wrote in news:1160605956.790621.133150
@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:

KØHB wrote:
Iitoi wrote:
80M and 40M phone band expansion

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-149A1.doc

Why will they go "balistic" (maybe you meant "ballistic")?

I don't see any reason to go ballistic.

I can still operate CW on all the freqs I could before,

In theory, yes.

But in practice, how much CW operation actually happens in the US
'phone/image subbands? Practically none that I can hear.

I've picked up
some additional phone spectrum on a couple of crowded bands (hopefully
in time for SS phone), and all my Novice and Tech (w/Morse test)
friends gained a new bunch of HF spectrum.

Yup.

What's to "bo balistic" about?

Nothing I can see. But there are some other things to consider:

- I don't think FCC will do much with "regulation by bandwidth". This
R&O reinforces the basic subbands-by-mode idea, and just moves the
dividing line.

- I don't think the FCC will do anything with CTT's "no
subbands-by-mode" proposal, for the same reasons.

- The available space for *data* modes is decreased.

- The foreign 'phones will move even lower in the band, to get away
from USA 'phone QRM.

- We'll probably hear more "hi-fi SSB" and AM on 75 meters, because
there will be more room for them.

73 de Jim, N2EY



The foreign phone ops won't be able to move lower to escape us on 80, as we
have been given the whole phone subband. OK, in some countries the CW
subband isn't obligatory, but I doubt if they will go down there.

One down, three more to go (40, 20 and 15). True we got 25kHz more phone on
40, which I am grateful for, but that's still well short of what any other
country has, and on 15 only the subbands for the lower classes moved, not
the bottom edge of phone. Of course, on 20 there was no change, as there
was no Novice subband to begin with.

73 de Alun, N3KIP