[CW] ARRL BOD Jan. 19-20, 2001

[N2EY@aol.com]

In a message dated 8/13/03 3:38:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
aa4nu@ix.netcom.com writes:


> >This is GOOD.   It simply places all the digital narrow band signals, 
> >including cw, PSK, RTTY etc. in one subband, and the wide band stuff
> >like SSB and SSTV in another , so they dont intefere with the narrow 
> >band signals.  
> 
> Is it really? 


Yes, when you consider the alternative of simply having no subbands at all. 

> 
> <and we are ALL speculating at this point, so here's mine!>
> 

Most of the rest of the world's hams have *NO* subbands-by-mode on HF. They 
can run any mode anywhere, just like 160. "Gentleman's agreements" are supposed 
to keep the modes apart.

What do you think the HF ham bands would be like if the USA adopted that 
system?


> Just how much 'space' will those narrow band signals be given
> compared to the wide band stuff?


All depends on how much of a case we make for it. 

> 
> You can easily see where this road heads ... and it's NOT pretty.


The alternative is far uglier. And make no mistake, there are folks out there 
pushing for an end to subbands-by-mode.

> 
> Lots of space for SSB ... little space for CW ...
> 
> And think about PSK or RTTY on 14.023 ... 


It's legal right now. The only reason the PSK-31 and RTTY folks aren't there 
is because they choose not to be. 

> 
> <sigh>
> 
> 

The only CW-only subbands we have are, ironically, the lowest 100 kHz of 6 
and 2 meters.

73 de Jim, N2EY


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---