If you wish to file your comments with the ARRL regarding their bandwidth
proposal, there is little time left to do so. Comments should be sent to:



It is my understanding that the proposal, in it's current form, will allow
WL2K stations control of nearly 40% of ALL of our current allocations in the
10, 15, 20, 40, and 80 meter bands. This does not include their efforts to
swallow up 1/2 of the 30 meter band. CW users will give up the most when
you consider that these users will share their remaining bandwidth with all
"narrow" digital modes ... which is everything BUT WL2K. Also, packet radio
will forever be laid to rest on the HF bands, as the proposal will eliminate
those miniscule parts of the bands for their auto-forwarding.

If it's OK with you to give up 40% of your favorite bands to internet e-mail
spewing Pactor III robots, then disregard this message, and your wish will
come true. The ARRL is wearing blinders, and can only see one direction at
this time, and that's WL2K. I don't intend to stand idly by and give up 40%
of our most popular bands so some rich dudes in their motor homes, or on
sailboats, can enjoy cheating the legitimate ISP's out of the fees that they
charge for providing this service.

I am all in favor of reorganizing our allocations in an effort to
accommodate new digital modes, but this proposal takes way too much from the
98% of amateur radio operators who are not interested in turning our hobby
into a cheap internet e-mail gateway for the rich and priviledged. Oh yeah,
they will cry emergency communications, and the "amateur radio inernet
e-mail for every EM's desk" motto, but it's just not worth it.

Tell the ARRL how you feel ... this could certainly be your last chance to
do so.

Ponder this ... if these new wideband modes are soooo efficient, then why do
they require 20 Khz of space? If you give packet radio 20 Khz, it too could
be much faster. The speed limit on packet radio is now determined by the
pitiful amount of bandwidth allocated to them. Why does WL2K, a proprietary
mode, with very high startup costs deserve all of this spectrum when packet
radio has had to deal with the microscopic slices of bandwidth for all of
these years??? It just smells of yesterday's garbage, and I don't think
that the proposal, in it's current form, will benefit anyone but the 2%
minority fighting for 40% of our bands.

For the record ... I do NOT, nor do I plan to utilize packet radio on the HF
bands. My concerns are for the service in general, and the negative impact
this proposal will have.

Best 73,
Luke Bannister AD4MG

--------------
Deputy State Emergency Radio Officer - Digital Communications
Virginia RACES, Inc.