May 2005 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:12447] Re: H. Res. 230
by n5ok.ok＠att.net 27 May '05

27 May '05

Kay wrote: "Also, I just looked at Division e-mail bulletins issued in the last month and found that 5 Divisions have done bulletins mentioning H.Res. 230. The resolution was introduced a month ago. Is there a conclusion to be drawn from this? (Though I did not read all the Section bulletins, a spot check showed several SM's have put something out on the subject.)" Kay, You don't have the whole story. You do not have access to our grassroots network nor do you have access to our grassroots reflector. Coy -- ARRL West Gulf Division Director Coy Day, N5OK 20685 SW 29th St Union City, OK 73090 n5ok(a)arrl.org 405-483-5632

1 0

Congressman Ross answers questions about H.Res. 230
by Bob Vallio 27 May '05

27 May '05

Frank, you really should not refer to H.Res. 230 as HR 230, as they are not one and the same, and our members may come off looking like fools for not knowing what they are writing about. Thanks for all of the work you and your committee have and are doing. 73, Bob On 5/26/05, Frank Fallon <n2ff(a)optonline.net> wrote: > Kay, > > A BIG THANKS for making those points. I was not aware that only five > division bulletins mentioned HR 230. That is NOT good. > > And yes, we are NOT using our great web site to advantage here. All our > users should see a yellow box as they enter asking for letters. It's > like the Chinese water torture. But it will get more e-mails, > eventually. We need to ask more than once. > > Unless all of the Board members do their utmost we are not going to get > enough congressmen to sign on and get the resolution passed. Let's all > do that, PLEASE! We are wasting a great opportunity and not playing a > major trump card in our BPL strategy. Perhaps some of us have lost sight > of that strategy which is to hang a "regulatory uncertainty" over the > BPL industry for at least two more years in hopes that by that time the > technology will face too many entrenched users of other, better, > technologies. And, yes, we have to be a bit strident here to assure > that we protect our interests. Getting our members energized is not > easy. We have to ask many times for letters and, if necessary, organize > letting writing meetings where we know for sure members have in fact > written when we collect them at the end of the meeting. Your Legislative > Action Chairs and Coordinators can help do that for you. > > I gave out some 3,000 two sided pieces at Dayton. One side, the front, > was about HR 230 and the back about our "Spectrum Protection Bill, much > less important at this point. I spoke to a lot of Section Managers and > gave them the strident "NO BPL" stickers to take home along with some > two sided sheets. I even had a guy I came across in the flea market > promise that he and his buddies would hand out some at the Rochester, NY > hamfest which I don't think I am going to get to unless my helicopter > pilot buddy is going to fly us up there. I have attached the two page > updated handout similar to the one used as Dayton. If you have not yet > sent out a division wide plea for letters and e-mails please feel free > to edit and personalize it and send it off to your ARRL members. You > may want to send only the first page information as they say, "The > target for the day is HR 230." It is not Bassingstoke. Even if you have > sent out a please you may soon want to send another. > > By now all directors should be well on their way to accomplishing the > mission John Chwat set us to contact tier one and two congressmen. It's > very important that ARRL make contact with them and generate letters > from their constituents. > > This is a BIG but important job that you and I cannot do alone. That's > the reason for the Grassroots structure - Legislative Action Chairs in > the division and Legislative Action Coordinators in the states. These > key aides or cabinet members can then find the individuals - Legislative > Action Assistants - in the congressional home districts who will make > the contacts with the congressman or his staff. You need to start > finding those people to do that job as outlined at the January Board > meeting. Harold has promised me that on June 10th we will have a > functioning Grassroots site to begin support those key volunteers. > > Thanks again, Kay, for your support here. > > Frank ...... N2FF...... the strident one........ > > Kay Craigie wrote: > > > This interview gets the point across in a very clear and reasonable way. > > > > Some related observations.... > > > > As I write this, there is nothing on the opening page of our web site > > about H.Res. 230, so when we urge members to get informed and then > > write their members of Congress, we can't just say, "Go to the ARRL > > web site and click on" something-or-other. They have to excavate their > > way to a story (which wasn't that great to begin with) buried way down > > in the news stack. Even clicking on the link that says "BPL" doesn't > > take you to anything about the resolution. Are we trying to make it > > hard for members to take grass-roots initiative about this, or does it > > only seem that way? > > > > Also, I just looked at Division e-mail bulletins issued in the last > > month and found that 5 Divisions have done bulletins mentioning H.Res. > > 230. The resolution was introduced a month ago. Is there a conclusion > > to be drawn from this? (Though I did not read all the Section > > bulletins, a spot check showed several SM's have put something out on > > the subject.) > > > > If we're not going to back up the work of Chwat & Co. any better than > > we are doing right now, why not save the membership's money and stop > > paying Chwat whatever we pay him. The members of the Board's Grass > > Roots Legislative Ad Hoc Committee are doing good work. How much > > cooperation are they getting? > > > > There may be activity going on within Divisions that I don't know > > about, of course, but it concerns me when it *appears* that we are in > > effect letting Rep. Ross hang out to dry and not pushing very hard to > > get the co-sponsors he needs. Will he be there for us again when we > > need him? > > > > 73 - Kay N3KN > > > > > > > -- Bob Vallio -- W6RGG Pacific Division Director, ARRL The national association for AMATEUR RADIO

