[AMRadio] Re: IARU bandplan

[Peter Markavage]

This Region 2 plan never came up for a vote at the ARRL Board meetings.
The Board of Directors have no vote in International rulings. FCC was
never against RM-11306. It was pulled before the FCC formally responded
to it.

Nothing like fanning the flames.

Pete, wa2cwa

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:08:55 -0400 "Mike Sawyer" <w3slk at hughes.net>
writes:
> 
> Other than being thrusted through by the 'board of embicils' at the 
> 
> ARRgghhL, why there wasn't any polling or surveying used as a basis 
> for the 
> adoption of these plans. Just the fact that the majority of hams and 
> the FCC 
> was against RM-11306 demonstrates the (be)League(d)'s plan was 
> unwanted by 
> not only AM'ers, but all users of every other mode. My only hope is 
> that TOM 
> will be awaken from his grave in Hagerstown, MD and run roughshod 
> over the 
> bumblers in Newington by beating them on the head with the Woulff 
> Houng and 
> stuffing the Retttysnitch where the 'sun don't shine and pills can't 
> reach!'
> Mod-U-Lator,
> Mike(y)
> W3SLK
> 
> 
> Steve Johnston, WD8DAS wrote:
> 
> Earlier I wrote to the ARRL...now I've sent the following message to 
> these
> officials of IARU and IARU-Region2...
> 
>
iaru at iaru.org,leandror at bellsouth.net,w6rod at iaru.org,hp1dj at sinfo.net,9y4ne
d at tst
>
t.net.tt,ve2ka at iaru.org,co2rp at jovenclub.cu,gudiel at comtelsa.com,9y4ned at tst
t.net
>
.tt,pt2adm at pobox.com,lu2ah at szama.com,LPrice at iaru.org,tellam at iaru.org,rlea
ndro@
> cantv.net,dsumner at arrl.org
> 
> Dear IARU Officer -
> 
> I see that the IARU has adopted, effective Jan 1 2008, a new "MF/HF 
> band
> plan" for Region 2 that places restrictive limitations on 
> transmitted signal
> bandwidths and overlooks common modes and practices on the bands 160 
> - 10m.
> 
> I am VERY much against such limits - tight regulation and 
> restrictions like
> these goes completely against the experimental and innovative 
> aspects of ham
> radio.  As a member of ARRL, which is the US member society of IARU, 
> I urge 
> you
> to stop this plan from going into effect.
> 
> I understand that it is a voluntary plan, but because it does not 
> match
> common practice on the bands today it will be ignored by thousands 
> of 
> operators.
> Why make a plan that doesn't match present reality?
> 
> But, voluntary or not, my position remains that plan is defective. 
> Bandplans
> like this have a history of increasing the stress among amateurs 
> with
> arguments and finger-pointing.  And voluntary ones  tend to become 
> ever more
> "official" over time, so I think it is vital that we not err on the 
> side of
> restriction and limitation which could hinder our future 
> communication 
> options.
> 
> Steve Johnston, WD8DAS
> ARRL Member
> Fitchburg, Wisconsin.