[NLRS] Important matter for VHFers

Fri Apr 22 23:35:07 EDT 2011

Jerry,

I respect everything you said.

In my limited experience during "emergencies" (tornadoes, hurricanes,
and local evacuations) the primary traffic was all conducted on 2m
Repeaters.  HF was available for longer distance contacts to agencies
one state over if needed.

With that said, could your logic not be applied to every frequency we
use above 148mhz?  I mean how much Emergency Communication is used on
1.2ghz, 2.3ghz, etc?  And if any communications are being done on the
70cm, could we not move it to 2m?  Where does it stop?  If we lost
everything above 54mhz, could the Ham community not adjust and do all of
our communications on 6m or 10m?  Several HT's now have 6m FM built in.

I agree that we have a very weak position if public service is our only
defense to defending our frequencies.  So what are other positions that
we can use?  Is it better education of the contributions that hams have
made over the years from innovation and experimentation on our
frequencies?  Better PR to show that we aren't just a bunch of "weird
guys with outrageous antennas for our CB Radios?"

I was always taught that we had use of our frequencies as a "reward" for
our personal investments monetarily as well as time to be prepared in
the case we are called upon to provide emergency communications. How do
we convey this general belief in a way that better positions us against
the threats to our frequencies?

I welcome any ideas.  I just don't want to sit back and watch big
business and big government take away our frequencies.

Respectfully,

Austin, K0GEM

-----------
Austin - K0GEM
e-mail: austin at k0gem.us
web:  www.k0gem.us
Twitter: k0gem
APRS: K0GEM-9

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Important matter for VHFers
From: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj at weather.net>
Date: Fri, April 22, 2011 8:48 pm
To: nlrs at mailman.qth.net

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