Actually, there is already a government mandated "clean transmitter standard."
It's called "Sec. 97.307" (as in FCC Part 97) and is titled "Emission
standards." Might an update of this section of Part 97 to address the issues
raised in this discussion perhaps be in order?
Although, the "spirit" of 97.307 already addresses several of the items you
mention: concerning "a limit on bandwidth," note, for example, that it says
(a) No amateur station transmission shall occupy more bandwidth than
necessary for the information rate and emission type being transmitted, in
accordance with good amateur practice.
My reading of this section would seem to indicate a mandate for "clean, narrow
banded signals with minimal splatter" is there already. While needless to say
improper equipment design is responsible for some of the "garbage" on the
bands, many more of the poor on-air signals we hear are due to misadjustment
by the operator and/or simple failure to follow "good amateur practice."
73, Al
On Sun June 16 2013 1:02:39 pm Richards wrote:
> OK. You need a page about this on your web site, with one of your world
> famous spread sheets (ala your tuner spec report) and that will be a
> start. I forget how many Arlo Guthrie says makes a "movement" ... ;-)
>
> In retrospect,... maybe Bob has a better idea than we first thought.
>
> Although I favor laissez faire economics, and less gov-mt intrusion
> overall, perhaps it would not exactly hurt if the FCC promulgated a
> clean transmitter standard, something like the amplifier purity
> standards ... you know... like the German (Reinheitsgebot) beer purity
> law... that mandates transceivers must meet a minimum, but sufficiently
> strict, standard for spectral purity and accuracy - like they do with
> linear amplifiers - and maybe provide a limit on bandwidth (yep, that
> should start a fist fight...) and mandate clean, narrow banded signals
> with minimal splatter. (I am speaking generally here - I am not an
> expert on this... sure got kicked on the processor issue...) :-)
>
> So, perhaps, a new regulation on the matter might be helpful - it would
> elicit a more prompt response from manufacturers than our market
> pressure plan.
>
> Again, while I don't favor gov-mt action, perhaps it couldn't hurt in
> this case. Let me know when you get your new clean transmitter page on
> the web site.
>
> -------------------- K8JHR ------------------
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|