Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /homepages/11/d132647312/htdocs/Amfone/mkportal/include/SMF/smf_out.php on line 47
IARU REGION 2 MF/HF BAND PLAN, effective 01 JA 2008, would limit AM operation.




 
The AM Forum
May 18, 2022, 05:01:08 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 [2] 3 ... 29   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: IARU REGION 2 MF/HF BAND PLAN, effective 01 JA 2008, would limit AM operation.  (Read 348923 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Tom WA3KLR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2070



« Reply #25 on: October 11, 2007, 11:16:10 PM »

I just looked over the IARU Region 1 band plan which was effective January 1, 2006.

The widest bandwidth on HF below 29200 kHz. is 2700 Hz.  On the 10 MHz. band the widest bandwidth is 500 Hz.

On 10 meters above 29200, 6000 Hz BW is allowed.  This cuts down the legal use of +/- 5 kHz deviation NBFM there.  

After the frequency segment charts, the first note is this:

Preferred mode and usage Notes

"All modes" - CW, SSB and those modes listed as Centres of Activity, plus AM (Consideration should be given to adjacent channel users.)

Then, in Notes the first note is:

"Amplitude modulation (AM) may be used in the telephony sub-bands providing consideration is given to adjacent channel user. (NRRL Davos 05)."
- - - - -
I don't know what "NRRL Davos 05" refers to.

It's rather poor and odd writing to list "all modes" segments along with 2700 Hz maximum bandwidth and then have this note after the chart; AM as an exception.  I guess this is to prevent other "6 kHz." modes. (Similar to RM-11306.)

I read in the ARRL report on the IARU 2 conference just held that "The new plan is modeled on one adopted previously by IARU Region 1".  But the region 1 plan allows AM on all HF bands it is currently allowed.

It's interesting to note that the AMer must give consideration to the adjacent users, but not the other way around, the way I read it.

The last note in the plan is:
"Preferred operating frequencies on each 10 kHz. from 29.210 to 29.290 MHz. included should be used.  A deviation of +/- 2.5 kHz being used with 2.5 kHz as maximum modulation frequency."
- - - - -

Maximum modulation frequency of 2.5 kHz.  Can you believe it?  Even the telephone companies allow more than this.

Applying Carson's Rule for FM bandwidth (2fm + 2dk) that is still 10 kHz BW, which is not 6000 Hertz BW.

10 kHz. NBFM channel spacings.

5 kHz deviation and 3 kHz modulation is 16 kHz. BW.  This is what the commercial and 2 meter NBFM is based on.

This all makes me wonder about the technical competence and possible language problems with this international union, the IARU.

* Region-1-HF-Bandplan-2006.pdf (193.76 KB - downloaded 410 times.)
Logged

73 de Tom WA3KLR  AMI # 77   Amplitude Modulation - a force Now and for the Future!
Tom WA3KLR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2070



« Reply #26 on: October 11, 2007, 11:32:35 PM »

KF1Z said,

"And, if I'm thinking straight.....

Didn't most older (older than 5 years) radios come with 2.8khz SSB filters?

That mean those would be "unacceptable"?"


Although it's getting late and MY head is starting to feel like lead, you are very perceptive; you get the prize.

Yes, it's all about future rig sales, rig sales, rig sales, money, money, money. 

All present radios will become obsolete as they happen to be just over the new acceptable "occupied bandwidth" allowed.  The new Kenwoods, Icoms, and Yaesu's advertised in QST in the near future will state "meets the new occupied bandwidth standards".

T.O.M. must be spinning in his grave, at 50 Hertz, to meet EU standards of course.
Logged

73 de Tom WA3KLR  AMI # 77   Amplitude Modulation - a force Now and for the Future!
WD8BIL
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4375


« Reply #27 on: October 12, 2007, 10:24:11 AM »

Well..... ifn any of their crap actually sees the light of day, the term "AM Gangsta" will have its place in reality. I, for one, will not stop using AM till they pry it from my cold dead fingers. This is America, for heaven's sake. (or is it quickly becoming AmeriKa, comrade)
Logged
KA1ZGC
Guest
« Reply #28 on: October 12, 2007, 10:48:50 AM »

Guys, you're getting all worked up over NOTHING.

Remember the ARRL's "mandatory voluntary bandplans" petition? How about the bandwidth petition? What do they have in common?

THEY ALL WENT DOWN IN FLAMES.

The FCC has absolutely no interest in adding further regulations to ham radio. They've said this over and over again, but something as stupid as an IARU bandplan comes along and everyone forgets that and goes all Chicken Little about it.

