[Wswss] Commercial Broadband 10 GHz Proposal

[Marty Woll]

To all microwave operators:

 

The petition for 10 GHz broadband by Mimosa Networks that I mentioned last
year at an SBMS meeting has now been put on public notice by the FCC in the
form of RM-11715.  I'm sorry I  cannot attach a copy of the proposal to this
posting due to its size; however, until I can get it posted on the SBMS or
other Web site, I will simply offer to e-mail a copy to anyone who sends me
a request for it (to n6vi at socal dot rr dot com).

 

It is likely that ARRL will file comments, and I want to be sure your input
is considered when they do so.  Please READ the proposal and SEND me your
comments within the next two weeks if possible.  The first half of the
document is just the we-need-more-spectrum-for-broadband pitch; the
specifics start on page 20.  

 

The proposed band plan for the commercial services leaves two segments
vacant to protect the Amateur Radio operations from 10.350 to 10.370 GHz
(which includes our Weak-Signal segment) and 10.450 to 10.500 (Amateur
Satellite sub-band).  Outside those two segments, Mimosa is asking for rules
that allow EIRP's of 55dBW (half a Megawatt, if my math is correct) and
point-to-many (isotropic) as well as point-to-point service.  Interestingly,
Footnote 65 (on page 18) cites AF6NA's article on the SBMS Web site as a
reference on Amateur Radio usage of the 10 GHz weak-signal segment.

 

My immediate concerns are:

 

-       What is the bleed-over past the edges of nominal 20-MHz-wide
channels in the proposed band plan and how might it impact our weak-signal
band segment?

 

-       How might the high-EIRP omnidirectional commercial signals impact
Amateur uses of the band outside the two protected segments mentioned above?


 

-       Would a contention-based protocol (Mimosa's proposed method of
avoiding interference to primary and secondary users) provide effective
protection to Amateur users of the paired analog / digital and experimental
segments in our National Band Plan? 

(Contention-based protocol means listen before transmitting; an Amateur
station would not be protected while in the receive mode, since the
commercial station would not hear the weak signal being received by the
Amateur.)

 

Would the proliferation of commercial Wi-Fi equipment on 10 GHz provide a
source of inexpensive gear that could be useful to Amateurs?  If so, would
that benefit outweigh whatever interference potential exists in the
proposal?

 

I look forward to hearing from you.  You are also welcome to file individual
comments directly with the FCC.

 

73,

 

Marty

 

Marty Woll N6VI

Vice-Director, ARRL Southwestern Division