Amateur Radio Newsline Report 1572 - September 28, 2007 Amateur Radio Newsline report number 1572 with a release date of Friday, September 28, 2007 to follow in 5-4-3-2-1.
The following is a Q-S-T. The National Frequency Coordinators' Council asks the FCC to declare all digital voice repeaters follow the same rules as analog F-M repeaters, Australia makes ready for digital voice operations and four New England repeaters voluntarily shut down over interference to Pave Paws radar. Find out the details on Amateur Radio NewslineT report number 1572 coming your way right now. ** RADIO LAW: NFCC ASKS FCC TO DECLARE DIGITAL VOICE REPEATERS THE SAME AS ANALOG Is a digital voice repeater really a repeater or is it something else yet to be defined in law? The National Frequency Coordinators' Council believes that anything that repeats voice in close to real time is a repeater, and its now asked the FCC to declare this to be the case. Jay Maynard, K5ZC, is president of the NFCC. He explains the back story that lead his organization to act: -- K5ZC: "When D-Star started really taking off, somebody wanted to put up a D-Star repeater. He went to his local coordination council and wanted to put up a 2 meter D-Star repeater. He went to his local coordination council but was told no because we do not have any frequencies available for you. In desperation -- I don't know if that's a truly accurate word but its close enough -- they (the want to be repeater owners) went to the FCC and described what D-Star did in such a way that the FCC -- specifically Bill Cross -- concluded that a D-Star repeater really wasn't a repeater and therefore did not have to operate in the repeater subbands." -- That night be all well and good if it were only D-Star and other digital repeaters that fell into this category. Unfortunately, many of today's analog FM systems alo include a slight audio delay to facilitate control or linking. And it soon became apparent that this opinion by Bill Cross could lead to a lot of problems on the VHF and UHF bands: -- K5ZC: "This guy said 'fine' and he put his machine up on 145.61MHz with a minus 1.2 MHz offset and went to town That gave D-Star a foothold in that area, but it also opened up a real can of worms because the way that Bill Cross wrote the message, he said that its not simultaneous because there is a delay in the path between the input and the output. The problem there is that lots of (analog) repeaters have delays between the input and the output. Anyone that's running an RC-850 (controller) or other computerized controller has a delay. And it was only a matter of time before some bright spark read that message and said: 'Ah hah! My repeater does not transmit simultaneously either. Its not a repeater and I can get on outside the repeater subbands and go to town." -- And that's what had frequency coordinators concerned. They did not want to see a return to the repeater turf wars that marked the early days of FM relay operation: -- K5ZC: "In the late 1960's and early 1970' there was a lot of proliferation of repeaters. That was really the 'golden age' of repeater construction. And in that era is when frequency coordination first came about because you had people wanting to put their repeaters up all on the same frequency, and that did not work very well -- as you might imagine. Part of the regulation that came down to stem that tide was restricting repeaters to parts of the ham bands so that they wouldn't take over the entire band. After all, there are folks that do other things than operate FM repeaters on 2 meters and on some of the other bands and they have just as much right to operate on the ham bands as repeater operators do. And that's where the restriction (of repeaters) to certain subbanbds comes from." -- After debating the matter for several months as more and more digital voice systems took to the air, the majority of NFCC members agreed that it was imperative for them to let the FCC know that they believe any device that retransmits an audio signal in near to real time is a repeater and should be treated as such.-- -- K5ZC: "What the NFCC did was vote to ask the FCC to treat anything that asks like a repeater, as a repeater. This was a formal motion and vote of the council." -- Specifically, the letter states that the NFCC believes that any amateur station, other than a message forwarding system, that automatically retransmits a signal sent by another amateur station on a different frequency while it is being received, regardless of any delays in processing that signal or its format or content, is a repeater station within the meaning of paragraph 97.3(a)(39) of the FCC rules and should be treated as such. In practical terms, it means that D-Star, APCO 25 and any other repeatable digital voice system that comes along would be restricted to operation in the FCC recognized repeater subbands. That they could not simply set up shop on any frequencies that the system owner might choose to the detriment of weak signal, satellite or any other user of any ham radio band. It's an action likely to be lauded by groups like those just mentioned but likely will be condemned by those wanting to put up digital voice repeaters. If the FCC finds itself agreeing with the N-F-C-C, then it will mean digital voice relay enthusiasts will have to get in line behind all of the others waiting for repeater pairs for their old line F-M systems. Obviously we have only scratched the surface of this controversial topic. If you want to learn more, take your web browser over to www.therainreport.com. That's where you will find Part 1 of a two-pard in-depth interview with NFCC President Jay Maynard, K5ZC. Again that's www.therainreport.com or on the phone at area code 773-358-7845 (ARNewslineT) ** EMERGING TECHNOLOGY: AUSTRALIA MAKES READY FOR D-STAR The United States is not the only place where digital voice repeaters are coming of age. Australia's National Technical Advisory Committee or NATC has been considering how best to accommodate narrow band digital voice technologies such as D-Star. They have now made a number of proposals. Peter Young, VK3MV, of the WIA News reports: -- Firstly, in the 2 meter band, digital repeaters will be assigned to frequencies in the 146 to 147 MHz band, using the space between existing FM repeater channels. This is known as inter-leaving and is a common method of assignment to increase spectrum efficiency. The are some compelling reasons to take this approach for 2 meters, one is to remove the potentially annoying "drone" of digital signals, and secondly, the lack of normal FM repeater channels in some parts of Australia. It also seems to make sense to have the uniform arrangements across all of Australia. The arrangements for simplex operations, again to separate digital and FM emissions, NTAC has recommended the best area for simplex D-Star activity would be the 145 MHz segment. One suitable channel that is clear of other use is 145.125 MHz and should be used as the national simplex digital channel. On 70cms, where there is less congestion, NTAC has recommended that the first fifteen repeater channels, that is, 438.025 to 438.375 MHz, be used for D-Star type activity. NTAC has recommended that the arrangements for simplex activity on 70cm be centred on a national channel of 438.900 MHz, with secondary channels 12.5 KHz either side of the national channel. For the 23cm band, NTAC has recommend that repeater channels be assigned in the high end of the 1293 to 1294 MHz repeater segment. And on the 23cm, there is already a digital simplex segment between 1298 and 1300 MHz. As D-Star on this band uses a 128 KHz emission bandwidth, it is suggested that channels are spaced at 200 KHz intervals, beginning at 1298.1 MHz. I'm Peter Young VK3MV -- Australia's National Technical Advisory Committee will review these arrangements as D-Star digital activity develops. Further information can be found on the W-I-A website and will be included in the next edition of the WIA call book. (WIA News) ** ____________________________________________________________________________________ Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. http://travel.yahoo.com/