Put away your guns, guys (and put away your white flag, Mack). There's no fight here, and nothing for us to be upset about. It's just a bunch of tired old men trying to pretend they were ever relevant.

--Thom
Killer Agony One Zipper Got Caught
Logged
WD8BIL
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4375


« Reply #29 on: October 12, 2007, 11:37:28 AM »

Quote
Guys, you're getting all worked up over NOTHING.

I disagree Thom.
Just like Man causing Global Warming...... what if it's true HuhHuh
If we do nothing we all may wake up dead one day !!
Logged
KB2WIG
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4451



« Reply #30 on: October 12, 2007, 02:32:56 PM »

If Man causes global warming, Women will blame him.................... klc
Logged

What? Me worry?
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10062



« Reply #31 on: October 12, 2007, 03:05:17 PM »

Guys, you're getting all worked up over NOTHING.

...something as stupid as an IARU bandplan comes along and everyone forgets that and goes all Chicken Little about it.

Put away your guns, guys (and put away your white flag, Mack). There's no fight here, and nothing for us to be upset about. It's just a bunch of tired old men trying to pretend they were ever relevant.

But what's the purpose of the band plan if someone didn't intended for everyone to follow it?  Reportedly, it passed unanimously at the IARU meeting, and US and Canada each had a vote as part of Region II.

Sure, it is only a suggestion, but if no-one shows any concern it likely will continuously be shoved in our faces, as a conditioning exercise to get the US amateur community to accept regulation-by-bandwidth.  Also of specific concern is the call to limit AM to two narrow segments in 80/75m, with no operation or 160 or 40-12m.

Some readers may recall that sometimes in the 70's, in a Report and Order of some FCC docket (I would have to dig through my files for more specific information) but I do recall a paragraph which read, "It is highly recommended that full carrier double sideband be used only in cases of emergency." I don't recall if this was pre-Johnston or not, but the overwhelming response to Docket 20777 made the FCC aware that amateur interest in AM had not gone away.  I remember once hearing some slopbucket trying to break in to my AM QSO with "didn't you know that AM is illegal except for emergencies?"

A substantial response by the AM community over this issue will make our amateur radio "leaders" think twice before proposing further limitations on the mode.

Plus, I can hear it now.  You are on 160m AM or somewhere else outside the 80m segments, and you hear some weak slopbucket in the background under the carrier, foaming at the mouth and screaming "why don'tcha get that AM back where it belongs."
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
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7954


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #32 on: October 12, 2007, 05:29:27 PM »

Just like Man causing Global Warming...... what if it's true HuhHuh
If we do nothing we all may wake up dead one day !!

Even if we do "something", we will still wake up dead one day!
Logged

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

Posts: 4375


« Reply #33 on: October 12, 2007, 09:00:00 PM »

Ah yes Pete, we will. But by means of our own choosing........ I hope.
Logged
Tom WA3KLR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2070



« Reply #34 on: October 13, 2007, 09:06:39 AM »

Here are 2 recent responses from the topic:
New band plan - bandwidth designated - IARU approv, New Band plan on QRZ.com:

De WQ8U:

The IARU has approved a new band plan based on signal bandwidth.  It becomes effective January 1, 2008.

Among other limiting changes, it limits traditional AM to only two small segments on 80 meters and above 10 meters.

This is similar but worse in several ways than the plan advocated by the ARRL that was soundly rejected by ARRL members and hams in general.  Dave Sumner, K1ZZ, the ARRL CEO is also an officer with the IARU.  The ARRL said it would revisit the failed approach - I guess this is their revisit.

While IARU designations are "voluntary" they are traditionally what has become the official designation.

See the bad news at:
http://www.iaru-regionii.org/Region_2_MF1_2008.pdf

Or Google "IARU Region 2" and look at the Sept 2007 headline.

73
Mac
WQ8U
Hillsborough, NC

- - - - - - - - -
De KQ6XA
Respectfully, the IARU Bandplan Committees have a difficult job. In this recent bandplan, I've noticed they are trying to give the appearance that they have moved to bandwidth-based bandplanning, but they still adhere to mode descriptions and categorization.

Sadly, they simply copied the IARU Region 1 bandplan, along with many of the poorly-planned parts of it. It is out of place in Region 2 (North America and South America Region). International normalization is good in some cases, but not when it happens in a negative or regressive direction. 

The use of 200Hz limit bandwidth is totally unrealistic for anything except PSK31... and if you notice, they did not apply 200Hz to the worldwide PSK31 window at 14070-14073 kHz! CW operators normally do not operate within 200Hz of each other, except for CW contests. This begs the question: What is 200Hz in there for?

