[SixClub] This is what the arrl had to say

[bruce mallon]

Hi, Bruce,
 
It is not at all uncommon for the FCC to issue
Experimental (FCC rules Part 5) licenses on the
Amateur bands, most to non amateurs.  In this case,
the Experimental was issued to a small group of
Amateur licensees, for purposes related to Amateur
Radio, but not permitted under the rules.  The Part 5
authorization specifically indicates that the
transmissions can occur ONLY subject to the
requirement that they not cause harmful interference
to Amateur communications.  So if there were
interference, hams do not have to move frequency, but
Experimental transmission would have to stop until the
Amateur spectrum was no longer in use.
 
The term "legacy" mode is used in professional
communications all the time.  Analog cell phones are
often referred to as "legacy," even though they are
still fairly common and useful.  I run across it all
the time in spectrum-management and industry-standards
circles, so I really wouldn't read that much into the
word.
 
I am not a digital guy; my personal operation is 99%
CW, but I can see value in Amateurs being permitted to
do experimentation of all sorts that may not be
permitted under the present FCC rules. That is a good
way for us to advance and grow, but in a way
controlled by the constraints of the Part 5 rules.  If
there are interference problems, they should be
documented, as that would be a valuable part of the
experiment. Although in saying that, I think that we
should note that there are interfernece problems
between traditional modes in Amateur Radio, too, and a
positive result would be for a developing mode to
cause no more interference to other use of our bands
than the present modes.
 
In most countries of the world, the rules would permit
such experimentation.  There are plenty of hams in
this country that believe that  our rules should
state, "These are your band edges. These are your
power limits. Stay within them." I don't think that
the US  amateur community is ready for that yet, but I
also think that allowing ongoing development under
FCC-issued experimental authorizations is a good
balance.  The results of this could well someday
influence future regulatory change, but this is NOT a
part of ARRL's interest in bandwidth and band
planning.  No one will know for sure the impact of
this until the work is done.
 
I also note that although there have been a number of
transmissions made, there have been no interference
reports, and the guys doing this have done what they
can to keep the amateur community informed.
 
Hams can make their views known to their ARRL Division
Director. See http://www.arrl.org/divisions.  ARRL's
President, Joel Harrison, is also very active on VHF
and above, as a "weak-signal" enthusiast, so it would
seem that the interests of the VHF community are well
known to the ARRL Board of Directors and staff.
 
This is just one man's view, Bruce, but at this point,
I think that what is needed is a good scientific
investigation of the methods and results, including
any interference that may occur.  That is the basis on
which good decisions can be made.
 
 
Ed Hare, W1RFI
ARRL Lab
 



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

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