In article . net, "KØHB"
writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote


None of that elaborate U.S. subdivision would be possible without
the modern frequency synthesizers ....


Wrong again, kind elderly Sir.. "modern frequency synthesizers" first
appeared in amateur radio equipment in the 80's, a couple of decades
after the imposition of "elaborate U.S. sub-division" in 1968.

Sunuvagun!

de Hans, K0HB

uh-oh, Hans, now you've done it......

You've used historical fact to prove that Lenover21 is mistaken about
something.

I'll 'draw fire' with some more historical facts:

- Hams were responsible for and successful at staying inside their allocated
bands and subbands (phone-image vs. cw-data) long before 1968 or "modern
frequency synthesizers".

- The concept of "subbands by license class" was proposed no later than 1964
and accepted in principle by FCC no later than 1965 - without "modern frequency
synthesizers".

- Some HF ham band and subband edges are/were not multiples of 100 kHz (top end
of 20 and 15, for example, or the edges of the old 11 meter amateur band). Many
have been that way since long before 1968 or "modern frequency synthesizers".

- With the exceptions of beacon and repeater operation, hams are not required
by regulation to operate on specific spot frequencies or channels. Nor are they
required to know their precise operating frequency other than that it is inside
the allocated band or subband. Nor are they required to use "modern frequency
synthesizers" or crystal control.

- Inexpensive, stable, precise, accurate self-controlled variable frequency
oscillators have been available for hams to build or buy since long before
1968.

- The concept of "subbands by license class" is intended to reward the passing
of more-advanced written tests.

73 de Jim, N2EY

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in
:

SNIP
- The concept of "subbands by license class" is intended to reward the
passing of more-advanced written tests.

73 de Jim, N2EY


I know what it's intended to do, but that doesn't mean it makes any sense.
Consider our neighbours to the North who have to get an Advanced to access
40 and the WARC bands. That makes more sense than subbands. (That's only an
example - I'm not suggesting adopting the Canadian system wholesale).

73 de Alun, N3KIP

On 23 Sep 2004 19:44:05 GMT, Alun wrote:

(N2EY) wrote in
:

SNIP
- The concept of "subbands by license class" is intended to reward the
passing of more-advanced written tests.

73 de Jim, N2EY


I know what it's intended to do, but that doesn't mean it makes any sense.
Consider our neighbours to the North who have to get an Advanced to access
40 and the WARC bands. That makes more sense than subbands. (That's only an
example - I'm not suggesting adopting the Canadian system wholesale).

Not quite correct, Alun - under the current license structure, access
to the Amateur bands in Canada is as follows:

Basic license - access to all Amateur bands over 30 MHz.
Advanced license only - same band access as Basic license only.
Basic license plus Morse Code - full access to all Amateur bands.
Advanced plus Morse Code - same band access as Basic plus Morse Code.

The Advanced allows more privileges - high power operation, ability to
sponsor a Club station, act as control operator for a repeater, become
a designated Examiner, build and / or repair your own transmitting
equipment, and a few others.

A Basic ticket (which uses a 100 question exam, and covers the same
material as the US Tech and General exams combined, more or less) plus
Morse is all you currently need for an "all access" Amateur Radio pass
up here!

Source: http://www.rac.ca/regulatory/allband.htm


73 de Alun, N3KIP

73, Leo

In article , Alun
writes:

(N2EY) wrote in
:

SNIP
- The concept of "subbands by license class" is intended to reward the
passing of more-advanced written tests.

73 de Jim, N2EY


I know what it's intended to do, but that doesn't mean it makes any sense.

It makes perfect sense.

Consider our neighbours to the North who have to get an Advanced to access
40 and the WARC bands. That makes more sense than subbands.

No, it doesn't. What that does is to crowd certain bands and empty others.

(That's only an
example - I'm not suggesting adopting the Canadian system wholesale).

So which bands would you give to entry-level?

73 de Jim, N2EY