Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() The FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology - the gatekeeper of spectrum allocations - dismissed a petition by Glen E. Zook (K9STH) for establishment of a 4-metre Amateur Radio Service band on the basis of the spectrum requested was not available for that purpose nor was it expected to become available for such use. The alleged merits of establishing such a band were not reached (i.e. not discussed) in the dismissal. We "spectrum watchers" could have told him that years ago! See: PETITION FOR PROPOSED CHANGES IN 47 CFR PART 97, SECTION 97.301(A) AND SECTION 97.305(C) TO ADD THE 4 -METER BAND. Denied Glen E. Zook's Petition for Rulemaking. Action by: Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology. Adopted: 09/17/2014 by ORDER. (DA No. 14-1347). OET https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/at...14-1347A1.docx https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/at...-14-1347A1.pdf 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 In Phil Kane writes: The FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology - the gatekeeper of spectrum allocations - dismissed a petition by Glen E. Zook (K9STH) for establishment of a 4-metre Amateur Radio Service band on the basis of the spectrum requested was not available for that purpose nor was it expected to become available for such use. The alleged merits of establishing such a band were not reached (i.e. not discussed) in the dismissal. We "spectrum watchers" could have told him that years ago! See: PETITION FOR PROPOSED CHANGES IN 47 CFR PART 97, SECTION 97.301(A) AND SECTION 97.305(C) TO ADD THE 4 -METER BAND. Denied Glen E. Zook's Petition for Rulemaking. Action by: Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology. Adopted: 09/17/2014 by ORDER. (DA No. 14-1347). OET https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/at...14-1347A1.docx https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/at...-14-1347A1.pdf 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon Hi Phil, Yes, I agree that the odds of success of the petition appeared to be low, especially if pretty much the only justification by the petitioner was, "Hey, the kid (country) down the street (across the ocean) has this, why can't I?" Regardless of whether the parents (government) can afford it or feel that it is appropriate to give it to him (significant legal and technical obstacles in the present allocation tables). I'm sure that you and I understand what the petitioner didn't, that it's also not a good idea to get a bureaucratic agency into the habit of saying no, even in situations where they might someday say yes. I wouldn't want to completely give up on the prospect of a 70 MHz amateur band here in the U.S., though. If I understand correctly, the FCC currently views this as not possible for the foreseeable future because this chunk of VHF spectrum is still allocated to television in the U.S. Even if refarmed at some point, the FCC seems to want to sell/auction the spectrum for commercial use, though it's been recent experience that at least some auctions aren't very effective in putting spectrum to the best/highest use. Often the buyer overbids, and either fails to purchase the spectrum when financing falls through, or purchases the spectrum for so much that the intended use is unprofitable from the get-go, and it either goes unused, or the buyer obtains permission from the FCC to flip it to another user/purpose, possibly at a loss to the buyer. Perhaps I should ask my elected ARRL officials this also, but are you aware of any serious lobbying/planning to try and set aside some of 4 meters at such time as VHF television is refarmed? Are there strategies that might have a higher odds of success in the future? Another amateur radio band, with unique propagation characteristics, to intercommunicate with amateurs in other countries who already have this band, would be a good justification, but certainly not the only one required, as the failed petitioner found out. What are the proposed alternative uses? Mid-band VHF spectrum like this appears to not be very sexy or appealing for those advocating state-of-the-art new uses, which seem to like high-bandwidth, point-to-point, low multi-path, high geographic-diversity/ frequency-reuse spectrum with fairly consistent propagation characteristics. Unless you are, for example, a government agency in a sparsely-populated state where trunking and repeaters are cost-prohibitive to provide wide-area coverage, I don't see a lot of money getting paid for this spectrum. Perhaps I'm not seeing the big picture. Do you have any particular useful insights into the "big picture" on the issue of long-term future refarming of mid-band VHF spectrum from analog television, whom we might be competing with over obtaining it, and what might be the chances of getting at least a small slice of it for amateur radio here in the U.S.? (73, Paul, K3FU) - -- Paul W. Schleck http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/ Finger for PGP Public Key -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (NetBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlQdzu8ACgkQ6Pj0az779o6B5ACfXsfCd9vDwq LSSDB0BqBQJ42K XQsAoLC4tc5MPmL+qe3XlDRlEuEXXOif =uqGh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Quick 19 Metre {Meter} Shortwave Band Scan @ 21:45 UTC | Shortwave | |||
Quick 19 Metre {Meter} Shortwave Band Scan @ 21:45 UTC | Shortwave | |||
jammers in the 49 metre band? | Shortwave | |||
All India Radio to vacate 90 metre shortwave band | Shortwave | |||
40 metre band | Shortwave |