April 2007 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:15441] Re: HOW WE CAN AVOID LETRING OUR MEMBERS DOWN -- AGAIN
by Karl Bullock 17 Apr '07

17 Apr '07

Folks, I want to go on record as agreeing totally with Jim's post. This last proposal has kept us on defense, and you don't win a game on defense only. This is not at all an indictment of current leadership, because I've seen this as a problem for years (anybody remember "Incentive Licensing"??? Yep, I mentioned the 'I' word). In today's world, where any yoohoo can post a bunch of garbage to a blog, it is even more incumbent on us to make sure the reasons, benefits, and considered alternatives are clearly explained to the Membership, and disinformation is corrected. Maybe a full-blown QST article, including FAQ's, followed by "error corrections" in the ARRL Letter? Whatever is decided, any proposal with any possibility of controversy should be accompanied by a sufficient marketing campaign. 73, Karl, WA5TMC Jim Weaver wrote: > > Ladies & Gents, > > RE: RM-11306 etc. > > PROPOSAL: I suggest ARRL develop and staff an effective Intellectual > Marketing operation for our main product which is the petitions for > rulemaking we submit to the FCC. To my knowledge, we do not have one > or two skill sets on staff at this time to operate this department. I > do not believe we need to break the piggy bank to obtain these skill > sets. Please note that the skills needed in an Intellectual Marketing > operation are different from the skills needs to market existing ARRL > product categories. > > Discussion: > > While deciding to vote my support for the EC reco to withdraw > RM-11306, I became quite depressed over the damage that was caused not > only to what remained of our effort to obtain Regulation by Bandwidth, > but to the reputation of ARRL and Amateur Radio, and the future > ability of ARRL to advocate effectively for the well-being of Amateur > Radio. To say this as plainly as I can, it is my opinion that we, the > Board and Management of ARRL, unintentionally abandoned our members > through our mismanagement of RM-11306 and other petitions we have > submitted to the FCC in recent years. Yes, I blame no one for the > despicable showings ARRL initiatives have made than us who lead ARRL. > This clearly includes me should, among everyone else on the Board and > in Management, should have known better because of my experience. > > Based upon the philosophy that correcting a situation late is better > than never, I ask that you follow my thinking. Evaluate it however you > will, but please give it consideration. I realize there will be an > initial thought that I am suggesting the Board “micro manage” staff, > but I would hope it does not become necessary for us to do this. > > Where I believe we all have failed our members and the entire US > Amateur Radio community is very basic. We have taken splendid > regulatory concepts and dropped them into the laps of the FCC and our > members without following the extremely basic principles of market > planning, market development and market introduction. If we were a > consumer product company, we would be out of business by now. We would > have developed products and introduced them into consumer sales > without determining either whether the consumer wants them or whether > we can educate the consumer to learn he/she wants them. We further > have not determined what roadblocks we are likely to face in our > market introduction, and how to manage or avoid these roadblocks. For > example, we did not anticipate the significance Mr. Teller would have > on our “bandwidth” effort. Therefore, we did not take the critical > steps necessary to negate his arguments before he sold these to > unsuspecting, gullible, well-meaning members. We did not even have a > plan to defuse Mr. Teller’s slanted and often-false allegations once > these were made. Please make no mistake about this. It is not Teller’s > fault he was successful, it is ours. > > Any quality, consumer marketing company would have developed and > employed preventative tactics to nullify readily-anticipated attack. > In addition, the company would have anticipated a variety of attacks > on the product after its introduction, and would have prepared tools > for the immediate management of these attacks upon their being made. > We have not done this, at least during recent years. > > How does the consumer product company analogy fit the situation with > ARRL? A cosmetic, cleaning product, food product, tool, etc. are the > company’s product. RM-11306 and other of our petitions to FCC are the > Board’s products. > > Just as no successful major consumer product company would attempt to > market a product without first having done effective basic research, > product research, consumer research, market research and development, > and consumer relations damage control preparation, I suggest the Board > needs to adopt equivalent planning and execution in our effort to > develop effect petitions to obtain FCC rulemaking. > > The Board has done each of the necessary steps toward developing and > promoting its recent petitions except that we have essentially ignored > consumer research, market research and consumer relations damage > control preparation. It is well known in the consumer industry that > many products succeed or fail because of inadequate management of > consumer affairs . . . not because the product is faulty. > > On Saturday, I spoke at a quarterly luncheon meeting of QCWA Chapter 1 > in Cleveland. During this meeting, one of the members asked me if the > ARRL has any clout with the FCC and if ARRL has enough of a following > with its members to get anything done. This was telling! > > I suggest that if we are to enjoy a sense of respect for ARRL within > the FCC, and are to redevelop (yes, redevelop) a sense of pride and > true allegiance in ARRL membership among the majority of our members, > we need to become successful in obtaining adoption of our petitions. > Without such success, it seems to me that we relegate ourselves to > being little more than an awards factory. Too, without success in > Washington, why should we expect non-members to want to join us? > > Major consumer product companies spend major portions of their budgets > on product development-marketing operations such as I’ve discussed. On > the other hand, ARRL is graced with a wide variety of skills and > experiences among its members. Properly identified and managed by > staff or the Board, I suggest we could tap into the marketing > experience of select members who would gladly volunteer their services > to provide much of the skill and experience needed to develop a top > notch Intellectual Marketing Department. Although the idea of using > volunteers in such a position may seem foreign to ARRL, I would like > to point out that the US FDA and other agencies have used the services > of volunteers effectively on critical advisory boards for many years. > This is not without cost, but greatly minimizes the cost as compared > with direct hires to the agencies. > > Finally and rather obviously, I do not believe we can afford not to > learn how to operate much more smartly than we have demonstrated recently. > > I will appreciate any discussion on this topic. What do you think? > > 73, > > Jim > > //Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director// > > //ARRL Great Lakes Division// > > 5065 Bethany Rd. > > Mason, OH 45040 > > E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org <mailto:k8je@arrl.org>; Tel.: 513-459-0142 > > /*/ARRL - The Reason Amateur Radio Is!/*/ > > /*/Members - The Reason ARRL Is!/*/ >

