Draft comments to FCC - Revision history

KJ7RRV at 01:10, 18 November 2023

2023-11-18T01:10:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:10, 17 November 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''This is a draft and is not an official statement from the club.'''		'''This is a draft and is not an official statement from the club.'''

	We are an amateur radio club located in Brookings, Oregon. We greatly appreciate the changes made to Part 97 by the Commission's recent ''Report and Order'' replacing baud rate limits on the HF bands with new bandwidth limits, and support the amendments discussed in the associated ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''.		We are an amateur radio club located in Brookings, Oregon. We greatly appreciate the changes made to Part 97 by the Commission's recent ''Report and Order'' replacing baud rate limits on the HF bands with new bandwidth limits, and we support the amendments discussed in the associated ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''.

	As many have ~~already stated~~, baud rate limits hinder emergency communications and technical advancement. Although the problem was most significant on the HF bands due to these bands having some of the strictest baud rate limits and generally being the most congested, ~~replacing~~ the baud rate limits on ~~all amateur~~ bands ~~would be a substantial further improvement~~.		As many amateurs have argued and the FCC has agreed, baud rate limits hinder emergency communications and technical advancement. Although the problem was most significant on the HF bands due to these bands having some of the strictest baud rate limits and generally being the most congested, the baud rate limits are still problematic on the bands where they remain.

	Therefore, we support the proposal to remove baud rate limits on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, ~~as well as~~ on the VHF and UHF bands which currently have such limits. We believe that the current bandwidth limitations on the VHF and UHF bands have been working effectively, and that there is no need to change these limits.		Therefore, we support the proposal to remove baud rate limits on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, and on the VHF and UHF bands which currently have such limits. We believe that the current bandwidth limitations on the VHF and UHF bands have been working effectively, and that there is no need to change these limits.

	We have no particular suggestions for bandwidth limits on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, as we do not have direct experience with these bands. However, we do support removing the baud rate limitations on these bands, because baud rate limits have been rendered obsolete by advancements in digital radio modulation technology.		We have no particular suggestions for bandwidth limits on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, as we do not have direct experience with the use of these bands. However, we do support removing the baud rate limitations on these bands, because baud rate limits have been rendered obsolete by advancements in digital radio modulation technology.

	Overall, we support the amendments contained in the ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''. Preventing the use of excessive bandwidth by individual operators is important on all bands, but symbol rate limits are an outdated and ineffective means to achieve this.		Overall, we support the amendments contained in the ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''. Preventing the use of excessive bandwidth by individual operators is important on all bands, but symbol rate limits are an outdated and ineffective means to achieve this.

KJ7RRV at 19:40, 17 November 2023

2023-11-17T19:40:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:40, 17 November 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''This is a draft and is not an official statement from the club.'''		'''This is a draft and is not an official statement from the club.'''

	We are an amateur radio club located in Brookings, Oregon. We greatly appreciate the changes made to Part 97 by the Commission's recent ''Report and Order'', and support the amendments discussed in the associated ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''.		We are an amateur radio club located in Brookings, Oregon. We greatly appreciate the changes made to Part 97 by the Commission's recent ''Report and Order'' replacing baud rate limits on the HF bands with new bandwidth limits, and support the amendments discussed in the associated ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''.

	Although the problem was most significant on the HF bands~~, already addressed by the ''Report and Order'',~~ due to these bands having some of the strictest baud rate limits and generally being the most congested, replacing the baud rate limits on all amateur bands would be a substantial further improvement.		As many have already stated, baud rate limits hinder emergency communications and technical advancement. Although the problem was most significant on the HF bands due to these bands having some of the strictest baud rate limits and generally being the most congested, replacing the baud rate limits on all amateur bands would be a substantial further improvement.

	Therefore, we support the proposal to remove baud rate ~~regulations~~ on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, as well as on the VHF and UHF bands which currently have such ~~regulations~~. We believe that the current bandwidth limitations on the VHF and UHF bands have been working effectively, and that there is no need to change these limits. We have no particular suggestions for bandwidth limits on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, as we do not have direct experience with these bands.		Therefore, we support the proposal to remove baud rate limits on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, as well as on the VHF and UHF bands which currently have such limits. We believe that the current bandwidth limitations on the VHF and UHF bands have been working effectively, and that there is no need to change these limits.

