The AM Forum
March 29, 2024, 07:59:53 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Links Staff List Gallery Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 [4]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Codeless Amateur Radio - Feb. 23, 2007  (Read 50235 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
WD8BIL
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4409


« Reply #75 on: February 09, 2007, 01:01:56 PM »

Quote
Many of us commented on both proposals and both proposals were beat hard into the ground. 11305's any mode, any bandwidth, anywhere, in my opinion, never got off the ground. The voice expansion was already blessed by the FCC two years prior.

No where's near true Petee !!!

The original FCC blessing would have given us 25Khz more on 75.(Down to 3725)
No where's near the expansion we got. And, on good authority, as part of the group, I know for a fact our 11305 had a lot to do with the LARGER phone expansions.

The withdrawal wasn't an admission of defeat but rather an acknowlegment to the FCC that the announced R&O went a good way toward our desires and in light of the feedback to BOTH proposals we'd withdraw. This was ment to show we are willing to work with the FCC when they make common sense decisions such as they did.

To continue to support the ARRL is fine.... but get ur facts and history straight.
The novice refarming WAS a good 2 years before 11305 true. But it did not provide the magnitude of change initiated by 11305 and others.
Logged
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8154


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #76 on: February 09, 2007, 02:08:52 PM »

Quote
Many of us commented on both proposals and both proposals were beat hard into the ground. 11305's any mode, any bandwidth, anywhere, in my opinion, never got off the ground. The voice expansion was already blessed by the FCC two years prior.

No where's near true Petee !!!

The original FCC blessing would have given us 25Khz more on 75.(Down to 3725)
No where's near the expansion we got. And, on good authority, as part of the group, I know for a fact our 11305 had a lot to do with the LARGER phone expansions.

Identify your source; the R&O never made any mention of RM-11305 or it's proposed goals of "any mode, any bandwidth, anywhere".

Quote
The withdrawal wasn't an admission of defeat but rather an acknowlegment to the FCC that the announced R&O went a good way toward our desires and in light of the feedback to BOTH proposals we'd withdraw. This was ment to show we are willing to work with the FCC when they make common sense decisions such as they did.

To continue to support the ARRL is fine.... but get ur facts and history straight.
The novice refarming WAS a good 2 years before 11305 true. But it did not provide the magnitude of change initiated by 11305 and others.


I stand by what I said. Based on 11305's original stated goals in its proposal, it never got off the ground. The fact that the FCC's final ruling expanded the phone bands further from the original agreement, could be based on the Comments submitted to the R&O by many people or to the FCC's own view that expansion of the phone band the way they saw it, could lead to an easier future implementation of "regulation by bandwidth".

Of course, the current gain was not without pain:
The big Extra Class phone band comes at the expense of General and Advanced CW operators, and at the expense of all RTTY/data operators. Legally, a CW traffic net made up of Extra Class operators could just stay put above 3600 kHz. However, RTTY/data operators have no option. They must relocate below 3600 kHz, and of course most CW nets will do so as well in order to avoid phone interference and so as not to exclude their General and Advanced members.

A particular problem for the users of automatically controlled digital stations is that the frequencies that no longer will be available for RTTY/data emission include 3620-3635 kHz, where automatic control of RTTY/data has been permitted. A later amendment to the ruling moved 3620-3635 activity moved this down to 3585-3600 to further eat into the CW segment.
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
WD8BIL
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4409


« Reply #77 on: February 09, 2007, 02:24:51 PM »

Quote
Identify your source; the R&O never made any mention of RM-11305 or it's proposed goals of "any mode, any bandwidth, anywhere".


How soon you forget. We've already been down this road Pete. I posted, in previous discussions, language from 04-140 that was directly influenced by 11305.

From 04-140:
"....The overall effect of this action is to further public interest by allowing amateur service licensees to use the spectrum more efficiently, and allowing amateur service stations to operate with fewer restrictions."
 

From 11305:

"..... to achieve greater, more efficient, utiliztion of frequency allocations within the amateur radio service bands."


R&O 04-140 directly addressed the spirit of 11305 and I'm proud of our efforts.

 
Logged
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8154


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #78 on: February 09, 2007, 02:44:41 PM »

Quote
Identify your source; the R&O never made any mention of RM-11305 or it's proposed goals of "any mode, any bandwidth, anywhere".


How soon you forget. We've already been down this road Pete. I posted, in previous discussions, language from 04-140 that was a direct quote from 11305.


Don't recall any direct quote or reference to RM-11305. However, it should be pointed out that a few of the people who commented to 04-140 also had a hand in the RM-11305 proposal. It's makes no sense that they wouldn't continue to speak the same words. I still see no justification that the FCC directly pulled any viable information from the 11305, "any mode, any bandwidth, anywhere" proposal.

Of course, it’s always a “feel good” to pat ones self on the back when one perceives inwardly that they made the world a better place.

Personally, in my opinion, it makes no sense to continue a discussion of RM-11305. It’s now a dead proposal for whatever reason.
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
WD8BIL
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4409


« Reply #79 on: February 09, 2007, 02:56:13 PM »

Don't patronize me Pete. And I won't attempt to prove anything to you. your mind is made up inspite of the facts.

I'll admit a "direct quote" was mis-stated and corrected. But for YOU to sit there and speak on things you have no direct info on is ignorance plain and simple.

I know we made a difference. It is not perceived inwardly. It has been confirmed to me directly and I don't NEED YOU to believe it.

And you're right, 11305 and code testing is gone. No need to hash it any further.
Enjoy ur new frequencies. Your welcome.
Logged
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10057



« Reply #80 on: February 09, 2007, 04:04:51 PM »

The original FCC blessing would have given us 25Khz more on 75.(Down to 3725)

And that's exactly how much phone band expansion ARRL requested in their "Novice refarming" proposal.  In their bandwidth petition, they proposed allowing wider bandwidths down to somewhere in the vicinity of 3600, but included language that specifically precluded the new "wide bandwidth mode" segment from becoming a "de facto expansion of the voice subbands."
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
Pages: 1 ... 3 [4]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

AMfone - Dedicated to Amplitude Modulation on the Amateur Radio Bands
 AMfone © 2001-2015
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.094 seconds with 18 queries.