Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
An updated version of the entire article "A Bandwidth-Based Frequency Plan", is
no available on the web at: http://www.qsl.net/kq6xa/freqplan/ Please refer to the new updated color chart of the frequency plan. It equitably distributes the space within the allocated band so that approximately the same number of narrowband 500Hz signals vs wider bandwidth signals can share the precious spectrum resources. Keep in mind that the plan is mode-neutral. If you can use technology to shoehorn a voice into 500Hz, then you can transmit it anywhere in the band. You may laugh, but my experience working with commercial DSP digital modulation systems proves to me that it can happen in Amateur Radio. In our present mode-based system in USA, we have a lot of nearly-dormant band segments. When the number of HF operators doubles overnight, we will no longer have the luxury to waste spectrum as we have in the past. I would like to thank everyone who has contributed with suggestions and constructive criticism during the development of the plan. The article and band chart is now on the web at: http://www.qsl.net/kq6xa/freqplan/ 73---Bonnie KQ6XA |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes: (Expeditionradio) wrote in message ... An updated version of the entire article "A Bandwidth-Based Frequency Plan", is no available on the web at: http://www.qsl.net/kq6xa/freqplan/ Please refer to the new updated color chart of the frequency plan. Did that. For one your "30M bandplan" would require both ITU and FCC approval to implement. Good luck with that one Bonnie. And that's just the beginning. It equitably distributes the space within the allocated band so that approximately the same number of narrowband 500Hz signals vs wider bandwidth signals can share the precious spectrum resources. IOW the 'phone bands are drastically widened and the CW/digital bands drastically narrowed. Also, the incentives to upgrade are reduced, the spectrum available for modes wider than SSB is reduced. Keep in mind that the plan is mode-neutral. No, it isn't. If you can use technology to shoehorn a voice into 500Hz, then you can transmit it anywhere in the band. You may laugh, but my experience working with commercial DSP digital modulation systems proves to me that it can happen in Amateur Radio. Of course it can. But will it? If the 'phone bands are as drastically widened as proposed, why should anyone bother with 500 Hz processed voice when they have so much room for regular SSB? In our present mode-based system in USA, we have a lot of nearly-dormant band segments. On HF? Where are they? When the number of HF operators doubles overnight, *IF* the FCC buys into anything like the recent ARRL proposal AND drops anything vaguely resembling that proposal on Hamdom USA MAYBE the number of individuals licensed to actually get on HF MIGHT double. All of which is pure conjecture right there and is a real stretch at best. More like wildly optimistic. We currently have about 324,000 US hams with General, Advanced or Extra class licenses. Also at least 130,000 with Novice, TechPlus and "Tech-with-HF" licenses. If even a small percentage of them were on HF at any one time, the bands would be full to busting. What is not conjecture is the fact that there is no statistical evidence which indicates that simply having a license to operate HF somehow equates to those with any new "giveaway" HF ticket actually putting together HF stations and getting 'em on the air on a 1:1 new license privs/band occupancy ratio. BINGO! And that's not going to change much. Quite the opposite is being demonstrated in fact. We already have tons of experience with, for example, the recent huge increase in the number of Extra Class licensees which fell out of the reduction in the code test speed for Extras. And the reduction in written testing for Extra. I tune the Extra 75/40/20M phone setasides today and the recently enfranchised don't seem to be there. In volume. If anything the overall activity level in those setasides is noticeably down from what it was long before the code test speed was dropped. Don't forget sunspots. we will no longer have the luxury to waste spectrum as we have in the past. When was spectrum ever "wasted"? Is that why AM is so restricted in this plan? The problem with HF ham radio, if there really is a problem, has nothing to do with whimsical "bandplans" like yours, "we need space . . sombody might eventually do some 10Khz wide digital voice modes" or any of the rest of it. The dead spectrum problem has far more to do with getting the HF-enabled of all flavors off the Internet, off their dead butts, geting the radios, actually putting the HF antennas up and getting on the air than it does with any "bandwidth-based frequency plan" sorts of things. HEAR HEAR And *THAT'S* where the problem really is! Fiddling with licenses is only going to have a minor effect on that, if any. License changes aren't going to fix anybody's CC&Rs, or suddenly improve the sunspot number, or empower vast numbers of existing hams to figure out how to end feed a wire and actually get on the air. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
