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

[arrl-odv:12415] Re: Approaching BOD meeting
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 24 May '05

24 May '05

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

Fwd: Approaching BOD meeting
by Bob Vallio 24 May '05

24 May '05

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:12413] Re: ARRL EXPO
by Joel Harrison 24 May '05

24 May '05

Very good show for ARRL ! Out of the literally thousands of hams, both members and some non-members (as well, I'm sure) that I shook hands with and talk to there were only about a dozen that brought up our draft bandwidth petition and the concept of regulation by bandwidth rather than mode.....and none of them were opposed to it. There was support for our license restructuring petition as well. It was good to see everyone and be a part of our 2005 National Convention! 73 Joel W5ZN

1 0

[arrl-odv:12412] Re: ARRL EXPO
by dick＠pobox.com 23 May '05

23 May '05

23 MAY, 2005 - 1655 CDT My experiences at our 2005 National cConvention/Dayton Hamvention were a combination of exhilaration and exhaustion. With possibly one exception, I've never spent as many consecutive hours standing with very little movement and my knees did not like it. However, I was so busy having fun passing out and explaining the ARRL Passports on Friday, that I was not aware of the passage of time. I thought it was time to take a break at around 11:00 AM only to discover that it was 1:30 PM. I really enjoyed the camaraderie that quickly developed between our staff, the board members present, and our other volunteers. Stealing the punch- line from a TV credit card commercial, the experience was "priceless". I quickly lost track of the number of positive comments I received about ARRL Expo. (There were no negative ones.) Congratulations to our Ad Hoc National Convention Committee, our hard-working staff members and, all our volunteers. As Dave Sumner has already said, we have raised the bar for future National Conventions. 73 - Dick, W9GIG

1 0

[arrl-odv:12411] Re: ARRL EXPO
by Tom Frenaye 23 May '05

23 May '05

At 02:31 PM 5/23/2005, N3KN wrote: >Now, as they say in the DX world, "Where do we go from here?" I expect the ad hoc National Convention Committee will be taking a shot at answering that question before wrapping up its work in a report for the July Board meeting. Those of you with suggestions and comments on what went right (or not), please feel free to post them on ODV - or send to me and I'll distribute to the Committee. For those of you not at Dayton, the rough sales numbers I heard were about twice what they were last year, and membership numbers (new and renewal) were up 50% or so. I heard very few comments about our bandwidth proposal and very many very positive comments about the Expo area. No National Convention has been approved yet for 2006 (or later). -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[arrl-odv:12410] Re: ARRL release Motorola Powerline LV system
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 23 May '05

23 May '05

I know you're just joking, Jim, but Rick Lindquist won't be back from Dayton until tomorrow. Besides, if we'd been any quicker it would have raised suspicions.... Dave -----Original Message----- From: Weaver, Jim K8JE (DIR, GL) Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 4:46 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12409] Re: ARRL release Motorola Powerline LV system What took so long? :-) 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: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 3:46 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12408] Re: ARRL release Motorola Powerline LV system It's at the top of the ARRL Web news crawl. http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/05/23/1/?nc=1 For Immediate Release Allen Pitts, W1AGP Media and Public Relations Manager (860) 594-0328 apitts(a)arrl.org Hams Encouraged by NEW Motorola BPL Technology Newington, Conn., May 23, 2005 --ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio, announced today that "The ARRL 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." Motorola's Powerline LV system avoids using the medium-voltage (MV) power lines and introduces broadband signals only on the low-voltage (LV) side of the power transformer. This greatly reduces the potential for interference to and from radio users, especially radio amateurs. ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner commented, "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." While sometimes pictured by BPL proponents as opposing all BPL implementation, the ARRL has always maintained that radio amateur "hams" are not interested in blocking new technology but are justifiably concerned about pollution of the radio spectrum. Significant interference has been documented at numerous sites where other BPL systems are being tested, and other BPL developers have been unwilling to share information about their systems. By contrast, Motorola invited ARRL's suggestions and welcomed its input during product development. Sumner concluded, "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." There are approximately 670,000 Amateur Radio operators in the United States. Many other countries are watching events unfold in the US as they plan their own BPL systems. There are approximately 2.5 million Amateur Radio operators around the world. If the new Motorola system lives up to its initial promise in actual deployment, this new "shortwave-friendly" system will have many advocates. Information about Amateur Radio is available from the ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio, 225 Main Street Newington, CT 06111 or by calling 1-800-32-NEW HAM. The URL for ARRL's home page is www.arrl.org <http://www.arrl.org/> . Information about Motorola's "Powerline LV" system can be found at: http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detailpf/0,,5519_5509_23,00.html ### Allen G. Pitts, W1AGP Media and Public Relations Manager ARRL (860) 594-0328

1 0

[arrl-odv:12409] Re: ARRL release Motorola Powerline LV system
by Jim K8JE 23 May '05