1 0

[arrl-odv:15438] Re: A bad day in Blacksburg
by Henry R. Leggette 17 Apr '07

17 Apr '07

Kay, thanks for the report. I was only thinking after it happen about the distance you maybe from the incident. I could not remember your new hometown at the time. Virginia Tech was at one time in the same athlete conference with Memphis State University. Memphis State was in many, many conferences as a non football school.. It was football there and the football was never in a conference until the later years. I always remember Virginia Tech was high competition for us. I am very sorry all that happen in a appeared to be one of the quite universities in the country. Somehow the country needs to get an upper hand on all the crime experienced in the larger cities. 73, Henry - WD4Q ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kay Craigie" <n3kn(a)verizon.net> To: "arrl-odv" <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 7:23 PM Subject: [arrl-odv:15437] A bad day in Blacksburg > By now you all know about the horrific events that took place today in my > new home town, Blacksburg, Virginia. The campus is about 5 miles from my > house. This morning we heard sirens screaming down the nearby highway > towards town -- presumably they were ambulances. We've had such high winds > since last night that I'm surprised we still have any shingles and > shutters > on the house, and medical evacuation helicopters certainly could not fly > in > these conditions. > > I was telling somebody just the other day how different this area is from > Philadelphia, where the local TV news invariably leads with stories about > murders, other violent crimes, deadly house fires in the slums, and so > gruesomely on. Around here, the local TV news top stories are usually > about > school board squabbles, bluegrass festivals, coyote sightings, and once in > a > while a bad crash on the interstate. What a relief to be so far from > big-city violence, I said. Today, however, more Americans died in > Blacksburg > than in Baghdad. > > No victims' names have been made public as yet. We're keeping our fingers > crossed that none of the fatalities will turn out to be young members of > the > Virginia Tech Amateur Radio Association. > > 73 - Kay N3KN > >

