Jim, I should have said that NGOs don't have funding for the current technology to give them high-speed, robust data that fits into a 3 KHz bandwidth. There is a firm in Australia that does sell this equipment but the cost of the radio and modem hardware is in access of $75 U.S.
If there was a computer modem that provided high-speed, robust data, then the cost to the NGOs would only be the radio with wider bandwidths. I have talked to two U.S. manufacturers of HF LM radios that are currently in production and they said that providing a radio with 3-10 KHz bandwidths would not add much to the cost of their radios. One radio cost less than $3000 and the other less than $5000. There are obviously many solutions to the problem(s) NGOs have with communications. The FCC has a great deal of latitude in what it can do with frequency assignments and I am sure that if Congress tells them to accommodate NGOs data communications needs, they will find some way to do it. I believe that two or perhaps 3 10 KHz channels on 80/75, 40 and 20 meters and one on 30M would meet the NGO needs. In "unofficial" talks with joint communications personnel with the 5 major disaster relief NGOs in the U.S. they agreed that 3 channels would be sufficient. Of course this is just discussion...food for thought and subject to refinement and many changes or other options. 73, Walt/K5YFW -----Original Message----- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of jgorman01 Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 3:42 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: USA: No Advanced Digital HF Data Comms --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Please see below... Walt/K5YFW > > -----Original Message----- > From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of jgorman01 > Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 9:36 PM > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [digitalradio] Re: USA: No Advanced Digital HF Data Comms > >> 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? > > Its not a resource problem, it is a problem that being basically in the > LMRS their assigned "channels" will not permit they type of > modulation that is/would be required for high speed, robust data > transmissions. > > Money is not really a problem, and of course if they are on NGO assigned > frequencies, no radio operator's license is needed. > Wait a minute, from message 17814 you said: "These organizations do need very high-speed throughput modes that are robust to meet their operational needs and do not have the funding to provide hardware to support the need." I was only addressing the argument you made that they didn't have the funding so must rely on amateur radio to provide their operational communications needs. > The FCC may not have a choice to assign new frequencies or even create a > new type of service...Congress may pass a Public Law establishing > it. Of the FCC might create a new type of service or sub-service > as they have done in the past. > > If 3750-4000 can be used for land services, then the FCC could > establish a sub-class or new land mobile radio class here for > disaster communications. The FCC just recently did away with a > sub-class with they effectively did away with RACES. You might > have a Radio Amateur Disaster Communications Service with > assigned frequencies in the ham bands and these frequencies might > be only used exclusively by NGOs during disasters with the modes > needed and operated by "certified" amateur radio operators or even > non-amateur radio persons who were "certified". This was done > during WWII. > They could also create a new "service" and reassign current land service frequencies and allow the use of wider bandwidths. They could do any of these things. > If you worked in a NGO Incident Command Post for the Red Cross, > Salvation Army, Baptist Disaster Relief for FEMA Incident Command > Post, you would know just how much information is needed to run > these facilities so that they can meet the collective needs of the > disaster area. Part of the problem we saw in Katrina and Rita, and > now looking back at other disaster events, we see that even in them > they could have run better, more effectively and met the collective > needs of those in the disaster area had information flow been large > and faster. > > Walt/K5YFW Just how many kilohertz on 80m do you think it would take to get one, just one 56 kb channel on 80m, i.e. one slow old dial up line? Do you think this would satisfy the needs of all the NGO's in a major disaster area like Katrina caused? Jim WA0LYK Connect to telnet://cluster.dynalias.org a single node spotting/alert system dedicated to digital and CW QSOs. Yahoo! Groups Links
