[digitalradio] FCC Denies Two Amateur Radio Petitions for Rulemaking
FCC Denies Two Amateur Radio Petitions for Rulemaking In two separate decisions released today, the Federal Communications Commission denied two Petitions for Rulemaking (PRM) having to do with Amateur Radio. These two PRMs, one filed by Mark Miller, N5RFX, of Arlington, Texas, concerning digital spectrum issues, and the other filed jointly by Ken Chafin, W6CPA, of La Crescenta, California, and Leon Brown, KC6JAR, of Los Angeles, California, concerning additional spectrum for more repeaters, including digital systems. Miller's PRM was assigned RM-11392, while the Chafin and Brown petition was not afforded an RM number by the FCC. According to ARRL General Counsel Chris Imlay, W3KD, the ARRL filed no comments on either petition in accordance with the League's standard policy on bare petitions for rule making that do not deal with spectrum allocations. Mark Miller, N5RFX Miller filed his PRM (RM-11392) in March 2007, requesting that portions of Part 97 be amended to revise various definitions and frequency privileges. He requested that the Commission amend various rules that relate to use of Amateur Service spectrum by stations transmitting data and other narrow bandwidth emissions. Specifically, the petition requested that the FCC amend the definition of data in Section 97.3(c)(2) to delete language added in the Commission's 2006 Omnibus Report and Order; amend Section 97.221 to limit the subbands on which unattended operation of automatically controlled digital stations is permitted, and amend Sections 97.305 and 97.307 to establish maximum necessary bandwidths for radioteletype (RTTY) and data emissions in the amateur high frequency bands. Miller noted in his PRM that adoption of these changes would result in a small number of wider bandwidth modes, including Pactor III, not being authorized. Miller supported his request, saying, [e]missions have crept into the narrowband RTTY/Data subbands in the 80-10 meter bands that are not appropriate for the RTTY/Data subbands, and that [s]tations under automatic control have taken advantage of loopholes created by terminology in the commission's rules. The FCC noted that it had received more than 650 comments and reply comments to this PRM, most of which oppose the petition. Definition of Data In its 2006 Omnibus RO, the FCC revised the definition of data to include certain image emission types in order to permit amateur stations to transmit both image and data emission types in the same frequency segments. The PRM noted that the Commission proposed this change in response to a rulemaking petition filed by Miller in 2003: The Commission agreed with commenters, including Miller, who argued that permitting images to be transmitted on data emission frequency segments would allow Amateur Radio to make the most of new software programs, thereby advancing Amateur Radio technology, which would be consistent with one of the purposes of Amateur Service, namely to contribute to the advancement of the radio art. Miller asserts in his 2007 PRM that Section 97.3(c)(2) should be amended to return to the pre-2006 definition of data because the necessary tests have not been performed to ensure that this mixing [of data and image emissions] will not cause interference because of an increase in traffic on certain bands by upgraded licensees after the FCC eliminated Morse code testing as an license examination requirement. Miller's assertion conflicts with the FCC's Omnibus RO, as well as Miller's own assertion in his 2003 PRM that permitting amateur stations to transmit both image and data emission types in the same frequency segments would not result in interference. The FCC contends that nothing in the present record indicates that increased activity by upgraded licensees, or any other changed circumstance, provides a basis for revisiting the Commission's 2006 conclusion. The FCC disagreed with Miller's unsupported assertion that elimination of Morse code proficiency testing would cause these bands to transmit both image and data emission types in the same frequency segments requires corresponding action to restrict permissible emission types. Rather, we believe that some upgraded licensees will choose to engage in these types of communications, but others will select different operating activities, the FCC stated in their decision. Moreover, the FCC continued, rescinding the 2006 amendment would conflict with the Commission's conclusion that permitting amateur stations to transmit both image and data emission types in the same frequency segments would contribute to the advancement of the radio art. The FCC concluded that Miller, in his 2007 PRM, had not set forth sufficient reasons for the Commission to consider deleting the 2006 addition to the definition of data: Should future experience substantiate Miller's concerns, he may file a new, factually supported petition for rulemaking. Automatically Controlled Digital
[digitalradio] X-1J4 Serial Control via Host Mode