The 500Hz bandwidth segments are misplaced and the demarcations are not in concert with actual use on the bands. Devoting large portions of traditional digital data spectrum to such narrow bandwidths ignores all the advancements in time-efficient fast digital methods that can be used in 2kHz or 3kHz bandwidths.

They copied Region 1's limit of 2700Hz bandwidth. It is rather unrealistic, considering that many amateur radio SSB voice transceivers have 2.8 to 3.1kHz filters. Oh, and did you notice the wacky "AM exception"?

The 80m, 40m, and 30m bands in the plan are vastly out of touch with the reality in Region 2. In fact, they are in direct contradiction to USA's FCC rules. They somehow missed the fact that USA operators are 95% or more of the operators in Region 2. Didn't any of the bandplanners notice the elephant in the room?

Perhaps they need input by more active digi operators over the next few years when they get around to making a new bandplan. It looks like they totally ignored the input they received over the past year. In the mean time, they missed the digitization trend on the air in ham radio, and the way that the bands are being used by operators on the ground.

By being out of touch with "ground truth", we can expect that large parts of the IARU Region 2 bandplan are going to be widely disregarded by operators in North America. In fact, they must be disregarded in some cases if operators follow their own country's ham regulations!

This is a tragedy, because this sort of "head in the clouds" bandplanning breeds overall contempt by the rank and file for bandplans.

The Region 2 bandplanners need to get together quickly by tele-meeting, and correct the glaring errors, before this document goes into effect, especially on 40 meters and 80 meters.

As usual, the various world bandplans, including the new IARU Region 2 bandplan are on the HFLINK.COM bandplans site:

Click here:  http://hflink.com/bandplans
 

Click here:  IARU REGION 2 - NEW BANDPLAN


73 Bonnie KQ6XA

Edited by KQ6XA on Oct. 13 2007,03:30

--------------
Bonnie KQ6XA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

We do need to respond to this IARU action, and loudly. 

You must provide your feedback to "your IARU member society" which in our case is unfortunately the ARRL, and to our IARU U.S. region director which happens to be the IARU Region 2 president, Rod Stafford.

Complaints to the ITU may be in order also.

Remember, there are several ITU conferences coming up VERY soon.
Logged

73 de Tom WA3KLR  AMI # 77   Amplitude Modulation - a force Now and for the Future!
n3mir
Guest
« Reply #35 on: October 13, 2007, 12:16:10 PM »

This plan is clearly aimed at freak and contest seeks.
you know the people that can only say 5 9 qrzed contest.
these ARRL types only have slide banders interest in mind.
these guys are sounding more like the federal goverment
every day.

what a shame  and they want my money for qst(not)

dave
Logged
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7954


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #36 on: October 13, 2007, 12:55:04 PM »

New band plan - bandwidth designated - IARU approv, New Band plan on QRZ.com:

De WQ8U:

The IARU has approved a new band plan based on signal bandwidth.  It becomes effective January 1, 2008.

Among other limiting changes, it limits traditional AM to only two small segments on 80 meters and above 10 meters.

Is there nontraditional AM out there somewhere Huh

Actually in this revised band plan, all AM is still allowed wherever "all modes" are still designated which is most of the current amateur bands but with a limitation of only 2700 Hz. My 756 PRO II doesn't comply but my Central Electronics 100V does. I can just modulate either the upper or lower sideband with full carrier. Ah, now the stress has gone away. Technology is good.
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
WA3VJB
Guest
« Reply #37 on: October 13, 2007, 03:03:30 PM »

Yes it's worth getting your concerns on record at the ARRL, but don't count on the club in Newington to actually be receptive to complaints about the IARU Region 2 band plan they have pushed into the international arena.

Actually, where you note :

Quote
Complaints to the ITU may be in order also.

Remember, there are several ITU conferences coming up VERY soon.

The guy in charge of the ITU just got his radio hobbyist license.
Might be nice to congratulate him, invite him to join us some time on AM, and say, oh by the way, you may not have heard, but there's this misguided plan floating up from Region 2.


Dr Hamadoun Toure, Secretary General of the International
Telecommunication Union (ITU), received his Amateur Radio license
October 8. Toure, who holds the call sign HB9EHT, is from Mali. He has a
Master's Degree in electrical engineering from the Technical Institute
of Electronics and Telecommunications of Leningrad and a PhD from the
University of Electronics, Telecommunications and Informatics of Moscow.

