[AMRadio] Is AM a special case, or is it "just another mode"?

[Douglas Burlew]

The proposed petition mentioned in Sumner's editorial is going to raise more 
than a few eyebrows.

Some salient passages:

"At the present time the only bandwidth limits on amateur HF digital 
transmissions that are contained
in the FCC Rules are on automatically controlled digital stations operating 
outside narrow designated
subbands (Section 97.221 imposes a 500 Hz bandwidth limit on these stations) 
and on stations
operating in the five channels of the 60 meter band (up to 2.8 kHz bandwidth 
is permitted, per
Section 97.303(h))."

"The committe recommended that a Petition for Rule Making be prepared 
seeking the deletion of all
references to symbol rate from Section 97.307(f) and the adoption of a 
bandwidth limit of 2.8 kHz
for amateur data emissions below 29.7 MHz. The Board adopted the committee's 
recommendations.
No timetable has been set for the filing of this petition, which first will 
be reviewed by the ARRL
Executive Committee."

"It is important to note that the limit would apply only to data modes in 
the subbands where RTTY
and data are authorized emission types and not to either analog or digital 
phone emissions."

"Some will argue that 2.8 kHz is too confining, others that is is excessive. 
Those positions were
taken into account by both the ad hoc committee and the Board. Once the 
petition is filed and
assuming the FCC does not dismiss it out of hand- as indeed it should not, 
given that the existing'
rules clearly need to be fixed- there will be additional opportunities for 
those arguments to be
heard."

Biggest problem for AM is at 160 meters. The entire band is authorized for 
RTTY and data.
If my understanding is correct, 2.8 kHz wide automatically-controlled 
digital stations would be
permitted to operate the entire band.

Although it does not affect AM, all of the 30 meter band is authorized for 
RTTY and data
so that band could see a big change from the way it is utilized today.

What are thought of as 'CW bands' at 80, 40, 20, 17, 15, 12, and 10 meters 
are also authorized
for RTTY and data. They could face the wrath of 2.8 kHz wide 
automatically-controlled
digital stations, with 80 through 17 meters potentially subject to the worst 
effects from harmful
interference. The 40 meter CW-RTTY-data subband is particularly messy at 
night in recent years
for a variety of reasons. This proposed petition has the potential to worsen 
an already-bad
situation.

At this time it appears the proposed petition is for the benefit of PacTOR 
III/Winlink 2000
manufacturers, network administrators, and users. ARRL, owing to it's roots, 
perhaps feels
this is a way to get back into the traffic game in a meaningful way. The 
availability of
commercial email for the general public, including amateur radio operators, 
doomed the Radiogram.

Without footnoting AM the proposed petition is another attempt at much the 
same objectives as
the failed RM-11306. Only instead of this time just AM operators facing 
burdensome regulation, AM,
SSB, and CW operators will be subject to "rotten QRM" from 2.8 kHz wide 
automatically-controlled
digital stations that do not play nice in the sandbox.

I expect once this petition is revealed there will be quite a ruckus from 
some of the more prominent
DXers and contesters, many of whom donate generously to ARRL.

73

Doug-  W3DBB