expeditionradio wrote: > > > > Hi Roger, > > ARRL was as confused as many other hams were by the new rules. That > was understandable, considering how poorly written and > self-contradictory they are. > > But, in the case of the 500Hz bandwidth limit, the FCC has already > published guidelines in the R&O to aid us in interpretation of their > new rules. If there is to be any argument about interpretation of the > rules, it is probably best to bet on the side of what FCC intended: > > "19. ...To accommodate the concern raised by ARRL, however, we will > revise our rules to clarify that the 500 Hz limitation applies only > to the emission types we are adding to the definition of data when > transmitted on amateur service frequencies below 30 MHz. By amending > the rule in this manner, the 500 bandwidth limitation will not apply > to other data emission types or amateur service bands in which a > higher symbol rate or bandwidth currently is permitted." > > After reading the FCC's own words, you can now clearly see that FCC > never intended to limit the fast data modes that hams have been using > for many years. Their intent is to only limit images sent in the > data subbands to 500Hz bandwidth. Nothing more. > > There is no deception. Pactor-3 is legal on HF, as it always has > been. In fact, Pactor-1 can now be used to send photos in the data > subband. > > 73---Bonnie KQ6XA >
Actually, it is mostly Greek to me. I admit it. Are you saying that the above quote, beginning with the numeral "19" came out **after** the ARRL interpreted the regs as prohibiting Pactor 3? Or are you simply disagreeing with ARRL on the interpretation of the FCC regs? And how does this affect Olivia and MT-63? Since these modes were presumably included in the original definition of "Data" are they unaffected as well--i.e. 1Khz Olivia and MT-63 would be permitted below 30 Mhz? de Roger W6VZV
