The AM Forum

Members of the AM community,

I have become aware that the FCC has received a complaint regarding the operations of the Marconi Net, and other SSB groups, the operate in the “AM window” with disregard for interference to ongoing AM operations. 

This complaint has been responded to personally by Ms. Laura Smith stating that pertinent (named) parties will be contacted for further discussion. 

The inference here is that the AM window may be subject to some scrutiny by FCC personnel.   Please act accordingly. 

I can confirm this as NOT rumor. This posting serves as notification only. I do not care to discuss the matter so please do not reply to ME. I will not answer, this is all I know at this time.   If I learn more I’ll post a follow-up. 

Very 73 one and all,
Mark

No-one has prior claim to any frequency.  If the alleged offenders have actually been monitored causing undeniably deliberate interference to AM operation or openly admitting to the same, that's one thing.  But complaining to the FeeCee merely because someone is being a PITA by operating slopbucket within the "AM Window", without specifically violating any section of the Part 97 rules, is likely to backfire.  This sounds exactly like the kind of whining that you would hear from No-Balls and crew about AM, and is probably the very last thing the FeeCee wants to be bothered with.

If the FeeCee were to enforce the AM Window by citing slopbucketeers for operating within that frequency range, they could just as easily cite AM'ers for operating anywhere else.

actually i think the complaint has to do with the fact that at net time they just fire up on 3872 even if there is an ongoing qso. it doesnt seem to matter to them if its am or ssb.  a lot of the time members of the net just zero beet the am qso and blow into the mic. 

according to irb these folks are child molesters

The best tactic in that case would be the old Timtron "Exit stage left" tactic.  QSY down about 1.5 kHz.  If the slopbucketeers follow you down, QSY again, until you are about 3 kHz down from the original frequency.  Then slip back up to the original frequency.  If the slopbucketeers  follow you  back up, the FCC would consider that proof that the interference was deliberate.

Possible Activity eeh....hmmm..that's interesting....why on our First Tour of Duty would the young Miss go right into a foray with a mode that is given little space..Little Peace...and is harrassed constantly...I wonder......is it possible we didn't review the Last Holder of that seats Records..?...

Well the Metal of the Chosen will be tried here, on both sides Take Great Care in walking the Young Miss through the ropes of what shes getting into...

I knew something was up I heard but I didn't think it was on the Scope this quick...I figured the Anti-ents..would try something...Ah well...All the time Never a break....OK we gona go after the audio guru's on Slop Bucket too Mam....Possible Width Issues..that's usually next....

Unbelievable...

73
Jack.

Geez, Mark... could you have a worse poker face?

WHAT  ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

Too funny (http://207.218.242.35/default/images/smilies/lolup.gif)

I actually listened to the Marconi Net last night, 4/22, for about two hours as I was doing some bench work. During that time, the Net experienced deliberate interference at least a dozen times. There were cat calls, dead carriers, whistling, music, someone playing the harmonica, nondescript remarks, and other deliberate interference. During the entire time, the Net never wavered from acting in a professional or sensible manner.

Unfortunately, there are also times I can't say I hear the same reactions from some AM "roundtables" that happen to be operating in the same frequency area. Actually, there are times when listening to some AM "QSO's (if you want to call them that), that it's embarrassing to even be associated with the AM mode.

And you know for a fact all this interference was caused by AM operators, Pete?

I'd also like to know why a group of AMers expressing frustration at deliberate interference makes them the bad guys.

Don't be so quick to throw AM under the bus.

What Hell.... >:(

Never said that. Read the post.

The Marconi Net can be arrogant and they seem to think they own whatever frequency they choose to operate on, but OTOH I have heard plenty of deliberate interference to them as well, although not at all unlikely to be self-instigated (mostly sounded like SSB to me).

Whatever happened, whoever started it, I just don't think this has become serious enough a problem to go running to Mommy just yet.  We might get more than what we asked for.