1 0

[arrl-odv:12445] BPL Article.....
by Frank Fallon 27 May '05

27 May '05

A member sent me the e-mail attached below. I am not sure what coverage the mailing gets but I think it is helpful. Frank...N2FF.... Subject: Microwaves & RF UPDATE May 26, 2005 Date: 26 May 2005 14:02:09 PDT From: Microwaves and RF Update <Microwaves_and_RF_Update(a)nls.planetee.com> Reply-To: Microwaves and RF Update <Microwaves_and_RF_Update_DAA1C3BA3D34A7DAAA218429E87C8280(a)nls.planetee.com> To: roberts(a)liii.com ============================== Microwaves & RF UPDATE PlanetEE - http://www.planetee.com/ MWRF - http://www.mwrf.com/ May 26, 2005 ============================== Greetings and welcome to your personal copy of PlanetEE's Microwaves and RF UPDATE e-newsletter. Please see below for address-change or subscribe/unsubscribe instructions. Today's Table of Contents: 1. A Few More Words About BPL Pollution 2. Report Predicts Rapid Broadband Wireless Growth 3. Record Volume Seen for WiFi in 2005 4. ARRL Sees Hope For BPL In New System 5. Terabeam Selects Fujitsu SoC for WiMAX System 6. FOCUS Enhancements Targets UWB Market 7. Chirp Chosen for IEEE 802.15.4a Wireless Standard 8. DIN 7/16 Connectors Curb PIM 9. Happenings - Conferences ************************ ADVERTISEMENT **************************** Taking Performance To a New Peak - 4500B Boonton introduces the new 4500B Peak Power Analyzer which has been totally redesigned from the inside out. This meter is changing the way the industry views and analyzes RF data. Some of the key features include: 8.4" TFT color LCD display, 100 ps timebase resolution, automatic peak-to-peak, delay-by-time and delay-by-events triggering, and many more. Visit our site in June for more information, http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF4E:FBC98 ******************************************************************* *************** 1. Viewpoint *************** A Few More Words About BPL Pollution Earlier this month, the Microwaves & RF UPDATE addressed an issue that is of obvious concern and importance to many RF engineers, notably amateur-radio operators: broadband powerline (BPL) communications. Proposed by industry as a viable solution for broadband communications services, and so far blessed (conditionally) by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), BPL makes use of existing power-line infrastructure to transmit signals carrying high-data-rate information. The response to that newsletter item has been so overwhelming (and almost 100-percent against BPL), that I apologize to all those readers/writers who I may not have been able to respond to personally with a return note. Your interest as readers has made it clear that a larger, more-comprehensive report on BPL is in order, and will be presented in either the July or August issue of the parent publication Microwaves & RF. Plans are being made to visit with the ARRL as part of this report, and the story will highlight the negative aspects of BPL as well as some encouraging details from a recent Motorola launch (see the news below). Watch your mailbox! JACK BROWNE Technical Director ************* 2. News ************* Report Predicts Rapid Broadband Wireless Growth WiMAX is the primary driver for future broadband wireless growth according to the latest report from Sky Light Research (Scottsdale, AZ). Predicting generous growth for at least five years, the 102-page report "Wireless Broadband Point-to-Multipoint State of the Market Analysis Report 2004 - 2009" notes that the market for broadband wireless grew 54 percent in 2004 over 2003, driven mainly by OFDM radios. According to Emmy Johnson, Principal Analyst and Founder of Sky Light Research, "In 2004, OFDM CPEs and base station equipment generated more than three times as much revenue as the previous four years combined." Although there are no certified WiMAX radios shipping, almost every wireless broadband vendor has announced a WiMAX platform or its intentions for one. Each of these products or plans is in various stages, with a handful of radios already shipping in commercial and trial deployments. Sky Light Research ---> http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF43:FBC98 ********* 3. News ********* Record Volume Seen for WiFi in 2005 Worldwide wireless local area network (WLAN) revenue rose 20 percent between the fourth quarter of 2004 and the first quarter of 2005, according to Infonetics Research's quarterly market share service, Wireless LAN