IARU REGION 2 MF/HF BAND PLAN, effective 01 JA 2008, would limit AM operation.

[Vortex Joe - N3IBX]

K1ZZ wrote, (as quoted from letter):

I did not see it myself until after the meeting (my responsibilities at the conference were in a different area).

How can a person who is the secretary for IARU Reg. 2 not see it until after the meeting? Folks, I was born during the day, but it wasn't yesterday!

Mike(y),
          Correct-to-mundo my 160M AM KOMRADE. And the both of us were not just born in a cabbage patch!
Joe N3IBX

[WA3VJB]

Maybe he spent his time at the hotel room with some of the local ladies and liquor!?

Mack

Yeah, he looks like a player.

[Tom WA3KLR]

Dave is about 2 years older than me but looks about 15 years older.  It must be all those all-niter CW contests.

He is secretary of the International IARU, not the Region 2 IARU.  Region 2 secretary was/is Reinaldo Leandro YV5AMH who was elected the new President at last month's IARU 2 conference.  Rod Stafford W6ROD (ex-ARRL Pres.) has stepped down as President of Region 2.  I don't know who the new secretary for Region 2 is, off the top of my head.

On a brighter note, the weather was beautiful at the Sellersville PA hamfest.  I talked with Pete WA2CWA, Reid W2HU, John W3AWT, Stan WB2???, Steve WA2DTW, Ken W2DTC (thanks for the donut Ken!), and the ARRL Eastern PA Section Manager Eric WB3FPL.

[KB2WIG]

 Now VJB is playing with Photoshop..................   klc

[Tom WA3KLR]

Ramon Santoyo XE1KK of Mexico City is the new IARU Region 2 Secretary.

[KC9GMF]

Although it would be best if all AM'ers could send out correspondence to the powers that be,
we all know this will not happen.

I was thinking if someone with web page savy could setup a petition page of sorts for AM hams, and others to sign
with their call sign and possibley being a ARRL member or not, we could all then pass on the hyperlink to other
comrades to go to and fill in the blanks who otherwise might not take the time to have ther voice heard.


73
Tom

[WA3VJB]

Good thought, Tom/GMF, and welcome to the Forum, seeing that it's your first posting.

I wonder if it might be more effective to take the idea of a petition, but work it up into a thing that represents a group who all are signatories.

The difference, I guess in my mind, is that a petition is typically limited to a brief yay or nay statement.

A position paper, endorsed by those of us on this site, would explain why the IARU plan will not enable voluntary compliance as hoped. The discussion in the position paper would establish the prevalence of AM among hobbyists in two major countries in Region 2 (the US and Canada), and why the specifications would exclude us from being able to support their band plan.

It's a bit more elaborate than a basic petition, but maybe it's just a minor reconfiguration of your idea Tom, what say ?

[KC9GMF]

YEP, you got it! Just what I was trying to get out!

Postion and Prevalence. AM'ers just "are not" going to go away.

There have been 150 post here on the subject, and well over 2000 veiws,
so this would make the meek (like me) HEARD.

And the link might be posted in ER and other rags?

Tom

[KB2WIG]

   "  Ramon Santoyo XE1KK of Mexico City is the new IARU Region 2 Secretary.  ""

Lets see if we can get Pedro, XE1YZY, to work on him.............  klc

[WA3VJB]

And the link might be posted in ER and other rags?

Tom

I just heard from Ray of ER, he's on board for an Editorial.

[Vortex Joe - N3IBX]

I talked with Pete WA2CWA, Reid W2HU, John W3AWT, Stan WB2???, Steve WA2DTW, Ken W2DTC (thanks for the donut Ken!), and the ARRL Eastern PA Section Manager Eric WB3FPL.

Tom,
      Did you bring up the topic to Eric, W3FPL, the Eastern Section Manager? if so, what did he say?

[WD8BIL]

Dave Sumner's response:

Thomas, despite the exaggerated fears of some alarmists, whatever the shortcomings of the new Region 2 band plan may be there are no "restrictions" on AM operation.

He's correct here, of course,...... as long as you run AM with 2.7Khz bandwidth.

