|
Dave:
This is scary... we actually agree...
I even like your wording.. which makes a Heck of a
lot of sense...
__________________________________________________________ Howard S.
White Ph.D. P. Eng., VE3GFW/K6 ex-AE6SM KY6LA Website: www.ky6la.com "No Good Deed Goes
Unpunished" "Ham Antennas Save Lives - Katrina, 2003 San Diego Fires,
911"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 6:56
PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ARRL proposal
removes baud rate limitations on HF
I have come to agree with you and Howard on this, John. We
should
replace all of 97.221 with the following 27 words:
"No
automatic station shall transmit on an already-occupied
frequency,
or without identifying in 15 wpm CW at the beginning of
each 5 minute
interval of operation."
Polite automatic stations can operate where
they like. Control
operators for rude automatic stations will lose their
licenses. No
sub-bands. No mercy.
73,
Dave,
AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> 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 Lately those regulations are no
longer in effect but I have yet to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
> To:
digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> 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" <n7dc@>
wrote:
>
>
> > The exact reson we need INTERNATIONAL
subbands.
> >
> > ----- Original
Message -----
> > From: "jgorman01"
<jg6164@>
> > 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
> > >
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
> a.. Visit
your group "digitalradio" on the
web.
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group,
send an email to:
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is
subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.
>
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
>
>
>
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
>
>
> 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
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|
