Re: [AMRadio] RE: Eliminate AM!
Amen Don! 50% of the 80 meter band reserved for (maybe) 10% of the activity. Why??? QST...QST...Is anyone awake in Newington? nothing heard. 73 de Dave
Re: [AMRadio] RE: Eliminate AM!
...The SSBers complain about bandwidth and carriers of the AM stations and the AMers complain about the Quack Quack from SSB. This may never ever be resolved as long as we are both trying to compete for the same space on the bandsWe take up a very small percentage of the total available bandwidth and we actively enjoy and preserve the heritage and rich history of the hobby. There is really room for all of us! ... 73, Jack, W9GT Something that makes the situation worse is the present subband structure. During primetime evening hours, especially on winter weekends, the 75m phone band may be jam packed with signals to the point that it is difficult to find a frequency clear enough to fire up, whether on AM or SSB. Of course, in amateur radio no-one is guaranteed a clear channel, and a certain amount of frequency overlap is to be expected under crowded condx. But at the same time, try tuning down below 3700 kc/s. Most likely, unless there is a major CW contest going on, there will be vast expanses of unoccupied frequency spectrum. The CW activity is usually concentrated at the bottom end of the band, with a few clusters up past 3600 with a lot of empty space in between. There are usually a few clusters of RTTY and other digital modes scattered above 3600, again with vast empty spaces in between. If we got rid of the outdated subband system that ham radio is saddled with here in the US, amateurs could work out voluntary band plans to make for more efficient use of the spectrum we do have. If there is still a need to maintain a CW-only subband mandated by the FCC, it could be cut back to 3500-3550 and more than accomodate the amount of CW that is heard on 80m these days, even in midwinter. The ARRL bandwidth proposal would expand the present phone band down by only an additional 25 kc/s. The present day phone band congestion is largely artificial, due to subband restrictions. Most other countries in the world, including Canada, have abandoned subbands years ago, and operate entirely on the basis of voluntary band plans. 160m in this country has no subbands, and the band works just fine. Even though I am Extra class (since 1963), I wouldn't mind seeing all subbands eliminated, both by emission mode and licence class. I do think we should have kept the 5/13/20 wpm code tests, but that's the subject of another topic altogether. Don K4KYV
Re: [AMRadio] RE: Eliminate AM!
This is an interesting thread and I guess I just had to throw my two cents in. The SSB vs AM wars have been going on since the 50's, perhaps mostly because of the incompatibility of the two modes. The SSBers complain about bandwidth and carriers of the AM stations and the AMers complain about the Quack Quack from SSB. This may never ever be resolved as long as we are both trying to compete for the same space on the bands. It does certainly help, however, to have some sort of mutual respect and tolerance for each other. After all, we are all hams!! This is why the idea for the AM window(s) really came into play. The problem is that as long as the windows are not respected as being a haven for AM operations, they are worthless as far as preventing interference from SSB or other modes. Andwe all know that the AM windows are certainly not respected by many, if any SSBers. It is interesting to note that the ranks of AMers are filled with many very knowledgable and talented individuals who are interested in AM because it just sounds better than SSB. There are also many individuals who enjoy the mode for the nostalgia aspects, including collecting, restoring , and operating vintage tube-type gear. Many of these folks were first licensed during the time when AM was the most prevelant mode on the phone bands. They really enjoy stepping back in time a little and enjoying the relaxed, laid back operating style that is associated with AM. Anyway, I believe that AM and its associated specialties which include the nostalgia aspects are a great and enduring part of the hobby that should be encouraged and preserved. Would you throw away a '57 Chevy just because it is not the latest technology? Why, then would anyone want to dispose of or eliminate vintage gear and/or technology on the ham bands? We take up a very small percentage of the total available bandwidth and we actively enjoy and preserve the heritage and rich history of the hobby. There is really room for all of us! The diversity is great and it is one of the things that makes ham radio such a great hobby. There are so many different aspects of the hobby under one umbrella. Long Live AM!! 73, Jack, W9GT -- Original message -- BlankAM is gaining in popularity like crazy..Just look at the prices some of the great old AM rig command on ebay...It will never go away..After all it's calledAngel Music..Long Live AM..73's Ron W6MAU Ron and All- I agree that there has been a significant increase in the interest of AM/classic amateur equipment/accessories in recent years! I myself collect and restore antique radios/classic amateur radio equipment/accessories. Amateurs are beginning to realize that not only does AM have superior quality, but the equipment and accessories are a sound investment! AM and CW are the earliest forms of amateur communications and part of our historical tradition. This besides the fact that having the classic discrete parts layout in a chassis makes it more user friendly to repair and maintain. AM like CW will be around for years to come! Even on the amateur bands. The ARRL I believe recognizes these facts in their regulation by bandwidth petition they are drafting. I have spoken to our ARRL Rocky Mountain Division Director and Vice-Director about this. Most recently at the Duke City Hamfest late August last month in Albuquerque, New Mexico. They support retention of the wider bandwidths such as AM. Best 73's. Bob Scupp K5SEP Kilowatt Five Sporadic E Propagation __ AMRadio mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Sep 19 12:46:01 2005 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Original-To: amradio@mailman.qth.net Delivered-To: amradio@mailman.qth.net Received: from relay01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (relay01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net [66.133.182.164]) by mailman.qth.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5730859C1D for amradio@mailman.qth.net; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 12:45:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from filter01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (filter01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net [66.133.183.68]) by relay01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CCCA3641B5 for amradio@mailman.qth.net; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:38:20 + (UTC) Received: from relay01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net ([66.133.182.164]) by filter01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (filter01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net [66.133.183.68]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 07514-02-81 for amradio@mailman.qth.net; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:38:20 + (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (216-190-181-117.nrp2.mon.ny.frontiernet.net [216.190.181.117])