3600 - 3625 2700 * All modes, digimode, automatically controlled data station (unattended)
*) DSB AM phone allowedin this segment with a maximum bandwidth of 6 kHz.

The term "allowed" is patronizing at best. Can you say Hitler complex
Sure......... I knew you could

[Tom WA3KLR]

Good quote Mack!

(Spoken as you bang a 4CX1500 dud on the table.)

[k4kyv]

Harbinger of things to come?

Thai Hams Now Authorized to Operate on More Bands

On October 12, radio amateurs in Thailand were granted permission to operate on 12, 17 and 30 meters and in the CW portion of the 80 and 160 meters on a permanent basis. Before this time, Thai hams had only been able to operate on the 80 and 160 meters on weekends during international contests; authorization to operate on 12, 17 and 30 meters was only granted on a few occasions for certain special event stations.

These new privileges are part of a complete revision and consolidation of Amateur Radio regulations by Thailand's National Telecommunications Commission (NTC), and follows more than five years of lobbying by the Radio Amateur Society of Thailand (RAST), Thailand's IARU Member-Society.

Specifically, the Amateur Radio HF spectrum in Thailand increased as follows: 1.800 to 1.825 MHz, 3.500 to 3.540 MHz, 10.100 to 10.150 MHz, 18.068 to 18.168 and 24.890 to 24.990 MHz. RAST advises Thai amateurs to respect the IARU Region 3 band plan.

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2007/10/16/100/

[Tom WA3KLR]

Who to address your IARU Region 2 Band Plan feedback to:

Go to these links for e-mail address information:

The American Radio Relay League (ARRL)

  For their officers:
  http://www.arrl.org/officers.html

  For Division Director and Vice Director:
  http://www.arrl.org/divisions/

  For State Section people, click on your state:
  http://www.arrl.org/sections/


International IARU (International Amateur Radio Union) officers:
http://www.iaru.org/

Region 2 (Americas) IARU Officers:
http://www.iaru-r2.org/executive-committee/


Even just a few lines to these people is good.  A large quantity of email coming in over the situation is an important message.

[wd8das]

I've been corresponding gently and respectfully with League and IARU officials (sometimes of course they are the same) in opposition to the  new "band plan" that places restrictive limitations on transmitted signal bandwidths on the bands 160 - 10m.  I've also compared notes with friends who are doing the same.

A couple main themes have emerged...

The typical response from these officials has been defensiveness and condescension.  They would prefer that we just ignore the bandplan because it is "voluntary", because we "don't understand the purpose", because it is "really meant for other countries in Region 2", or (believe it or not) "the new plan is not restrictive in nature"(?).

Also, putting all the responses together seems to confirm that, in spite of their protests to the contrary, the ARRL representatives at the IARU conference argued for the tightening-up of the bandwidth and mode limitations.  One IARU rep said, "That was an ARRL suggestion. They were worried that some people were using quite wider (bandwidths)."

Interestingly, responses to our messages to ARRL Directors and Vice-Directors have been either non-existent, or demonstrate complete ignorance of the issue. 

I urge everyone to contact your ARRL Directors and Vice-Directors (see  http://www.arrl.org/divisions/ )  and educate them about what is happening at the IARU. 

Steve Johnston, WD8DAS

Fitchburg, Wisconsin.

[wd8das]

A number of folks who found the IARU bandplan OK, and support restrictive band plans, have suggested to me that "the bands are so crowded we've got to do something!" 

I must disagree.  I passively listen to the MF and HF bands at least ten hours a week, and actively operate about an additional ten hours, and I do not find the bands particularly crowded.  And the interference issues that I do overhear are usually caused by one of two things:  either deliberate jamming and harassment, or a shift in propagation brings QSOs that were previously unheard to each other into conflict.  It is rarely a matter of too many hams on the bands...

Again, I feel it is vital that we err on the side of flexibility and less restrictions, rather than more and tighter controls that eliminate future choices.  If we are to remain viable as an organized hobby we've got to be open to a wide variety of modes, both old and new.

Steve WD8DAS

[K4QE]

I've emailed all involved but being a non member of the ARRL, I get no responses from any of them, understandable. IARU guys don't seem to understand what the problem is with their idea.

