RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] ARRL Request for Member comment on Proposed HF Band Plan Chan

To: Michael Zolno <luv.myipad3@me.com>, "rtty@contesting.com" <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] ARRL Request for Member comment on Proposed HF Band Plan Change
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 13:16:21 -0400
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>

> Do you mind if I use your enumerated items for my submission?

Not at all.  Feel free to expand on and improve them if you wish.

The key points are that automatically controlled data systems *must*
include effective channel busy detectors, their end users *must* use
visual means to determine of the frequency is occupied or automatic
channel busy detectors and that ACDS should be restricted to very
narrow allocations where they will not interfere with the majority
of CW and narrow bandwidth data users.

Further, ACDS serves *no legitimate amateur purpose*.  The claimed
benefits for EMCOMM can be filled by manually monitored and controlled
systems established as needed within the impacted area during a
communications emergency.  No amateur, individual or ACDS, is entitled
to occupy scarce HF spectrum 24 x 7 by ACDS to the exclusion of all
other users.

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV


On 2015-03-14 12:59 PM, Michael Zolno wrote:
Joe,

Lots of good advice which I hope and pray will be followed. Do you mind if I 
use your enumerated items for my submission?

Mike WH6YH

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 14, 2015, at 12:00 PM, rtty-request@contesting.com wrote:

The period for comments on ARRL's grossly misguided HF Band Plan
Change has roughly one month left.  The comment period ends April 19.

Today, I submitted my comments very much along the lines of those
I posted here two weeks ago:

ARRL's proposal misses the mark on *every count*.

It needs to be completely rewritten to include:

1) expand 80 meter data to 3675 not 3650 ...
2) move the "automatically controlled data" segments to 3560-3570,
    7110-7120, 14130-14140, 21180-21190 and 28280-28290 *ONLY* - with
    *no automatic control on 60, 30, 17 or 12 meters* due to the limited
    available spectrum.
3) require *all* automatically controlled data stations - including
    "auto-responding stations" - operate in the automatic control
    (Section 97.211) sub-bands.
4) require all automatically controlled data stations - including "auto
    responding stations" - implement fully functioning "channel busy"
    detectors which respond to 125% of the [maximum] bandwidth to be
    used including any "enhanced speed" modes.  The channel must be idle
    for at least 90 seconds before initiating *any* transmission or 90
    seconds prior to receiving a call *when responding to interrogation*.
5) require all automatically controlled data stations - including "auto-
    responding stations" and *US licensed amateurs* operating systems
    off shore - list their frequencies, operating times, and control
    operator telephone number in a publicly accessible database
7) require all manually controlled digital stations include either
    visual means (e.g. spectrum display or "waterfall") of determining
    whether a frequency is busy before transmitting *or* a channel busy
    detector with the same parameters as automatically controlled data
    stations.
6) allow Novice/Technician licensees to use *only* RTTY (45.45 baud,
    170 Hz shift) and PSK31 within their current allocations and any
    expanded 80 meter data allocation.

I don't believe there should be any "grace period" for automatically
controlled digital stations (including "auto-responding stations") to
implement the *effective* channel busy detection and establish a public
database of schedule/contact information.  In addition, I do not
believe that automatically controlled stations should *ever* operate
outside an extremely limited spectrum (e.g., 97.211 allocations) as
automatic channel busy detection can not be 100% effective and
automatic operation is incompatible with the first come first served
(no "assigned channels") nature of amateur radio.

As as early adopter of ACDS, participant in the Special Temporary
Authorization issued to TAPR in the late 1970s for the study of
automatically controlled HF forwarding systems, and member of ARRL's
*first* ad hoc Digital committee, I believe ACDS are a blight on amateur
radio and serve *no legitimate amateur purpose*.  The claimed EMCOMM
role can be provided by *manually controlled and monitored* stations
established in [limited] areas impacted by a communications emergency
during the emergency and for limited drills not to exceed four
[consecutive] hours per month.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>