1 Sep
2017
1 Sep
'17
3:04 p.m.
A few decades ago, I was one of a handful of people included in
a Special Temporary Authority (STA) permitting the use of spread
spectrum on the ham bands. It was astonishing to me how much
opposition from the ham community itself we encountered trying to get
that exception to the rules approved.
I think to a large extent we could get the FCC rules brought
into at least the previous century, if not this one, by a
concerted effort to get them changed. But in general, hams in
the USA don't work together, and we have no national organization
in favor of getting such changes made, so that is not going to
happen.
Some day I would hope we would be able to do something about that.
In the meantime, both STAs and the Experimental Radio Service are
legal ways around the stupid rules we have to contend with. Both require
a lot of paperwork.
But that's enough of USA rules problems; this is an international
mailing list and I'm often encouraged by what people elsewhere are
doing. Keep up the good work, folks.
- Brian
PS: in Southern California, 70cm is so eaten up by military radars
and other transmission stuff that it's really not very usable
for anything beyond FM voice repeaters anyway.
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 10:55:11AM -0700, Tom Hayward wrote:
In the context of data emissions (like we would expect
on this mailing
list), it's because the USA rules are so limiting. Every new
technology is an exercise in squeezing into the old rules. This method
of packing data into an ATV transmission--which is the one exception
for high bandwidth on 70cm--is engenius.
And yes, it is no wonder most innovation takes place in other
countries given the limits imposed on lower frequency data
transmissions in the US.
Tom KD7LXL