Equipment. Revenues rose to $767.6 million with 12.2 million WLAN units being shipped worldwide. Revenue is expected to rise another 2 percent to $779.6 million by the first quarter of 2006, and is projected to reach $3.6 billion by 2008. WLAN switch ports rose in sales 44 percent to 112,000, while revenue for switch ports grew 13 percent to %52.2 million and is expected to jump to $699.2 million by 2008. The main reason for the expected continued growth in the interest in broadband communications. Infonetics Research ---> http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF44:FBC98 ********* 4. News ********* ARRL Sees Hope For BPL In New System One of the more vocal critics of broadband over power line (BPL) communications, the Amateur Radio Relay League (ARRL), has announced that Motorola may have overcome some of the traditional problems with the technology. In a release issued this week, the ARRL announced that it is "pleased to hear Motorola's announcement of its Powerline LV System. This is the first Access Broadband over Power Line (BPL) system that has been designed from the start with radio interference concerns in mind." The Motorola solution avoids using medium-voltage (MV) power lines, transmitting broadband signals only on the low-voltage (LV) side of the power transformer. The approach reduces the potential for interference to and from radio users. According to ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, "We know that medium-voltage (MV) power lines are no place for broadband energy, since there is overwhelming technical evidence that radio interference from BPL is unavoidable if MV lines are used. By confining their Access BPL system to LV lines and by adding hardware notch filters for additional protection to amateur radio frequency allocations, Motorola has addressed our interference concerns." He added that "we look forward to seeing the first Powerline LV system in operation, and to continuing to work with Motorola to ensure that their new product is indeed the first BPL system that is a solution, not a problem." ARRL ---> http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF4C:FBC98 Motorola Powerline LV ---> http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF4F:FBC98 ********** 5. News ********** Terabeam Selects Fujitsu SoC for WiMAX System Terabeam Wireless (Falls Church, VA) has selected the model MB87M3400 WiMAX system on a chip (SoC) mixed-signal chip for its TeraMax 3.0 next-generation WiMAX point-to-point and point-to-multipoint systems. The systems will incorporate Terabeam's new wireless network management operating system, code-named "Logan," and are planned for general availability in the fourth quarter of 2005. The Fujitsu SoC is fully compliant with the IEEE 802.16-2004 WiMAX standard and can be configured to be used in both base station and subscriber station applications. It is designed to support frequencies ranging from 2 to 11 GHz in both licensed and license-exempt bands. Terabeam's "Logan" has been under development for over three years and was a significant driver of Terabeam's acquisition in 2004 of KarlNet, Inc. Logan is a processor-agnostic operating system that can support multiple wireless modes (including 802.11). Logan's agility and versatility allow for a major streamlining of Terabeam's software portfolio, and it enables support for quality of service (QoS), voice-over-IP (VoIP), state-of-the-art security and IPv6. Terabam Wireless ---> http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF47:FBC98 Fujitsu Microelectronics ---> http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF42:FBC98 ************************ ADVERTISEMENT **************************** Learn the Fundamentals of Real-Time Spectrum Analysis With a new Tektronix Primer, comparing traditional tools like Swept Spectrum and Vector Signal Analyzers with Real-Time Spectrum Analyzers. It also explains how Real-Time Spectrum Analyzers enable you to describe with greater confidence the dynamic RF signal produced by the device. Click here to receive your free Tektronix Primer: http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF40:FBC98 ******************************************************************* ********* 6. News ********* FOCUS Enhancements Targets UWB Market Known for their video production and conversion products, FOCUS Enhancements has announced that Mark Zadeh has joined the company as Vice-President of Sales for the Semiconductor Group. Zadeh was most recently