Re: [digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
There's also some 'I live outside the US but still feel your pain'. I'm with you in spirit(s). Simon Brown, HB9DRV -- From: johnhutchinsusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is a lot of I only care what you think if you agree with me! on this forum, which is one reason I don't hang around much.
[digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
Mark N5RFX wrote: I am disappointed that the FCC did not elaborate on the purpose of Section 97.307(f) which limits specified RTTY or data emissions to a symbol rate not to exceed 300 bauds... Why is that there? The FCC has spoken and the status quo prevails. Hi Mark, This FCC order means so much more than affirmation of the status quo. It gives us a rare window of observation into FCC's internal trends toward support for modernization and progress. It very significantly shows the willingness of the FCC to open the door to change in several areas toward digital advancement and away from prior technologically adverse, artificial, or archaic constraints. It now seems quite clear from FCC's considered and reasoned statements in the petition denial order, that the only reason the 300 baud limit still exists is as a remnant of past history that serves no useful purpose in today's digital communications technology. As you know, it is common in USA for antiquated blue laws to continue on the books, while being effectively rendered useless or obsolete due to changes in society or advancements in technology. Congratulations, and on behalf of the majority of the greater amateur radio community, we thank you very much for your petition, Mark. A result of it is that we may possibly better project the possible outcome of future FCC rulemaking opportunities, within perhaps a wider venue, to include abolishment of baud limits altogether. Indeed, baud limit is now considered not simply superfluous, but counterproductive to the primary purpose of USA's Amateur Radio Service toward advancement of the radio art. 73 Bonnie KQ6XA At 08:47 PM 5/7/2008, expeditionradio wrote: In FCC's official consideration statements, FCC specifically supports no finite limit of bandwidth for digital data emissions for the amateur radio service. FCC said that imposition of such limits might impede experimentation and technological innovation.
[digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
bruce wa4gch wrote: So does this meen we can junk 99% of all ham stations for your idea of what ham radio should be? Ha ha, Bruce! Good one. Seriously, though, this is more of a rejection of backward-thinking attempts to stifle USA hams' future while the rest of the world passes us by. 73 Bonnie KQ6XA
[digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: bruce wa4gch wrote: So does this meen we can junk 99% of all ham stations for your idea of what ham radio should be? Ha ha, Bruce! Good one. Seriously, though, this is more of a rejection of backward-thinking attempts to stifle USA hams' future while the rest of the world passes us by. 73 Bonnie KQ6XA Bruce makes a serious point. There is a lot of I only care what you think if you agree with me! on this forum, which is one reason I don't hang around much. 73, John WB4NNY
Re: [digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
And if this became law we in the USA would be sitting back watching while the rest of the world operated the modes that we now could not. Bonnie makes a very good point when she say we would be back in the stone age. John, W0JAB At 10:05 PM 5/8/2008, John WB4NNY wrote: Bruce makes a serious point. There is a lot of I only care what you think if you agree with me! on this forum, which is one reason I don't hang around much. 73, John WB4NNY
Re: [digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
Hello Bonnie, I was wondering if you could bring me ( others in the group) up-to-date with your MIL 188-141A ALE experiments? specifically I would be be interested in knowing how most messages are passed? are they AMD/DBM or DTM? The only ALE signals I have heard recently (at least on 30m) have been soundings. Is the system now integrated into Winlink 2000? if so, what would be a simple procedure to send a message addressed to an internet email destination? Also, is there any use of the ARQ FAE semi-duplex mode? it seems to me this is one of the most powerful yet underused methods of exchanging messages on HF - especially in the 400Hz version of the mode. 73, Sholto KE7HPV
