[SixClub] Digital on 6 meters

Wed Mar 28 23:44:46 EST 2007

Bruce,
Perhaps you misunderstand what I'm saying.

I agree with you that we need to both occupy the band and also ensure that
we have enough space for the modes that we currently know and love in the
future.  3.7 MHz of the 50 and 144 MHz bands is probably too much, but there
is a "happier" medium.  We need dialogue to get to the point of discerning a
good answer for the whole community.  I think that the dialogue has to be
focused on operational concerns and not about who did what to whom and who
wants to do want to whom.  

We need to protect current users, while providing for new ones.  This may
require movement.  I remember folks declaring the end of 144 MHz SSB and CW
when the calling frequency was moved from .110 to .200.  Some didn't like
it, some did, we all do it now, with no problems, but many advantages.
People don't like change and that is understandable, but some change is in
order.  The question is how to make the changes sensibly...let's try!

As you noted, we need guard bands, we need more operational space for times
when the bands open, we need space for conventional repeaters, we need space
for AM, we need space for radio control, we need space for existing digital
modes such as CW, WSJT, Pactor and APRS, we need space for DX windows where
the allocation doesn't match the North American band, and we need to
increase spectrum usage with new stuff.  In the case of 144 MHz, we also
need to reserve space for satellites, unless the birds are going to handle
wideband digital operations.

I would suggest thinking through the needs and make your own alternative
proposal in your reply comments or perhaps in a separate filing if the FCC
process allows it.  Just saying, "No" is not good enough and frankly lacks
the earnest thought that this matter deserves.  When you sketch it out, put
it out here for comments and then perhaps 100 of us will help shape a better
plan that we all submit to the FCC Comment Web site.

I work from home and unless I'm on a conference call using the speakerphone,
I have the volume turned up on 50.125, 144.200 and 40M. Sometimes, I even
turn on a fourth rig for either 20 or 10M and I always have a few FM rigs
dedicated to various simplex and repeater frequencies in monitor mode. Feel
free to call me on the air or on the phone for a sked anytime!

73,
Gordon Beattie, W2TTT
W2ttt at att.net
201.314.6964

-----Original Message-----
From: sixclub-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:sixclub-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of bruce mallon
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 3:56 AM
To: World Wide Six Meter Club
Subject: RE: [SixClub] Digital on 6 meters

On 220 mhz loss ....

I was on 223.5 in 1974 and im STILL on 222 after 30
years .... that said .... We lost it because of more
that a TOTAL lack of use Here in Tampabay we NEVER had
more than 3 -5 users.

On to 6 meters .... It is dead only because there is
no skip we have about 20 which check into our 6 meter
weekly FM net and at least twice that that are on SSB
WHEN ITS OPEN.
I commented over a year ago that any wide band had to
be displaced as far as possible from weak signal and
was met with no interest on the part of these digi
users. The same apply to 2 meters which does have a
higher usage they seem to think that somehow we need
to be displaced into 10% of that band too I guess the
repeaters will have to go .... I DON'T HAVE A CLUE .

IF they had proposed 50.5 - 51.0 which already had
digi guys or 53.5 to 54.0 which is very lightly used I
don't think you would see the hostile response you are
seeing but again they have NO interest or even care
about the other users . As for " BEING MOVED " If we
are already there whats the reason IF this is some way
to use the band ????

After 40+ years on 6 ( I sent out 300+ QSL cards last
year ) I know that when its open again the 50,1 - 50.5
slice will be PACKED as will 52.00 - 53.00 with FM
nets and repeaters.... AGAIN if someone realy looked
at this band there are only 2 places that are clear
99% of the time when things get hot.
The same can be said for 10 meters EXCEPT for AM at
29.0 what do you have from 29.0 to 29.50?

HOSTAL WORDS ...

LEGACY mode thats what we are being called it's the
way it's used that frosts me EXCUSE ME but It's not
going any place ARRL... and as a life member damn neat
30 years and a league member almost 40 IT OFFENDS ME
.....

You say ......

"It's not going to be the same after the rule changes
"

EXPLANE ..... If this is to ADD people to any band why
would it effect thoes already their? If it does then
what would happen would be a LOSS of stations not a
gain AGAIN why are current users targeted by the
league and why are others making rules that are only
self serving to there wants or causes ..... 3.7 out of
4 mhz for a mode that 99% of us dont even have or WANT
.....somehow  are you saying that 51% of league
members are DIGITAL ?

DIGITAL WE COULD LIVE WITH .......

Is one that DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH ALL OF US and we
don't have to  MOVE ....... NOT a BANDGRAB of more
than 90% for 1% of all active hams......

Finaly This is MY opinion NOT that of this forum .

Bruce WA4GCH
SMIRK member since 2/74 on 6 since 1966
EXTRA CLASS First licensed in the mid 60's 
Member QCWA, OOTC
ARRL since 1968 life member since the 70's
Working in radio since 1967 .....

--- "J. Gordon Beattie, Jr., W2TTT" <w2ttt at att.net>
wrote:

> Bruce et al,
> Let's face a fact...we have to occupy the bands we
> are allocated with stuff
> or lose the bands.
> I was part of a very active 220-222 MHz defense
> committee and subsequently a
> member of the 219 MHz task force and I remember well
> working with great guys
> like Todd Olsen, K0TO to recover from that loss of
> spectrum.
> It's not pretty!
> Having said that, I really enjoy weak signal
> operation and we do need to
> make sure that we make some small changes to the
> broad rule as proposed
> and/or come up with bandplans that address the
> concerns that we all share. 
> The bottom line is that it is not going to be the
> same after the rule
> changes, and we can make it better than the
> relatively sterile spectrum that
> it is today.  With that thought, let's figure what
> has to be addressed as
> is, what has to be moved, how much spectrum is
> needed and make room for the
> multi-media digital operations that will complement
> what is done in the weak
> signal, FM, AM, etc. areas of the band.
> Thanks for reading!
> 73,
> Gordon Beattie, W2TTT
> 201.314.6964
> W2ttt at arrl.net
> 
> 

____________________________________________________________________________
________
Don't pick lemons.
See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html 
______________________________________________________________
SixClub mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/sixclub
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/faq.htm
Post: mailto:SixClub at mailman.qth.net