1 0

[arrl-odv:15437] A bad day in Blacksburg
by Kay Craigie 17 Apr '07

17 Apr '07

By now you all know about the horrific events that took place today in my new home town, Blacksburg, Virginia. The campus is about 5 miles from my house. This morning we heard sirens screaming down the nearby highway towards town -- presumably they were ambulances. We've had such high winds since last night that I'm surprised we still have any shingles and shutters on the house, and medical evacuation helicopters certainly could not fly in these conditions. I was telling somebody just the other day how different this area is from Philadelphia, where the local TV news invariably leads with stories about murders, other violent crimes, deadly house fires in the slums, and so gruesomely on. Around here, the local TV news top stories are usually about school board squabbles, bluegrass festivals, coyote sightings, and once in a while a bad crash on the interstate. What a relief to be so far from big-city violence, I said. Today, however, more Americans died in Blacksburg than in Baghdad. No victims' names have been made public as yet. We're keeping our fingers crossed that none of the fatalities will turn out to be young members of the Virginia Tech Amateur Radio Association. 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0

[arrl-odv:15436] HOW WE CAN AVOID LETRING OUR MEMBERS DOWN -- AGAIN
by Jim Weaver 17 Apr '07

17 Apr '07

Ladies & Gents, RE: RM-11306 etc. PROPOSAL: I suggest ARRL develop and staff an effective Intellectual Marketing operation for our main product which is the petitions for rulemaking we submit to the FCC. To my knowledge, we do not have one or two skill sets on staff at this time to operate this department. I do not believe we need to break the piggy bank to obtain these skill sets. Please note that the skills needed in an Intellectual Marketing operation are different from the skills needs to market existing ARRL product categories. Discussion: While deciding to vote my support for the EC reco to withdraw RM-11306, I became quite depressed over the damage that was caused not only to what remained of our effort to obtain Regulation by Bandwidth, but to the reputation of ARRL and Amateur Radio, and the future ability of ARRL to advocate effectively for the well-being of Amateur Radio. To say this as plainly as I can, it is my opinion that we, the Board and Management of ARRL, unintentionally abandoned our members through our mismanagement of RM-11306 and other petitions we have submitted to the FCC in recent years. Yes, I blame no one for the despicable showings ARRL initiatives have made than us who lead ARRL. This clearly includes me should, among everyone else on the Board and in Management, should have known better because of my experience. Based upon the philosophy that correcting a situation late is better than never, I ask that you follow my thinking. Evaluate it however you will, but please give it consideration. I realize there will be an initial thought that I am suggesting the Board "micro manage" staff, but I would hope it does not become necessary for us to do this. Where I believe we all have failed our members and the entire US Amateur Radio community is very basic. We have taken splendid regulatory concepts and dropped them into the laps of the FCC and our members without following the extremely basic principles of market planning, market development and market introduction. If we were a consumer product company, we would be out of business by now. We would have developed products and introduced them into consumer sales without determining either whether the consumer wants them or whether we can educate the consumer to learn he/she wants them. We further have not determined what roadblocks we are likely to face in our market introduction, and how to manage or avoid these roadblocks. For example, we did not anticipate the significance Mr. Teller would have on our "bandwidth" effort. Therefore, we did not take the critical steps necessary to negate his arguments before he sold these to unsuspecting, gullible, well-meaning members. We did not even have a plan to defuse Mr. Teller's slanted and often-false allegations once these were made. Please make no mistake about this. It is not Teller's fault he was successful, it is ours. Any quality, consumer marketing company would have developed and employed preventative tactics to nullify readily-anticipated attack. In addition, the company would have anticipated a variety of attacks on the product after its introduction, and would have prepared tools for the immediate management of these attacks upon their being made. We have not done this, at least during recent years. How does the consumer product company analogy fit the situation with ARRL? A cosmetic, cleaning product, food product, tool, etc. are the company's product. RM-11306 and other of our petitions to FCC are the Board's products. Just as no successful major consumer product company would attempt to market a product without first having done effective basic research, product research, consumer research, market research and development, and consumer relations damage control preparation, I suggest the Board needs to adopt equivalent planning and execution in our effort to develop effect petitions to obtain FCC rulemaking. The Board has done each of the necessary steps toward developing and promoting its recent petitions except that we have essentially ignored consumer research, market research and consumer relations damage control preparation. It is well known in the consumer industry that many products succeed or fail because of inadequate management of consumer affairs . . . not because the product is faulty. On Saturday, I spoke at a quarterly luncheon meeting of QCWA Chapter 1 in Cleveland. During this meeting, one of the members asked me if the ARRL has any clout with the FCC and if ARRL has enough of a following with its members to get anything done. This was telling! I suggest that if we are to enjoy a sense of respect for ARRL within the FCC, and are to redevelop (yes, redevelop) a sense of pride and true allegiance in ARRL membership among the majority of our members, we need to become successful in obtaining adoption of our petitions. Without such success, it seems to me that we relegate ourselves to being little more than an awards factory. Too, without success in Washington, why should we expect non-members to want to join us? Major consumer product companies spend major portions of their budgets on product development-marketing operations such as I've discussed. On the other hand, ARRL is graced with a wide variety of skills and experiences among its members. Properly identified and managed by staff or the Board, I suggest we could tap into the marketing experience of select members who would gladly volunteer their services to provide much of the skill and experience needed to develop a top notch Intellectual Marketing Department. Although the idea of using volunteers in such a position may seem foreign to ARRL, I would like to point out that the US FDA and other agencies have used the services of volunteers effectively on critical advisory boards for many years. This is not without cost, but greatly minimizes the cost as compared with direct hires to the agencies. Finally and rather obviously, I do not believe we can afford not to learn how to operate much more smartly than we have demonstrated recently. I will appreciate any discussion on this topic. What do you think? 73, Jim Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director ARRL Great Lakes Division 5065 Bethany Rd. Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org; Tel.: 513-459-0142 ARRL - The Reason Amateur Radio Is! Members - The Reason ARRL Is!

