Not to burst anyone’s bubble, but the bandplanning committee hasn’t even had its first meeting yet (having only been formed yesterday). Even if this weren’t true, bandplanning is usually an extended process. For anyone who doesn’t believe this, you can ask Ned AA7A what it’s been like trying to find appropriate recommendations just about harmonious existence for FT8 and FT4. The “wide” bandwidth modes add an additional layer of complexity. There is no “extra” space on our bands below 30 MHz. For those who will be attending hamfests in the near future, please don’t promise any particular date for the outcome of the bandplanning committee. Yes, it is a step forward for a committee to be formed, but I expect that we will have a long road ahead of us before we will have recommendations. In particular, our now-overdue filing to FCC will be much more overdue if we wait to have the bandplanning committee’s recommendations before filing. 73, Greg, K0GW On Tuesday, August 27, 2019, Michael Ritz <w7vo@comcast.net> wrote:
I am going to recommend that we hold off on Counsel's FCC submission until the new bandplan committee puts in a recommendation on the new digital bandplan as part of the submission. The part of the current proposal related to to lumping all wide-band digital signals into with the ACDS segment has gotten a lot of backlash from up here in the NW Division, and not only from the ARES/Winlink folks. There are other wide-band groups out there upset as well.
This is all due to Lor's comments sent out to all the Winlink users, but it has also stirred up a hornet's nest in the entire digital community.
73;
Mike
W7VO