[CW] FCC Actions - OOOOPS?

[scott mcmullen]

--- Donald Chester <k4kyv at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Typically on 80m there are a few signals scattered across 3500-3525, and 
> maybe some spot frequencies with DX pile-ups, but lots of open space between 
> signals.  Then from 3525 up to about 3550 there is a fair amount of cw 
> activity, much like I always remembered 80m being.  The activity begins to 
> thin out above 3560 or thereabouts until I tune up near 3600, where I hear a 
> cluster of digital signals, usually limited to a spread of 10 or 20 kHz.  
> Tuning on up, I hear a few CW traffic nets here and there, but many CW 
> channels' worth of empty space in between.  The higher up in frequency I 
> tune, the less activity I hear, until I run across several CW QSO's in the 
> old novice portion, mixed in with Canadian phones.  Not a  lot of phone 
> activity on 3750-3775, but above that, wall-to-wall signals on up to 3990, 
> where the German DRM broadcaster wipes out the top 10 kHz of the band with 
> its white noise.

I agree with you on the parts of the band where most of the activity is.

3546 KHz is a boatanchor enthusiasts frequency, and it is quite active in
my area.

3558 KHz is the FISTs calling frequency, and 3560 KHz the QRP calling frequency,
and that area can become quite busy, particularly during QRP or FISTs events.

The whole area from 3540-3560 KHz was filled with signals during the recent
Texas QSO Party.

For me, the issue is that all the activity that used to occupy 3500-3750 Khz
is now going to have to be crammed into 3500-3600 KHz; a compaction of more
than 2x.

My experience is that about the most unoccupied part of 80/75 meters 
is 3750-3775 KHz; the Extra Class-exclusive phone band. I think that's 
because most of the 75m SSB roundtable ragchews involve at least some 
Advanced and General Class licensees.

This FR&O dramatically widens that segment. 

> I don't think we can justify holding unused frequencies "in reserve" just in 
> case digital activity might become more popular sometime in the near or 
> distant future, or, if by some miracle, CW activity might increase by 
> tenfold, which is what it would take to fill 3500-3700 with signals once 
> again.
> 
> The Extra Class subband makes matters worse with the new changes, because 
> General, Novice and Advanced must cram CW and digital activity between 3525 
> and 3600. I think the idea of "refarming" the old novice bands and allowing 
> Novices and coded Techs to use the same frequencies for CW as the Generals 
> was a good idea.

I agree that "refarming" the old Novice Band would have been a good idea.

This FR&O went waaaay beyond that, though.

If they had left 3600-3675 KHz as Novice/Tech+/General/Advanced/AE Class 
data and CW, that would have provided adequate room for the RTTY, PSK, 
Pactor activity, and the NTS CW nets that have previously occupied 
3600-3725 KHz.

But they didnt'.

> 
> We haven't lost anything as long as there is plenty of spectrum left to 
> operate CW and other narrowband modes somewhere on the band without undue 
> congestion. I agree that the FCC went overboard with the exclusively Extra 
> class band segments.

No argument from me; they've merely traded off one underused segment for another.

Public Service nets need to be accessible to General and Advanced Class licensees,
so none of the new Extra Class Phone Band will be useful for that, except possibly
Region, Area, or TCC CW Nets might reasonably be held in Extra Class-only segments.

> 
> When working cw I prefer hearing a cw signal every 500 Hz or so, than spread 
> out so there is 1.5 kHz (or much more) between each signal.

You are fortunate (as well as enterprising); you have assembled a receiver with 
outstanding selectivity. 

For years, I worked CW with a "typical" transceiver with the standard 2.5 KHz IF 
filter, until I could scrimp some funds for a 500 Hz IF filter. I think it's 
worthwhile to consider that not everyone will be able to afford the narrow IF 
filters immediately when assembling an amateur station, particularly if they're 
just trying out CW to see if they like it or not.

The 500 Hz CW filter for the Icom 718 is the IC-FL52A, which is $179.95 at HRO.
The filter for the Yaesu FT-857 is $169.95.

I'm lucky that Ten-Tec's filters are only $109/ea new, and I've been able
to buy some second-hand ones on the Ten-Tec reflector from folks who had 
upgraded to an Orion.

> 
> Remember, receiver selectivity, frequency stability, dynamic range, and dial 
> resetability in equipment used by the average ham, are vastly improved since 
> 15 years ago when the cw band used to be fully occupied.

The selectivity of many of the rigs are better if you have added the optional 
CW filters, or have one of the Software-defined radios.

The "typical" ham with an "average" budget and an Icom 718, 706, or Yaesu 
FT 857 will be in about the same straights I was in with my "stock" TS-520
30 years ago.

> 
> Blame the dwindling CW activity on dumbing down the exams, dying off of 
> older hams, the no-code lobby, lack of newcomers, phasing out of commercial 
> and military CW communication, lack of interest in endeavours of "delayed 
> gratification," or whatever you prefer; it doesn't matter.  The signals in 
> the ham bands just aren't there anymore.
> 
> BTW I have no sympathy for the NCI crowd.  I wish we still had the 13 and 20 
> wpm code requirements.
> 

Me, too!

73
Scott
W5ESE

Scott McMullen, W5ESE
http://www.geocities.com/scottamcmullen
scottamcmullen at yahoo.com
Dripping Springs, Texas

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com