On Nov 1, 7:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:

All HF rigs that I have permit one to set and transmit SSB in the CW/Data
portion.

All the HF amateur rigs I have seen will also permit one to transmit
data modes in the 'phone/image subbands, which is also against US
regs. Some will permit things like too-wide-for-the-regs FM on HF,
too.

That is operating out of band. Happened to a lot of continental
US folks last weekend in the CQ WW contest. I suppose they got excited and
weren't paying attention to the frequency readout.

Or they don't know the rules well enough to apply them all the time.

For example it is against FCC rules
for continental US stations to transmit any voice mode in the CW/DATA
portion.

Whether we like it or not, subbands-by-license-class are a reality for
FCC-licensed amateurs. That's a reality which isn't going to change
soon, because FCC has repeatedly denied all proposals to eliminate
subbands-by-mode or subbands-by-license-class on the HF amateur radio
bands. We might someday go to subbands-by-bandwidth, if someone can
come up with a reasonable proposal, but the situation won't change
much if that happens. We'll still have the case of 'you can't transmit
that mode on this frequency'.

There's also the fact that we US amateurs - all of us - are allowed
by the regs to design, build, repair and modify our rigs, and they
don't have to be formally type-accepted or certified. So it makes
sense to require us to know the regs rather than expecting our rigs to
prevent our mistakes.

Even if there is a question in the pool, it may not show up in an actual
test. Basically the pool needs to contain several questions of this type to
insure that one does show up on the actual test taken.

Even if the question shows up on the test, the person can get it
wrong.

IMHO, one of the fundamental weaknesses of the written tests today is
that all subjects and questions are lumped together so that a person
can have huge holes in their knowledge yet still pass. This is of
particular concern because the holes can be in subjects like safety
and regulations.

I think it would be better if each test were broken down into
subelements-by-subject, and marked in such a way that you'd need a
passing grade in each subelement to pass the whole exam.


73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:

So it makes
sense to require us to know the regs rather than expecting our rigs to
prevent our mistakes.

I agree with this, but it brought a question to my mind.

The new generation of HF transceivers -- the ones that have quite a bit
of computing ability built in -- do they have the ability to enforce
sub-bands? Certainly they *could* have that ability, since they already
"know" the band edges and in most cases won't allow you to transmit
completely outside a band allocation, but why not support the next step
and not allow SSB in the CW band?

I don't think that most folks who find themselves doing something stupid
like using SSB outside of the US sub-bands do so because they don't know
the regulations. They get caught up in the excitement of a contest or
chasing DX or their mind slips out of gear, and when they realize what
they've just done they feel about two inches tall. I would like to see
the flexibility in a piece of equipment that I just shelled out big
bucks for to keep me from doing this, while at the same time giving me
the flexibility to program the segments that apply to my license class
or if I take the rig to a different location where the rules are different.

Or maybe this is already a feature of the new rigs. I wouldn't know,
not having bought any HF equipment in this century.

73, Steve KB9X

On Thu, 1 Nov 2007 13:51:51 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote:

I would like to see
the flexibility in a piece of equipment that I just shelled out big
bucks for to keep me from doing this,

That separates the "Compleat Ham" who is in control of the station
from the "appliance operator".

while at the same time giving me
the flexibility to program the segments that apply to my license class
or if I take the rig to a different location where the rules are different.

An interesting thought.

Or maybe this is already a feature of the new rigs. I wouldn't know,
not having bought any HF equipment in this century.

I acquired an Elecraft K2/100 about 18 months ago. It has been
augmented by the K3 now. Both are top-of-the-line HF rigs in kit or
modular form (think of a Heathkit on steroids). Neither has the
feature that you are describing.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007 13:51:51 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote:

I would like to see
the flexibility in a piece of equipment that I just shelled out big
bucks for to keep me from doing this,

That separates the "Compleat Ham" who is in control of the station
from the "appliance operator".

while at the same time giving me
the flexibility to program the segments that apply to my license class
or if I take the rig to a different location where the rules are
different.

An interesting thought.

Or maybe this is already a feature of the new rigs. I wouldn't know,
not having bought any HF equipment in this century.


You can program many new rigs to auto mode switch based on frequency but
they also allow you override that auto mode at any time.

Dee, N8UZE

"Steve Bonine" wrote in message
...
wrote:

So it makes
sense to require us to know the regs rather than expecting our rigs to
prevent our mistakes.

I agree with this, but it brought a question to my mind.

The new generation of HF transceivers -- the ones that have quite a bit of
computing ability built in -- do they have the ability to enforce
sub-bands? Certainly they *could* have that ability, since they already
"know" the band edges and in most cases won't allow you to transmit
completely outside a band allocation, but why not support the next step
and not allow SSB in the CW band?


