[CW] Elmer, anyone?

[Donald Chester]

>Your would have to have sub sub-bands.

IMO that is the problem with the various subband proposals floating around 
now.  We already have an overly complex matrix of subband divisions, based 
on licence class and emission modes.

I have long pondered the idea of whether we should even have subbands at 
all, as in many countries worldwide where subbands have been eliminated.  
With all the talk of eliminating the cw  requirement here and the fact that 
it has already happened elsewhere, I'm thinking that some form of worldwide 
subband allocation may be necessary to maintain visibility and preserve 
usable opreating space for cw, especially if there is to be an influx of 
newcomers with NO telegraphy experience whatever.  But I don't think we need 
a complex system of subbands for cw-only, cw + digital, cw + phone, etc, and 
then have each of those subbands further divided by two or more licence 
classes.

First of all, the FCC probably wouldn't go along with it, because it would 
make more work for them and I suspect ham radio is pretty low on their 
priority list these days.  Secondly, dividing the band into so many segments 
would result in inefficient use of spectrum, since some mode/class subbands 
would inevetably become congested beyond usability while others would  lie 
idle.

I'm for returning to something similar to pre-1968, with enough space  
reserved for cw to allow for reasonably uncongested operation during normal 
(noncontest) periods, without having to compete with modes such as SSB.  
With all the recent and recently proposed restructuring ( "dumbing down" if 
you wish to call it that) of amateur radio worldwide, the concept behind 
incentive licensing is a dead horse, like it or not.  Since 1968 Amateur 
radio has almost completely evolved from a technically-oriented endeavour to 
an appliance opreator's "communicator" hobby, despite 36 years of Incentive 
Licensing.

Nevertheless, the  last thing we need is a licence class that forbids home 
construction and  repair of equipment.  Such a class already exists in 
Canada and elsewhere, and I belive this would lead us down the road towards 
the end of ham radio, once and for all, as we know it today.

I propose a simple Class A and Class B licence structure, minimal subband 
divisions, with no restrictions on home building and modification.

The licence classes should be renamed appropriately.  Isn't the term 
"Techician," considering what that class is today, pretty absurd?

Don K4KYV

_________________________________________________________________
High-speed users�be more efficient online with the new MSN Premium Internet 
Software. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=byoa/prem&ST=1