| Bob Ditto on all that. Tnx for the dBc numbers. I hope the Spectrum guys at ARRL are on it. Seems like it might work with restrictions of course. This is only one group. Other HFT companies would ask for their services too if it goes. Does 20kw and frequency shifting get you world wide capability 24/7? Ask the SAC guys! RH Sent from my i-Thingamajig On Jul 16, 2023, at 3:51 PM, STROUPE, BOB <bobstro...@iheartmedia.com> wrote:
Rick,
I have mixed few about this. I have read the petition and have see. the W6LG video. The “worst” thing I saw in the petition was that the spurious emissions were only limited to -60 dBc. MF and VHF broadcasting must meet -80 dBc. I believe they must
be held to the same standard. Of course, I don’t want their emissions at greater than -80 dBc inside the amateur and they should be required to use frequencies far enough from the amateur band edges to give this performance.
Other than that, someone is going to need to come up with a quantifiable reason on how this will impact amateur radio rather that “it will end amateur radio.” High power shortwave broadcast didn’t do that; how will this (other than the emission type)
be any different that then.
Now if I was a part 90 user of the HF frequencies, I would want to have more assurances that this would not impact my operations.
W5KK
From Bob Stroupe, Regional Engineering Manager, Houston TX
Help? Call 1-888-271-2395
On Jul 16, 2023, at 3:09 PM, Rick Hiller <rickhille...@gmail.com> wrote:
Submission Comment #2 W5RH
Looking at a bit more detail in Appendix E (Page 74) their study shows available frequency ranges within 2 to 25 MHz. None of their proposed bands cover any of our ham bands
EXCEPT 60 Meters, where we have 5 "channels", but I think this is shared anyway.
Their 10, 25 and 50 KHz "channailzed space" ranges come up to the band edges on a few ham bands NOT JUST 20 MX as has been blogged and youtubed. Below I have outlined where their study touches our band edges (always skirting our bands except 60 mx).
They claim throughout that they want to cause NO Interference to existing services (ham, marine, etc.)
Their study indicates these Frequency bands available 2 to 25 MHz (ref our bands)....
Below Above
3.4 4.0 80 is 3.5 to 4.0
5.4 5.0 (within 60 meters 5.3 to 5.4)
7.0 7.4 40 is 7.0 to 7.3
9.995 10.15 30 is 10.100 to 10.150
14.0 14.350 20 is 14.0 to 14.350
18.068 18.168 17 is 18.068 to 18.168
21.00 21.850 15 is 21.0 to 21.450
24.89 End 12 is 24.890 to 24.990
Looked up in the license database. None of the commenting parties is a ham except maybe John Madigan (AC0GP -- maybe).
Also, have a look at what they intend to do. These shortwave HF links are to benefit High-Frequency stock trading. (high frequency is not meaning RF but the speed of the trade data xfer). Using shortwave will reduce the latency times for the transfer
of applicable stock data. Not using satellites or the internet will cut milli seconds off of their transfer times. HFT is a crazy way to trade stocks.. Google HFT and read on Wikipedia.
73...Rick W5RH
A cursory read through the proposal and attached amendments shows that they have done their homework in all aspects. The various companies have been running experiments on air for the past 4 years. (experimental call signs are listed) Seems
like they wish to run 20KW to a 10dBi antenna on transmit and have a simple vertical whip on the receive end. They also propose interference avoidance and frequency jumping.... kind of like ALE.
Freqs used were 4.9, 10.2, 14.9 19.9 and 24.8 with a bandwidth of 10 KHz.
In their initial paragraphs they mention avoidance interference to amateur, marine and aeronautical. No mention of military in there that I saw.
Again, this was my 30 minute read of the various sections which means that I was looking for pertinent information relating to us hams. I am sure there is more to be found and corrected with a further read.
Just my $.02 for now.....73...Rick W5RH
On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 5:54 PM JP Pritchard via BVARC < bvarc@bvarc.org> wrote:
Thanks for the reply Bill. As Jim Heath points out in this video, the deadline for comment is two weeks away. My first thought is, we might (emphasis MIGHT) be better off to express our immediate concern to
the ARRL defense of spectrum lobbyists, in hopes that they could help convey what they know to the rest of us (beyond what's in the petition) to give Ham World a chance to weigh in. But whatever we do we're already late in the process and big money backing
this plan already has a big edge on us, if there is something here to be worried about.
Any thoughts from others? Time is running out. Let's hear it!
JP
JP:
We may want to convene a committee of interested people to talk about what is proposed. There are so many variables, not to mention the costs to construct and run a digital transmitter. Also,
who has digital receivers? Currently there are limited AM shortwave receivers for that industry is dying (like the majority of the over-the-air broadcast stations due to the ubiquitous and massively increasing wireless internet)..
Bill
From: BVARC <bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org>
On Behalf Of JP Pritchard via BVARC
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2023 3:47 PM
To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB <bvarc@bvarc.org>
Cc: JP Pritchard <jppn...@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [BVARC] Will This Petition Before The FCC Bring An End To Amateur Radio As We Know It Or Am I Wrong Jim W6LG - YouTube
How 'bout a couple of our broadcast engineers to respond to this... Paul, Bill, Chris, Bob?
________________________________________________
Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club
BVARC mailing list
BVARC@bvarc.org
http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
Publicly available archives are available here:
https://www.mail-archive.com/bvarc@bvarc.org/
________________________________________________
Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club
BVARC mailing list
BVARC@bvarc.org
http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
Publicly available archives are available here:
https://www.mail-archive.com/bvarc@bvarc.org/
________________________________________________
Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club
BVARC mailing list
BVARC@bvarc.org
http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
Publicly available archives are available here:
https://www.mail-archive.com/bvarc@bvarc.org/
--
Rick Hiller
Cell: 832-474-3713
Physical: 9031 Troulon Drive
Houston, TX 77036
--
Rick Hiller
Cell: 832-474-3713
Physical: 9031 Troulon Drive
Houston, TX 77036
CAUTION: This message originated from outside of the company. Please take all precautions when opening attachments or links from outside sources.
|
