The word I hear on this subject is they are basically trying to save their
proposal of the Amateur WINLINK EMAIL SYSTEM. They have obviously gone
the way of Washington DC and OWE SOMEBODY BIG TIME. Otherwise why would
the League, the "supporter" of Amateur Radio, overtly persue the total
destruction of the bands by allowing un-attended 3 KHZ WIDE signals in HF
and above?
Think how six and above will sound? Chanalized digital hubs top to bottom.
Room for anything else? Nope. That's alright, ICOM has D-Star now.
ON HF, FCC already has thrown all the none voice/wideband mode in the
bottom of ALL the bands. FCC fooled ARRL when they disallowed that Winlink
crap from special slots created just for its purpose. Instead FCC used
some sense. Now ARRL want to put this same garbage in what is left of the
CW/NARROW BAND SEGMENTS. This is not only a serious mistake, but I feel
will eventually lead to the total demise of Amateur Radio. Ham Radio is
not a un-attended process.
Dan/W4NTI
> [Original Message]
> From: Tommy <aldermant at alltel.net>
> To: <secc at contesting.com>; <sedxc at contesting.com>
> Date: 3/22/2007 10:25:31 AM
> Subject: [SECC] What is the ARRL doing?
>
>
> As a rather long-time Life Member of the ARRL, I normally try not get
> publically involved in 'rumors' of what the ARRL is doing or trying to do.
> But if this pdf publication by the FCC is correct, and I have to assume it
> is factual, the ARRL has privately asked the FCC to widen the RTTY
bandwidth
> to 3kc, allow RTTY to operate anywhere in the ham bands, including WARC
> bands, and allow automated email bots (read 'Winlink') to operate
ANYWHERE
> they wish in the ham bands, any time they wish.
>
> If you are at all interested in this, YOUR hobby, it would be informative
> for you to read this document published by the FCC and draw your own
> conclusions.
>
>
>
> Ref: http://n4af.blountscreek.org/CW/RM11306.pdf
>
>
> US hams may comment direct to FCC at
> http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi
>
>
> There may be some explanation for this of which I'm unaware. Perhaps the
SE
> Director or the SE Vice Director would care to comment on this to help us
> all understand what the ARRL is really trying to accomplish? However I
doubt
> they will since their history shows extremely little communication about
> what the ARRL is trying to do, with the folks who voted them into office.
>
> Tommy Alderman - W4BQF
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SECC mailing list
> SECC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/secc
|