[Boatanchors] APATHY - Are you enjoying CW at all? read this!!

[Bry Carling]

Forward from N9NB





 Hi y’all:



Life is short, and this great hobby has enough room for everyone! 



Pactor, DX, Winlink, Contestting, SSB, RTTY, etc...... We can all 
coexist, but the HF spectrum is very limited, and sadly the FCC is about
 to sign into law a really grave error that will completely disrupt 
CW/RTTY if you don’t read and file comments at the FCC about NPRM 11708 
and WT 16239. We must write to both our ARRL officials at all levels, as
 well as file public comments at the FCC.



The FCC is about to make this officially law, but is taking last ditch 
comments from now (up until October 5th or so) and then during a one 
month “Reply to Comments” phase. this is our LAST CHANCE to really get 
the base of CW/RTTY users to write in to ARRL and FCC officials to 
modify this law.... NPRM RM 11708 cannot be repelled at this point, only
 modified, unless a miracle occurs and ARRL rescinds it – not likely 
unless tens of thousands of us write to ARRL officials while also filing
 comments.



Here is what RM 11708 will enable, if it is passed into law as the FCC 
is proposing in its NPRM 11708 published on July 28, 2016. Note the FCC 
ignored ARRL’s request for a 2.8 kHz bandwidth to replace the 300 baud 
limit, and instead is proposing an **unlimited** bandwidth limit 
with no baud rate limit. Unfortunately, neither the ARRL or FCC have 
recognized the resulting interference that will occur to the narrowband 
CW and RTTY users, and have never once considered a 200 Hz bandwidth 
emission limit on the lower 50 kHz and 500 Hz emission bandwidth limit 
on the lower 100 kHz of every HF band (That is what is needed for 
protection, and we must write in by the tens of thousands!!! To ARRL and
 to FCC! See footnote 37in their July NPRM, very short shrift given to 
this argument!). Here is what will happen if CW/RTTY apathy continues:



1. SSB and other voice operations will be freely allowed in all the 
CW/Data/RTTY segments of HF with unlimited bandwidth, as long as the 
signals are digitized into data first. This NPRM opens up digitized 
voice to the CW/RTTY lower end HF bands -- digitized voice using 12.5khz
 c4fm stations will be allowed,  since the FCC has not proposed a 
bandwidth limitation. And this is not a conspiracy theory, its real.



2. If the rule passes without any bandwidth limit, or with the ARRL’s 
suggested 2.8 kHz bandwidth limit on the low end, Pactor 4 will be 
permitted and conversations will be encrypted as part of the protocol.  
And if there were to be a way to listen in, it’s going to require a the 
purchase of a Pactor 4 modem which is not cheap.  Meaning you have no 
ability to identify the call sign of a station short of engaging in a 
Pactor 4 based conversation. No way for OO’s to find offending station 
since no CW id is needed.



3. A lot of the Automatic Data stations (the auto repeaters that are 
already causing great QRM) are tied in with the watercraft and boating 
crowd. Which means the stations would ring the coastline using new data 
services in the CW/Data part of the band to log into Facebook, check 
weather, and make dinner reservations.  So unless you are beaming north,
 you are going to be pointing toward one of those stations.



4. At about 2.4 Khz per station for Pactor 4, and with MANY more 
stations active (the P4 speeds make email via HF a lot faster and less 
painful, which will drive more users after this NPRM is legalized), it 
won’t take much to swamp all the traditional RTTY segment.  That pushes 
the RTTY guys down into the top of the CW segment. And not to even 
mention digitized voice signals that will be allowed there, too!



No matter how you slice it, even with voluntary band plans, this means 
trouble for the RTTY operators right up front, and more congestion for 
the CW bands as a result.  Of course, the SSB guys successfully defeated
 essentially the same proposal 10 years ago (ARRL TRIED TO PASS RM 11306
 in 2005, but rescinded it in 2007 because the SSB operators made enough
 noise to get the ARRL to pull it from the FCC consideration—Check out 
RM 11306 and -- CW and RTTY apathy has failed to make enough noise, and 
now this is about to become law).  It has gone too far, and CW/RTTY 
people have not been heard, and this is about to remove the enjoyment of
 our bands forever! Please get active. This is real. Please don’t take 
this lightly and do nothing, please get your CW/RTTY friends engaged. 
Read the NPRM! See Footnote 37. See what the FCC is about to sign into 
law. You only have 2 months to move the ARRL and the FCC to modify this 
rule.



Lets give Pactor 4 and Winlink its due at 100 kHz and above from the low
 end of HF, but lets also preserve the lowest 50 kHz for CW and lowest 
100 kHz for RTTY by urgently requesting bandwidth limits that preserve 
CW and RTTY. 



Tell your ARRL official and write in to the FCC about the need to have 
narrow bandwidth protection in the low end of HF if they remove the 300 
baud rate -- we need tens of thousands of thoughtful responses! I am 
copying Brennen Price, ARRL’s CTO and PVRC member, here. And I hope you 
and others will similarly write him and all ARRL officials while you 
submit your short, focused comment to the FCC on RM 11708 and WT 16239 
to seek interference protection on the low part of HF, as well.



73 ted n9nb