Source: ARRL club newsletter


Logged
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10062



« Reply #38 on: October 13, 2007, 03:18:19 PM »

Actually in this revised band plan, all AM is still allowed wherever "all modes" are still designated which is most of the current amateur bands but with a limitation of only 2700 Hz. My 756 PRO II doesn't comply but my Central Electronics 100V does. I can just modulate either the upper or lower sideband with full carrier.

One sideband plus carrier is NOT the same thing as what we call AM.  It is merely SSB with poor carrier suppression.  It is readable on an AM detector only if the percentage of modulation is kept low, below 20 or 30%.  At higher percentages of modulation, re-inserted carrier is required for relatively distortion-free reception, just as in the case of regular SSB.
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
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10062



« Reply #39 on: October 13, 2007, 03:29:57 PM »

Interestingly, news about this bandplan has been widely circulated on the internet for over a week now.  There still has been nothing mentioned about it in the ARRL Letter.
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
Tom WA3KLR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2070



« Reply #40 on: October 13, 2007, 03:51:59 PM »

Yes it was mentioned in an article in the ARRL Letter Number 38 September 21, 2007 newsletter:

http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter/07/0921/

I pasted a copy of the article from that newsletter in one of my previous postings on the prior page.
Logged

73 de Tom WA3KLR  AMI # 77   Amplitude Modulation - a force Now and for the Future!
Tom WA3KLR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2070



« Reply #41 on: October 13, 2007, 04:06:13 PM »

An excerpt from the ARRL-written article on the *Braziliian Conference held in September:

"The Plenary adopted all of the Committee's recommendations, including: A new Region 2 band plan for 160-10 meters was adopted, effective January 1, 2008. The new plan is modeled on one adopted previously by IARU Region 1, with regional differences taken into account; steps were taken to try to reduce interference to national emergency Nets, including establishing an inventory of such Nets and calling their importance to the attention of the radio amateur community; and an IARU Region 2 Diploma was approved, with some details remaining to be worked out by the Executive Committee."

- - - -  -

I guess "regional differences" refers to the U.S.-based AM-hating ARRL.

Gee, what can I do with a Region 2 Diploma?
Logged

73 de Tom WA3KLR  AMI # 77   Amplitude Modulation - a force Now and for the Future!
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7954


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #42 on: October 13, 2007, 04:57:10 PM »

Actually in this revised band plan, all AM is still allowed wherever "all modes" are still designated which is most of the current amateur bands but with a limitation of only 2700 Hz. My 756 PRO II doesn't comply but my Central Electronics 100V does. I can just modulate either the upper or lower sideband with full carrier.

One sideband plus carrier is NOT the same thing as what we call AM.  It is merely SSB with poor carrier suppression.  It is readable on an AM detector only if the percentage of modulation is kept low, below 20 or 30%.  At higher percentages of modulation, re-inserted carrier is required for relatively distortion-free reception, just as in the case of regular SSB.

You need to think outside the AM standard type box. Actually you can "re-insert" carrier by just unbalancing the balanced modulator. With many phasing rigs, SB-10/Apache or SB/DX100B, and even some of the Johnson SSB rigs, that's easy to do from the front panel. And to many on the receiving end, they don't sound that bad. When I operate 20 M AM, I generally just use 1 sideband and full carrier. No one on the other end has yet to comment about something weird with my AM signal.
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
Tom WA3KLR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2070



« Reply #43 on: October 13, 2007, 07:34:33 PM »

Back on August 08, 2007, Pete posted links to the ARRL's July board minutes and the band planning committee minutes. 

In the band planning committee minutes it mentions that the ARRL was withdrawing their RM-11306 petition.  The minutes are also written as presuming the petition was going to be enacted.

I attach that pdf file for reading in retrospect.  It does not elude to the events of the September 2007 IARU conference.  When I went to save the pdf a few moments ago, I found that I had already saved it back in August when Pete posted the existence of the minutes (thanks Pete).  This means I read the minutes at the time and I sensed no danger.

Pete, you donít seem fazed about this potential change essentially eliminating AM as we know it.  Personally, I don't want to work the non-traditional AM the ARRL has cooked up for us, again without our input.  I don't want to work no AM either, I prefer the traditional AM.

* 20_Band_Planning072007.pdf (10.13 KB - downloaded 379 times.)
Logged

73 de Tom WA3KLR  AMI # 77   Amplitude Modulation - a force Now and for the Future!
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10062



« Reply #44 on: October 13, 2007, 08:38:19 PM »

You need to think outside the AM standard type box. Actually you can "re-insert" carrier by just unbalancing the balanced modulator. With many phasing rigs, SB-10/Apache or SB/DX100B, and even some of the Johnson SSB rigs, that's easy to do from the front panel. And to many on the receiving end, they don't sound that bad. When I operate 20 M AM, I generally just use 1 sideband and full carrier. No one on the other end has yet to comment about something weird with my AM signal.

