ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
At 09:57 PM 3/1/2006, Dave wrote:
>The absence of "and we checked the bandplan" from the process you describe
>below is both glaring and ominous. Conformance to voluntary bandplans is the
>foundation of the ARRL's claim (in RM-11306) that current constraints on
>remotely-invoked automatic operation can be eliminated without causing
>widespread QRM. If it doesn't occur to the ARRL to check the ARRL bandplan
>before repositioning its automatic station, what does this suggest about the
>likelihood that the larger population of automatic station operators will
>conform?
>
>In case you had trouble finding the current ARRL bandplan, see
>
>http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/bandplan.html
>
>In particular, note the second line in the 160m table.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave, AA6YQ (member ARRL)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I notice the 160 meter bandplan does not even mention any DX window
at all. Between this glaring omission and the 40 meter RTTY DX
calling frequency fiasco, one can only wonder what's going on at
headquarters. I suspect some powerful politics but I have no personal
knowledge.
For some additional detail on the ARRL bandplan, see "The Considerate
Operator's Frequency Guide" at
http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/conop.html
73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|