Look what happened with the 7290 No-Traffic net when they whined to the FCC about Ashtabula Bill.  I'm not sure exactly how the FeeCee ultimately reacted to their complaint, but I notice now that whenever there is an ongoing AM QSO on 7290 when they start up their net, they QSY down the band 3-4 kHz until the frequency becomes clear.

You're in good company, Pete - Babelfish couldn't figure it out either. No option in the 'from....to....' box.   ;)

 

I dunno, the few (and only) times I listened to the Marconi Net about 2 months ago, I was very impressed with the friendly, professional way it was run.

That said, a few times is not nearly enough data points to form an opinion on the interference issue.

This is the type of thing any federal agency that deals with administrative law will do.  When they investigate any complaint they are bound by rules to apply the law of the service equally to all parties.  So if someone who has the complaint filed against them violates the rules, whoa to them.  If the complaining party violates any rule they are in trouble as well.

The FCC, nor any agency of the federal government, can play favorites nor prosecute only one party when individuals of both violate the rules.  This is a good argument to operate properly every time you flip the switch.

Gee Nads I Babbled...... 8)

Kinda like the complaint eh....Babble.

Makes me think so.

73
Jack.

Of course, this also comes a ham who says "just turn the wick up and ignore them". "them" meaning the potential interfering party whoever they might be.  ;D

Well put Pete.
and running to mommy not a good idea.

Well, yes, that's it exactly.  If you can't hack it in the radio jungle, don't go crying to mama FCC.  They just might monitor the frequency and say it's 6 one, half-dozen the other. But don't ever let on over the air that jammers are  bothering you.  Do that, and you have just made their day, given them exactly what they were looking for.

Over-the-air squabbles amongst hams probably impress the FCC just about as much as over-the-air squabbles on CB.

It is all a joke! The ARRL or FCC could give a fat rats tail about mediating interference. I seriously doubt anyone in an offical FCC capacity is wasting their time to monitor interference either on the SSB or AM mode. The AM "window" idea has no legal standing and there is no such thing as gentlemen agreements anymore.

Nets are just excuses for trying to claim frequencies. Claiming AM windows is another attempt to lay claim to a frequency. Making a case claiming willful interference is extremely difficult and to document with recording, etc is a waste of time. The FCC just doesn't care. Ham radio is just a hobby anymore and the FCC has bigger fish to fry that whether some slopbucketeer interfered with an AM qso that wasn't an emergency communications.

Most so called AM'ers I know also operate SSB. They finish their AM fix and then go to their SSB net "handling traffic" fooling themselves into thinking they are providing a community emergency service. How many here are all AM and have no SSB gear? Very few I bet. So how do we determine what makes one an AM'er or a slopbucketeer?  Is it the flipping of the switch on a ricebox that divides these adversaries?

I think many who pride themselves on being AM'ers are suffering serious BI-Polar disorder and some borderline schizophrenic. They whine about the SSB'ers while in the sacred AM window, then when they go down frequency to their SSB group, they whine about the AM'ers coming down there interfering with their group that has used that frequency since Moses parted the red sea. "Why don't they stay in the AM window," they cry.

It would be nice if no interference existed, but it is part of ham radio and now with a majority of ham radio operators of all modes having degraded their manners and consideration for others to that lower than a billy goat in rut so as to keep up with the FCC deregulations and their care less about ham radio attitude ... well welcome to CB. CB'ers in the late 50's had more manners and love for AM radio than the average ham does today. Then no license required, introduction of rice boxes, and FCC washing it's hands of the whole CB mess. It is still against the law to willfully interfere with a CB chat ... I bet the FCC has monitors looking into this and probably the same dedicated G men and women monitoring the SSB/AM problem eager to make a bust.

Sign me up, there is no permanent SSB gear in my home shack.

I do own a Yaesu FT-100D all-mode mini-rig, but it stays in the pickup truck.
If I need SSB, I'll bring it in the house, hook it up to a car battery and the 30L-1. The last time that happened was 3 years ago.

