nobodys old friend wrote:
Jim Hampton wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/11/15/1/?nc=1

Note how much wider the 'phone bands would become under the proposal.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hello, Jim

Well, does this mean an SSB signal with either reduced or full carrier so I
can use a 9 KHz audio bandwidth (better than a 4.5 KHz bandwidth).
Audioooooo ...

Of course, one could use the 4.5 KHz (nice audio) bandwidth with double
sideband, full carrier, but shift the carrier 90 degrees for interesting
effects too ...

Where's my sideswiper?

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA
ps - doesn't 10 meters run from 25 MHz to 32 MHz? Or something like that?

given the flaming I got over not knowing what some aphabet soup meant I
wonder what will happen to Jim for blowing that one 10 meters BTW
extends from 28MHZ to 29.7MHZ 12 meter as an aside runs from 24.890
*24.990

Stand-by for more "flaming", Mark.

I know the concept may be a bit foreign to you, but Jim hampton
was being facetious. Those who participate in "freebanding" consider
that part of the spectrum (25Mhz to 32Mhz) to be "theirs". That is the
range that many "export CB's" cover when "opened" for "freeband"
operation.

meaning jim has called the B band and the 10 meter combined with a
section above that as 10 metters amuch bigger error i sghould think
than my not knowing some alphabet soup

"B band"...?!?! I won't even venture a guess.

Your scope of awareness of present day reality of "radio policy
and practice" is far too narrow, Mark.

As for "alphabet soup", it's part of what you're supposed to know
as a Commission licensee...

No one expects you to memorize them, however you should be able to
RECOGNIZE them, realize what they are and look them up in the proper
regulation and then comply with the regulation.

but Stevie will show his double standard again

Nope. Just pointing out that you are, once again, ill-prepared to
address the subjects, Mark. You tried to "redress" Jim Hampton based
on YOUR lack of understanding, not HIS "error" for refering to it as
"10 meters".

Steve, K4YZ

wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/11/15/1/?nc=1

Note how much wider the 'phone bands would become under the proposal.
73 de Jim, N2EY

That's fine by me as just 20% of hams who use HF
also use CW on a regular basis.

"K4YZ" wrote in message
ups.com...
nobodys old friend wrote:
Jim Hampton wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/11/15/1/?nc=1

Note how much wider the 'phone bands would become under the
proposal.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hello, Jim

Well, does this mean an SSB signal with either reduced or full carrier
so I
can use a 9 KHz audio bandwidth (better than a 4.5 KHz bandwidth).
Audioooooo ...

Of course, one could use the 4.5 KHz (nice audio) bandwidth with
double
sideband, full carrier, but shift the carrier 90 degrees for
interesting
effects too ...

Where's my sideswiper?

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA
ps - doesn't 10 meters run from 25 MHz to 32 MHz? Or something like
that?

given the flaming I got over not knowing what some aphabet soup meant I
wonder what will happen to Jim for blowing that one 10 meters BTW
extends from 28MHZ to 29.7MHZ 12 meter as an aside runs from 24.890
*24.990

Stand-by for more "flaming", Mark.

I know the concept may be a bit foreign to you, but Jim hampton
was being facetious. Those who participate in "freebanding" consider
that part of the spectrum (25Mhz to 32Mhz) to be "theirs". That is the
range that many "export CB's" cover when "opened" for "freeband"
operation.

meaning jim has called the B band and the 10 meter combined with a
section above that as 10 metters amuch bigger error i sghould think
than my not knowing some alphabet soup

"B band"...?!?! I won't even venture a guess.

Your scope of awareness of present day reality of "radio policy
and practice" is far too narrow, Mark.

As for "alphabet soup", it's part of what you're supposed to know
as a Commission licensee...

No one expects you to memorize them, however you should be able to
RECOGNIZE them, realize what they are and look them up in the proper
regulation and then comply with the regulation.

but Stevie will show his double standard again

Nope. Just pointing out that you are, once again, ill-prepared to
address the subjects, Mark. You tried to "redress" Jim Hampton based
on YOUR lack of understanding, not HIS "error" for refering to it as
"10 meters".

Steve, K4YZ


Hello, Steve

Yep, tongue way way into cheek LOL )
Especially when I say "or something like that" ...
BTW, double sideband with a 90 shifted full carrier yields phase modulation.
I would almost suspect that might be legal under the "regulation by
bandwidth", but am not sure. Currently, only in the high end of 10 meters
and above (along with standard FM). Something like 29 to 29.7 MHz.
Somewhere around there. At this point, I'd mention that if I were to fire
up FM on 10 meters, I'd sure as heck break out the rules as I am not exactly
sure where it is permitted on 10 or the exact frequency of the FM repeaters
on 10. Ya can't know everything; as long as you can look it up, you'll be
fine



73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

"KØHB" wrote in message
ink.net...

73, Hans, K0HB



Hey Hans, back when I was in the Coast Guard, they told
us all Radiomen had two dried shriviled up little balls. Is there
any truth to that?

Nick
former brown water navy

Jim Hampton wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/11/15/1/?nc=1

Note how much wider the 'phone bands would become under the proposal.


73 de Jim, N2EY


Hello, Jim

Well, does this mean an SSB signal with either reduced or full carrier so I
can use a 9 KHz audio bandwidth (better than a 4.5 KHz bandwidth).
Audioooooo ...

No.

