[AMRadio] [AMRadio} Membership

[Rob Atkinson]

It might not affect AM immediately but it raises some questions.  Why
2.8 KHz?  How was that chosen?  What was the method that led to 2.8
KHz?  Surely it was not arbitrary.  Why not 5 or even 8 KHz?   A
typical AM bandwidth is 8 KHz.  If it's okay to have AM, why not the
higher data rate that would go with 8 KHz?  Or is that not _really_
okay in some people's minds.  And if it's not really okay, what's
next?  What happens if someday there is a proposal to require all
analog modes wider than 2.8 KHz go digital?   Can't help but notice
2.8 KHz was the typical bandwidth of a lot of manufactured slopbucket
transceivers of years past.  Coincidence?  Am I suspicious?  Yep.  By
the way, last time I looked, the symbol rate petition has included in
it, refarming 80 meters to put CW back in 3600 to 3650.

73

Rob
K5UJ


>I think this has come up before. /Does it affect AM/?    I think /*NOT*/ !
>Notice:
>" ... replace the current HF digital symbol rate limit ..."
>If I am wrong so be it.  First time this year   :-)    But it says "digital symbol rate limit", not transmitted bandwidth.