-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tom W8JI
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 10:43 AM
To: Brian Machesney; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Symbol Rates (was [ARRL-LOTW] BoD votes LoTWinitiatives)
> I don't understand your objection to removal of t
I have to admit to not realizing this matter was on the table.
So the ARRL Board of Directors voted to petition the FCC on the strength
of their collective wisdom, without asking the membership our opinion,
so it seems? Now someone is going to probably point out to me that
it has been written abo
Alas, it would appear the BoD does not possess that most uncommon of senses:
common sense. Symbol rate and bandwidth are closely related as you say.
Gary W2CS
On Jul 24, 2013, at 10:43 AM, "Tom W8JI" wrote:
>> I don't understand your objection to removal of the symbol rate language.
>> Un
I don't understand your objection to removal of the symbol rate language.
Under the existing band plan, CW is expected to co-exist with other
"digital" modes of all kinds.
I think perhaps Joe is objecting to the potential **bandwidth** of modes
mixing with narrow modes. Many people either don'