1 0

[arrl-odv:15435] FW: [dxac-i:1049] Remote operation - has it gone too far?
by Cliff Ahrens 16 Apr '07

16 Apr '07

Here's an email from Jim Reisert AD1C to the DXAC-I reflector about remote operation in the DXCC program. This will likely be a hot policy issue, if it isn't already! It will be interesting to see what the feedback is from DXAC members. I thought the board would be interested. Cliff K0CA DXAC Board Liaison From: Jim Reisert AD1C [mailto:jjreisert@alum.mit.edu] Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 5:04 PM To: dxac-i list Subject: [dxac-i:1049] Remote operation - has it gone too far? Hello fellow DXAC members, I have heard from two different sources in the last week about stations who are near the top of the DXCC Challenge ladder who are making some of their contacts remotely, for example, an East Coast station using a remote transmitter located on the West Coast to work Swains Island on 10 meters, a band otherwise unavailable to most of us in the Northeast. In reading the DXCC Rules as published on the ARRL web site (which seems to match the printed January 2007 edition), I found only these two references to remote operation (the underlining is mine): http://www.arrl.org/awards/dxcc/rules.html 8. All stations contacted must be "land stations." Contacts with ships and boats, anchored or underway, and airborne aircraft, cannot be counted. For the purposes of this award, remote control operating points must also be land based. Exception: Permanently docked exhibition ships, such as the Queen Mary and other historic ships will be considered land based. 9. All stations must be contacted from the same DXCC Entity. The location of any station shall be defined as the location of the transmitter. For the purposes of this award, remote operating points must be located within the same DXCC Entity as the transmitter and receiver. Is this really within the spirit of the DXCC Challenge, and in the spirit of the DXCC award program in general? Of course, the playing field is never level, but it seems to me that have some have found a way to unlevel it even further. I have no axe to grind, being far down the list myself. Thoughts, anyone? Thanks & 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, <jjreisert(a)alum.mit.edu>, http:// <http://www.ad1c.us/> www.ad1c.us <http://www.ad1c.us/>

