[HCARC] Fwd: [CTDXCC] ARRL Technician Permissions now a RM proposal RM-11828

Thu Mar 14 20:33:23 EDT 2019

Don and everyone,

The ARRL is determined to destroy amateur radio.  Every year it seems 
that new hams have less technical knowledge, less sense of the 
traditions of ham radio and less understanding of why our regulations 
are what they are.  The ARRL's major goal seems to be to increase the 
number of so called hams no matter what the cost. I remember when the 
justification of ham radio included technical things like radio 
propagation studies, technical improvements to comm equipment, providing 
an experienced pool of technical and comm people for the nation.  There 
is some of these still going on but when was the last time you heard 
about them?   It seems all we hear about now is EMCOM for which the ARRL 
provides training, etc.  Every thing the ARRL pushes seems to be for 
EMCOM.  E-mail doesn't belong on the ham bands - it is not amateur!  The 
way to get more techs licensed is to give them better HF privileges - 
but lets use HF NVIS on the low bands for EMCOM as the excuse.  My 
opinion is EMCOM is a scam and is invoked by ARRL to make ham radio more 
attractive to new hams to increase the number of hams.

My view of organizations is that the original people who lead the 
organization truly believe in what the organization does.  By the 3rd 
generation or so, the leaders just want to be in charge of something and 
don't care what the organization is.  The last ARRL president I had any 
respect for was W4KFC many years ago.  When I first joined the ARRL the 
only paid officer was the secretary. Probably the correct title.  His 
main job seemed to be do what needed to be done for the president, board 
and league to function.  Then we had an executive vice president and 
then a CEO.  It seem that by the time it was CEO, the president and 
board were superfluous.

Its not my league any more.  You younger guys need to decide what you 
want ham radio to be and act accordingly.

Kerry. K5KS

On 3/14/2019 11:03 AM, Don Murray via HCARC wrote:
> Hello all...
>
> Ted, N9NB,
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=ted+rappaport&oq=ted+rappaport&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.12577j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
>
>
>
>
>
> From: ctdxcc at lists.kkn.net
> Reply-to: tsrwvcomm
> To: adam@
> Cc: k5na@, ctdxcc at lists.kkn.net
> Sent: 3/14/2019 10:20:54 AM Central Standard Time
> Subject: Re: [CTDXCC] ARRL Technician Permissions now a RM proposal RM-11828
>
> The impetus for this is simple:
> The desire for ARRL to add 375,000 new illegal Pactor stations to use free secure email in the US HF bands by relatively untrained individuals. More attacks on the safety of our spectrum, our hobby,  and our country.
>
> https://www.kb6nu.com/arrls-latest-push-wide-band-digital-arpa/
> https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/the-big-tent-of-amateur-radio-lets-find-a-better-way.612753/
> Again, we are forced to write comments to the FCC against this NPRM RM-11828, and to lobby your elected congressional officials to ignore and rebuke the FCC for considering this RM and RM-11708/NPRM 16-239 without first fixing and enforcing its own rules in 95-2106 and 13-1918.
>
> Urge congress to tell the FCC to not act on this RM-11828 or NPRM 16-239, since the FCC has not properly safeguarded the airways such that hams may self police themselves to ensure proper use of amateur radio. There are so many digital modes now being developed and used by Winlink and ARSFI that are not able to be intercepted by others over the air, or even by the relay stations, themselves, and this RM-11828 was written when Chris Imlay , the former ARRL lawyer, was running the legal activities of ARRL.
>
> This NPRM-11828 supports illegal and improper use of the amateur spectrum. Similar to NPRM 16-239, RM-11708.
>
> Congress must hear from you!
>
> So must ARRL elected officials and the FCC public comments.
> We are still suffering from the effects of a dysfunctional ARRL board with this NPRM, before 5 new ARRL officers were voted in this year.
>
> We must be very vocal at Congress!
>
> 73, ted N9NB
> Sent from smartphone, please excuse typos
> On Mar 14, 2019, at 9:19 AM, Adam Bartlett <adam@> wrote:
>
>
> The league is pushing it - it's to allow techs to operate with NVIS style setups for Emcomm, their usual reasoning these days and 15 for some reason just came along for the ride.
> I think if they were going to push this, they should push a bit more knowledge on HF into the technician pool and possibly limit them to narrow bandwidth digital modes, giving them full permission to run PACTOR/Winlink modes is just asking for it.  If a technician wants to jump in and have a go at PSK31 or FT8 then great, those modes are simple to use and live in well known spots.  I also commented that maybe the 40m permissions should be explicitly limited to daytime hours only if the goal there is Emcomm/NVIS, not DX.
> 73 adam
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 7:35 AM Richard King <k5na> wrote:
> Interesting information Adam. Thanks for posting this.
> First, 80, 40, and 15 meters are the same bands that holders of the old novice license use to have access to. So someone is thinking about that license parameters as a guide or is using the same original reasons for choosing those bands for newbies.
> What I don't understand is why RM-11828 would not allow CW to be operated on those same bands by Technician licensees. If that mode and band are allowed to these licensees, then some of them would take advantage of CW to learn and extend their skills.
> I haven't actually looked at RM-11828 yet and wont have time today. Does anyone know who is promoting this rule change?
> 73, Richard - K5NA
> 73, Richard - K5NA
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 3:18 AM Adam Bartlett <adam@> wrote:
> I just noticed that the FCC has put up a rule making proposal on granting technician level licensees phone & digital in the HF bands (80/40/15 for those keeping track at home), the number is RM-11828 if you're interested in laying out comments for them to read/ignore or for the crew in Newington to promote/ridicule.  I know some folks here may have an interest in the outcome of that matter on both sides of the fence.
> 73 de N5YHF_______________________________________________
> CTDXCC mailing list
> CTDXCC at lists.kkn.net
> https://lists.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/ctdxcc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CTDXCC mailing list
> CTDXCC at lists.kkn.net
> https://lists.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/ctdxcc
> _______________________________________________
> CTDXCC mailing list
> CTDXCC at lists.kkn.net
> https://lists.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/ctdxcc
> ______________________________________________________________
> HCARC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hcarc
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:HCARC at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html