wrote on Sun, 22 Apr 2007 11:52:02 EDT:

On Apr 21, 11:09?am, wrote:
On Apr 21, 2:45 am, Larry wrote:
wrote in news:1177105498.800186.298520

Our service will only continue to exist so long as the majority of the
worlds national governments believe that we bring value to the public
in exchange for the incredibly valuable RF spectrum that is entrusted
to our use.

That might have been true before 2000, but isn't true today. ?Some
spectrum would be lost to services who are interested in VHF/UHF and
above. ?But, noone wants HF any more, as is self evident by the lack of
traffic across HF outside the ham bands.


Maybe it's not
vulnerable, or maybe it is, but compared to the massive amount of VHF/
UHF spectrum we could lose, I consider HF an insignificant issue.

Which would you rather lose - 1 MHz of the 1296 MHz band, or all of
160, 40, 20, 30 and 17 meter bands? Same amount of bandwidth...

Are radio amateurs going to "lose" EM spectrum space? I didn't
know this was so dictated. If amateurs want to keep something in
radio, they have to continually fight for it; just because they
got some allocations once doesn't mean it is forever.

In the last half century, amateur radio worldwide has GAINED
allocations, not lost. Begin with WARC-79 decisions...


So I pose my question again..... ?"What are we going to do about
that?"

The first thing is to simply *use* that spectrum. The very best
argument for reassignment of spectrum is that the folks who have it
aren't using it. or aren't using much of it.

How does "*use*" of line-of-sight get publicized nationally?

The NTIS has a specific EM Survey mobile unit which has been
used to take readings of certain areas of the United States
over an extremely wide range of frequencies. Those surveys are
available to the public and each one is extensive, technically
explicit.

Other than "popular activities" described in amateur radio
interest periodicals, the use of line-of-sight frequencies is
mentioned only in regards to an already-allocated radio
service in trade journals.

That argument was one
reason we lost 220-222 MHz: the folks who wanted it were able to
convince FCC that we hams could fit all of our 220-222 activities into
222-225.

"220" wasn't the only amateur band in dispute in the last half
century in the USA. The politics of the various disputes can't
be simplistically interpreted. As I recall, not a user of "220"
at the time, the ARRL did not argue effectively enough for its
retention to convince the FCC.

But you can't force amateurs to operate on certain bands. They can be
encouraged, but not forced.

Yes, they can be forced. See "200 Meters and down."

So the question becomes "what will make
the VHF/UHF amateur bands more attractive to hams?"

I wasn't aware that the ham bands above 30 MHz were not
attractive. Radio equipment manufacturers are continually
supplying radios and advertising VHF-and-up radios, have
been for years. There's obviously a market for them as
witness the continued advertising campaign waged with
high monetary values.

Since the inception of the no-code-test Technician class
license 16 years ago, the vast majority of newcomers in the
USA have entered amateur radio in the "world above 30 MHz."
The Technician class has become - easily - the most numerous
of all US amateur radio classes. No-code-test Technicians
were banned from privileges below 30 MHz in the USA. "Techs"
continue being newcomers despite cessation of morse code
testing in the USA for amateurs.

The migration to VHF and above in amateur radio is not
confined to the USA. JARL and Japanese electronics industry
have developed D-Star specifically for digital modes on
VHF and above. AOR in Japan has one digital voice adapter
for voice-bandwidth radios and another one from Germany has
been described in the April QST issue this year. While US
HF-only hams may shun digital anything on "their" bands, such
is readily useable on VHF and above with no basic changes.


Perhaps a new generation of near-geosynchronous amateur satellites
would attract more activity.

Perhaps it would be prudent to take a good look around
at the activity at VHF and above that is going on today?

Or the deployment of a highspeed linked
repeater network. But those things require sizable infrastructure
investments by amateurs.

Is that a necessity? In 1977 I was shown the start of what
would grow into the present-day Condor Net on the "220" band,
operating in three states (CA, NV, AZ) and capable of being
tone-coded-linking from one repeater to any other repeater.
That was without using conventional digital logic or the
ubiquitous microprocessor. Sizeable investment by amateurs?
Yes, but also willingly done. Well done, I might add.

The latest ARRL Repeater Directory shows an enormity of
repeaters ("sizeable infrastructure investments"), most of
them public-access, installed and operated by radio amateurs.
Repeaters have been put into place all over the USA in the
last three decades plus. Even without repeaters, the use
of VHF-UHF and even low microwaves by radio amateurs has
become sizeable in urban areas of the USA.

---

We hams got our enormous VHF/UHF allocations after WW2, when much of
it was considered relatively useless, or at least not as useful as the
lower frequencies. That's all changed in the past couple of decades.

Not being a licensed radio amateur right after WWII, I was
unaware that "VHF/UHF" was "useless." Edwin Armstrong
pioneered FM broadcasting there in the 1930s. Public safety
radio started the use it in the last 1930s, finding it very
useful compared to the old HF radios a few agencies had.
The US military was already using low VHF in the 1930s and
would continue that with the famed "walkie-talkie" of WWII.
The fledgling TV broadcast industry and their equipment
makers had already standardized on low-VHF frequencies in the
1930s (via the "first" NTSC). The US military switched to
low-VHF FM radios for vehicular operation en masse at the
beginning of WWII...even the USN had its "TBS." Radar, a
savior of tacticians in WWII, had to operate on UHF and
microwaves, was predictably quite successful in that RF
region. Still is.

All of the preceding paragraph took place 7 decades ago,
not a "couple" of them.

Perhaps it's 1929 all over again in some ways.

Perhaps too many of the HF persuasion are affected with
ennui over their self-imposed limitations of radio use.
I still see an unlimited vista of hope and adventure in
the future. The state of the art of radio-electronics is
constantly advancing. By the looks of things, it isn't
about to stop anytime soon. Change keeps happening.

Those who refuse to change, want their endless youthful
discoveries to continue, want to close off amateur
activities to what was long ago, will all mourn and wail
over "losses." The rest of the world will continue
without them, changing things to fit the new people, not
the old ones. Those who want something will have to go
out and WORK for it, DO something about it, not sit
around and grouse about things not being the same. The
new people will have earned theirs and the future will
be different. I say good for them!

73, Len AF6AY


PS: No "artifacts" were exploited or utilized on this
text file upload.