[AMRadio] Phone band expansion


Brian Carling bcarling at cfl.rr.com
Fri Jun 11 06:19:00 EDT 2004


Hi Don,
It's great to hear from you again and to consider your 
expansion proposal.

I don't think this will fly. There is a rapid expansion taking 
place in the digital sub-bands below 3700 kHz and there 
are still many CW ops using the spectrum around 3700 to 3725

ARRL is VERY interested in promoting digital modes. Sadly the 
main one they are promoting is (in my opinion) very expensive, 
wasteful and inefficient. The unattended Pactor robot stations
are ruining the CW and digital sub bands on 40m, 30m and 20m 
and they threaten to do the same on 80m too.

I seriously doubt that ARRL will promote additional phone 
expansion on 75m, even though it could well be argued that we 
need it. I suppose the CW and digital ops could all move down,
but I can see both sides of the argument for adding 25 kc. 
versus 50 kc. to the phone band. Since I enjoy all the modes
I probably don't feel as strongly about this as you do.
Even more so since QRN makes 80m and 160m virtually unusable
for 8 months out of the year here in Florida.

I wish we could get the broadcasters off 7100-7300 kc.
How many decades will THAT take?!

73 from your friend - AF4K

On 10 Jun 2004 at 15:58, Donald Chester wrote:

> 
> This is a reminder that the comment deadline for FCC Docket 04-140 is
> rapidly approaching. The comment deadline is 15 June and reply comment
> deadline is 30 June.
> 
> Amongst other things, the FCC is seeking comments on whether to adopt
> the ARRL's proposed phone band expansion, "refarming" the novice
> subbands. In my opinion, the League proposal falls short, especially
> on 75/80m. Generals would be able to go down to 3800, Advanced to
> 3750, and Extras to 3725. The total phone band would be expanded only
> 25 kHz. This would offer little relief to the present overcrowded
> conditions on the "phone" band, while most of the "cw" band lies idle
> even during optimum wintertime nighttime conditions on weekends. I
> suggest that if we must continue to have subbands, the 80/75m phone
> band be expanded at least down to 3600 kHz to allow a more equitable
> distribution of wideband vs narrowband signals and make for more
> effective use of the 80m amateur spectrum.
> 
> Per to-day's date, the FCC has received only 85 comments on this
> proceeding, and fewer than half dozen address the specific issue of
> cw/phone or narrow/wideband allocation.
> 
> The follow excerpt from the Docket addresses the subband issue. The
> entire document can be viewed (Adobe reader required) at:
> 
> http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_d
> ocument=6516185678
> 
> To electronically file comments to the FCC, go to
> 
> http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/
> 
> High Frequency Privileges:
> 
> ARRL Petition. Background. On March 22, 2002, the ARRL requested that
> we eliminate the telegraphy frequency segments currently authorized to
> Novice and Technician Plus Class licensees, and to restructure the
> operating privileges authorized licensees in certain HF amateur
> service bands.33 The ARRL based its request on over 4,700 responses to
> a survey it conducted regarding different emission subband options for
> four of the eight HF amateur service bands. The ARRL notes that while
> the survey results did not reflect a consensus on any one HF band
> frequency alternative, most respondents favored dissolving the Novice
> and Technician Plus Class telegraphy subbands so that additional
> spectrum could be authorized for phone communications. The ARRL
> requests the Commission to amend Section 97.301 of its Rules to expand
> the frequency segments of the 80-, 40-, and 15 m HF amateur service
> bands that licensees may use for phone communications. The ARRL states
> that a “refarming” plan based on eliminating the Novice and Technician
> Plus Class subbands is critical because the segments presently
> authorized for phone and digital communications are severely
> overcrowded.
> 
> The ARRL requests that ...General Class licensees should be authorized
> to control an amateur station transmitting voice communications on the
> 3800-4000 kHz, 7175-7300 kHz and 21275-21450 kHz frequency segments;41
> (3) Advanced Class licensees should be authorized to control an
> amateur station transmitting voice communications on the 3750-4000 kHz
> and 7125- 7300 kHz frequency segments;42 and (4) Amateur Extra Class
> licensees should be authorized to control an amateur station
> transmitting voice communications on the 3725-4000 kHz and 7125- 7300
> kHz frequency segments.
> 
> Discussion: ... Because the ARRL Petition
> addresses the operating privileges of all classes of licensees on
> these amateur service bands, we believe that the ARRL Petition
> provides a basis for a comprehensive restructuring of operating
> privileges. We note that, as proposed, no licensees would lose any
> spectrum privileges and that General, Advanced, and Amateur Extra
> Class licensees would gain spectrum for phone emissions, one of the
> most popular operating modes on the HF bands. For these reasons, we
> will propose amending Part 97 of our Rules as the ARRL requests. We
> seek comment on this proposal.
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Check out the coupons and bargains on MSN Offers!
> http://youroffers.msn.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AMRadio mailing list
> AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio





More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 23 Oct 2017.