3 ms·
They’ve explicitly made it illegal for anything to go faster or wider, which is the core of the problem. The ARRL is so incompetent, overly concerned with thei
by nickysielicki 4y ago
They’ve explicitly made it illegal for anything to go faster or wider, which is the core of the problem.
The ARRL is so incompetent, overly concerned with their own elections and never interested in pursuing changes that would actually allow for the hobby to grow into the 21st century. Proud non-member.
- wkat4242 4y agoOh we don't have this issue in Europe where I'm based. Faster is possible, it was just that 9600 was so sufficient for APRS and the remaining traditional packet community so small that the interest waned. Though like I said in another post something started up that is not really for end users but more a backbone high speed network: https://hamnetdb.net/map.cgi https://hamnetdb.net/map.cgi And yeah I also tend to not join the national radio associations. I often don't agree with their decisions and they're often more about old guys infighting and resisting change. I'll join the local radio clubs wherever I live for fun meetups but I leave the politics out of it.
- wrycoder 4y agoThis is not true. The ARRL is constantly fighting for the benefit of radio amateurs, and has been doing so for a century. The FCC recently considered an over-reach, naming removing the limits on signalling rate, which would be a technically incompetent move. The ARRL is working with Congress to require the FCC to replace the signalling rate limit to one which would use a 2.8 kHz bandwidth, same as SSB. This was discussed here a short time ago, "Rep. Lesko Introduces Bill to Replace Symbol Rate Limit with Bandwidth Limit"[0]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34117073 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34117073