When I need to work someone on SSB, I just transmit using one of the AM rigs. More often than not, they don't have a clue that I'm running AM until I tell them.

Works fine.

He didn't say permanent. You have SSB gear even it's a FT-100  ;D

My S 38 has a bfo...

OH NO   i'm a ssb'er!!

Yeah, my receiver has an ssb button!

the transmitter don't though     ;D

I for one.  Have operated AM since 1959, and never switched to SSB.

Technically, I do have a SSB rig.  Back when 10m was open last time, I bought a little Radio Shack AM/FM/SSB transceiver (basically a modified CB rig) that runs 7 watts AM, 20 watts FM and about 20w peak on SSB.  I got it on sale at RS as the band was fading fast and they were trying to get rid of them while they could, mainly so I could copy the FM up on the top end.

I may have had half a dozen FM contacts on it and fewer than that on AM.  I could count the times I fired it up on SSB on one hand.  Once I could clearly monitor the FM signals, I found 10m FM about as exciting as talking on a cell phone.  The  same goes for SSB.  The thing puts out space shuttle audio quality on AM, so I stuck with my modified Eico 720/730 for 10m AM.  The thing is collecting dust on a shelf somewhere in the shack.  I would have to search for it before I could even put my hands on it.

One of the reasons I never changed over to SSB was that I strongly resented all the high pressure tactics exerted on all hams back in the 50's and 60's to "go sideband" whether they wanted to or not.  If SSB had merely been presented as an available option,  take it or leave it, I probably would have eventually included SSB along with AM as part of my station capability. And the famous AM vs SSB wars of the 60's probably never would have occurred.  One of the legacies of those "wars" that plagues the amateur bands to this day is the widespread practice of deliberate interference.

Jeez.  Get a life.  It's OK to operate both AM and SSB, and NO, just because somebody has both, doesn't mean they HAVE to play one side against the other.  Who are you to paint all hams with both capabilities with the same broad brush?  If MOST AM'ers you know behave like that, you're hanging with the wrong crowd.  Your vitriol would go to better use confronting them on the air or in person.

I operate AM at home and SSB (if at all) in the mobile.   (Pissweak AM in the mobile is more of a challenge than I want to bother with.)  My ratio of AM to SSB operation over 30 years is probably 98% AM, 2% SSB.  Given a choice, I'd rather operate CW than SSB anyway. There is at least a billion things I'd rather do than join a SSB net to complain about AMers.

"So called AM'ers" K1JJ and HUZ operate a lot more SSB than I do.  Do you SERIOUSLY think they turn into AM bashing slopbucketeers at the flip of a switch?  ::)

Enter-

      More Babble.... ;D   Do you SSB often....how many days a week...hours on... ;D ;D  

Ah my God...LOLOL.....

73
Jack.

Jack,

You have to be on the air to cause interference.  Werk U sumday sune?

Hi Tom,

 Yea Maybe....don't know fer sure though...there's a lot a heat comin in..LOL...SSB users you know...


I need a tranny Tom i'm down to that afterwards....we get through the next 5 Chemo treatments...I survive
that then we'll see....

73
Jack.

I'm a bit puzzled by this report of a complaint.

It's been quite a while, maybe some years since I have noticed anything in particular coming out of the Marconi group that was discernable during my normal AM or SSB operation in that part of the band.

Things seem rather calm.

In fact it does seem that when on the very extremely rare occasion when I bothered to listen to them, that they have cleaned up their act considerably since times some years ago when what was typically heard was not very nice.

What is relevant is that someone or some people (who, I have no clue) apparently are alleged to have made a formal complaint to the FCC regarding another group.

If anything the 4 land bunch that gets on 3887 quite regularly and ignores the ongoing AM activity is more of an issue.

Complaints of this sort can backfire - and I wonder if that might not have been the true intent - the complaintant alleges one thing, but brings scrutiny to another resulting in negative outcomes to the other?

