Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: new fcc study/questionare on amateur radio comms  (Read 6058 times)
WB8VLC
Member

Posts: 123




Ignore
« on: April 03, 2012, 03:53:05 PM »

See the link below

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db0402/DA-12-523A1.pdf
Logged
KATEKEBO
Member

Posts: 117




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: April 04, 2012, 06:10:50 AM »

It's really important that as many of as possible take some time to answer this questionnaire.  It's our best chance to have FCC take action against unreasonable restrictions.

WB8VLC - thanks for posting

S. Bucki
KD8KQH
Logged
K5LXP
Member

Posts: 4507


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #2 on: April 04, 2012, 08:13:55 PM »

I wonder if they'll post the responses like is done for NPRM's, or if the results of the study will be available later.

Mark K5LXP
Albuquerque, NM
Logged
KATEKEBO
Member

Posts: 117




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: April 05, 2012, 06:12:17 AM »

You can see individual comments/answers on FCC web page.  I submitted mine yesterday and it was posted for public view couple of hours later.  There were nine comments / reply letters posted yesterday - some are long and elaborate, other are short.
Please, take few minutes of your time to answer the request.  This is our best chance to convince FCC that they need to act to address unreasonable restrictions on amateur radio operations imposed by private CC&R's.
S. Bucki
KD8KQH
Logged
N4VNV
Member

Posts: 179


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #4 on: April 05, 2012, 06:56:34 AM »

After 45 years I'm tired of justifying my value in a natural disaster situation. The MOST IMPORTANT THING in a disaster is COMMUNICATION! I'm very glad some of you will answer the inquiry by the FCC. I'm just too burned out to do it anymore. When I moved to my current location some of my neighbors did all they could to get rid of my radio station. Now several tornados and ice storms later they smile and wave at me.
Logged
K2CMH
Member

Posts: 276




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: April 05, 2012, 08:15:46 AM »

>You can see individual comments/answers on FCC web page.

Would you happen to have a specific link?  The FCC has lots of web pages.  ;-)

Logged
KATEKEBO
Member

Posts: 117




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: April 05, 2012, 09:15:15 AM »

The Request for Comments (in pdf format) can be found at this link
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-523A1.pdf

You can submit your comments FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System at
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs//
Click on Submit a Filing, then enter "12-91" in the "Proceeding Number" field and click Continue for further instruction.
You can also send your comments by mail to the address provided in the Request for Comments release.

You can see comments that were already submitted at
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs//
Click Search for Filings, enter "12-91" in the "Proceeding Number" field and click Search for Comments

Please, do you part to help hams who live under restricted covenants.

73

S. Bucki
KD8KQH

Logged
K5LXP
Member

Posts: 4507


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #7 on: April 06, 2012, 09:35:00 PM »

If the comments submitted so far are any indication, there'd be no reason for the FCC or anyone else consider accommodating the amateur service for anything.  With few exceptions, no one is really answering the questions on the notice.  It's just like reading comments on eHam!  A few guys got it right and commented intelligently, but it's pretty underwhelming so far.

Burt Fisher's comment is my favorite.


Mark K5LXP
Albuquerque, NM
Logged
K3WEC
Member

Posts: 260




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: April 09, 2012, 04:07:01 PM »

Burt Fisher's comment is my favorite.

Mine too  Cheesy
Logged
NN4RH
Member

Posts: 328




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: April 09, 2012, 06:41:17 PM »

If the comments submitted so far are any indication, there'd be no reason for the FCC or anyone else consider accommodating the amateur service for anything.  With few exceptions, no one is really answering the questions on the notice.  It's just like reading comments on eHam!  A few guys got it right and commented intelligently, but it's pretty underwhelming so far.

This is normal. Over the past ten years or so that I've paid any attention to FCC proceedings related to amateur radio, it is typical for the vast majority of comments filed by hams to be irrelevant, illiterate, emotional, or irrational; or some combination.  I don't think FCC  takes that noise into consideration.
Logged
AA4HA
Member

Posts: 1493




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: April 29, 2012, 12:44:02 PM »

If the comments submitted so far are any indication, there'd be no reason for the FCC or anyone else consider accommodating the amateur service for anything.  With few exceptions, no one is really answering the questions on the notice.  It's just like reading comments on eHam!  A few guys got it right and commented intelligently, but it's pretty underwhelming so far.

This is normal. Over the past ten years or so that I've paid any attention to FCC proceedings related to amateur radio, it is typical for the vast majority of comments filed by hams to be irrelevant, illiterate, emotional, or irrational; or some combination.  I don't think FCC  takes that noise into consideration.

For most radio amateurs under the grey cloud of an HOA or some other property restriction it can be a very emotional issue. You can bet that the counter-arguments (probably some lobbyist group with a ton of lawyers) are going to write much more coherent and logically based arguments. As we know, once the FCC went into the frequency auctioning business much of their behavior has been driven by the commerce/commercial (AKA money) side of things and not based upon sound technical decisions.

If you have followed the BPL/PLC debates of a few years ago you even find that the FCC deliberately omitted technical evidence produced by their own staffers to favor the commercial deployment and acceptance of HF interference caused by BPL/PLC systems.

If the FCC wants to impress me they should can the entire staff of the commission and set a minimum qualification of being an engineer to sit on the commission. That would leave room for commercial interests, non-profits and amateur radio operators. While many engineers have been "tainted" by the sales and marketing types they still have a few blood cells that remember the time when things were based upon scientific truths, logic and semi-rational decisions. Leave the hacks in congress since the FCC really just writes recommendations of what gets included into CFR 47.
Logged

Ms. Tisha Hayes, AA4HA
Lookout Mountain, Alabama
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!