51 Comments

Commenting has been turned off for this post
Paul Elliott's avatar

Spread Spectrum -- I would like to see the rules simplified so that SS is allowed on *all* ham bands. It would need to be kept within the applicable occupied bandwidth limits for each band, but other than that I see no need to restrict it to 50 MHz and above. Many of the current digital modulation techniques have similar bandwidth characteristics to direct-sequence SS, so the prohibition of HF SS seems like an archaic holdover. With the 2.8 KHz occupied bandwidth requirement HF SS won't deliver fast bit-rates but there are many other reasons to to use this mode.

I'm currently going over Part 97, looking for things to delete or at least simplify. I'm also in discussion about this with several well-connected folks (ARRL will not be the only ham organization to respond to this opportunity). I've been looking at the FCC replies to date -- some good ideas, but I think we need a well-coordinated response from the established ham organizations to have an impact.

I definitely like the "Here are your band limits. Have fun!" approach, but I suspect that there are too many people who want to preserve the status quo. Still any progress towards that goal is well-worth the effort.

HamSci -- I missed it this year, but I was a presenter last year (with Rob Robinett on wsprdaemon and WSPRSONDE) and I share your enthusiasm. Seeing all the younger hams and science enthusiasts was very encouraging.

Expand full comment
John Alley's avatar

THIS!!! This right here … yeah the whole thing! Is why I am a paid subscriber and WE ALL need to rally around this and get the ARRL on board or move on over and let the digital realm take over. This seems like it’s inevitable and gonna happen no matter….!! Thank you Steve for an AWESOME newsletter….? It is so much more than that though…!!

Expand full comment
49 more comments...

No posts