Sooo whats yer point?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Christensen, Esq." <w9ac@arrl.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] FCC Letters for "Enhanced SSB"
> Note that I, W9AC, am one of four culprits named in the article.
Absolutely
> fascinating considering the fact that I have not operated on SSB of any
kind
> since October, 2002. I am primarily a CW operator and spend less than 1%
> of my time on SSB. The fact that I authored some of the audio
enhancement
> mods may have contributed to the issuance of the official Notice. So,
where
> is due-diligence on the part of the FCC when and where it's needed?
>
> I am an advocate of the mode (one band, on one frequency), but not the
> manner in which the FCC is arbitrarily issuing Advisory Notices based on
one
> man's personal opinion rather than on a Notice based on a legal memorandum
> of law. I have challenged the FCC to produce any case law, particularly
> appeals to that effect.
>
> The "Notices" were issued, because the FCC realizes that a citation based
> solely on a violation of "good operating practice" as prescribed under
> 97.307 et. seq., will never, ever, pass Constitutional scrutiny as it will
> not meet the two-prong procedural due-process test.
>
> That said, his time and for that matter, tax-payer dollars are better
spent
> on enforcing clear violations of the rules (e.g., 75M obscenities, 2M
> repeaters that do not identify, etc.), rather than arbitrary and
capricious
> personal "opinions" on how to operate a station. Note that no specific
> reference to a rule is applied against the operating practice in question.
> Disseminating a letter that tells us to "read the rules" is a bit silly
when
> no convincing violation is occurring.
>
> In the future, you will see action taken to the League, for the League is
> the most appropriate place in which to add this activity to the existing
> ARRL band plan....the same band plan the FCC uses to judge other
> mode-related operating practices. AMI successfully added a calling
> frequency to the band plan and soon enough a new calling frequency will be
> added. The logic is axiomatic: if AM transmission falls within "good
> operating practice," then taking an AM signal (from which we derive SSB),
> cutting it in half, and eliminating the carrier, must also represent "good
> operating practice. The argument I often hear is "Because that's the way
it
> is," or "because that's the history of AM and SSB." But if we examine
the
> issue for what it truly is, a matter of bandwidth, then the FCC's logic
> simply fails.
>
> Quite honestly, the FCC does not care about the root issue. Recall, that
> the FCC's Bill Cross, W3TN has repeatedly stood before a group of us and
may
> I paraphrase: "The FCC will no longer rule the amateur radio service by
> fiat." The FCC is reaching out to add, alter, and delete rules. The FCC
> currently places weighted emphasis on the League's band plan as the
> appropriate place in which to reference all operating modes....and I
> maintain this is where reconciliation is required. Codifying bandwidth
> rules will only hurt the amateur radio service.
>
> So, what does any of this have to do with Ten Tec? Well, if you're an
owner
> of a Jupiter, Pegasus, or Orion and your SSB transmit menu indicates
> anything more than 2.4 kHz audio bandwidth, guess what? That Advisory
> Notice could have had your name on it instead of mine.
>
> 73,
>
> -Paul, W9AC
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
> To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 20:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] FCC Letters for "Enhanced SSB"
>
>
> > Excellent !
> >
> > 73 de Gary, AA2IZ
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "W2AGN" <w2agn@w2agn.net>
> > To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 3:55 PM
> > Subject: [TenTec] FCC Letters for "Enhanced SSB"
> >
> >
> > > The ARRL Web site notes that several "widebanders," a wide SSB
> > > emission that has bothered HF-Pack operations on 17 meters, have been
> > > put on notice by the FCC's Riley Hollingsworth:
> > >
> > > " 'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely Inconsiderate,' FCC Says (Apr
> > > 17, 2003) -- The FCC has sent advisory notices to four enthusiasts of
> > > what's become known as 'enhanced SSB'--the practice of engineering
> > > transmitted single-sideband audio to ..."
> > > Complete article at
> > > http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/04/17/102/?nc=1
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > +-++-++-++-++-+ John L. Sielke
> > > |W||2||A||G||N| http://www.w2agn.net [UPDATED]
> > > +-++-++-++-++-+ Ex-K3HLU,TF2WKT,W7JEF,W4MPC,N4JS
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TenTec mailing list
> > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|