There is probably no mention of a proposed segregation by bandwith on 160
meters by the ARRL, because of their involvement in the recent mini war on 160
meters over separation by mode. I guess they continue to shy away from ANY
tinkering with 160 meters.
A small group of hard core CW only on 160 meter operators wanted a CW sub band
setup below 1850 kc. They claimed interference of their CW operations by phone
operators below 1843 kc, a total lie. They then took their proposal to the ARRL
and an ARRL sanctioned "Ad Hoc Committee" was formed to study the idea.
Unfortunately the committee was made up entirely of pro CW sub band hams ONLY
but still the "gentleman's agreement" proposal that came out of the committee
was for CW only below 1843 kc instead of below 1850 kc. It was also proposed to
do away with the gentleman's agreement 1840-1850 kc phone DX window in
existence for many many years.
Well no phone operation below 1843 kc was unacceptable to most phone operators
and any phone operation between 1840-1850 kc was unacceptable to CW only
operators. Naturally phone operation continued and still does between 1840-1850
kc.
So the next step by the small group of troublemaking elitist CW operators was
to get Riley Hollingsworth K4ZDH to declare that phone operation below 1843 kc,
a violation of the ARRL "gentleman's agreement" VOLUNTARY band plan, had the
same force of law as a violation of a Part 97 regulation. Of course a
preposterous concept that was ignored by most phone operators, as it is
unconstitutional.
Next came RM-10352 drafted by K1ZM and W4ZV. It proposed no phone operation
below 1843 kc. The RM sat for 2-3 years and then recently the FCC denied the
RM-10352 petition stating that no separation by mode is necessary on 160
meters. The end result is as follows.
CW operators now routinely intentionally and maliciously interfere with phone
operations between 1840-1850 kc and also intentional and malicious interference
from CW operators of all operations below 1843 kc occurs except CW. Effectively
the only operating below 1843 kc besides CW is YES DIGITAL OPERATIONS. RTTY,
PSK31, MFSK16, etc. between approximately 1805-1812 kc. So digital mode
operators now suffer withering nightly intentional and malicious interference
of their operations. Now you see why I spent time on this diatribe.
Unfortunately complaints of the interference to the FCC has fallen on deaf
ears. So after 16 years of continuous operation on 160 meters by myself I
recently abandoned the band. Hopefully I explained the above scenario from
memory without errors and omissions.
73,
Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF
Plant City, FL, USA
Grid Square EL87WX
Lat & Long 27 58 31 44N 82 09 51 98W
kn4lf@arrl.net
Propagation eGroup: http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/propagation
KN4LF Solar Space Weather & Geomagnetic Data Archive:
http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf5.htm
KN4LF Amateur & SWL Radio History: http://www.kn4lf.com From: Dick Kriss, AA5VU
To: rtty-contesting
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 1:20 PM
Subject: [RTTY] ARRL Bandwidth Petition
Very interesting there was no mention of the 160 meter band in the ARRL
"Bandwidth" petition to limit bandwidth.
73, Dick AA5VU
> ARLB025 ARRL seeks comment on draft "Bandwidth" petition
---------------
In addition, the League's proposal would limit bandwidth in the
existing "RTTY/data subbands" to either 500 Hz or 3 kHz, with phone
emissions specifically prohibited in certain subbands where 3 kHz
would be permitted. Under the proposal, these would include
3650-3725, 7100-7125, 14,100-14,150 and 21,150-21,200 kHz.
--------------
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
---
Outgoing mail is certified virus free by Grisoft AVG 6.0.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.744 / Virus Database: 496 - Release Date: 8/24/2004
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|