Director of Sales and Business Development at Planar Systems, and had worked at PixelWorks prior to that. According to Brett Moyer, the company's President and Chief Executive Officer, the hiring signifies the firm's strong interest in ultrawideband (UWB) technology: "Mark's arrival at FOCUS Enhancements is aptly timed, as the industry progresses with UWB standards and we expect to move our UWB technology into silicon in the second half 2005. This addition to the team better positions us to capitalize on the market potential of UWB in what will be a dynamic and exciting time for the company." FOCUS Enhancements, Inc. ---> http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF46:FBC98 ********* 7. News ********* Chirp Chosen for IEEE 802.15.4a Wireless Standard Chirp modulation is the winner of the latest popularity contest for a wireless standard, the IEEE's 802.15.4a for personal area networks (PANs). Developed by Nanotron Technologies (Berlin, Germany), the approach offers long range and low power consumption at moderate data rates for personal communications devices as well as for industrial controls, sensor networking, home automation, and medical devices. According to Nanotron's Chief Technology Officer (CTO) Zbigniew Ianelli, "this decision by the world-renowned experts at IEEE confirms the outstanding features of our technology: high robustness, long range, low power consumption and the ability of precise localization." The chirp approach is expected to yield maximum data rates of 2 Mb/s and a maximum range of 900 m (outdoors) and typically 60 m (indoors) at 10 mW output power. The first chips and network software based on the new standard will be offered by Nanotron Technologies at the end of 2006. IEEE ---> http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF4D:FBC98 Nanotron Technologies ---> http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF48:FBC98 ********* 8. News ********* DIN 7/16 Connectors Curb PIM Passive intermodulation distortion (PIM) can limit the performance of the most carefully designed cellular or PCS system. For that reason, Santron has developed the 1906-30 series of DIN 7/16 connectors according to 169-4 IEC-3, Class 1 specifications. Designed with single-body construction and a solid outer contact, the high-power connectors achieve 31-dB return loss through 7.5 GHz with PIM performance of -173 dBc. The connectors are ideal for curbing PIM in PCS filters, splitters, duplexers, amplifiers, and terminations for less than $5 each in large volume. San-tron, Inc. ---> http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF49:FBC98 ******************************* 9. Happenings - Conferences ******************************* Microwave Theory & Techniques Symposium (MTT-S) June 12-17, 2005 Long Beach Convention Center Long Beach, CA http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF4D:FBC98 IEEE Compound Semiconductor IC Symposium (formerly the GaAs IC Symposium) October 30 - November 2, 2005 Palm Springs, CA http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF4B:FBC98 Wireless Congress 2005: Systems and Applications November 9-10, 2005 Munich, Germany http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF41:FBC98 ************************ ADVERTISEMENT **************************** CHECK HIRING TRENDS: FREE Copy of The Oxford Index Log on now for this quarterly survey of demand trends for high-end consultants in your industry. From Oxford Global Resources, specializing in high-tech consultants for mission-critical projects. Oxford: The Right Talent. Right Now.(R) URL: http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF3F:FBC98 ******************************************************************* Read past issues of Microwaves and RF (MWRF) UPDATE e-Newsletter: http://www.mwrf.com/ MICROWAVES AND RF (MWRF) UPDATE e-NEWSLETTER CONTACTS ==================================================== Technical Director: Jack Browne mailto: jbrowne(a)penton.com Associate Editor: Laurie Collins mailto: lcollins(a)penton.com Advertising/Sponsorship Opportunities: Mike McCaffery at 1-201-845-2414 or mailto: mmccaffery(a)penton.com ==================================================== To subscribe click here: http://nls.planetee.com/t?ctl=AF45:FBC98 To unsubscribe click here: http://nls.planetee.com/u?id=DAA1C3BA3D34A7DAAA218429E87C8280 Penton's e-Newsletter homepage: http://www.planetee.com/ ==================================== Copyright 2005 Penton Media Inc. All rights reserved.

