RadioBanter - View Single Post - ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation

August 19th 04, 01:34 PM

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

"KØHB" wrote in message
thlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote

- No CW-only subbands

There never have been any "CW-only" subbands on HF.

That's true - but there should be!

Odd, when I was first licensed I could only use CW on 80, 40, 15, and 10M.

Wonder what kind of subbands those were?

Personally, I'd propose a regulation similar to what currently exists on
160M --- "Here are your bands. Stay inside of the edges. Have a nice
day."

The result would be chaos. All you have to do is tune around 160 a bit
to come to the conclusion that the ops who get on 160 are with very
rare exceptions a whole different breed of cat from the hordes of
HF-only spectrum dwellers from a number of perspectives. The
"misbehavior ratios" being one of those. If there was a simplistic
"unisolution" like you're proposing it would have been implemented
decades ago.

Agreed but there's even more to it.

160 used to have subbands-by-mode. Then hams all but lost the band to LORAN. We
got it back in little bits and pieces over a couple of decades. The lack of
subbands-by-mode today is a result of that, not any special characteristic of
160.

btw, anybody who says "CW is dead" should take a look at the ARRL 160 m contest
scores.

73 de Jim, N2EY

What was your score?