[digitalradio] Re: Omnibus rules published in Federal Register

2006-11-15 Thread Bill McLaughlin
I hate people that reply to their own posts but I was being curt...besides the obvious response to the onmibus rules, what was interesting to me was the ARRL page specifically saying The elimination of J2D emissions, data sent by modulating an SSB transmitter, of more than 500 Hz bandwidth

[digitalradio] New FCC Rules Dec 15th

2006-11-15 Thread Pete Kemp
FCC Omnibus Amateur Radio RO Published in Federal Register, Takes Effect December 15 NEWINGTON, CT (November 15, 2006) -- Just a little over a month after the Federal Communications Commission released the Report and Order (RO) in the so-called Omnibus Amateur Radio proceeding, WT Docket

Re: [digitalradio] 80M

2006-11-15 Thread KV9U
Even though some things are still not fully clear to me, as I mentioned on an earlier post, at least we do know for sure that in the U.S. the CW/data area is now below 3600 for 80 meters. The Extra class can operate from 3600 to 4000 phone or image which includes wide band width digital FAX or

[digitalradio] Re: Omnibus rules published in Federal Register

2006-11-15 Thread Jon Maguire
As of Dec 15 Pactor-III running at a bandwidth of greater than 500 Hz (such as Winlink) is not permissible below 30 MHz. This is one of the petition to reconsider items being considered by the ARRL Board of Directors. Of course any digital mode 500Hz bandwidth on any frequency =30Mhz is not

[digitalradio] FCC Failure

2006-11-15 Thread dshults
Somehow, the Federal Register posting neglected to resolve the conflict concerning automatic digital forwarding on 80 meters. There is no change to section 97.221. Forwarding is allowed, but it isn't, yet it is? Raising the lower end for voice to 3.635 would fix a few problems. ... Duane

Re: [digitalradio] Omnibus rules published in Federal Register

2006-11-15 Thread Robert McGwier
Dan: Why would the ARRL do this? It is my opinion that coupled with the parts of Pactor-III that are considered trade secrets, Pactor-III is in violation of Part 97 making it an encryption. There is no provision in part 97 for being able to receive it with ridiculously priced hardware, it