[AMRadio] bandplan thoughts


Todd, KA1KAQ ka1kaq at gmail.com
Thu Dec 13 12:51:10 EST 2007


On Dec 13, 2007 9:34 AM,  <SBJohnston at aol.com> wrote:

> The main reason I get this impression is in the responses from supporters of
> the Region 2 bandplan, or regulation-by-bandwidth, I hear the term "chaos"
> used to describe our present operations, and the term "channel" comes up often,
> and "we must do this for the future growth of ham radio", and the like.

My recollection of the whole digital mess was more a concern of
unattended operation being allowed, along with puzzlement as to why we
needed robots sending email over amateur frequencies, inevitably of a
commercial nature in some way(s), not unlike the perceived need for
BPL, to carry internet activity.

The FCC has made clear that they don't want to be saddled with even
more amateur regulations to enforce, and that they do not support the
ARRL's desire to regulate in a way that stifles the experimental
nature of amateur radio.

Which leads us to terms like 'chaos', 'channel', and some dubious
assertion that the bands are overcrowded, stressed to the point of
breaking, and so on. As some have pointed out, lack of propagation
from 20 through 10 meters has placed a large number of operators on
40, 75/80, and to a lesser extent - 160 meters. But the obvious (to
me, at least) conflicts seem to arise from the issue of 'frequency
ownership' for nets etc FAR more than the issue of available space to
use. Just listen around the bands, anytime but during a contest.
Plenty of space to use, with most folks jammed into certain portions
of the band.

Why? Because they've been there forever, had their net there since
radio was invented, AM Window reserved for AMers only, and similar
nonsense. We're losing licenesees faster than we are gaining them last
time I checked. With a given percentage of people inactive, and fewer
joining the ranks than leaving, where is the crisis the League sees?
Beyond coming up with a working plan to coexist with digital
transmissions, that is?

So yes, it does appear they have tried to create a problem to solve,
basically. And we're clear that, despite words by a few saying they
wouldn't support such a thing, the ARRL has indeed pushed for
regulation by bandwidth, in the very recent past.

Which makes this an issue for Amateur Radio specifically, not just AM.
More, as well as restrictive regulations have the real likelihood of
impacting all amateurs in a negative way.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ


More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 15 Dec 2017.