[MRCA] Digital sigs on 5357 kc

[Alex J Rokowetz]

ALCON,
Private sector entities, namely phone companies and power companies are also licensed to to use 5MHz freqs... This is not just a Govt party.  If I recall correctly, private sector entities are licensed to sue 5.005 MHz - 5.45 MHz under the business/industrial license group.  I have worked for more than one phone company licensed to use this range of freqs under licenses like KJL412, WNME910, WQIQ872 (look them up in the FCC ULS) and many other licenses.  I have personally used the aforementioned licenses are assigned to phone companies like Verizon, FairPoint, Consolidated, and Frontier.  Other phone companies and power companies are also licensed to use the same range of 5.005 - 5.45 MHz freqs.  FWIW, None of us use or are interested in using the 5MHz amateur radio channels.  We have plenty of other bandwidth to use without having to worry about amateurs misbehaving and stomping on our comms... and we don't use JT65.
AlexK2AJR



      From: Peter Gottlieb <kb2vtl at gmail.com>
 To: mrca at mailman.qth.net 
 Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2017 12:44 PM
 Subject: Re: [MRCA] Digital sigs on 5357 kc
   
There was a recent MARS-amateur exercise which used 60 meters and they kept 
referring to those channels as the "interop" (interoperability) channels.  My 
understanding of what that means is that all the 60 meter channels are reserved 
for government to amateur use in support of an emergency situation.  As MARS and 
other government or government related groups do not use JT65, such use would 
not be permitted.

Peter kb2vtl


On 11/12/2017 11:35 AM, Robert Nickels wrote:
> On 11/12/2017 9:34 AM, Peter Gottlieb wrote:
>> Someone mentioned they installed the software and found out who the hams were 
>> but they seem to think that is their channel and won't move.
>
> Exactly right, Peter.   They have stated their believe that 5357 Khz is "a 
> digital frquency" and that voice operators should go elsewhere.   Not 
> surprisingly they could care less about our argument about radios that only 
> tune in 1 Khz increments (just look at the current state of amateur technical 
> knowledge to understand why).
>
> These are  hams, but the point about Primary Users deserves clarification.  
> Everyone who remembers when 60 meters was opened (which I'd say includes 
> virtually none of these JT-65 users) understands that we are secondary users 
> and are required to vacate the frequency on request from a primary user.   If 
> these JT-65 stations ignore amateur convention and courtesy by starting up 
> digital transmissions at random times without regard for other amateur users 
> on the channel, how would they ever respond to an official request from a 
> primary user?   That's the scenario that will wreck 60 meter privileges for 
> everyone, and you'd think the ARRL which fought for this allocation would step 
> in and help preserve it.
>
> Before I get off the soapbox, let me add that some of them do not think they 
> are causing harmful interference because they are using a "narrowband mode".   
> And while it's true that JT-65 uses a very small frequency shift between 
> tones, the net impact on a voice user is a warbling continuous carrier.   The 
> fact that the software initiates transmissions automatically on a 
> time-synchronized schedule combined with the common use of excessive power 
> leads to malicious interference, just as if I randomly laid a brick on my key 
> in the middle of someone's QSO.
>
> Searches show there's been considerable discussion about whether digital modes 
> are even legal on 60 meters, but it seems those who wanted to use them just 
> decided to do so, and now claim squatters rights, despite the fact that voice 
> and CW users were there first.   In my opinion digital modes are incompatible 
> with the intent of our 60 meter secondary allocation and should be banned.
>
> 73, Bob W9RAN
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> MRCA mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrca
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:MRCA at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
MRCA mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrca
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:MRCA at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/mrca/attachments/20171112/0c80e01d/attachment.html>