I thought that I'd relay a message from K0TO that was posted on the
Lowfer Reflector. (http://www.qth.net/archive/lowfer/lowfer.html)
>Gentlemen:
>
>Today I spoke with Chris Imlay, the ARRL General Counsel, about the concept
>of using 1800 kHz to 1801 kHz as a place for MF beacons operated by
>amateurs. He quickly reviewed the FCC rules pertaining to HF beacons and
>agreed that the only thing that would prevent such use would be the
>restriction on automatic/unattended operation . If persons were to only
>operate beacons when they were 'present' as control operators there are no
>other restrictions the would prevent such operation. I asked about an STA
>for beacon operation. We decided we should look at the worldwide amateur
>allocation for 160 meters. Region 2 (N.A and S.A.) and Region 3
>(Asia -Oceania) both permit amateur operation between 1800 and 1900 kHz (and
>higher), but Region 1 (Europe and Africa) amateurs can not operate between
>1800 kHz and 1810 kHz since that is (was) reserved for radiolocation. We
>discussed the fact the radiolocation is moving from this area in the future
>and that in the long term one could expect the Region 1 band would be
>extended to cover 1800-1810.
>
>Based upon these facts he felt that the FCC would be willing to grant an STA
>(Special Temporary Authority) for beacon operation at 1800-1801 kHz if an
>appropriate application was made.He felt that an objective MF propagation
>studies would be acceptable. He advised that STA's are limited to six
>months. The FCC prefers to have petitions for rule making as opposed
>requests for extension of an STA. A proposal for an STA should be predicated
>upon a future proposal for 'permanent' rules change should the STA indicate
>such a change would be appropriate.
>
>Chris suggested that I contact my ARRL Division Director and ask him to make
>a motion at the January ARRL Board meeting directing the ARRL to make an
>application for the STA we had been discussing. At noon I had lunch with Jay
>Bellows, KØQB, the Dakota Division Director. I outlined the idea and asked
>if he was willing to make such a motion. Jay is a very serious QRP operator
>and has been interested in the activities of LowFers for some time although
>he has not participated in Part 15 operation. He agreed to make the motion
>and we have asked Chris Imlay to draft a motion that would cover beacon
>operation using BPSK or QRSS operation in that frequency range.
>
>Later in the day I spent some time on the phone discussing the beacon idea
>with Mark Wilson, K1RO, the publisher of QST. In that conversation I asked
>Mark how the ARRL poll on 135 kHz operation had been going. He said that
>they were surprised at the high level of interest in LF operation. Mark told
>me that most of the polls that they had run over the past several months
>generated about 1000 responses. At this point the LF question has generated
>over 2000 responses with more than 75% of the respondees indicating interest
>in operating on such a band should the FCC permit it.
>
>I shared with Mark the points of my conversation with Chris. When he asked
>me who I thought should be the persons authorized to be covered by an STA,
>I stated that it should cover anyone who sent documentation to ARRL stating
>that they would be placing a beacon on 160 and provided the frequency, mode
>and geographic location of their beacon. Both Chris and Mark thought that
>would be a good way to "self-select" the appropriate people to cover with
>the STA. Mark was not aware of the QRSS activities of the LOWFERS and I
>agreed to forward to him the URL references that have been provided by
>members of the LOWFER community so he could hear and see some of the things
>members of this group have been doing for the past three months or so. I
>personally think there have been some impressive observation results shared
>among you.
>
>In 1997, when the ITU held its Plenipotentiary Conference in Minneapolis,
>MN, I had an opportunity to discuss with Larry Price (President of the
>International Amateur Radio Union) and Dave Sumner (Executive VP of ARRL and
>Secretary of IARU) what might be done to increase the status of amateurs in
>the eyes of the ITU. They told me that if amateurs could find a way to
>provide useful, technically sound, propagation data that would add to the
>propagation studies being conducted by the ITU it would be a significant
>plus. Since that time I have been trying to find a way to put something in
>place that would lead to such useful data. Mark Wilson has been interested
>in this as well. A collection of 'registered' beacons operating at 1800-1810
>kHz providing signals that could observed by casual and serious listeners
>using simple equipment might be an initial step toward this objective. I
>asked Mark if he thought that the ARRL could be a 'coordinating'
>organization for such data and he felt it could be done although the actual
>work would need to be done by volunteers not at Newington, CT. Something
>similar to this exists in the arrangements that are in place for the editing
>and publishing of the National Contest Journal and QEX both of which have
>non-staff editors and columnists.
>
>
>With all of this information in hand I called Lyle Koehler and we had an
>extended conversation on 80 meters coving the PSK 31 Warblers and possible
>ways to place low cost beacons in that frequency range. At the end of that
>conversation I told him I would be writing something for the LOWFER
>reflector so people who are on it are aware of what has been said and
>proposed. I will leave to Lyle to comment on equipment matters. However, I
>feel that getting an MF beacon STA by September 2001 is very possible and
>would be interested in hearing from anyone who thinks they might put such an
>MF beacon on the air if an STA is granted. In addition, if you feel this is
>a good idea, I would like to have you send an e-mail to Jay Bellows, KØQB
>at (k0qb@arrl.org) and tell him that you would like him to present a motion
>proposing an STA. It would be nice if you could copy me as well
>(k0to@arrl.org) so I can talk with him about this before he leaves for the
>meeting on January 17th.
>
>I continue to be very optimistic that sometime in 2001 the FCC will allocate
>US amateurs some frequencies on LF in response to the petition that ARRL
>made about 24 months ago. If that happens 2001 will be a very interesting
>year for those who have been experimenting on LF (and MF) for the past
>decade using Part 15 rules.
>
>Tod Olson, KØTO
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/topband
Submissions: topband@contesting.com
Administrative requests: topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-topband@contesting.com
|