10 1&.sig=9lSLfMHwXV-vjTYO4qyD8w> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > > > * Visit your group "digitalradio > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio>" on the web. > > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >No virus found in this incoming message. > >Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.2/251 - Release Date: 2/4/2006 > > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > Other areas of interest: > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.2/251 - Release Date: 2/4/2006 > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
