"Dave Heil" wrote in message
...


Michael Coslo wrote:
1. What experience and expertise do seven or eight old men (ARRL EC) in
Newington have, to qualify to make policy for the conduct of Amateur HF
operations?

Whoops! Clay, I like the idea of a non-name calling thread, so we
should probably drop the "old men" pejorative.

You beat me to it, Mike.

*************************
My profound apologies to those I may have offended by the "old men" term.
This term Old Men, Old Man, or OM used to convey respect or endearment of
fellow operators back in the day. I will add OM to my PC filters.
*************************

2. While it may appear to be "overregulating" as someone pointed out, I
take
the opposite view. K1ZZ says "Oh, bandwidth is too hard to define,
let
alone measure, so lets just "say" we are going to restrict AutoDATA to
3.5
KHz and Semi-Auto DATA to 500 Hz, but we won't require measurement for
verification.

It would seem to me that we might find a space for these modes
via the
bandplan, same as we have in the past.

I tend to agree.

I think that making unenforceable rules such as "saying things"
is the
breeding ground of disrespect.

****************************
My ARRL Handbook is from the last century, but nonetheless states:
"According to FCC Rules, occupied bandwidth is: The frequency bandwidth such
that, below its lower and above its upper frequency limits, the mean powers
radiated are each equal to 0.5 percent (-23dB) of the total mean power
radiated by a given emission". ..."Occupied bandwidth...can be measured on
a spectrum analyzer,...". "Occupied bandwidth can also be calculated..."
It is interesting to note that Part 97.3 (a) (8) uses 0.25 percent or
(-26dB). Maybe this definition needs to be refined. But it is there now.
****************************


First of all, does anyone have a copy of the current rules and regs
for
AutoDATA and Semi-AutoDATA operation on HF? I've been away a while,
so
someone please point me to that in the Part 97. Let's get that
established
first. For instance do those stations have to identify in CW or
Voice(AM or
SSB) at any time? So how about some clear rules and regs for conduct
of the
Auto and Semi-Auto stations.

dunno...

Part 97 is available for free online.

*****************************
After laboring through several passages of the June 2004 version of Part 97,
it is clear that the entire reg. needs a major overhaul. I think the ARRL
EC proposal should state the Part 97 text "before" and "after" to
demonstrate their changes. Otherwise it is not clear at all what is
intended. I do not see Semi Auto DATA defined anywhere in the Part 97
text, but K1ZZ refers to this in his write-up. It would appear that the
entire "Definition" section needs some rework to include these "new" data
terms. Part 97.221 (c) (2) states that the Auto's bandwidth is to be
limited to 500 Hz. K1ZZ, in the full write-up over on arrl.org turns this
around and states that this paragraph doesn't apply to Auto DATA, but only
applies to Semi Auto DATA. Does this need to be changed to accomodate the
ARRL EC plan? 97.305, 307, and 309 also need some revision to remove the
obfuscation, ambiguities, and circuitous logic.
*****************************

Not agreed. A digital signal with a nominal bandwidth of 3200 Hz isn't
going to bother anyone noticeably more than a digital signal of 3000 Hz.


We don't operate on assigned discrete channels. A robot station which
fires up directly on top of you will QRM you the same as one which is
200 Hz too wide.

The plan moves automatically controlled stations to a specific area. If
I want to ragchew, I'll stay outside those segments.

********************************
The ARRL EC plan only tweaks the existing specific areas for Auto Data
stations on HF. They are currently defined in 97.221 (b). Sorry, I did not
realize that before I read the June 2004 version. It appears the major
change for the Autos is to allow expansion of occupied bandwidth 7 fold.
********************************
--Clay
N4AOX