“There are other wide-band groups out there upset as well”. Mike: Since wide band data is not yet legal, what groups (besides WINLINK et al) think there is an issue? Maybe prospective groups or proponents? Is it RTTY guys who think this limits them? Is their concern that they will need to stop what they are currently doing? If so, that doesn’t make sense unless they are using older RTTY shifts or non-conventional speeds. They were/are limited to 300 baud now anyway. And band planning is not something the FCC wants to deal with in minutiae anyway. The FCC trend is “you work it out yourselves – have at it. Leave us be”. And besides, the idea is a step at a time. I see 20 – 25 KHZ someday on 40 for example unless there are real problems we learn about. Get 300 baud rate limit trashed and ease into wideband spaces. Otherwise Rappaport’s team will likely prevail for now and hams might get nothing. Our compromise is the best path forward. The fact that no one likes it is not bad news. As judges often tell me, it is a good settlement when no one is happy. Give me a call if you like at my office to chat. Bob Famiglio, K3RF Vice Director - ARRL Atlantic Division 610-359-7300 www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF From: arrl-odv On Behalf Of Michael Ritz Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 11:34 AM To: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org Subject: [arrl-odv:28645] Siddall's FCC filing I am going to recommend that we hold off on Counsel's FCC submission until the new bandplan committee puts in a recommendation on the new digital bandplan as part of the submission. The part of the current proposal related to to lumping all wide-band digital signals into with the ACDS segment has gotten a lot of backlash from up here in the NW Division, and not only from the ARES/Winlink folks. There are other wide-band groups out there upset as well. This is all due to Lor's comments sent out to all the Winlink users, but it has also stirred up a hornet's nest in the entire digital community. 73; Mike W7VO