I'm not interesting in operating "outside the AM standard type box". I am perfectly happy with high level plate modulated AM using broadcast transmitter components.  I  sometimes have people answer my CQ's using SSB + carrier, and on my receiver the audio generally sucks.  To me,  running that crap would defeat the whole purpose of AM.
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
WA3VJB
Guest
« Reply #45 on: October 13, 2007, 09:04:47 PM »

Quote
with some details remaining to be worked out by the Executive Committee."


Those interested can supply them with some details to work out.

Logged
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7954


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #46 on: October 13, 2007, 09:23:53 PM »

I'm not interesting in operating "outside the AM standard type box". I am perfectly happy with high level plate modulated AM using broadcast transmitter components.  I  sometimes have people answer my CQ's using SSB + carrier, and on my receiver the audio generally sucks.  To me,  running that crap would defeat the whole purpose of AM.

That's why amateur radio is great. We have lots of variety to communicate from point A to point B.

And, in the end, it's all about the ears. Smiley
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7954


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #47 on: October 13, 2007, 09:49:26 PM »

Pete, you donít seem fazed about this potential change essentially eliminating AM as we know it.  Personally, I don't want to work the non-traditional AM the ARRL has cooked up for us, again without our input.  I don't want to work no AM either, I prefer the traditional AM.

I just follow the current rules and regulations on the books set forth by our FCC. If and when a proposal for changing the rules is submitted to the FCC, and if they assign an RM number to it, we then have a process in place within the FCC to make all our issues and concerns known to them in a formal manner. Venting is sometimes good, but we already know the current ARRL band plan is voluntary, and the ARRL has already stated in an e-mail (posted on the amradio reflector) that the IARU band plan is voluntary. The FCC is our government agency dictating our amateur rules. As I see it, complying with the voluntary revised Region 2 band plan, the general U. S. amateur radio population gains nothing and neither does the FCC. I would be hard to believe that any of these Region 2 countries have any real clout with the FCC, and we have already seen over the last few years how often the ARRL has been beaten down by the FCC.

And you also said: "non-traditional AM the ARRL has cooked up for us"
The assumption, that the U. S. representative (ARRL) was able to sway the committee members who actually modeled this revised plan like the Region 1 band plan in which the ARRL has no vote, and then swayed the entire IARU to approve the plan, is at this time without any merit.
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
W1VD
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 401



« Reply #48 on: October 14, 2007, 08:53:58 AM »

Relying on the FCC as AM's first and last line of defense doesn't seem prudent. A political change starting next year could, over time, see the thinking of the FCC forcibly changed to a 'one world view'. Those familiar with the workings of the ARRL, IARU and ITU should suggest a coherent course of action we can take...so we can begin to derail this nonsense now.     
Logged

'Tnx Fer the Dope OM'.
Tom WA3KLR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2070



« Reply #49 on: October 14, 2007, 09:26:29 AM »

Well Pete, we don't know for a fact who actually instituted the heavy curtailing of AM in the IARU band plan, yet.  I presume that the ARRL is directly involved with the change, because in their newsletter there is no such text as "well we were broadsided at the conference by a group of countries who appear to have conspired against AM and the U.S.  We did vote against the band plan as written but were out-voted by our brothers in the Americas." No.

Surely the ARRL must know that this change will be very unpopular.  But there was no attempt to defend themselves about this in the newsletter.

By the way, my November QST came Friday.  So far no mention, probably too late of course for the Nov. issue.  I can't want for the December issue to read Dave's editorial, "It Seems to ME" I mean "It Seems to US" extolling the wonderful things that were accomplished at the IARU Region 2 *Braziliian conference.

Jay, yes the timing of the federal election appears unfortunate to this situation.  With the unpopularity of the war in Iraq, conventional wisdom presumes that the White House will change parties and so the man (or woman) at the top of the FCC will change January 2009.

This change if it becomes the law for the US hams is a loss that may not ever get undone. 

I brought this up a year ago Ė the need for a regime change in the ARRL.  I said at the time that Dave Sumner has been in there a long, long time, too long.  It should be obvious by now Pete.  More on this later.
Logged

73 de Tom WA3KLR  AMI # 77   Amplitude Modulation - a force Now and for the Future!
Pages: 1 [2] 3 ... 29   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 0.071 seconds with 18 queries.