1 0

[arrl-odv:12444] Re: Congressman Ross answers questions about H.Res. 230
by Frank Fallon 27 May '05

27 May '05

Kay, A BIG THANKS for making those points. I was not aware that only five division bulletins mentioned HR 230. That is NOT good. And yes, we are NOT using our great web site to advantage here. All our users should see a yellow box as they enter asking for letters. It's like the Chinese water torture. But it will get more e-mails, eventually. We need to ask more than once. Unless all of the Board members do their utmost we are not going to get enough congressmen to sign on and get the resolution passed. Let's all do that, PLEASE! We are wasting a great opportunity and not playing a major trump card in our BPL strategy. Perhaps some of us have lost sight of that strategy which is to hang a "regulatory uncertainty" over the BPL industry for at least two more years in hopes that by that time the technology will face too many entrenched users of other, better, technologies. And, yes, we have to be a bit strident here to assure that we protect our interests. Getting our members energized is not easy. We have to ask many times for letters and, if necessary, organize letting writing meetings where we know for sure members have in fact written when we collect them at the end of the meeting. Your Legislative Action Chairs and Coordinators can help do that for you. I gave out some 3,000 two sided pieces at Dayton. One side, the front, was about HR 230 and the back about our "Spectrum Protection Bill, much less important at this point. I spoke to a lot of Section Managers and gave them the strident "NO BPL" stickers to take home along with some two sided sheets. I even had a guy I came across in the flea market promise that he and his buddies would hand out some at the Rochester, NY hamfest which I don't think I am going to get to unless my helicopter pilot buddy is going to fly us up there. I have attached the two page updated handout similar to the one used as Dayton. If you have not yet sent out a division wide plea for letters and e-mails please feel free to edit and personalize it and send it off to your ARRL members. You may want to send only the first page information as they say, "The target for the day is HR 230." It is not Bassingstoke. Even if you have sent out a please you may soon want to send another. By now all directors should be well on their way to accomplishing the mission John Chwat set us to contact tier one and two congressmen. It's very important that ARRL make contact with them and generate letters from their constituents. This is a BIG but important job that you and I cannot do alone. That's the reason for the Grassroots structure - Legislative Action Chairs in the division and Legislative Action Coordinators in the states. These key aides or cabinet members can then find the individuals - Legislative Action Assistants - in the congressional home districts who will make the contacts with the congressman or his staff. You need to start finding those people to do that job as outlined at the January Board meeting. Harold has promised me that on June 10th we will have a functioning Grassroots site to begin support those key volunteers. Thanks again, Kay, for your support here. Frank ...... N2FF...... the strident one........ Kay Craigie wrote: > This interview gets the point across in a very clear and reasonable way. > > Some related observations.... > > As I write this, there is nothing on the opening page of our web site > about H.Res. 230, so when we urge members to get informed and then > write their members of Congress, we can't just say, "Go to the ARRL > web site and click on" something-or-other. They have to excavate their > way to a story (which wasn't that great to begin with) buried way down > in the news stack. Even clicking on the link that says "BPL" doesn't > take you to anything about the resolution. Are we trying to make it > hard for members to take grass-roots initiative about this, or does it > only seem that way? > > Also, I just looked at Division e-mail bulletins issued in the last > month and found that 5 Divisions have done bulletins mentioning H.Res. > 230. The resolution was introduced a month ago. Is there a conclusion > to be drawn from this? (Though I did not read all the Section > bulletins, a spot check showed several SM's have put something out on > the subject.) > > If we're not going to back up the work of Chwat & Co. any better than > we are doing right now, why not save the membership's money and stop > paying Chwat whatever we pay him. The members of the Board's Grass > Roots Legislative Ad Hoc Committee are doing good work. How much > cooperation are they getting? > > There may be activity going on within Divisions that I don't know > about, of course, but it concerns me when it *appears* that we are in > effect letting Rep. Ross hang out to dry and not pushing very hard to > get the co-sponsors he needs. Will he be there for us again when we > need him? > > 73 - Kay N3KN >