(N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: Please refer to the new updated color chart of the frequency plan. Did that. For one your "30M bandplan" would require both ITU and FCC approval to implement. Good luck with that one Bonnie. And that's just the beginning. Right: I haven't rummaged thru it in real depth and I don't intend to but I'll just betcha there are more similar instances of conflicts with the ITU regs. If you can use technology to shoehorn a voice into 500Hz, then you can transmit it anywhere in the band. You may laugh, but my experience working with commercial DSP digital modulation systems proves to me that it can happen in Amateur Radio. I poked around, she's apparently big on "pack radio", using digital military HF "tactical" gear is one piece of it. She doesn't seem to understand the collections of "differences" . . ? Of course it can. But will it? If the 'phone bands are as drastically widened as proposed, why should anyone bother with 500 Hz processed voice when they have so much room for regular SSB? Is it even possible to compress digitized voice down to 500Hz? Violation of Shannon's Law? In our present mode-based system in USA, we have a lot of nearly-dormant band segments. On HF? Where are they? There really are a bunch of underutilized spaces in the 160, 80, 15 & 10M bands James. "Spectrum banks for future expansions . . " What is not conjecture is the fact that there is no statistical evidence which indicates that simply having a license to operate HF somehow equates to those with any new "giveaway" HF ticket actually putting together HF stations and getting 'em on the air on a 1:1 new license privs/band occupancy ratio. BINGO! And that's not going to change much. If anything the ratio will get worse. I've seen too many examples of new-wave 5wpm ex-Tech Extras who have yet to make the first move toward putting an HF station on the air to believe otherwise. I'm not at all convinced that expanded HF privs is all that much of an incentive to upgrade these days vs. earlier days. Prolly has more to do today with the incentive to acquire bragging rights vs. anything to do with actually operating. Quite the opposite is being demonstrated in fact. We already have tons of experience with, for example, the recent huge increase in the number of Extra Class licensees which fell out of the reduction in the code test speed for Extras. And the reduction in written testing for Extra. It's all one disgusting big dumbed-down bag of worms. I tune the Extra 75/40/20M phone setasides today and the recently enfranchised don't seem to be there. In volume. If anything the overall activity level in those setasides is noticeably down from what it was long before the code test speed was dropped. Don't forget sunspots. I'm talking about the much longer term thru the highs and the lows. In years gone by there was always chatter in the Extra phone setasides, not with just sunspot-affected dx, but with."locals". After the last FD I decided to dredge up a ragchew in the 20 phone setaside before I tore down. Usta be no sweat. I had to tune around for ten minutes until w3bv came on the air and we yakked for 45 minutes via ground path.. Mid day, the spots were middling and the dx was there. The only w's in the space were a small group of 8s & 9s and Alan (keeper of the k3jh pole) and I. All of us were old 1 x 2s. Message there. . . The dead spectrum problem has far more to do with getting the HF-enabled of all flavors off the Internet, off their dead butts, geting the radios, actually putting the HF antennas up and getting on the air than it does with any "bandwidth-based frequency plan" sorts of things. HEAR HEAR And *THAT'S* where the problem really is! Fiddling with licenses is only going to have a minor effect on that, if any. License changes aren't going to fix anybody's CC&Rs, or suddenly improve the sunspot number, or empower vast numbers of existing hams to figure out how to end feed a wire and actually get on the air. Perfect example of the results of dumbing-down. Bonnie also dumped her Master Plan into QRZ.com. Bad move. Those guys make us RRAPers look like wilted lilly nice guys in comparison. Check it out. I notice that she hasn't gone back at anybody with a single rebuttal. Whatta weenie SHE is. "Glory hound shoots self in foot." 73 de Jim, N2EY w3rv |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , (N2EY) writes: I notice that she hasn't gone back at anybody with a single rebuttal. That's changed, but it's basically a preaching session. Does this mean we can expect another Sermon On The Antenna Mount soon? Show us the Righteousness of the True Path... It should be apparent to you, Leonard. They're discussing matters dealing with amateur radio. You've delivered bushels of sermons here but you have zip to do with amateur radio. Instead, you entertain us with tales of how the commercials do things and of your military exploits of fifty years back. Your claims of being here only to engage in civil debate on morse testing elimination ring very hollow. Dave K8MN |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
