RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] Director response

To: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Director response
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 17:38:19 -0500
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>

> Has 97.307 been changed since then?

No, my quote came from the FCC's web site (eCFR):
<http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=41328afaea28f9a25ef32f8fdcacd897&n=47y5.0.1.1.6&r=PART&ty=HTML>


73,

   ... Joe, W4TV


On 11/26/2013 5:22 PM, Kok Chen wrote:

On Nov 26, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:


The CURRENT regs already have that "unspecified code" language in
97.307. The ARRL proposal does not have a "drafting error".

That is *incorrect*.  97.307(f)(3) currently says:

(3) Only a RTTY or data emission using a specified digital code listed in 
§97.309(a) of this part may be transmitted. The symbol rate must not exceed 300 
bauds, or for frequency-shift keying, the frequency shift between mark and space 
must not exceed 1 kHz.

The Appendix in ARRL's petition supports what Joe just said.

The copy I have of Part 97 (published ARRL 2007) says the same thing.

Has 97.307 been changed since then?

73
Chen, W7AY


_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>