Perhaps I am confused (wouldn't be the first time), but it appears to me
that RM-11392 was filed by N5RFX rather than KQ6XA. And in fact,
KQ6XA has been posting on the Winlink reflector that amateurs should file
comments against RM-11392 but use those comments as a vehicle to push for
abolishing the 300-baud limit on data transmissions. Here is here
latest comment from the Winlink reflector:
Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:30 pm (PST)
The FCC Petition RM-11392
opens the door for
re-examination of the Automatic Sub Bands.
Individuals may comment to FCC again with information
such as this, below, that has not been sent before.
73 Bonnie KQ6XA
New FCC comments:
1. I oppose the petitioner's proposed method of changing
the automatically controlled station data subbands.
2. The use of automatically controlled data stations has
increased tremendously since the original FCC rule was
written. We do need change, to increase the spectrum
available for automatically controlled stations.
It would help alleviate crowding and facilitate efficiency
on the amateur radio bands, to widen the automatically
controlled data subbands to the following frequency
band segments: 1805kHz-1825kHz, 3575-3600kHz,
7100-7125kHz, 10130-10150kHz, 14090-14099kHz,
14101-14150kHz, 18090-18110kHz, 21090-21150kHz,
24900-24930kHz, 28100-28189kHz.
P.S. I wouldn't worry about anyone accusing us of using KQ6XA as a
front -- she would put an end to that in a big hurry. As Director
Vallio can attest, she wants **nothing** to do with the ARRL.
-- Andy Oppel, N6AJO
At 09:44 PM 12/27/2007, K8JE wrote:
I can just see the posts on
QRZ.com and other places regarding RM-11392:
-----
"Dave Sumner, K1ZZ and his ARRL Board sycophants are at it
again. They've
gotten a former member to present this petition which would go a long
way
toward getting the FCC to adopt Regulation by Bandwidth in spite of
the
overwhelming mandate given by League members and other US amateurs to
the
ARRL's own plan. Did I say it was a former member who is pushing
Regulation
by Bandwidth? Read this as being a member who dropped her
membership for
the sole purpose of deluding hams into thinking she is no longer
being
manipulated by ARRL. I think you can figure out what really
happened,
though.
"This is another shallow attempt at deceit by Sumner. First we
have the
petition to FCC and later we have the thinly veiled attempt to
legitimize
band planning through the new Region 2 band plan!
"s/A disgruntled truly former member of ARRL who has seen the
light."
------
To set the record straight, In no way I do not believe this is being
done.
Do I believe we just might see this tactic in the near future? Sure
could.
There are sick and treacherous people among the US population which is
the
same population from which the us ham population is drawn.
Am I neurotic? You be the judge based upon actions during recent
months.
73. HNY
Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director
ARRL Great Lakes Division
5065 Bethany Rd.
Mason, OH 45040
E-mail: k8je@arrl.org; Tel.: 513-459-0142
ARRL - The Reason Amateur Radio Is!
Members - The Reason ARRL Is!
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Frenaye
[
mailto:frenaye@pcnet.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 12:19 AM
To: arrl-odv
Subject: [arrl-odv:16286] Re: KQ6XA & RM-11392
At 11:58 PM 12/26/2007, Coy Day wrote:
>Anyone know what Bonnie is up to now and what her problems are
with
RM-11392?
Your message is the first I've heard of it, maybe it's something
being
discussed within the Exec Committee?
I found nothing on our web site - the one where we wanted to be the best
AR
news source... why not?
A quick google search turned up:
http://www.southgatearc.org/news/december2007/bandwidth_band_plan.htm
Is it something ARRL will be filing on? Looks like the
deadline for filing
is the Friday of our January meeting
-- Tom
=====
e-mail: k1ki@arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director
http://www.arrl.org/
Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone:
860-668-5444
Andy Oppel
andy@andyoppel.com
andy_oppel@alamedanet.net