There has been some criticism of the U.S.'s supposedly backward ways with amateur radio bandwidths, and other countries (practically everyone else?) being so advanced in this area.
If it is true that others are not being held back, what actual new wideband HF modes have been developed that we can not use in the U.S.? How many are actually using these new modes? If not, why are you not doing so? Or is all this criticism being levelled at the U.S. without any substance? 73, Rick, KV9U John B. Stephensen wrote: > My comment was in regards to a question about why the rules need to be > changed. They do because you can't mix voice, image and data on one > frequency in the HF bands. The defect in the ARRL proposal for > regulation by bandwidth was the 3 kHz limit that they chose for HF. I > argued for 25 kHz and then 9 kHz as time went by, but with no effect. > There are also limits on data bandwidth of 20 kHz in the VHF bands and > 100 kHz in the 70 cm band that need to be changed. > > There is no bandwidth limit in the HF RTTY/data segments as > 97.307(f)(2) is only referenced in the table in 97.305 for the > phone/image segments. I agree that digital phone has no bandwidth > limit, but image does. > > 73, > > John > KD6OZH >
