Draft comments to FCC: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| 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 we support the amendments discussed in the associated ''Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking''. | ||
Although the problem was most significant on the HF bands | 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 | 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 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the use of excessive bandwidth by individual operators is important on all bands, but symbol rate limits are an outdated and ineffective means to achieve this.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. | ||
Latest revision as of 18:10, 17 November 2023
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 we support the amendments discussed in the associated Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
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, 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 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.
