RadioBanter - View Single Post - What makes a Pro code test Amateur a Troglodyte?

October 14th 03, 12:02 AM

(Hans K0HB) wrote in message . com...
"Kim" wrote

At any rate, so you're bringing up the scenario
that someone outside the FCC would bring up a petition to ban a mode.
Hmmmmmm, hadn't thought of that--but why? Why would anyone want to have a
mode banned? I mean, seriously, what would be gained?

As to "what would be gained", that obviously depends on who is
advancing the petition and what their agenda might be.

I recall the rallying cry "No setasides for legacy modes!"

There's another more contemporary example than the AM situation. On
20M there is a small group of experimenters who are playing with
something they call "enhanced SSB". This is regular old SSB, but
these guys are enamored of excellent audio quality and spend a great
deal of time (and money) modifying their radios and microphone/audio
systems to gain the very best audio fidelity that they can manage.
This results in bandwidth usage greater than typical SSB (nominally
3KHz) but less than AM (nominally 6KHz).

Some of them have been found using as much as 9 kHz of the band.

This operation, although it consists of only a small number of
enthusiasts (perhaps less than 20 stations) and is situated on only
one small segment of the HF bands, has been the subject of many
complaints to the FCC (for occupying more bandwidth than necessary),
and Hollingsworth has gone so far as to make note of it in a speech at
a hamfest last winter. He warned that such use of the spectrum might
lead to FCC rule changes.

In part because of the time of day it was being done, and the
crowdedness of the band at the time.

But the main point was that transmitting audio frequencies above those
considered "communications quality" was "poor amateur operating
practice".

IIRC, anyway.

Now mind you, this "mode" uses less space than an AM signal conveying
the same information. It logically follows that if this "mode" is
banned for being spectrum-inefficient, then the
even-more-spectrum-inefficient DSB AM mode probably would fall to the
same regulatory action. (I'm not suggesting that FCC is always
logical, however grin.)

Excellent point! Indeed, spark was abandoned and eventually outlawed
in large part for being spectrum inefficient.

AM has repeatedly come under fire for the same reason. Besides the
additional spectrum used, there's also the heterodynes.

So back to your "Why would anyone want to have a mode banned?"
question. Ask yourself why people have targeted a few stations on
"enhanced SSB" (perhaps 4.5KHz wide), but do not complain about many
more DSB AM stations on the bands (perhaps 6KHz wide)? Could it be
that they simply have a personal agenda which is not evident from the
facts?

Another excellent point.

Perhaps they see a greater chance of success against a few stations
running "single wideband" than against the many who run AM.

Or perhaps they want to set a precedent. If they can get "single
wideband" banned for the "bad practice" of using more spectrum than
necessary....

AM defenders will say "But it's *not* the "same information" because
AM (DSB-with-carrier) quality is inherently better than SSB
(one-sideband-and-no-carrier) quality. But will that fly with FCC?

Now look at the persistent demeaning language here against Morse code
users, and it doesn't take much imagination to expect that a "no more
CW use" petition might show up at the Commission some day soon.

Perhaps I shall compile a list...

As you know, I don't think Morse testing is any longer a regulatory
necessity, but I am very much a CW-lover and have a low-level (but
growing) concern that the end of Morse testing is only a first step on
some peoples agenda.

Exactly my concern. Stranger things have happened.

73 es well said Hans de Jim, N2EY