I am trying to use the host serial console functionality to control a repeater controller from a X-1J4 TheNet digipeater. The issue I'm running into is the fact that the digipeater appears to repeatedly be sending a string to the repeater controller that the repeater controller interprets as an invalid command. I understand there is a way to turn that off, but so far I haven't be able to tweak the controls to arrive at that point. Can anyone point me to the correct mode settings to make this work? The repeater controller doesn't have any options for the serial port. Follows is a transcript of the ping-pong action between the two devices. Invalid DTMF character comes from the repeater controller, the DF2AU/... is from the TNC. cmd:*** CONNECTED to NQ4Y-1 host GRUNDY:NQ4Y-1} Please wait, trying Local host GRUNDY:NQ4Y-1} Connected to GRUNDY:NQ4Y-1 rn ihdfmr : Unrecornized command Umm:aoa^ooEmrdrozed command edoc^^a^dy DF2AU/DC4OX/GEKBB or rc:reemrror: Invalid DTMF character nn^m^r JError: UnrecognizedooNEMoea e mo edc rnco^nized cNEtind edrt^onTheNet X-NJN NQ4Y-1 cdEm^drnUnrecognized e^mnrnd cmd:Fn d i dfmr : Unrecornized command iUm:aoa^ooEmrdrozed command idoc^^a^dy DF2AU/DC4OX/GEKBB cmd:d *** retry count exceeded *** DISCONNECTED cmd:NQ4Y-1NQ4Y:ir NQ4Y-1NQ4Y:i^rc:reemrror: Invalid DTMF character thank you! NQ4Y
[digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
Mark N5RFX wrote: I am disappointed that the FCC did not elaborate on the purpose of Section 97.307(f) which limits specified RTTY or data emissions to a symbol rate not to exceed 300 bauds... Why is that there? The FCC has spoken and the status quo prevails. Hi Mark, This FCC order means so much more than affirmation of the status quo. It gives us a rare window of observation into FCC's internal trends toward support for modernization and progress. It very significantly shows the willingness of the FCC to open the door to change in several areas toward digital advancement and away from prior technologically adverse, artificial, or archaic constraints. It now seems quite clear from FCC's considered and reasoned statements in the petition denial order, that the only reason the 300 baud limit still exists is as a remnant of past history that serves no useful purpose in today's digital communications technology. As you know, it is common in USA for antiquated blue laws to continue on the books, while being effectively rendered useless or obsolete due to changes in society or advancements in technology. Congratulations, and on behalf of the majority of the greater amateur radio community, we thank you very much for your petition, Mark. A result of it is that we may possibly better project the possible outcome of future FCC rulemaking opportunities, within perhaps a wider venue, to include abolishment of baud limits altogether. Indeed, baud limit is now considered not simply superfluous, but counterproductive to the primary purpose of USA's Amateur Radio Service toward advancement of the radio art. 73 Bonnie KQ6XA At 08:47 PM 5/7/2008, expeditionradio wrote: In FCC's official consideration statements, FCC specifically supports no finite limit of bandwidth for digital data emissions for the amateur radio service. FCC said that imposition of such limits might impede experimentation and technological innovation.
[digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
bruce wa4gch wrote: So does this meen we can junk 99% of all ham stations for your idea of what ham radio should be? Ha ha, Bruce! Good one. Seriously, though, this is more of a rejection of backward-thinking attempts to stifle USA hams' future while the rest of the world passes us by. 73 Bonnie KQ6XA
[digitalradio] Fw: GO-32 9.6k APRS Sked May 17, ~8:30pm EDT
- Forwarded Message From: Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 8, 2008 10:21:30 AM Subject: [illinoisdigitalham] GO-32 9.6k APRS Sked May 17, ~8:30pm EDT I'm putting together a little sked for APRS operations on GO-32. I've been listening, and there doesn't seem to be many hams in the region using it. It seems that most folks have seen their own position report, and that is it. I'd like to see something other than my own packet :). I'm working with some of my local hams to help them get on, but we'd love to see some packets from Dayton and elsewhere in the country! So if you'll be there with your TMD7x0 or TH-D7A(g), and you don't have anything better to do on a saturday night, set it up for GO-32 and send a few position reports! Dayton GO-32 Pass Time Satellite Azm Elv Mag Range -- 2008-05-17 20:34:04 GO-32 [P] 145.5 10.0 10.7 2403 2008-05-17 20:39:11 GO-32 [P] 71.8 50.1 9.0 1029 2008-05-17 20:44:20 GO-32 [P] 357.8 10.1 11.1 2416 Everything you need to know to operate via GO-32: http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/GO32-ops.html I'm trying to line up someone to switch their igate to GO-32's downlink and run that configuriation for the duratoin, but so far all my candidates are stuck on 1200bps, my own home station included. 73 de Joseph Durnal NE3R Yahoo! Groups Links Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
[digitalradio] Re : Digital Stone Age