And once again people, by insisting on operating ONLY on 3885 and vicinty all the time you have lost and continue to loose the opportunity to gain de facto acceptance elsewhere on the expanded 75m band!!

In the immortal words of the 3 Stooges:  SPREAD OUT![size]  "BREAK THE WINDOW"

                   _-_-WBear2GCR

What Moe said.

"Spread Out!!"

"I'm surrounded by idiots!!"

Wow...

calm down everybody.
Listen to HAL....

http://www.ee.ryerson.ca/~elf/pub/au/2001/stresspill.au


 :o

The 75/80 meter phone window is 3600 - 4000 kHz.  Save your box tops and upgrade to Extra.  Get out of the ghetto.  Lots of fresh air below 3700.

Don says it like it is and was. There is nothing new about deliberate interference and those that dislike a mode based on the conduct of inconsiderate or vindictive operators. I agree with Don that the SSB/AM wars of the 60's were fueled because SSB was being promoted as a superior mode. Many wanted the old AM to go ... exterminated ... because they claimed it had no valid purpose in modern communications, especially for emergency services. The truth is most operators liked the convenience of SSB, especially when transceivers hit the market. It had little or nothing to do with emergency services.

YGF, I agree there is nothing wrong if one operates both SSB and AM. It is a personal choice. My point was what criteria has been established that labels one as a SSB'er or an AM'er? What makes one evil and the other good? It is all about the operator and not the mode. As far as your statement, "get a life," you might be surprized that I don't get all worked up anymore when interference starts. If it bothers me, I just shut down the station and find something else to do. Making a contact or being in on a roundtable isn't all that important to me anymore and certainly not worth suffering stress over. Getting a life at my age and disability isn't as important to me as holding on to the unimpressive one I have.

I started building shortwave receivers in 1956 and wasn't licensed until 1964 when I got the bug to transmit and started building transmitters, all AM and CW. The only SSB I ever operated was in the mid 80's when I lived in the mountains without conveniences, such as phones, electricity, indoor plumbing, etc. I bought a small SSB, CW, and AM transceiver so I could keep in contact with my mother via SSB phone patch and get a daily report on my dad who underwent brain surgery to remove cancerous tumors. My dad was a ham most of his life and operated CW only. He was never on phone, except when I lived nearby and we experimented with "beam of light" communications. I sold the rice box after he died. Later sold off all FM and had vintage AM/CW gear only. Then about 3 years ago, I was finally all homebrew AM with all gear designed and built by me. I sold off all other gear, even homebrew if I hadn't made it. What did I prove? Nothing and no one cared. It was a personal accomplishment and that is it.

Back to the original topic that the FCC is monitoring the "AM window" to catch the SSB net that is deliberately interfering with an AM qso in progress, is doubtful in my opinion. I have heard these rumors over the years and have never seen anyone punished. The last people to get scared are the offenders.

Last week while up at camp I was listening to the Marconi net. On guy was moaning about the use of AM on 40 meters.Fearless Fred was defending anyone's right to run AM on any band where it is allowed.

He said and I Quote " I am against people who home brew transmitters and think they have more privileges than others" End of quote.

I don't know where he got that idea but it appears that on the night I was listening, he has softened his attitude toward AM in general.

Stay tuned for future updates as they become available.   

Well, if that's how you feel, I take take what I said and apologize for the misunderstanding.   Fundamentally, I am not an AM'er or a SSB'er, I am a HAM who has operated many modes.  Labels serve to divide us, not unite us, when used negatively.  Do we really need to start a discussion about who is a "real" AM'er?

I'm a real imitation AMer. But at least I'm not a child raper.

http://w2dtc.com/w2dtc-sound-bites/2004-1207-w2vjz-child-rapers.mp3

What if you say "excuse me" after belching?  ;D

The other side of the coin could be this.......What would stop a Ham op, who wants to cause problems, to flip his radio to the A.M. mode and make it appear that it was someone from the A.M. community doing this?
Get the DF equipment out!


Phred

Polite child raper?