[NLRS] Important matter for VHFers

[Marciniak, Ed]

Perhaps it would be a better argument that:

The cellular providers should adopt a lower bandwidth codec such as AMBE or IMBE that could double the capacity before relentlessly seeking more spectrum.

That lower frequncies increase the cost of certain components in radio hardware, as well as antenna size...and that it is not the best place to add a spectral allocation.

Data over 9600 bps, and atv are two modes that can't be served by 2m allocations. Sure they could be done on 1.2ghz but we've leaned from 800mhz digital radio that certain terrain and foliage conditions can cause coverage issues on long hops. To arrive at reasonable capacity cellular networks (usually) place towers close enough together that that isn't an issue.



----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Gerald N. Johnson [mailto:geraldj at weather.net]
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 08:48 PM
To: nlrs at mailman.qth.net <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Important matter for VHFers



Trouble with the proposed letter is that its full of fractional (small 
fractional) truths. How much public service communication has ever been 
performed below 440 MHz in the 70 cm band? Other than the occasional 
analog TV remote what communication do we do below 431.98 MHz? What is 
there that we presently do in all our activity between 431.98 and 432.15 
that we couldn't do at 440.0 to 440.15 MHz? There may be a problem 
shutting up failed satellites that downlink in the 436 range. A threat 
of interference from our use of 1.5 KW and 20 dB antenna gain is not a 
valid defense for chasing off interlopers and preserving our frequencies.

If public service is our only reason for holding frequencies we are in a 
world of hurt because the emergency agencies have begun to notice that 
our role has been one of coordinating between the agencies that wouldn't 
talk to each other (it wasn't a matter of couldn't, just they wouldn't 
allow it and set up radios to prevent it) so they now talk to each other 
more. And for our involvement in exercises they want us to be ready to 
assume command of the whole operation by having taken their emergency 
operations courses (that I suspect downplay accuracy in message handling 
and ignore the procedures we've been using for a major part of a 
century) to be the general purpose emergency volunteer with radio on the 
side. Red Cross wants us to take their first aid classes and to be ready 
to render first aid, not just communications, and to join their 
organization.

But what public service have we ever done using the spectrum 420 through 
440 MHz?

I think we can make a better argument of learning about weak signal and 
long distance propagation modes that can upset the other users of the 
nearby spectrum which we can't do if we are sharing with strong signal 
local modes. But I don't see that as adequate justification to save 2/3 
of our 70 cm band from being taken for direct use by public service or 
sold to the highest bidder.

Glumly, 73, Jerry, K0CQ

On 4/22/2011 9:20 AM, w0zq at aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
> Hello NLRS-land
>
> By now all of you should be aware of H.R.607, a new bill in Washington that proposes that the FCC should auction off the D-block frequencies, a part of which includes the 432 (440) MHz band.  Check out the most recent QST for more information, or go to the ARRL website at http://www.arrl.org/hr-607  .
>
> I recommend that all NLRS members write their Representative to voice their opinion on this subject.  If you so wish, a very easy to use tool has been set up to assist us in this process.  Click on www.kd4pyr.net/hamletter.htm will generate a letter in opposition to this bill with instructions on how&  where to send it.
>
> PS:  The 432 Sprint Wednesday, April 27.
>
> 73, Jon
> W0ZQ
> =
>
______________________________________________________________
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