To follow up on Jay’s excellent question, I have to admit there seem to be relatively few members who are ready to accept the basics of our band plan proposal at this time. They like the idea of promoting experimentation with new forms and variations of transmission, but seem to believe what we are considering is quite excessive.

Having said this, I wonder if we could accomplish essentially the same goal without turning the regulation of band plans upside down? Could we simply develop and propose a regulation that will take the shackles off of testing of new “modes” or “variations of modes” without becoming specifically involved in transmitted bandwidths?

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@arrl.org

ARRL:  The reason Amateur Radio Is!

MEMBERS: The reason ARRL Is!

-----Original Message-----
From: arrl-odv@arrl.org [mailto:arrl-odv@arrl.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 8:25 PM
To: arrl-odv
Subject: [arrl-odv:12119] Re: The EC Allocation by Bandwidth Proposal

I can't speak for the rest of the EC, but I don't minimize the difficulty of coming up with band planning processes that will have broad acceptance and I don't think the rest of the committee members do, either. On the other hand, I don't see that we have much choice. Either we face up to the challenge or we settle for sub-optimal use of our limited spectrum access -- and if we do the latter, eventually it will translate into reduced spectrum access.

Dave K1ZZ 

-----Original Message-----
From: arrl-odv
Sent: Wed 4/20/2005 11:54 PM
To: arrl-odv
Cc:
Subject: [arrl-odv:12117] The EC Allocation by Bandwidth Proposal

It seems the EC Proposal presumes a workable and enforceable, band by band, HF Band Plan can be devised that will receive general acceptance for the 3 KHz and wider allocations. Admittedly modifying Band Plans does not involve the delay and inertia that accompanies the effort needed to secure a change in frequency allocations or usage by FCC.

I can’t help but think that garnering the necessary consensus to establish such Band Plans will not only be challenging but is likely to generate significant negative reaction among Amateurs toward ARRL.  In spite of the best of intentions, Band Plans like Frequency Coordination inevitably have a “Tar Baby” component.  I can already here the phrase “There they go again” welling up in the distance. What plan(s) do we or the EC have to avoid such reactions? The last thing we need at this juncture is to unnecessarily alienate members. If others feel there are good reasons to think this concern is unfounded let’s talk about this now. I think we should begin this discussion now rather than in the weeks just prior to the July Board Meeting.  

When the allocation by bandwidth proposal was submitted I thought it an excellent opportunity to encourage experimentation particularly in digital communications.  The way is has evolved seems to have changed from a way to open a door to experimentation and innovation to kicking down the walls because of the promise of digital modes.         

73,

Jay,   KØQB