[Elecraft] KRC2 first!

Thu May 15 11:33:01 2003

I think its obvious FCC  thinks everything but SSB is obsolete!  If the channels are
allocated to us, what other of the alphabet soup agencies should give a damn? (FEMA
etc.)
As far as voice modes on 30 meters?  Listen up!  The Europeans etc are there
jabbering on SSB all over the place at times.  Maybe the SSB group should lobby for
the upper 25 khz of 30 meters!
SSB only (USB indicated) is narrow minded "commercial" thinking!  All the 'other'
services use USB only generally.  Why not CW and digital modes?  Maybe not PACTOR,
PACKET and the other 'wide' digital modes, but at a 50 watt ERP and with a 2,8 Khz
"channel", this could accommodate a horde of PSK QSO's all at once.
The "ruling" indicates gross stupidity or "I don't give a damn" mindset on some
agency's
part!  Where is our traditional representation in the FCC?  Probably bought out by
other interests?  I'm appalled at the ruling.
73,
Sandy W5TVW
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Brindle" <[email protected]>
To: "Bruce D. McLaughlin" <[email protected]>
Cc: "'Sandy W5TVW'" <[email protected]>; "'Daniel Reynolds'" <[email protected]>; "'Thom
LaCosta'" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 10:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KRC2 first!

| I think you guys are reading a bit more anti-ham from the FCC into the
| offering than may really be there. The opposition to the 5MHz
| allocation came from the military and government folks who now own the
| band. They are the ones  who put the breaks on things. I see the five
| channels as being a test to see if the hams can behave properly. If
| they pass the test, then the "owners" will be pressured to give up more
| frequencies, finally allowing us a contiguous band. It might take a
| while, though, since the government moves slower than banana slugs in
| these manners...
|
| As for the non-CW bent, it is only fair. i mean no voice is allowed on
| 30m, so they obviously wanted to balance things out by allowing only 5
| phone-only conversations on 60m at a time.
|
| Anyone know how closely related the frequencies are to the British 60m
| allocation?
|
| On Wednesday, May 14, 2003, at 08:37  PM, Bruce D. McLaughlin wrote:
|
| > As someone who loves and primarily operates CW I think it is obvious
| > that the FCC considers the mode obsolete.  It is no longer in
| > commercial
| > use and to all intents and purposes, it is practically dead in the
| > amateur service.  I wouldn't be surprised to see it entirely eliminated
| > as a license qualification after the upcoming WARC.  But I am surprised
| > that the digital modes will also be affected by the "band plan."  If CW
| > can't be used, I doubt any of the narrow digital modes can either.  And
| > they are not considered "obsolete."  With the power limits and the QRN
| > potential and the narrow frequency space, the digital modes might be
| > the
| > most practical use of the allocation but . . . . Of course, this could
| > be a good band for digital audio. (g)
|
| -Jack Brindle, WA4FIB
| =======================================================================
| MacDobs - helping to shift the paradigm for low-cost amateur astronomy.
|
|