1 0

[arrl-odv:15434] RE: [arrl-odv:15433] 4O3ZZ will be QRV tonight
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 16 Apr '07

16 Apr '07

WA5TMC, K0CA and N2FF made it into my log very quickly on 20 CW -- apologies to anyone I missed. I will try 40 next, then 80 later on. 73, Dave 4O3ZZ ________________________________ From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Mon 4/16/2007 8:13 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:15433] 4O3ZZ will be QRV tonight Hi, I am in Montenegro at the YT6A location, and plan to use my Montenegro 4O3ZZ license on CW tonight. 73, Dave K1ZZ

1 0

[arrl-odv:15433] 4O3ZZ will be QRV tonight
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 16 Apr '07

16 Apr '07

Hi, I am in Montenegro at the YT6A location, and plan to use my Montenegro 4O3ZZ license on CW tonight. 73, Dave K1ZZ

1 0

[arrl-odv:15432] FW: Job Change
by Kramer, Harold, WJ1B 16 Apr '07

16 Apr '07

FYI And, Congratulations to Khrysyne. Harold Harold Kramer, WJ1B Chief Operating Officer ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio 225 Main Street Newington, CT 06111 Telephone: 860 594 0220 email: hkramer(a)arrl.org web: www.arrl.org/ <http://www.arrl.org/> ________________________________ From: Kleinman, Joel, N1BKE Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 2:17 PM To: HQ Staff Subject: Job Change Congratulations to Khrystyne Keane, K1SFA, who will become ARRL News Editor, effective June 4, 2007. (As previously announced, Rick Lindquist will be retiring from the HQ staff June 1.) We are advertising for Khrystyne's current position of Assistant Editor; a "Job Posting" notice will be posted on the bulletin boards soon. Joel

1 0

[arrl-odv:15431] Re:RE: More propaganda from Skip Teller
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 14 Apr '07