To those of us residing in places outside of the USA, meaning the rest of the world, in plain English, what does all this rejection of the petition mean ? May I hazard a guess and suggest that when the radio conditions improve and communications around the world resume to a reasonable standard, will we, in Europe, be subject to QRM where QRM does not exist at the present time ? G0GQK
Re: [digitalradio] Re : Digital Stone Age
If it had become law in the US the rest of the world would be operation on modes that us in the USA can no longer operate. We would be kicked back to the stone age. That's it in a few words. At 03:25 PM 5/8/2008, you wrote: To those of us residing in places outside of the USA, meaning the rest of the world, in plain English, what does all this rejection of the petition mean ? May I hazard a guess and suggest that when the radio conditions improve and communications around the world resume to a reasonable standard, will we, in Europe, be subject to QRM where QRM does not exist at the present time ? G0GQK Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Check our other Yahoo Groups http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [digitalradio] Fw: GO-32 9.6k APRS Sked May 17, ~8:30pm EDT
Mark, Is there a program that I can use to decode GO-32 downlink my radion is a IC-706MKII2 and using HRD to track the bird. Thanks Russell NC5O = IN GOD WE TRUST ! = Russell Blair NC5O Skype-Russell Blair Hell Field #300 DRCC #55 --- On Thu, 5/8/08, Mark Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Mark Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [digitalradio] Fw: GO-32 9.6k APRS Sked May 17, ~8:30pm EDT To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, May 8, 2008, 1:14 PM - Forwarded Message From: Joe joseph.durnal@ gmail.com To: illinoisdigitalham@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Thursday, May 8, 2008 10:21:30 AM Subject: [illinoisdigitalham ] GO-32 9.6k APRS Sked May 17, ~8:30pm EDT I'm putting together a little sked for APRS operations on GO-32. I've been listening, and there doesn't seem to be many hams in the region using it. It seems that most folks have seen their own position report, and that is it. I'd like to see something other than my own packet :). I'm working with some of my local hams to help them get on, but we'd love to see some packets from Dayton and elsewhere in the country! So if you'll be there with your TMD7x0 or TH-D7A(g), and you don't have anything better to do on a saturday night, set it up for GO-32 and send a few position reports! Dayton GO-32 Pass Time Satellite Azm Elv Mag Range - - - - - - 2008-05-17 20:34:04 GO-32 [P] 145.5 10.0 10.7 2403 2008-05-17 20:39:11 GO-32 [P] 71.8 50.1 9.0 1029 2008-05-17 20:44:20 GO-32 [P] 357.8 10.1 11.1 2416 Everything you need to know to operate via GO-32: http://web.usna. navy.mil/ ~bruninga/ GO32-ops. html I'm trying to line up someone to switch their igate to GO-32's downlink and run that configuriation for the duratoin, but so far all my candidates are stuck on 1200bps, my own home station included. 73 de Joseph Durnal NE3R - - -- Yahoo! Groups Links Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
[digitalradio] what is this HF sound please?
http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/oddsound_1.824.0_1000UTC.wmv f
[digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, expeditionradio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: bruce wa4gch wrote: So does this meen we can junk 99% of all ham stations for your idea of what ham radio should be? Ha ha, Bruce! Good one. Seriously, though, this is more of a rejection of backward-thinking attempts to stifle USA hams' future while the rest of the world passes us by. 73 Bonnie KQ6XA Bruce makes a serious point. There is a lot of I only care what you think if you agree with me! on this forum, which is one reason I don't hang around much. 73, John WB4NNY
Re: [digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
And if this became law we in the USA would be sitting back watching while the rest of the world operated the modes that we now could not. Bonnie makes a very good point when she say we would be back in the stone age. John, W0JAB At 10:05 PM 5/8/2008, John WB4NNY wrote: Bruce makes a serious point. There is a lot of I only care what you think if you agree with me! on this forum, which is one reason I don't hang around much. 73, John WB4NNY
Re: [digitalradio] 300 baud limit open to change Re: FCC Denies Digital Stone Age Petition
Hello Bonnie, I was wondering if you could bring me ( others in the group) up-to-date with your MIL 188-141A ALE experiments? specifically I would be be interested in knowing how most messages are passed? are they AMD/DBM or DTM? The only ALE signals I have heard recently (at least on 30m) have been soundings. Is the system now integrated into Winlink 2000? if so, what would be a simple procedure to send a message addressed to an internet email destination? Also, is there any use of the ARQ FAE semi-duplex mode? it seems to me this is one of the most powerful yet underused methods of exchanging messages on HF - especially in the 400Hz version of the mode. 73, Sholto KE7HPV
