Re: [digitalradio] Re: ARRL proposal removes baud rate limitations on HF

Mon, 06 Feb 2006 18:26:02 -0800

why would we re-do regulations which have been in effect for 50 years, or longer,  allowing SSB down to 14100 and 7050 in Canada?
 
Lately those regulations are no longer in effect but I have yet to see anyone operating below those freq's, so far respecting the
"gentleman's agreement" which is how our band plan is now run.
 
I can't , for the life of me, understand why you guys keep getting mired in the desire for more regulations, completely out of step with the rest of the globe.
 
 
John
VE5MU
----- Original Message -----
From: jgorman01
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 7:37 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ARRL proposal removes baud rate limitations on HF

As long as countries like Canada would redo their regulations and
prevent stations from simply moving lower since it is legal to so.

Jim
WA0LYK

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Danny Douglas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The exact reson we need INTERNATIONAL subbands.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jgorman01" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <digitalradio@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 3:09 PM
> Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ARRL proposal removes baud rate
limitations on
> HF
>
>
> > The real problem right now is not expanding our SSB segments, but
> > rather that expansion forcing other countries SSB even lower.
> > Canadian, Mexican, and Central American SSB stations are already far,
> > far down in the lower parts of 80m and 40m.  So far in fact that
> > sometimes it is hard to have CW or PSK qso's.  How many more will show
> > up if our SSB segments expand.  Sometimes we forget we are not the
> > only hams in the world.
> >
> > Regardless of what is officially said, hams in other countries are
> > allowed to operate this low for only one reason, to avoid qrm from US
> > SSB stations.  They will continue to do, making it harder and harder
> > for both CW and the narrow digital modes.
> >
> > Jim
> > WA0LYK
> >
> > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Danny Douglas" <n7dc@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "KV9U" <mrfarm@>
> > > 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.
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
>

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.0.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.2/251 - Release Date: 2/4/06


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 Craft hobby Hobby and craft supply
Icom ham radio Yaesu ham radio

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Reply via email to