14 Apr '07

97.113(a)(4) prohibits "messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning, except as otherwise provided herein." That applies to all transmissions, not just to exchanges with amateurs in other countries. The exceptions are for telecommand and telemetry -- they are a bit broader than just space telecommand, but certainly do not extend to message content. See 97.207(f), 97.215(b) and 97.217 in addition to 97.211(b). Dave 9A/K1ZZ ________________________________ From: Joel Harrison [mailto:w5zn@arrl.org] Sent: Sat 4/14/2007 8:28 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: RE: [arrl-odv:15429] Re: More propaganda from Skip Teller What about communications between stations in the SAME country??? Joel ________________________________ From: w3kd(a)aol.com [mailto:w3kd@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 9:31 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:15429] Re: More propaganda from Skip Teller Skip Teller is simply wrong, Andy. Our bandwidth petition proposed to delete redundant language in 97.309. No encryption limits are deleted at all. Here is an excerpt from an encryption memo prepared by me for the HSMM last year. Joel has a correspondent who asked about this, and I am preparing a response to try to insert some sanity into this process. Gee, this process is painful when the uninformed speak so positively and raise the fear level in people who have the opportunity to think for themselves, but don't. Chris W3KD Until recently, FCC rules prohibited the transmissions of messages in codes or ciphers which are intended to obscure the meaning thereof, except as otherwise provided in the FCC Part 97 Rules. 47 C.F.R. § 97.113(a)(4). That rule also prohibited the use of "false or deceptive messages, signals, or identification." The rule section was revised by an FCC Report and Order, DA 06-79, released January 19, 2006. That Report and Order amended numerous rule sections in Part 97 to conform to the current language of the International Radio Regulations, which were amended substantially at WRC-03. Article 25.2A was one of the provisions of the Radio Regulations that changed at WRC-03.[1] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [1] Previously, Article 25.2 stated "When transmissions between amateur stations of different countries are permitted, they shall be made in plain language and shall be limited to messages of a technical nature relating to tests and to remarks of a personal character for which, by reason of their unimportance, recourse to the public telecommunications service is not justified."[2] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [2] Article 25.2A, as adopted at WRC-03, now states "Transmissions between amateur stations of different countries shall not be encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning, except for control signals exchanged between earth command stations and space stations in the amateur satellite service."[3] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [3] In order to conform Section 97.113(a)(4) to the amended Radio Regulations, FCC dropped the "codes and ciphers" language, and amend the rule to prohibit amateur stations exchanging messages with amateur stations in other countries from making transmissions that are encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning, except for control signals exchanged between earth command stations and space stations in the amateur-satellite service. With regard to the exception in the Radio Regulations for encoded control signals exchanged between earth command stations and space stations in the amateur-satellite service, we note that this exception is already set forth in the Commission's Rules.[4] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [4] The FCC, in that January, 2006 Report and Order, also revised Section 97.117 of the Commission's Rules[5] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [5] to reflect the current language of Article 25.2 of the Radio Regulations.[6] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [6] Article 25.2, as revised at WRC-03, now states "Transmissions between amateur stations of different countries shall be limited to communications incidental to the purposes of the amateur service, as defined in No. 1.56 [which defines the amateur service] and to remarks of a personal character."[7] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [7] Section 97.117 of the Commission's Rules formerly stated that "transmissions to a different country, where permitted, shall be made in plain language and shall be limited to messages of a technical nature relating to tests, and, to remarks of a personal character for which, by reason of their unimportance, recourse to the public telecommunications service is not justified." In order to conform Section 97.117 to the amended Article 25.2 of the Radio Regulations, the FCC amended Section 97.117 to state that amateur stations may transmit communications "incidental to the purposes of the amateur service and to remarks of a personal character." So, the "plain language" provision is gone internationally and domestically. ________________________________ -----Original Message----- From: andy(a)andyoppel.com To: arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org Sent: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 10:50 PM Subject: [arrl-odv:15427] More propaganda from Skip Teller Mr. Teller has started a new thread on QRZ - this time he is going after use of encryption on the amateur bands. http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST&f=3&t=152634 Andy Oppel andy(a)andyoppel.com andy_oppel(a)alamedanet.net ________________________________ size=2 width="100%" align=center> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000437> . ________________________________ [1] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [1] WRC-03 Final Acts, Article 25.2A. [2] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [2] 2000 Radio Regulations, Article 25.2. [3] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [3] WRC-03 Final Acts, Article 25.2A. [4] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [4] Specifically, this exception is codified in Section 97.211(b), which provides that an Amateur Radio Station that is controlling an amateur service space station may transmit special codes intended to obscure the meaning of telecommand messages transmitted to the space station. [5] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [5] 47 C.F.R. § 97.117. [6] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [6] See WRC-03 Final Acts, Article 25.2. [7] <http://mymail.arrl.org/exchange/k1zz/Drafts/RE:%20[arrl-odv:15429]%20%20Re:…> [7] Id.