1 0

[arrl-odv:12442] Re: Bart Jahnke
by Joyce Birmingham 27 May '05

27 May '05

Bart and Debra will be missed by all of us. As a VE for many years, I have developed a great respect for Bart and all who work with him. The VE department has always been 'top-notch'. Bart has a wonderful personality , a sharp wit....and excellent sense of humor. These things you need when you deal with the FCC! As Harold said...'his shoes will be very hard to fill'. I will miss him tremendously and would like to thank him for his many years of service with the ARRL. Debra, likewise has been a real plus for the League. Safe travels, my friends and good luck to you both. You are going home! ----- Original Message ----- From: Kramer, Harold, WJ1B To: arrl-odv Cc: Bloom, Jon, KE3Z ; Ford, Steve, WB8IMY ; Hare, Ed W1RFI ; Jahnke, Bart, W9JJ ; Mills, Wayne N7NG ; Motschenbacher, Dennis K7BV ; White, Rosalie, K1STO Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 3:19 PM Subject: [arrl-odv:12392] Bart Jahnke Hi, I hate to spring this on everyone just before Dayton but I thought that you would want to know. It is with great regret that we have accepted the resignation of Bart Jahnke, our VEC Manager. Bart, who has served as VEC Manager for 16 years, and has been with the League for just 5 months short of 20 years, has decided to relocate to his native Wisconsin where his parents and close relatives are located. Bart will be starting a new career in operations which in his words is "a position that will afford me the opportunity to further my career goals while introducing its own new challenges." Even though I have only been here a short time, I, along with every member of the staff, will miss Bart not only for his extensive knowledge of amateur radio and the VEC program, but also for his level-headedness, and his common sense approach to some difficult and complex issues. His will be a hard pair of shoes to fill. Bart will be leaving at the end of the month and we all wish him well in his new endeavors. Harold Harold Kramer, WJ1B Chief Operating Officer ARRL - The National Association for Amateur Radio 225 Main Street Newington, CT 06111 860 594 0220 www.arrl.org/

1 0

Bandwidth Proposal, W6OBB, and 3 kHz
by Richard J. Norton 27 May '05

27 May '05

Was up until 2 AM a couple nights, working on projects before leaving for Dayton. Turned the radio on to 3840, and heard W6OBB and entourage, using and talking about their higher-fidelity audio, which appears to use 3.6 kHz of bandwidth. The wider-band audio did sound better than conventional-bandwidth SSB. It does appear unlikely that they are in contention for any Nobel prizes in physics, but on a positive note, they appeared to be actively experimenting, as opposed to discussing the Dodgers and their own arthritis. The 75-meter band was almost unused otherwise. I see no reason why they shouldn't be permitted to continue with their operation. I certainly can't justify requesting the federal government to spend taxpayer money to curtail it. I don't believe I have ever listened to W6OBB's radio show, don't believe I have ever met or conversed with W6OBB, and have no positive things to say about his purported belief in alien invasions from other worlds. When the bands are crowded, use of wideband audio might be out of place. Most of the time, it seems acceptable. Consequently, I can't see why we need to restrict bandwidth to 3 kHz. 73, Dick, N6AA

1 0

[arrl-odv:12439] Re: Approaching BOD meeting
by Huntington Howard-CADV02 26 May '05

