| 
				  
 
			
			"Mike Coslo"  wrote in message
 ...
 Bill Sohl wrote:
 
 Assuming your hypothetical...
 IF the non-phone segment is being underused, then
 the CW users will likly lose bandwidth.  BUT, if the non-phone
 segment is just as crowded with users, then there's
 no valid argument for phone expansion.  The burden
 will be on the users of non-phone modes.
 
 
 And right there you have it!
 
 - Mike KB3EIA -
 
 
 Mike,
 
 Don't read Bill's comments above as "NCI Policy" or "NCI Goals/Agenda" ...
 that's
 simply not the case.
 
 Bill's just stating the obvious.  (And since what CW fans refer to as "the
 CW
 bands" are actually the "non-SSB/phone, CW/narrowband digital modes bands,"
 the occupancy thereof  that Bill refers to need not be solely CW users, but
 users
 of other digital modes as well.
 
 Collectively, they (CW and digital users) need to "use it or lose it" in a
 long-term,
 practical sense (even ARRL says "use it or lose it" ... see Dave Sumner's
 recent
 column on the new channels near 5 MHz).  That, I am sure, is what Bill meant
 when he said "The burden will be on the users of non-phone modes."
 
 HOWEVER, phone band expansion is NOT an NCI agenda ... the ARRL has,
 though, asked the FCC in the past to expand the phone bands by "refarming"
 the Novice bands ... and, if the FCC were to see that roughly half of our HF
 bands were grossly underutilized, they might, of their own volition, decide
 to
 do some "refarming" in the form of phone band expansion.
 
 As I have said over and over, I would NOT favor/support phone band expansion
 at the expense of the CW/digital portions of the bands.
 
 Carl - wk3c
 
 
 |