(N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: Please refer to the new updated color chart of the frequency plan. Did that. For one your "30M bandplan" would require both ITU and FCC approval to implement. Good luck with that one Bonnie. And that's just the beginning. Right: I haven't rummaged thru it in real depth and I don't intend to but I'll just betcha there are more similar instances of conflicts with the ITU regs. If you can use technology to shoehorn a voice into 500Hz, then you can transmit it anywhere in the band. You may laugh, but my experience working with commercial DSP digital modulation systems proves to me that it can happen in Amateur Radio. I poked around, she's apparently big on "pack radio", using digital military HF "tactical" gear is one piece of it. She doesn't seem to understand the collections of "differences" . . ? Of course it can. But will it? If the 'phone bands are as drastically widened as proposed, why should anyone bother with 500 Hz processed voice when they have so much room for regular SSB? Is it even possible to compress digitized voice down to 500Hz? Violation of Shannon's Law? In our present mode-based system in USA, we have a lot of nearly-dormant band segments. On HF? Where are they? There really are a bunch of underutilized spaces in the 160, 80, 15 & 10M bands James. "Spectrum banks for future expansions . . " What is not conjecture is the fact that there is no statistical evidence which indicates that simply having a license to operate HF somehow equates to those with any new "giveaway" HF ticket actually putting together HF stations and getting 'em on the air on a 1:1 new license privs/band occupancy ratio. BINGO! And that's not going to change much. If anything the ratio will get worse. I've seen too many examples of new-wave 5wpm ex-Tech Extras who have yet to make the first move toward putting an HF station on the air to believe otherwise. I'm not at all convinced that expanded HF privs is all that much of an incentive to upgrade these days vs. earlier days. Prolly has more to do today with the incentive to acquire bragging rights vs. anything to do with actually operating. Quite the opposite is being demonstrated in fact. We already have tons of experience with, for example, the recent huge increase in the number of Extra Class licensees which fell out of the reduction in the code test speed for Extras. And the reduction in written testing for Extra. It's all one disgusting big dumbed-down bag of worms. I tune the Extra 75/40/20M phone setasides today and the recently enfranchised don't seem to be there. In volume. If anything the overall activity level in those setasides is noticeably down from what it was long before the code test speed was dropped. Don't forget sunspots. I'm talking about the much longer term thru the highs and the lows. In years gone by there was always chatter in the Extra phone setasides, not with just sunspot-affected dx, but with."locals". After the last FD I decided to dredge up a ragchew in the 20 phone setaside before I tore down. Usta be no sweat. I had to tune around for ten minutes until w3bv came on the air and we yakked for 45 minutes via ground path.. Mid day, the spots were middling and the dx was there. The only w's in the space were a small group of 8s & 9s and Alan (keeper of the k3jh pole) and I. All of us were old 1 x 2s. Message there. . . The dead spectrum problem has far more to do with getting the HF-enabled of all flavors off the Internet, off their dead butts, geting the radios, actually putting the HF antennas up and getting on the air than it does with any "bandwidth-based frequency plan" sorts of things. HEAR HEAR And *THAT'S* where the problem really is! Fiddling with licenses is only going to have a minor effect on that, if any. License changes aren't going to fix anybody's CC&Rs, or suddenly improve the sunspot number, or empower vast numbers of existing hams to figure out how to end feed a wire and actually get on the air. Perfect example of the results of dumbing-down. Bonnie also dumped her Master Plan into QRZ.com. Bad move. Those guys make us RRAPers look like wilted lilly nice guys in comparison. Check it out. I notice that she hasn't gone back at anybody with a single rebuttal. Whatta weenie SHE is. "Glory hound shoots self in foot." 73 de Jim, N2EY w3rv |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Phase frequency Detector | Homebrew | |||
BETTER HF FREQUENCY PLAN for AMATEUR RADIO | Policy | |||
Drake TR-3 transceiver synthesizer upgrade | Homebrew | |||
Drake TR-3 transceiver synthesizer upgrade | Homebrew | |||
Low reenlistment rate | Policy |