26 May '05

Dave, That is a good input regarding AM, with voice modulation the amplitude rolls off quickly. Besides, no one of us surely would propose to legislate it away. In terms of bandwidth, I think the wider bandwidths are more efficient than 3 kHz bandwidth in that maybe 10 kHz bandwidth could accommodate, for example, 10 users with bursted traffic on a timeshare basis. Maybe some day all the digital users could be accommodated on one "channel" and alleviate the possible interference to voice modes. I am thinking of data, not voice. Digital voice is spectrum intensive. Still not HSMM but a thought for the future. Howie, K9KM -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 1:52 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12432] Re: Approaching BOD meeting Speaking only for myself, I can support maintaining AM as-is as a legacy mode because the full 9 kHz bandwidth is only occupied on peaks and because the amplitude at the edges is down quite a bit from the carrier level. A 9-kHz- wide digital signal is an entirely different animal. If you don't believe it, look for some broadcast DRM signals. The German transmitter on 3995 is over S9 at my location from before my sunset until European sunrise. It renders the entire upper 10 kHz of the band unusable by amateurs in the northeastern US -- it's quite a contrast to 40 meters, where we can slip in between the AM broadcast signals pretty well except when they're playing music. It may be that 3 kHz is a bit too restrictive -- I think the jury is still out on that -- but I don't think a single station should be allowed to use 2% of an entire band, which is what 9 or 10 kHz would represent. Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: Huntington Howard-CADV02 [mailto:Howard.Huntington@motorola.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 2:54 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: RE: [arrl-odv:12415] Re: Approaching BOD meeting Bob, Jim, and All, Our HSMM WG also have some issue with the maximum digital bandwidth within the proposal as it would stifle future development. One or two years ago they were looking for some bandwidths that would seem entirely impractical below 28 MHz. Last year I suggested to them to consider to target 10 or 20 kHz in a fixed band segment, in effect, a channel. They too have difficulty to understand why we support 9 kHz for DSB AM and at the same time, in their view, propose to stifle new development with similar bandwidth. Of course, none of us want complexity and inflexibility in the regulations. The premise of Novice Refarming supports digital allocations to some extent. If the proposal supports the beginning of new development today and some new technology gains wide acceptance, how long do we wait for further expansion? Part of the problem with wider bandwidth is we do not have a system waiting to go on the air or even a defined purpose to make us of the spectrum. One high speed digital channel at, for example, 3650 to 3660 kHz would provide for dial up speed at HF. It could coincide with 3 kHz maximum users of today's known modes. Compared to what we do at HF now, it will be blazing fast. A second channel at 7100 to 7110 would allow coverage with propagation variations. The 10 kHz bandwidth would be much more efficient than 3 kHz and would allow for OFDM with FEC. The opportunity is for better spectrum efficiency which the FCC wants. Imagine if today's Winlink users could be accommodated in 10 kHz using collision avoidance and short burst transmissions. That would reduce the apprehension of "unattended interference to SSB". Among the HSMM group, Walt DuBose, K5YFW, of the West Gulf Division is knowledgeable on this subject and has experience with various digital modes. This is not HSMM however it is close enough that we should consider the HSMM input. Howie, K9KM -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 8:16 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12415] Re: Approaching BOD meeting I'm curious about the identity and credentials of your mystery member, Bob. He makes some good points but I'm uncomfortable with anonymity. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Vallio, Bob (Dir, Pacific) Sent: Tue 5/24/2005 2:08 AM To: arrl-odv Cc: Subject: Fwd: Approaching BOD meeting Comments from a member re signal bandwidth proposal: I have a few concerns about issues likely to come before the ARRL board that I'd like to present here. I was gratified to see many of my suggestions incorporated in the description of the revised proposal for regulation by bandwidth instead of by mode. However, the proposal described on the ARRL website still contains serious internal inconsistencies that detract from it's credibility. These inconsistencies also preclude some likely future technical developments. Unless and until these inconsistencies are satisfactorily resolved, the proposal should not be adopted. In July 2002, the ARRL Board of Directors directed that (Minute 64): "At the next practical opportunity the ARRL shall petition the FCC to revise Part 97 to regulate subbands by signal bandwidth instead of by mode." My concerns are that making a special dispensation for AM/ISB mode is inconsistent with this direction and not including wider bandwidth segments below the 10 meter band will preclude future technical developments. Petitioning the FCC with this inconsistency detracts from the credibility of the proposal. An approach that is consistent with the proposal would be to assign spectrum in additional HF bands for signals of 9 KHz or less bandwidth. However this is not the best approach to take in this case. The current proposal has no bandwidths greater than 3 KHz allocated below 10 meters. Given that one of the goals of this proposal is to preempt possible requests for future FCC action, it is inconsistent to preempt the future development of wider bandwidth modulation schemes, presumably digital. The advantages of wider bandwidth on HF include, for comparable modulation constellations, faster data rates. Given the apparent intent of the ARRL to provide the capability for emergency bridging of discontinuities in the Internet via WinLink2000 and the like, precluding the use of wider bandwidth signals is inconsistent. It is also inconsistent with the goals set in 97.1 of the commissions rules. In a similar context, HF modulation constellations of wider bandwidth can be more robust during periods of poor propagation than a narrower signal for the same effective data rate. While the modulation schemes are still to be developed, greater immunity to noise, multipath and interfering signals can be obtained at the cost of greater bandwidth. Presumably an adaptive scheme will be able to trade data rate for noise immunity over a continuum, depending on conditions. However this option will not be available if no accommodation for wider bandwidth signals is made in the HF bands, as is the case in the current proposal. In order to provide for these potential developments and also to provide for existing AM/DSB activity in a manner that is consistent with the remainder of the proposal, it is imperative that there be allocations for wider bandwidth signals on the HF bands below 10 meters. It seems wise to make these allocations as general as possible. I would suggest that 20 KHz of spectrum be allocated in the 160m, 80m, 40m and 20m bands for signals whose transmitted bandwidth shall not exceed 20 KHz. In other words, the widest allowed signal will just fill the subband. It seems prudent to select these subbands so that they include the frequencies currently used for AM/DSB "by gentlemens agreement". This will allow for three simultaneous AM/DSB QSOs (assuming that AM/DSB requires 6 KHz of bandwidth) and allow the future development of wider bandwidth digital HF signals. In summary, the revised proposal for regulation by bandwidth instead of by mode is internally inconsistent, inconsistent with the boards direction for its creation and less supportive of the goals in 97.1 of the FCC rules than it might be. These issues must be satisfactorily resolved before the proposal can be adopted by the board.

