This is the part that is incredibly baffling to those of us outside the United States.
The argument that us Cannucks and our Aussie cousins have very few hams and very limited population is valid only on VHF/UHF, since HF has no boundaries when it comes to propagation. 90% of Canada's population is within 100 miles of the US border, so all of our radio traffic heard on the ham bands is from the south. The Aussies have Japan as one easy bounce for them, with the multitude of JA hams providing lots of traffic. We used to have a lot of rules, modes , emission types, etc. similar to the FCC. This has since been abolished in favour of frequency limits, maximum bandwidth (6khz) and maximum power allowed. No regulations exixt on what modes can be used where, etc. This has not produced chaos in the ham bands, nor do we set up and operate digital data in what is traditionally the SSB portion of the band. We simply follow the traditional band usage that has been around for 70 years or more. Sure we mix modes at some points, especially on 40M where from 7050 to 7100 is used by SSB, RTTY and other digital modes at the same time in Canada. Has it been a problem? Not to my knowledge. Would I knowingly start calling CQ in a digital mode on top of a SSB QSO? No, out of respect for my fellow hams who were there first. The only real problems we have on 40M is the large number of DX stations using that segment during a contest, transmitting blind since they are all running splits and listening high on 40M. (I know I'll hear from Danny on this) Sure there will always be "lids" who have to run power and whatever since "it is their right to do so,and no guvmint gonna tell me what to do" We have all seen them on PSK31, running enough power to run a small village and basically wiping the band out for everyone. fortunately they are the minority. So why not go for less rules? Maybe the FCC would welcome this since they would not have to enforce the present rule structure, thus saving a little money. The hams in the US would then be allowed to experiment with new technologies such as RFSM2400 without fear of penalties, and this in turn would lead to better modes. It seems to come down to a matter of trust and respect within the ham community to be able to work with few regulations. John VE5MU Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Gray Areas of Ham Radio Regulations and Rules The problem is that I am in the minority. From what I can tell, most hams want modes kept as separate as possible and Danny has pointed out the problems you have with mixing modes which has somewhat tempered my enthusiasm. Wouldn't you agree that the reason that you may be able to have fewer rules (assuming you really do since I have not read your rules), is due to your very low density of population, both in terms of square miles and number of hams? 73, Rick, KV9U Brad wrote: > > > It is not surprising Bonnie, but it is INCREDIBLY boring. You guys have > way too many rules, and the surprising thing is that so many hams seem > to think that the problems can be solved by introducing yet more! > > Brad VK2QQ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.14/727 - Release Date: 3/19/2007 11:49 AM
