[Boatanchors] ALERT: AM Under Attack - WA3VJB

Colburn kd4e at ARRL.NET
Sat Jun 21 10:42:23 EDT 2003

> But you said earlier that 5.8kHz was a good idea!

Never once has anyone but you referred to 5.8KHz.  The original proposal
was 5.6KHz and my first response suggested that 6.0 was more reasonable.
I am now persuaded that 6.2KHz gets the job done.

As for the resistance to acknowledging the decades-long problem on the
bands I don't know what to say.  The FCC has acknowledged it in writing
and in public statements at ARRL gatherings, all of the Amateur Radio
magazines have documented it over the years in editorials and other
articles and cartoons, and Amateur Radio lists on the Internet tell the
story with dates, times, callsigns, and detailed descriptions (including
captured audio).  Facts are facts and they don't disappear merely
because we don't like them.

It is also a fact of history that the bad behavior of a minority poisons
the well for the majority.  Between out-of-control contest ops, drunks
on the air, power-crazed QRO ops wiping out Nets and QSO's, etc. the FCC
has grown increasingly sick of listening to the complaints and having to
step in to break up the quarreling children -- I didn't say it Riley

We are getting no-where.  The technical issue seems resolved at 6.2KHz
for AM and no one seems troubled by 3.0KHz for SSB.  So if the FCC
decides to act we now have a defensible position that preserves both

Off to enjoy a brief moment of sunshine between monsoons!

73, doc kd4e

This list is a public service of the City of Tempe, Arizona

Subscription control - http://www.tempe.gov/lists/control.asp?list=BOATANCHORS
Archives - http://interactive.tempe.gov/archives/BOATANCHORS.html

More information about the Boatanchors mailing list