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:15429] Re: More propaganda from Skip Teller
by Joel Harrison 14 Apr '07

14 Apr '07

What about communications between stations in the SAME country??? Joel _____ From: w3kd(a)aol.com [mailto:w3kd@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 9:31 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:15429] Re: More propaganda from Skip Teller Skip Teller is simply wrong, Andy. Our bandwidth petition proposed to delete redundant language in 97.309. No encryption limits are deleted at all. Here is an excerpt from an encryption memo prepared by me for the HSMM last year. Joel has a correspondent who asked about this, and I am preparing a response to try to insert some sanity into this process. Gee, this process is painful when the uninformed speak so positively and raise the fear level in people who have the opportunity to think for themselves, but don't. Chris W3KD Until recently, FCC rules prohibited the transmissions of messages in codes or ciphers which are intended to obscure the meaning thereof, except as otherwise provided in the FCC Part 97 Rules. 47 C.F.R. § 97.113(a)(4). That rule also prohibited the use of false or deceptive messages, signals, or identification. The rule section was revised by an FCC Report and Order, DA 06-79, released January 19, 2006. That Report and Order amended numerous rule sections in Part 97 to conform to the current language of the International Radio Regulations, which were amended substantially at WRC-03. Article 25.2A was one of the provisions of the Radio Regulations that changed at WRC-03.[1][1] Previously, Article 25.2 stated "When transmissions between amateur stations of different countries are permitted, they shall be made in plain language and shall be limited to messages of a technical nature relating to tests and to remarks of a personal character for which, by reason of their unimportance, recourse to the public telecommunications service is not justified."[2][2] Article 25.2A, as adopted at WRC-03, now states "Transmissions between amateur stations of different countries shall not be encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning, except for control signals exchanged between earth command stations and space stations in the amateur satellite service."[3][3] In order to conform Section 97.113(a)(4) to the amended Radio Regulations, FCC dropped the codes and ciphers language, and amend the rule to prohibit amateur stations exchanging messages with amateur stations in other countries from making transmissions that are encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning, except for control signals exchanged between earth command stations and space stations in the amateur-satellite service. With regard to the exception in the Radio Regulations for encoded control signals exchanged between earth command stations and space stations in the amateur-satellite service, we note that this exception is already set forth in the Commission's Rules.[4][4] The FCC, in that January, 2006 Report and Order, also revised Section 97.117 of the Commissions Rules[5][5] to reflect the current language of Article 25.2 of the Radio Regulations.[6][6] Article 25.2, as revised at WRC-03, now states "Transmissions between amateur stations of different countries shall be limited to communications incidental to the purposes of the amateur service, as defined in No. 1.56 [which defines the amateur service] and to remarks of a personal character."[7][7] Section 97.117 of the Commissions Rules formerly stated that "transmissions to a different country, where permitted, shall be made in plain language and shall be limited to messages of a technical nature relating to tests, and, to remarks of a personal character for which, by reason of their unimportance, recourse to the public telecommunications service is not justified." In order to conform Section 97.117 to the amended Article 25.2 of the Radio Regulations, the FCC amended Section 97.117 to state that amateur stations may transmit communications incidental to the purposes of the amateur service and to remarks of a personal character. So, the plain language provision is gone internationally and domestically. _____ -----Original Message----- From: andy(a)andyoppel.com To: arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org Sent: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 10:50 PM Subject: [arrl-odv:15427] More propaganda from Skip Teller Mr. Teller has started a new thread on QRZ - this time he is going after use of encryption on the amateur bands. http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST <http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST&f=3&t=152634> &f=3&t=152634 Andy Oppel andy(a)andyoppel.com <javascript:parent.ComposeTo(> andy_oppel(a)alamedanet.net <javascript:parent.ComposeTo(> _____ size=2 width="100%" align=center> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000437> AOL.com. _____ [1][1] WRC-03 Final Acts, Article 25.2A. [2][2] 2000 Radio Regulations, Article 25.2. [3][3] WRC-03 Final Acts, Article 25.2A. [4][4] Specifically, this exception is codified in Section 97.211(b), which provides that an Amateur Radio Station that is controlling an amateur service space station may transmit special codes intended to obscure the meaning of telecommand messages transmitted to the space station. [5][5] 47 C.F.R. § 97.117. [6][6] See WRC-03 Final Acts, Article 25.2. [7][7] Id.

1 0