			We have no particular suggestions for bandwidth limits on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, as we do not have direct experience with these bands. However, we do support removing the baud rate limitations on these bands, because baud rate limits have been rendered obsolete by advancements in digital radio modulation technology.

	Overall, we support the amendments contained in the ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''. Preventing the use of excessive bandwidth by individual operators is important on all bands, but symbol rate limits are an outdated and ineffective means to achieve this.		Overall, we support the amendments contained in the ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''. Preventing the use of excessive bandwidth by individual operators is important on all bands, but symbol rate limits are an outdated and ineffective means to achieve this.

KJ7RRV at 01:05, 17 November 2023

2023-11-17T01:05:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:05, 16 November 2023
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Although the problem was most significant on the HF bands, already addressed by the ''Report and Order'', due to these bands having some of the strictest baud rate limits and generally being the most congested, replacing the baud rate limits on all amateur bands would be a substantial further improvement.		Although the problem was most significant on the HF bands, already addressed by the ''Report and Order'', due to these bands having some of the strictest baud rate limits and generally being the most congested, replacing the baud rate limits on all amateur bands would be a substantial further improvement.

	Therefore, we support the proposal to remove baud rate regulations on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, as well as on the VHF and UHF bands which currently have such regulations. We believe that the current bandwidth limitations on the VHF and UHF bands have been working effectively, and that there is no need to change these limits. We ~~agree that~~ bandwidth ~~limitations are necessary~~ on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, ~~especially considering the small size of these bands, but~~ as we do not have direct experience with these bands~~, we have no specific suggestion for the limit to be used~~.		Therefore, we support the proposal to remove baud rate regulations on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, as well as on the VHF and UHF bands which currently have such regulations. We believe that the current bandwidth limitations on the VHF and UHF bands have been working effectively, and that there is no need to change these limits. We have no particular suggestions for bandwidth limits on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, as we do not have direct experience with these bands.

	Overall, we support the amendments contained in the ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''. Preventing the use of excessive bandwidth by individual operators is important on all bands, but symbol rate limits are an outdated and ineffective means to achieve this.		Overall, we support the amendments contained in the ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''. Preventing the use of excessive bandwidth by individual operators is important on all bands, but symbol rate limits are an outdated and ineffective means to achieve this.

KJ7RRV: Created page with "'''This is a draft and is not an official statement from the club.''' We are an amateur radio club located in Brookings, Oregon. We greatly appreciate the changes made to Part 97 by the Commission's recent ''Report and Order'', and support the amendments discussed in the associated ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''. Although the problem was most significant on the HF bands, already addressed by the ''Report and Order'', due to these bands having some of the st..."

2023-11-15T02:56:08Z

Created page with "'''This is a draft and is not an official statement from the club.''' We are an amateur radio club located in Brookings, Oregon. We greatly appreciate the changes made to Part 97 by the Commission's recent ''Report and Order'', and support the amendments discussed in the associated ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''. Although the problem was most significant on the HF bands, already addressed by the ''Report and Order'', due to these bands having some of the st..."

New page

'''This is a draft and is not an official statement from the club.'''

We are an amateur radio club located in Brookings, Oregon. We greatly appreciate the changes made to Part 97 by the Commission's recent ''Report and Order'', and support the amendments discussed in the associated ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''.

Although the problem was most significant on the HF bands, already addressed by the ''Report and Order'', due to these bands having some of the strictest baud rate limits and generally being the most congested, replacing the baud rate limits on all amateur bands would be a substantial further improvement.

Therefore, we support the proposal to remove baud rate regulations on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, as well as on the VHF and UHF bands which currently have such regulations. We believe that the current bandwidth limitations on the VHF and UHF bands have been working effectively, and that there is no need to change these limits. We agree that bandwidth limitations are necessary on the 2200 meter and 630 meter bands, especially considering the small size of these bands, but as we do not have direct experience with these bands, we have no specific suggestion for the limit to be used.

Overall, we support the amendments contained in the ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''. Preventing the use of excessive bandwidth by individual operators is important on all bands, but symbol rate limits are an outdated and ineffective means to achieve this.