[NLRS] VHF Contesting - Use it or lose it debate (W9SNR)

Thu Jan 7 23:26:50 EST 2010

I don't agree with either position here.  Both SEEM to be saying, "IF 
IT'S NOT IMPORTANT TO ME, I DON'T CARE"....
at least that's how I take it...maybe that's not the intent, but that's 
what it sounds like to me.

W9SNR says he doesn't care about unused portions of the microwave 
bands.  Well, if unused parts are taken away, what will happen when the 
number of hams on the microwave bands doubles or quadruples or more?  
Now you will have such crowded conditions, it will be like HF!  That's 
why some of us left HF, or at least use it a lot less than when we were 
first licensed.

Now let me tackle Les Rayburn's comments.

Too little "activity above 1.2ghz as to make the impact of the loss of 
these bands unnoticeable to the amateur population outside the members 
of these mailing lists. Even the majority of VHF Men wouldn't directly 
mourn the loss."  ???  I'm not sure where Les is, but there are many 
areas that have quite a bit of activity at 1.2 GHz and up.  I happen to 
live in one area where there is considerable activity from 6M up through 
and including 24 GHz.

"In exchange for all amateur allocations above 1.2ghz (with perhaps a 
small allocation at 10ghz) we could ask for:" ???  Why an allocation at 
10 GHz?  I suspect Les has gear for 10 GHz, but no other band above 1.2 GHz.

"1.) Swift passage of legislation similar to PRB-1 that would allow 
reasonable accommodation of amateur radio antennas, even those who live 
in HOA situations."  Not sure what HOA is, but I suspect it is some sort 
of covenant.  Let me guess...Les lives in a place with a covenant in place?

"2.) Legislative protection from any future encroachment on current 
amateur radio allocations."  HUH???  He wants to give up spectrum now 
(and probably bands HE doesn't use) and keep others (HF through 902)???  
Makes no sense to me.

"4.) Allocation of spectrum on LF and MF ranges that are not nearly as 
attractive to industry, and of greater interest to the majority of 
amateurs."  OK, let's pose this.  The HF bands generally have 100KHz to 
400 KHz in their allocations.  Let's assume a normal voice QSO needs 3 
Khz of bandwidth.  In a region such as Los Angeles, where there are many 
hams (that are within groundwave distances from each other), any given 
HF band would only be able to support about 30-130 QSOs.  Now let's look 
at the same area using the 1.2 GHz band.  The band has 60 MHz of 
available bandwidth.  This could support 20,000 of the same 3 KHz wide 
QSOs.  Most hams in the LA area would be able to make a QSO at the same 
time without having to wait for a 45 minute ragchew to end before they 
got their turn at the airwaves.

I propose that the ARRL fight to defend the spectrum for ALL hams, not 
just the "majority" as Les proposes.

Scott
N0EDV

W9SNR - Jim wrote:
> Since the mid 70's my favorite ham activity has been UHF  & microwave 
> experimentation.  Started with 432. now up to 24 GHz. After putting a lot of 
> time, effort, and money into this activity, I would be extremely 
> disappointed to see it all blown away by someone of influence who does not 
> appreciate the value of keeping all the frequencies currently used by hams. 
> Now, I really don't care what happens to the unused parts of the microwave 
> bands, but I very much want to see hams retain the weak signal frequencies 
> (2304 and multiples of 1152 MHz on the higher bands), and any other 
> frequencies used for FM, ATV, EME, etc.  Hopefully we can reach such a 
> compromise and not eliminate all future hope for those of use for whom 
> microwave work is the primary reason we are still in this hobby.
>
> 73 - Jim
> W9SNR
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:55:15 -0600
> From: "Les Rayburn" <les at highnoonfilm.com>
> Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] [VHF] Use It or Lose It
> To: <vhf at w6yx.stanford.edu>, "VHF Contesting Reflector"
> <vhfcontesting at contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <5A207D943341432A869DAED37096A237 at LesN1LFPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> It seems clear that another assault on our frequencies is coming. I'd be
> willing to bet my next paycheck that the ARRL will cease this opportunity to
> drum up contributions to the Spectrum Defense Fund, and fight any such move
> tooth and nail. This "tried and true" approach may succeed, but if so, what
> will really be gained?
>
> Instead, I propose another course of action.
>
> Instead of entering into bitter legal combat with corporate giants, why not
> negotiate with both corporate interests and Congress instead? I'd submit
> that there is so little activity above 1.2ghz  as to make the impact of the
> loss of these bands unnoticeable to the amateur population outside the
> members of these mailing lists. Even the majority of VHF Men wouldn't
> directly mourn the loss.
>
> If instead of fighting to retain these highly underutilized bands, let's
> look at what negotiating a settlement might offer:
>
> In exchange for all amateur allocations above 1.2ghz (with perhaps a small
> allocation at 10ghz) we could ask for:
>
> 1.) Swift passage of legislation similar to PRB-1 that would allow
> reasonable accommodation of amateur radio antennas, even those who live in
> HOA situations.
>
> 2.) Legislative protection from any future encroachment on current amateur
> radio allocations.
>
> 3.) An increased commitment towards resolving interference issues that
> affect amateur radio.
>
> 4.) Allocation of spectrum on LF and MF ranges that are not nearly as
> attractive to industry, and of greater interest to the majority of amateurs.
>
> Some would argue that such an approach to "spectrum defense" would make more
> sense in the long term, and that the gains to amateur radio would be far
> greater. Alas, it won't serve the professional fundraisers who seem to have
> the loudest voice in Newington these days, nor will it please those who
> always prefer mortal combat to reasonable solutions, but the essence of true
> leadership is in plotting the wisest course, not bending to the rule of the
> mob--or the voices of a well-heeled few.
>
> 73,
>
> Les Rayburn, N1LF
> EM63nf
> 121 Mayfair Park
> Maylene, AL 35114
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> NLRS mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Flying Corben Junior Ace - Building RV-4
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die