23 May '05

What took so long? :-) 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: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 3:46 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12408] Re: ARRL release Motorola Powerline LV system It's at the top of the ARRL Web news crawl. http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/05/23/1/?nc=1 For Immediate Release Allen Pitts, W1AGP Media and Public Relations Manager (860) 594-0328 apitts(a)arrl.org Hams Encouraged by NEW Motorola BPL Technology Newington, Conn., May 23, 2005 --ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio, announced today that "The ARRL 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." Motorola's Powerline LV system avoids using the medium-voltage (MV) power lines and introduces broadband signals only on the low-voltage (LV) side of the power transformer. This greatly reduces the potential for interference to and from radio users, especially radio amateurs. ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner commented, "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." While sometimes pictured by BPL proponents as opposing all BPL implementation, the ARRL has always maintained that radio amateur "hams" are not interested in blocking new technology but are justifiably concerned about pollution of the radio spectrum. Significant interference has been documented at numerous sites where other BPL systems are being tested, and other BPL developers have been unwilling to share information about their systems. By contrast, Motorola invited ARRL's suggestions and welcomed its input during product development. Sumner concluded, "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." There are approximately 670,000 Amateur Radio operators in the United States. Many other countries are watching events unfold in the US as they plan their own BPL systems. There are approximately 2.5 million Amateur Radio operators around the world. If the new Motorola system lives up to its initial promise in actual deployment, this new "shortwave-friendly" system will have many advocates. Information about Amateur Radio is available from the ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio, 225 Main Street Newington, CT 06111 or by calling 1-800-32-NEW HAM. The URL for ARRL's home page is www.arrl.org <http://www.arrl.org/> . Information about Motorola's "Powerline LV" system can be found at: http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detailpf/0,,5519_5509_23,00.htm l ### Allen G. Pitts, W1AGP Media and Public Relations Manager ARRL (860) 594-0328

1 0

[arrl-odv:12408] Re: ARRL release Motorola Powerline LV system
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 23 May '05

23 May '05

It's at the top of the ARRL Web news crawl. http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/05/23/1/?nc=1 For Immediate Release Allen Pitts, W1AGP Media and Public Relations Manager (860) 594-0328 <mailto:apitts@arrl.org> apitts(a)arrl.org Hams Encouraged by NEW Motorola BPL Technology Newington, Conn., May 23, 2005 --ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio, announced today that "The ARRL 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." Motorola's Powerline LV system avoids using the medium-voltage (MV) power lines and introduces broadband signals only on the low-voltage (LV) side of the power transformer. This greatly reduces the potential for interference to and from radio users, especially radio amateurs. ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner commented, "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." While sometimes pictured by BPL proponents as opposing all BPL implementation, the ARRL has always maintained that radio amateur "hams" are not interested in blocking new technology but are justifiably concerned about pollution of the radio spectrum. Significant interference has been documented at numerous sites where other BPL systems are being tested, and other BPL developers have been unwilling to share information about their systems. By contrast, Motorola invited ARRL's suggestions and welcomed its input during product development. Sumner concluded, "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." There are approximately 670,000 Amateur Radio operators in the United States. Many other countries are watching events unfold in the US as they plan their own BPL systems. There are approximately 2.5 million Amateur Radio operators around the world. If the new Motorola system lives up to its initial promise in actual deployment, this new "shortwave-friendly" system will have many advocates. Information about Amateur Radio is available from the ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio, 225 Main Street Newington, CT 06111 or by calling 1-800-32-NEW HAM. The URL for ARRL's home page is <http://www.arrl.org/> www.arrl.org. Information about Motorola's "Powerline LV" system can be found at: <http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detailpf/0,,5519_5509_23,00.html> http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detailpf/0,,5519_5509_23,00.html ### Allen G. Pitts, W1AGP Media and Public Relations Manager ARRL (860) 594-0328

1 0

[arrl-odv:12407] Re: FW: Dayton Expo!
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 23 May '05

23 May '05

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. Years ago Dayton didn't need the ARRL. Now they do. Once the numbers are in we should think about how to build on that to mutual advantage. My flight home was before the prize drawing, but I learned this morning that Hamvention gave us a great opportunity just before the drawing -- in front of the biggest crowd of the weekend -- to thank them publicly for their support and to plug the ARRL, with a lot of cheering from the crowd. Dave -----Original Message----- From: k8je(a)earthlink.net Mail Account [mailto:k8je@arrl.net] Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 1:42 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12402] FW: Dayton Expo! 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. Congratulations and tnx for demonstrating one aspect of the synergistic creativity of a team of dedicated and involved group of HQ staff and management! Anyone interested in building on this success for next year? Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director, Great Lakes Division ARRL 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040-9660 Tel. 513-459-0142; FAX. same; E-mail k8je(a)arrl.org <mailto:k8je@arrl.org> -----Original Message----- From: Steve Morgan [mailto:w4nho@arrl.net] Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 10:54 PM To: Jim Weaver, K8JE Subject: Dayton Expo! Jim, Kudos to the all that had anything to do with the Expo layout at Dayton. This is the first time that I can remember that a clear picture has been presented to the general ham populace in what the league actually does. I certainly enjoyed talking to the meaning voices I have heard over the phone but not really having the opportunity to have a face to face so. It is clearly a good way to get the message across. Hope that it can be looked at year to year. Without the league display and floor space, Dayton Hamvention this year would have really hurt. Again, Great Job! Steve -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVGAS Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.15 - Release Date: 5/22/05

1 0

[arrl-odv:12406] Re: ARRL EXPO
by Brian Mileshosky 23 May '05

23 May '05

> Now, as they say in the DX world, "Where do we go from here?" 73 - Kay N3KN Onward and upward, of course! 73 and congrats everyone, Brian, N5ZGT ARRL Vice-Director, Rocky Mountain Division

1 0