Your argument isn't logical.

If the NGO's don't have the resources to use the frequencies they
currently have assigned, where would the resources come from to allow
them to use amateur service frequencies reassigned to the land
fixed/mobile service?  How would they convince the FCC to allocate and
assign new frequencies when they aren't using the ones they have?

The ITU controls the segments assigned to different services.  For
example, 3750 - 4000 kHz in Region 2 can be amateur, land, or
aeronautical.  The FCC just can't create a new "service" for this
segment without agreement of the signatories of the ITU.  Therefore,
these frequencies would have to be assigned within the land
fixed/mobile service and end up with the same restriction that their
current assignments have.  

Lastly, I just can't understand where so much data is going to come
from in a disaster that the FCC could justify moving HF amateur
allocations to land fixed/mobile.  Amateur radio should not be the
primary service that handles megabytes/gigabytes of data on a
continuous basis for logistics, etc. for NGO's or the government. 
This is close to the line of using amateur radio as a full blown
communications carrier.  If amateurs involved with emcomms are
"selling" this to NGO's and the government they are doing so without
consulting with all the other amateur service licensees that share
these frequencies and getting their agreement.

Jim
WA0LYK

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Red Cross, Salvation Army and the like frequencies are just
commercial frequencies requiring the same bandwidth as other users of
the frequencies...they have no special frequencies.
> 
> However, I would think that DHS would approach the FCC about setting
aside disaster communications frequencies that don't reside within the
commercial frequencies.  What is unfortunate is that the ITU really
controls the bandwidth of the frequencies on HF world wide so there is
not really any or many available frequencies on HF that can be used
for wideband use EXCEPT the hambands.  Even our military frequencies
that we in the U.S. (Region II) cannot be used in other parts of the
world.
> 
> The clostest thing we have to a disaster frequency is the 5 MHz
frequency that is used in Alaska.  When you consider the actual needs
of frequencies set aside for disaster communications, there just isn't
enough bandwidth available...what IS available is amateur radio
frequencies.
> 
> I fear that if amateur radio operators in the U.S. don't accommodate
NGO HF communications needs...and choose to give the NGOs their own
disaster frequencies, those frequencies will come out of the hambands.
 It may be a case of play with the NGOs and meet their "sometime"
communications needs or lose frequencies to them altogether.
> 
> Walt/K5YFW
> 

Reply via email to