[RTTY] Band Plan Points

[Dave AA6YQ]

Re " The busy frequency detectors deployed by unattended digital stations are not effective."

What leads you to this conclusion?

       73,

             Dave, AA6YQ

-----Original Message-----
From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Terry
Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2014 6:33 PM
To: rtty at contesting.com
Subject: [RTTY] Band Plan Points

Here are some general thoughts and concerns that can be used in preparing
your own response to the ARRL band plan committee.     Please copy your
directors with your inputs.

 

 

Unattended Digital Stations need a defined sub band - Unattended digital stations have been deployed with no band plan across the
digital sub band.
Many of these stations provide "Internet as a service" to yachtsmen and EMCOMM however the unattended robots are causing
interference to traditional waveforms of SSB, CW and RTTY.

It's a fact that an unattended packet robot QRM'ed the FT5ZM 40 meter SSB operation for over one hour.  The QRM from unattended
digital stations is not contained to digital operations; it affects SSB and CW as well.  This is an example that illustrates
concretely the concerns that people have.  We
have every expectation for such things to continue in the future.   The busy
frequency detectors deployed by unattended digital stations are not effective.

 

Additionally, waveforms deployed in unattended digital stations have an
advantage over traditional narrow band modes.   The ARRL acknowledges this
on their website by stating "provides resistance to strong narrowband interference (e.g., CW)" (reference:
<http://www.arrl.org/pactor-ii> http://www.arrl.org/pactor-ii).  

The issue with unattended digital stations is a global one and recognized by
the IARU Region 1 publications.   Statements like "We are concerned about
that too many automatic (unattended) amateur radio services are active in the 30 m band" and "bandplan is not obeyed by a number of
automated digital station users" demonstrate misuse of our spectrum and tell us the ARRL has to be involved in not only band plan
development and enforcement but also in supporting the issues at IARU levels.  (reference:
http://uska.ch/fileadmin/download/iaru/interim_meetings/vienna2013/VIE13-C4-
04_NRRL.pdf)

Unattended digital stations need to be moved out of mainstream traditional waveform sub bands and into their own sub band.

 

Beware of Creep by those providing "Internet as a Service" - Several concerns were presented to the committee deal with the area
that at HF frequencies we do not have enough bandwidth to keep up with the Internet
demands from sailors and EMCOMMM.   Requests for more frequency allocations
and bandwidth drove RM-11708 and more requests for wider bandwidth and wider sub band allocations are expected in the future.  We
advise the ARRL to be aware of future creep.  

On the "Internet as a Service" side there are also red flags indicating the direction we are headed is for is "private email" which
raises further concerns of "transparency" detailed further below. 

 

New Wide Bandwidth Waveforms need their own sub band - When looking ahead at new wide bandwidth waveforms allowed by RM-11708, many
of waveforms are
designed to ride roughshod over narrow band waveforms.   For example, STANAG
specs claim as much as a 40dB over narrow-band-interference advantage (ref:
<http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7521065139>
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7521065139 )   New wide bandwidth
waveforms be contained in their own sub band outside the main stream sub bands used for SSB, CW and narrow band digital operations.

 

Expansion of digital segment on 80 meters - A few years ago, the digital community lost several KHz of sub band above 3.6 MHz.  The
committee recommends this bandwidth be returned for digital use and set aside for wide band experimentation and unattended packet
operations.  This sub band will be of great use by unattended digital operations engaged in supporting local emergency
communication.

 

Transparency - Transparency is basic and fundamental to Amateur Radio.   We
must have the capability to monitor all waveforms used on amateur
frequencies.    This is necessary for security, for tracking interference,
for the ARRL Official Observer Program and even FCC monitoring.    Amateur
Radio is about experimentation but transparency across all waveforms is key.


 

All waveforms transmitted over the air need to be open allowing us to examine them technically, learn how they work and even provide
modifications expanding them to solve other communications problems.  In general, closed
waveforms should be discouraged.   Closed waveforms if allowed, at a
minimum, should provide free "read only" soundcard based software program that allows others the capability of monitoring usage of
the waveform. 

 

The ARRL already maintains a list of major digital waveforms on its web
site.   In order to address the transparency issue, we suggest that the ARRL
web site be expanded to include the download of free readers that resolve transparency concerns.

 

Proposed Digital Band Plan - The ARRL in their RM11708 filing presents a clear case that changes to the existing band plan are not
needed and in fact the existing amateur band plan will be more efficient under RM11708.  The responses listed above assume the
statements made by the ARRL are true and I therefore conclude that the only changes needed to the existing band plan are changes to
place unattended digital stations and new wide bandwidth waveforms in their own sub band.  

 

Other concerns about dealing with transparency, expansion of the 80 meter digital band, bandwidth creep, and a basic question of
providing "Internet as a Service" while outside immediate band planning discussions are key considerations to make sure that narrow
and wide bandwidth waveforms play successfully on the amateur bands.  It is my sincere hope that the ARRL and its BOD consider these
in planning and develop a clear vision to guide the amateur community as the new wide and narrow waveforms are allowed.

 

 

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty