Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS operating frequencies on 20m
On 03/04/2010 09:10 PM, pd4u_dares wrote: All wouldn't have happened if it was not claimed by some that ROS is illegaal in the US. Since there is no official publication on this by the FCC, ROS is neither legal nor illegal. So the first claim by some users of ROS was in error. Jose's subsequent claiom too. The FCC statement was quite clear: the responsibility of determining whether or not ROS is allowed under the rules lies with each amateur radio operator. Claims made by Jose or others do not absolve amateur radio operators of the responsibility of making that determination themselves. -- All rights reversed.
[digitalradio] Re: ROS operating frequencies on 20m
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, g4ilo jul...@... wrote: .. Well I guess now it's immaterial to you guys anyway. What I don't understand is why anyone still wants to use the mode. The developer has made threats to other amateurs, he has posted false information on his website and risked bringing the hobby into disrepute. Anyone who continues to use it is basically saying none of that matters. PSE don't start this hypocracy again Julian. And if so, state the complete context. All wouldn't have happened if it was not claimed by some that ROS is illegaal in the US. Since there is no official publication on this by the FCC, ROS is neither legal nor illegal. So the first claim by some users of ROS was in error. Jose's subsequent claiom too. Threaths of the programmer of ROS to exclude users were as much not in line with the ham radio spirit as stopping support by user on their HAM radio chat room. It is clear that you don't want to use ROS anymore. And pse don't reply that you do, but are banned. If you want to continue bashing ROS, pse use your own website for that purpose, and not this digital radio group. Because this group is not intended for this , and bashing is not in line with the HAM radio spirit. Marc Marc
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS operating frequencies on 20m
On 03/04/2010 07:44 AM, g4ilo wrote: I thought you were in Region 2. I have the Region 2 band plan in front of me right off the IARU site and it definitely says All Modes in all of the sections right up to 14.350. I don't see any division at 14.150 at all. In any case, I don't think you'd need to go as far even as 14.150 to find a frequency that hasn't been designated for use by some other modes. The US band plans are a little more restrictive than the Region 2 plan. I do not know why that was done, but it does give the smaller countries some empty frequencies so it seems to be beneficial overall. The US probably has more hams than the other Region 2 countries together. -- All rights reversed.
[digitalradio] Re: ROS operating frequencies on 20m
I thought you were in Region 2. I have the Region 2 band plan in front of me right off the IARU site and it definitely says All Modes in all of the sections right up to 14.350. I don't see any division at 14.150 at all. In any case, I don't think you'd need to go as far even as 14.150 to find a frequency that hasn't been designated for use by some other modes. Julian, G4ILO --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: Julian, In the US, the RTTY/data segment of 20m stops at 14.150.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS operating frequencies on 20m
Julian, the problem is that the FCC regulations we live under are often more strict than the IARU bandplans. Under those regulations, RTTY/Data stops at 14.150. Furthermore, the IARU band plans are only recommendations for member organizations. The FCC regulations are laws we MUST follow. While this may seem unfair in some cases (often to everyone!) it is actually the FCC restriction on unattended operations to certain band segments that have kept the unattended stations from covering all the HF bands with Pactor-II and Pactor-III, which they would dearly like to do, so they would never have interference from one of their own kind. All modes, with no other legally-enforceable restrictions, would be a disaster for all our HF activities. The problem with recommendations is that they are only suggestions, so there are those who do not agree with the recommendations and just do what and where they wish. US amateurs, since they are governed instead by laws, face license revocation or fines if they consistently flaunt the laws. 73 - Skip KH6TY g4ilo wrote: I thought you were in Region 2. I have the Region 2 band plan in front of me right off the IARU site and it definitely says All Modes in all of the sections right up to 14.350. I don't see any division at 14.150 at all. In any case, I don't think you'd need to go as far even as 14.150 to find a frequency that hasn't been designated for use by some other modes. Julian, G4ILO --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: Julian, In the US, the RTTY/data segment of 20m stops at 14.150.
[digitalradio] Re: ROS operating frequencies on 20m
OK, I understand. That still doesn't make it impossible to use somewhere above 14.109 though, does it? Well I guess now it's immaterial to you guys anyway. What I don't understand is why anyone still wants to use the mode. The developer has made threats to other amateurs, he has posted false information on his website and risked bringing the hobby into disrepute. Anyone who continues to use it is basically saying none of that matters. --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: Julian, the problem is that the FCC regulations we live under are often more strict than the IARU bandplans. Under those regulations, RTTY/Data stops at 14.150. Furthermore, the IARU band plans are only recommendations for member organizations. The FCC regulations are laws we MUST follow. While this may seem unfair in some cases (often to everyone!) it is actually the FCC restriction on unattended operations to certain band segments that have kept the unattended stations from covering all the HF bands with Pactor-II and Pactor-III, which they would dearly like to do, so they would never have interference from one of their own kind. All modes, with no other legally-enforceable restrictions, would be a disaster for all our HF activities. The problem with recommendations is that they are only suggestions, so there are those who do not agree with the recommendations and just do what and where they wish. US amateurs, since they are governed instead by laws, face license revocation or fines if they consistently flaunt the laws. 73 - Skip KH6TY