This will cause a problem for those who use AFSK for RTTY rather than FSK.

The radio has to be set for "SSB" to use AFSK. The effect on the receiving
end is identical to using FSK and so is a perfectly legal way to do RTTY..
If you put this as a "hard point" in the radio, you eliminate using AFSK for
RTTY. Something along the lines of the "law of unintended consequences".

Dee, N8UZE

"
The radio has to be set for "SSB" to use AFSK. The effect on the
receiving end is identical to using FSK and so is a perfectly legal way to
do RTTY.. If you put this as a "hard point" in the radio, you eliminate
using AFSK for RTTY. Something along the lines of the "law of unintended
consequences".

Dee, N8UZE


Indeed, it is also a problem if you use the HF set as the driver for a
transverter to a band where the bandplan is entirely different.

73
Jeff

On Nov 1, 12:51?pm, Steve Bonine wrote:
wrote:
So it makes
sense to require us to know the regs rather than
expecting our rigs to
prevent our mistakes.

I agree with this, but it brought a question to my mind.

The new generation of HF transceivers -- the ones that
have quite a bit
of computing ability built in -- do they have the ability to enforce
sub-bands?

I don't know of any that do, in terms of subbands-by-mode or subbands-
by-license-class.

But I don't think it would be a big feat of software engineering to
have a lookup table that compared the mode selection with the
transmit frequency, and allowed transmission only if the selection was
in the lookup table.

Certainly they *could* have that ability, since they already
"know" the band edges and in most cases won't allow you to
transmit
completely outside a band allocation, but why not support the next step
and not allow SSB in the CW band?

As N8UZE points out, this would limit flexibility, because all sorts
of "soundcard data modes" are often implemented by putting the rig in
SSB mode and feeding audio into it. This may become less of a problem
as more rigs incorporate data modes internally. (The Elecraft K3 can
send and receive RTTY and PSK31 without a computer, monitor, or
keyboard).

I don't think that most folks who find themselves doing something
stupid
like using SSB outside of the US sub-bands do so because they don't know
the regulations. They get caught up in the excitement of a contest or
chasing DX or their mind slips out of gear, and when they realize what
they've just done they feel about two inches tall.

With all due respect, if someone forgets the regs by being caught up
in the excitement, they really don't know them in a practical sense.

I would like to see
the flexibility in a piece of equipment that I just shelled out big
bucks for to keep me from doing this, while at the same time
giving me
the flexibility to program the segments that apply to my license
class
or if I take the rig to a different location where the rules are
different.

The second problem is that, for flexibility, you'd have to include the
ability to defeat/disable the feature. Which means it could be left in
the off position unintentionally, and provide no protection.


73 de Jim, N2EY

On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:44:34 EDT, wrote:

(The Elecraft K3 can send and receive RTTY and PSK31 without a computer, monitor, or
keyboard).

Good trick. I can see using the front-panel display for the monitor
but how does one input alphanumeric characters without a keyboard of
sorts?

Then again, what do I know? I'm just as lowly K2 "appliance operator"
ggg
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

On Nov 2, 2:04?pm, Phil Kane wrote:
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:44:34 EDT, wrote:
(The Elecraft K3 can send and receive RTTY and PSK31
without a computer, monitor, or
keyboard).

Couple of other modes, too. See the website - the manual is online
now:

www.elecraft.com

Good trick. I can see using the front-panel display for the monitor
but how does one input alphanumeric characters without a
keyboard of sorts?

You send Morse Code to the rig and it translates/encodes the Morse
into the PSK31, RTTY, etc. Paddles are the usual input device.

Built in, not an add-on device. The decoder is reputedly very good
too, its only limitation being the limited display space.

Then again, what do I know? I'm just as lowly K2 "appliance
operator"
ggg

bwaahaahaaa....

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
On Nov 2, 2:04?pm, Phil Kane wrote:
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:44:34 EDT, wrote:
(The Elecraft K3 can send and receive RTTY and PSK31
without a computer, monitor, or
keyboard).

Couple of other modes, too. See the website - the manual is online
now:

www.elecraft.com
Good trick. I can see using the front-panel display for the monitor
but how does one input alphanumeric characters without a
keyboard of sorts?

You send Morse Code to the rig and it translates/encodes the Morse
into the PSK31, RTTY, etc. Paddles are the usual input device.


That is pretty darn clever. Does it have any special characters for
backing up/corrections? I don't know if you've ever done it or not, but
I suspect that it would be really easy to drop into "cw speak", which
might be a little strnge for us native psk'ers. In any event, props go
out to Elecraft for an innovative solution.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -