| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kim W5TIT" 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. 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). 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. 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.) 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? 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. 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. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1402 Â June 25, 2004 | General | |||
| Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1402  June 25, 2004 | Dx | |||
| Low reenlistment rate | Policy | |||
| Some comments on the NCVEC petition | Policy | |||
| NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement. | Policy | |||