Of course, one could use the 4.5 KHz (nice audio) bandwidth with double
sideband, full carrier, but shift the carrier 90 degrees for interesting
effects too ...

Yep. Of course it doesn't explain why it's OK to run AM at a bandwidth
of 9 kHz but not some new data mode at a bandwidth of 4.5 kHz.

Where's my sideswiper?

Yep.

73 de Jim, N2EY

(yes I got the "10 meter" joke...)

K4YZ wrote:
nobodys old friend wrote:
Jim Hampton wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/11/15/1/?nc=1

Note how much wider the 'phone bands would become under the proposal.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hello, Jim

Well, does this mean an SSB signal with either reduced or full carrier so I
can use a 9 KHz audio bandwidth (better than a 4.5 KHz bandwidth).
Audioooooo ...

Of course, one could use the 4.5 KHz (nice audio) bandwidth with double
sideband, full carrier, but shift the carrier 90 degrees for interesting
effects too ...

Where's my sideswiper?

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA
ps - doesn't 10 meters run from 25 MHz to 32 MHz? Or something like that?

given the flaming I got over not knowing what some aphabet soup meant I
wonder what will happen to Jim for blowing that one 10 meters BTW
extends from 28MHZ to 29.7MHZ 12 meter as an aside runs from 24.890
*24.990

Stand-by for more "flaming", Mark.

I know the concept may be a bit foreign to you, but Jim hampton
was being facetious.

menaing we see again your doublt standard

wrote in message
oups.com...

Jim Hampton wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/11/15/1/?nc=1

Note how much wider the 'phone bands would become under the proposal.


73 de Jim, N2EY


Hello, Jim

Well, does this mean an SSB signal with either reduced or full carrier
so I
can use a 9 KHz audio bandwidth (better than a 4.5 KHz bandwidth).
Audioooooo ...

No.

Of course, one could use the 4.5 KHz (nice audio) bandwidth with double
sideband, full carrier, but shift the carrier 90 degrees for interesting
effects too ...

Yep. Of course it doesn't explain why it's OK to run AM at a bandwidth
of 9 kHz but not some new data mode at a bandwidth of 4.5 kHz.

Where's my sideswiper?

Yep.

73 de Jim, N2EY

(yes I got the "10 meter" joke...)


Hello, Jim

I'm going to have to really read up on the proposal. Why 9 KHz AM and not
allow a data mode at 4.5 KHz doesn't make a whole lot of sense; then again,
we are discussing government involvement in which case one shouldn't expect
a whole lot of sense anyway.


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

"6H4Ballast" wrote in message
groups.com...

wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/11/15/1/?nc=1

Note how much wider the 'phone bands would become under the proposal.
73 de Jim, N2EY

That's fine by me as just 20% of hams who use HF
also use CW on a regular basis.


And I'm not afraid to switch to CW right in that phone band when someone
tries to jump on me. Been there, worn that T-shirt. Funny how 75 watts of
cw can get through a kilowatt AM station.


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

raped an old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
nobodys old friend wrote:
Jim Hampton wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/11/15/1/?nc=1

Note how much wider the 'phone bands would become under the proposal.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hello, Jim

Well, does this mean an SSB signal with either reduced or full carrier so I
can use a 9 KHz audio bandwidth (better than a 4.5 KHz bandwidth).
Audioooooo ...

Of course, one could use the 4.5 KHz (nice audio) bandwidth with double
sideband, full carrier, but shift the carrier 90 degrees for interesting
effects too ...

Where's my sideswiper?

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA
ps - doesn't 10 meters run from 25 MHz to 32 MHz? Or something like that?

given the flaming I got over not knowing what some aphabet soup meant I
wonder what will happen to Jim for blowing that one 10 meters BTW
extends from 28MHZ to 29.7MHZ 12 meter as an aside runs from 24.890
*24.990

Stand-by for more "flaming", Mark.

I know the concept may be a bit foreign to you, but Jim hampton
was being facetious.

menaing we see again your doublt standard

"Menaing" that we see that you are ill-prepared mto discuss radio
policy issues and that you have no understanding of what's going on
around you.

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
raped an old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
nobodys old friend wrote:
Jim Hampton wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/11/15/1/?nc=1

Note how much wider the 'phone bands would become under the proposal.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hello, Jim

Well, does this mean an SSB signal with either reduced or full carrier so I
can use a 9 KHz audio bandwidth (better than a 4.5 KHz bandwidth).
Audioooooo ...

Of course, one could use the 4.5 KHz (nice audio) bandwidth with double
sideband, full carrier, but shift the carrier 90 degrees for interesting
effects too ...

Where's my sideswiper?

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA
ps - doesn't 10 meters run from 25 MHz to 32 MHz? Or something like that?

given the flaming I got over not knowing what some aphabet soup meant I
wonder what will happen to Jim for blowing that one 10 meters BTW
extends from 28MHZ to 29.7MHZ 12 meter as an aside runs from 24.890
*24.990

Stand-by for more "flaming", Mark.

I know the concept may be a bit foreign to you, but Jim hampton
was being facetious.

menaing we see again your doublt standard

"Menaing" that we see that you are ill-prepared mto discuss radio
policy issues and that you have no understanding of what's going on
around you.

Steve, K4YZ

Steve, it appears that you changed Mark's attribution from "an old
friend" to "raped an old friend."

Why did you do that?