1 0

[arrl-odv:12438] Re: Dayton Pictures in Germany
by Jim K8JE 26 May '05

26 May '05

Frank, only a RTTY man would have caught the site! Interestingly, I walked out with a group of DARC members who remarked, first, about a motorcycle-sidecar that hosted two High Sierra's and then just one slot down was my car with its High Sierra. One of the German fellows noticed me heading for the car and we had a nice, but brief, conversation. He works for VW which is also part of the AUDI corporation. I guess one of these fellows took the photo. If you look further at the Dayton photos, you'll see one with a "speaker" and Barthi (sp?) The "speaker" is K4ZLE who turned the 8th Region QSL Bureau around and is its Chairman. Jim Weaver, K8JE Director, Great Lakes Division ARRL; http://www.arrl.org/ 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040 Tel.: 513-459-0142; E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org ARRL: The reason Amateur Radio Is! MEMBERS: The reason ARRL Is! -----Original Message----- From: Frank Fallon [mailto:n2ff@optonline.net] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 2:09 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12430] Dayton Pictures in Germany This German web site has some Dayton pictures including one of an ARRL's directors car. Take a gander. http://home.arcor.de/waldemar.kebsch/ Frank....N2FF......

1 0

[arrl-odv:12440] Re: FW: Dayton Expo!
by Richard J Norton 26 May '05

26 May '05

FYI - Regarding the empty flea market After picking up a flier announcing that they would not be at the Hamvention, I paid a visit to Mendelson's near downtown Dayton. Mendelsons Liquidation Outlet has had a large tent in back of the HARA Arena every year I've been to the Hamvention. Their home is a 1 million square foot warehouse in an old Dayton Delco factory. As I was about to leave the store, I noticed a guy who looked like a boss, and asked him how come they weren't at the Hamvention this year. His story is somewhat enlightening. Seems the convention now charges $70 per space for 1 or 2 outdoor spaces, increasing to $90 per space if you use 3 or 4, and up to $130 per space for 7 or more. If you use 7 or more, you pay $130 per space for all the spaces. You do not get the first two at lower prices. The Mendelson tent took 60 spaces, and would have cost $7800. Add the cost of the tent, cost to move all the stock, and employee salaries, and I can't see how the event could have come close to profitable. I certainly can't blame them for not coming. The guy also noted that his uncle or father was part of the Hamvention from the start, even when it was small. He also pointed out to me that a few years ago, many of the exhibitors, both inside and out, were in the computer business. Almost all of them are simply out-of-business today as computer prices and consequent profit margins have plummeted. Additionally, the Internet is now a low-cost alternate for offering many of the electronic products. It seems that a good percentage of the empty spaces resulted from a combination of loss of computer vendors and overpriced space rents. I echo the positive comments many of you have made about the ARRL presence. 73, Dick, N6AA Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ wrote: > I think Steve's observation that without ARRL EXPO the Hamvention would have been hurting this year is spot on, although we should be careful not to say so publicly. Without EXPO the "buzz" would have been all about the empty flea market and exhibitor spaces, the perception of declining attendance, and so on. That buzz will still be there, but we gave them something positive to balance it. > Dave > > -----Original Message----- > From: k8je(a)earthlink.net Mail Account [mailto:k8je@arrl.net] > > To all, I could not have said it better than Kentucky Section member, W4NHO, > below. I particularly applaud our HQ team for what appears to have been the > assembly and operation of an unprecedented and highly successful team that > developed the EXPO concept and area. > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Morgan [mailto:w4nho@arrl.net] > Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 10:54 PM > To: Jim Weaver, K8JE > Subject: Dayton Expo! > Without the league display and floor space, Dayton Hamvention this year > would have really hurt.

1 0

[arrl-odv:12437] Re: 2005 ARRL Expo Pictures & Article On Web Site?
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 26 May '05

26 May '05

Rick's working on it. Lot going on. Dave -----Original Message----- From: dick(a)pobox.com [mailto:dick@pobox.com] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 4:17 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12436] 2005 ARRL Expo Pictures & Article On Web Site? 26 MAY, 2005 - 1610 CDT I certainly hope that a picture-loaded article about 2005 ARRL Expo is placed on our web site very soon. Perhaps by tomorrow? - Dick, W9GIG

1 0