Again I ask why are the higher bands not as attractive? Readily available COTS Gear is available for 900Mhz, 2.4GHz, 3.4Ghz, 5.7Ghz, 10Ghz, & 24Ghz. We ought to be looking to fill 5.7, 10, & 24 to the point that we can show value in being there. it is our non use of these bands that makes them easy targets for reallocation and takeover. Try reallocating for instance the 2M Band in a major metropolitan city, you'd have an uproar, but the middle microwave bands, easy chicken, egg.
Eric AF6EP
It may be different in the US, but here "an uproar" (if any) is not going to determine how bands are re-allocated. We have constructive discussion with the license authority, but in the end we are not the ones that decide.
VHF/UHF band popularity has gone down anyway, because of license class changes. Until a decade ago, there was a separate "no code" license class that only allowed operation on VHF/UHF, and a "novice" class that allowed a couple of sub-bands and lower power. Then the code requirement was dropped for everyone, so now "no code" licensees (like me) can operate on all HF bands. "novice" class were given access to most of the HF bands as well. The result was that many active amateurs who always wanted to be on HF but were restrained by the code or exam level requirements now went there, and most DX activity the VHF/UHF bands vanished. There now are only repeaters (mostly silent) and a couple of local channels with very little activity. Tuning over the 2M band you may hear 2 or 3 QSOs. This weekend there was a contest but I only heard a German and a UK station, while a decade ago the SSB segment would be filled with activity.
As it is now, there are not enough active hams here to setup and sustain something as involved as a data network. We had one in the past, but interest dropped with the availability of internet for everyone. Sure one could experiment with a link to a friend just for fun, but that is no significant band use.
Unattended operation is more of a problem as well. We now need a special permit for anything that transmits beyond of the direct control of the operator. Presence of the operator while the gear is operating is no longer sufficient. Such special permits are given only for fixed frequencies and only in certain bands, and they also cost money.
Rob PE1CHL
Eric, With the degradation of 440 due to PAVPAWS 900 is actually very popular on the east and west coasts(for voice). As 900 is also part 15 (shared with non-licensed users) inthe US and as well as most of 2.4 and some parts of 5 ghz and 3ghz are pretty safe. When you get up higher than that you are talking big $ to operate. the only commercial 10ghz stuff I have seen is the Icom "dstar" links.
To agree with you we could not give away 5ghz radios to hams at Dayton this year. N4NEQ had wifi radios that would do 54mps for <$50 each these had the now non-legit firmware that allows "compliance mode" This mode allows users to select frequencies from 4-6ghz. They were finally sold to an international non-ham group for use in LATAM I think.
BTW I have 3 of these APs on a tower right now moved to the ham band below the part 15 noise. There is not a lot of use but they are there. I would love to turn the wick up to 10watts input power, but again that is big bucks.
Lin N4YCI
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
Again I ask why are the higher bands not as attractive? Readily available COTS Gear is available for 900Mhz, 2.4GHz, 3.4Ghz, 5.7Ghz, 10Ghz, & 24Ghz. We ought to be looking to fill 5.7, 10, & 24 to the point that we can show value in being there. it is our non use of these bands that makes them easy targets for reallocation and takeover. Try reallocating for instance the 2M Band in a major metropolitan city, you'd have an uproar, but the middle microwave bands, easy chicken, egg.
Eric AF6EP
It may be different in the US, but here "an uproar" (if any) is not going to determine how bands are re-allocated. We have constructive discussion with the license authority, but in the end we are not the ones that decide.
VHF/UHF band popularity has gone down anyway, because of license class changes. Until a decade ago, there was a separate "no code" license class that only allowed operation on VHF/UHF, and a "novice" class that allowed a couple of sub-bands and lower power. Then the code requirement was dropped for everyone, so now "no code" licensees (like me) can operate on all HF bands. "novice" class were given access to most of the HF bands as well. The result was that many active amateurs who always wanted to be on HF but were restrained by the code or exam level requirements now went there, and most DX activity the VHF/UHF bands vanished. There now are only repeaters (mostly silent) and a couple of local channels with very little activity. Tuning over the 2M band you may hear 2 or 3 QSOs. This weekend there was a contest but I only heard a German and a UK station, while a decade ago the SSB segment would be filled with activity.
As it is now, there are not enough active hams here to setup and sustain something as involved as a data network. We had one in the past, but interest dropped with the availability of internet for everyone. Sure one could experiment with a link to a friend just for fun, but that is no significant band use.
Unattended operation is more of a problem as well. We now need a special permit for anything that transmits beyond of the direct control of the operator. Presence of the operator while the gear is operating is no longer sufficient. Such special permits are given only for fixed frequencies and only in certain bands, and they also cost money.
Rob PE1CHL
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
-
Lin Holcomb -
Rob Janssen