80M and 40M phone band expansion

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-149A1.doc

Iitoi wrote:
80M and 40M phone band expansion

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-149A1.doc

Why will they go "balistic" (maybe you meant "ballistic")?

I can still operate CW on all the freqs I could before, I've picked up
some additional phone spectrum on a couple of crowded bands (hopefully
in time for SS phone), and all my Novice and Tech (w/Morse test)
friends gained a new bunch of HF spectrum.

What's to "bo balistic" about?

73, de Hans, K0HB
--
" The dust will not settle in our time. And when it does some
great roaring machine will come and whirl it all skyhigh again."

{{{{* http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb

KØHB wrote:
Iitoi wrote:
80M and 40M phone band expansion

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-149A1.doc

Why will they go "balistic" (maybe you meant "ballistic")?

I don't see any reason to go ballistic.

I can still operate CW on all the freqs I could before,

In theory, yes.

But in practice, how much CW operation actually happens in the US
'phone/image subbands? Practically none that I can hear.

I've picked up
some additional phone spectrum on a couple of crowded bands (hopefully
in time for SS phone), and all my Novice and Tech (w/Morse test)
friends gained a new bunch of HF spectrum.

Yup.

What's to "bo balistic" about?

Nothing I can see. But there are some other things to consider:

- I don't think FCC will do much with "regulation by bandwidth". This
R&O reinforces the basic subbands-by-mode idea, and just moves the
dividing line.

- I don't think the FCC will do anything with CTT's "no
subbands-by-mode" proposal, for the same reasons.

- The available space for *data* modes is decreased.

- The foreign 'phones will move even lower in the band, to get away
from USA 'phone QRM.

- We'll probably hear more "hi-fi SSB" and AM on 75 meters, because
there will be more room for them.

73 de Jim, N2EY

KØHB wrote:
Iitoi wrote:
80M and 40M phone band expansion

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-149A1.doc

Why will they go "balistic" (maybe you meant "ballistic")?

Maybe he meant balistic?

I can still operate CW on all the freqs I could before, I've picked up
some additional phone spectrum on a couple of crowded bands (hopefully
in time for SS phone), and all my Novice and Tech (w/Morse test)
friends gained a new bunch of HF spectrum.

Sounds like a win/win.

wrote:
KØHB wrote:
Iitoi wrote:
80M and 40M phone band expansion

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-149A1.doc

Why will they go "balistic" (maybe you meant "ballistic")?

I don't see any reason to go ballistic.

I can still operate CW on all the freqs I could before,

In theory, yes.

But in practice, how much CW operation actually happens in the US
'phone/image subbands? Practically none that I can hear.

How much happened in the Novice subbands?

I've picked up
some additional phone spectrum on a couple of crowded bands (hopefully
in time for SS phone), and all my Novice and Tech (w/Morse test)
friends gained a new bunch of HF spectrum.

Yup.

What's to "bo balistic" about?

Nothing I can see. But there are some other things to consider:

- I don't think FCC will do much with "regulation by bandwidth". This
R&O reinforces the basic subbands-by-mode idea, and just moves the
dividing line.

I wasn't thrilled with that.

- I don't think the FCC will do anything with CTT's "no
subbands-by-mode" proposal, for the same reasons.

- The available space for *data* modes is decreased.

- The foreign 'phones will move even lower in the band, to get away
from USA 'phone QRM.

Fine. More room for emcomm.

- We'll probably hear more "hi-fi SSB" and AM on 75 meters, because
there will be more room for them.

Invoke your filter and you won't hear much of it.

I like the Alaskan Freq amendment. It lets amateurs try out the freq
in drills and tests. In the absense of a code-free HF license, my
personal opinion is that ALL licensed amateurs have access to the 5MHz
frequencies for emergencies, drills and tests.

"Iitoi" wrote in
ink.net:

80M and 40M phone band expansion

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-149A1.doc


I don't know if we'll get Mad right away but it's clear the FCC and the
ARRL want to drive all good hams out of the service. Little by little
they'll take away the non-phone portions of the bands and hand it over to
the phone users. Like a frog in a pot of water that's raised to boiling
point, one day us real hams will find we have to place to communicate on
the ham bands that doesn't sound like Citizens Band.

SC

"Slow Code" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Iitoi" wrote in
ink.net:

80M and 40M phone band expansion

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-149A1.doc


I don't know if we'll get Mad right away but it's clear the FCC and the
ARRL want to drive all good hams out of the service. Little by little
they'll take away the non-phone portions of the bands and hand it over to
the phone users. Like a frog in a pot of water that's raised to boiling
point, one day us real hams will find we have to place to communicate on
the ham bands that doesn't sound like Citizens Band.

SC

Anyone got some of what he's smoking?

Might be he's toking down on some Hawaiian Salvia Divinorum....(google it)
-ps there is a Salvia ng too.....


"U-Know-Who" wrote in message
...

"Slow Code" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Iitoi" wrote in
ink.net:

80M and 40M phone band expansion

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-149A1.doc


I don't know if we'll get Mad right away but it's clear the FCC and the
ARRL want to drive all good hams out of the service. Little by little
they'll take away the non-phone portions of the bands and hand it over to
the phone users. Like a frog in a pot of water that's raised to boiling
point, one day us real hams will find we have to place to communicate on
the ham bands that doesn't sound like Citizens Band.

SC

Anyone got some of what he's smoking?

"U-Know-Who" wrote in
:


"Slow Code" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Iitoi" wrote in
ink.net:

80M and 40M phone band expansion

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-149A1.doc


I don't know if we'll get Mad right away but it's clear the FCC and the
ARRL want to drive all good hams out of the service. Little by little
they'll take away the non-phone portions of the bands and hand it over
to the phone users. Like a frog in a pot of water that's raised to
boiling point, one day us real hams will find we have to place to
communicate on the ham bands that doesn't sound like Citizens Band.

SC

Anyone got some of what he's smoking?


I smoke Marlboro, but you're not man enough to smoke'em. You should stick
with your Virginia Slims.

Make any CW contacts lately?

SC

As if *data* modes were being crowded anyhow! The few users are clustered around a couple of frequencies, like small watering holes on the Sonoran desert, talking to pretty much nobody except the few other lonesome prospectors. As a measure of how little attention is paid to this, I haven't heard a single complaint about the fact that the 75m "automatic" data freqs are now smak-dab in the middle of the proposed 80m Extra phone band! Nobody even noticed!

The Man in The Maze
QRM from Baboquivari Peak, AZ