Yes, Mack, this is exactly why it is WRONG for the ARRL to purport it represents the majority of USA ham community.  They, in fact, do not.  The only thing that is true is that they are the largest national ham organization in the USA, and as such, are a member society of the IARU.  Nothing more.

The ARRL membership only comprises 23% of the USA ham population.  There are 656,068 hams as of December 2006.  There are approximately 152,000 ARRL members. This info was gathered from the ARRL website.  Only a fraction of that 23% have so far been able to learn about the band plan because not every ham has access to the Internet.  It will take a month or two for the ham radio rags to catch up.  By then, those folks will be commenting very close to the Jan 1, 2008 adoption date.  That late response will be used to spin a story of complacency toward the "recommendation".  Yes, that's my conjecture, but it seems a likely one.

As I have stated before in this thread, it is wrong for the ARRL to ignore comments from non-members like yourself, if, in fact, that is what HQ is doing.  It is their responsibility, as the USA's only member society in the IARU, to take your comments into consideration.  I believe, as you obviously do, that such comments from non-members are sent to the bit bucket or the circular file.  I will continue to believe so until I see evidence to the contrary.

[WA3VJB]

Although a written follow-up puts it in the record, may I suggest phone calls to a few of the Region 2 representatives from beyond the United States ? 

It's worth the money for a few international calls since you'll be introducing yourself in a more personal manner.

After the conversation, summarize your points and the responses you received and send it to that person for their records. They then can pull out the summary come revision time, and use it for reference.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Don, K4KYV and I had a long conversation the other night on how it seems 75 meters is far less crowded than it was 10 years ago. I wonder what others have heard and observed?

A number of folks who found the IARU bandplan OK, and support restrictive band plans, have suggested to me that "the bands are so crowded we've got to do something!" 

I must disagree.  I passively listen to the MF and HF bands at least ten hours a week, and actively operate about an additional ten hours, and I do not find the bands particularly crowded.  And the interference issues that I do overhear are usually caused by one of two things:  either deliberate jamming and harassment, or a shift in propagation brings QSOs that were previously unheard to each other into conflict.  It is rarely a matter of too many hams on the bands...

Again, I feel it is vital that we err on the side of flexibility and less restrictions, rather than more and tighter controls that eliminate future choices.  If we are to remain viable as an organized hobby we've got to be open to a wide variety of modes, both old and new.

Steve WD8DAS

[AF9J]

I agree with that Steve, 

You still have your lids and jerks on the band, but it's nowhere near as packed as it used to be in the 90s.  I'd e-mail the ARRL & IARU about this shennanigans, but I got fed up with the ARRL back in 2001, and quit.  I still get literature in the mail from them asking me to rejoin, or like yesterday - to contribute to the Spectrum Defense Fund. 

73,
Ellen - AF9J

[K6JEK]

What about the ESSB crowd?   They should hate this too.   Do they have forum?  Should we try to get them on board?

I've written messages to the various players too.   I've been getting responses all in essence, don't worry about it.  It doesn't affect you.

Jon

[wd8das]

A few interesting notes on the new IARU HF bandplan for 40 meters :

7070 kHz is to become the new Digital-Voice center-of-activity freq
7043 kHz is to be the Image mode transmission center-of-activity freq.
CW is only allowed in the lower 30 kHz of the band.

Steve WD8DAS

[Pete, WA2CWA]

A few interesting notes on the new IARU HF bandplan for 40 meters :

7070 kHz is to become the new Digital-Voice center-of-activity freq
7043 kHz is to be the Image mode transmission center-of-activity freq.
CW is only allowed in the lower 30 kHz of the band.

Steve WD8DAS

CW is allowed from 7000 to 7300 KHz. "All narrow band modes" and All modes" also includes CW. So it says on their chart.

[WD8BIL]

.....but I got fed up with the ARRL back in 2001, and quit.

Yes Ellen, and I know what you mean. Believe me, I do.

But this isn't just an American issue. The ARRL is not "representing" U.S. hams to just the FCC.
When they agree to be the U.S. rep for IARU meetings they put themselves in the position where they MUST listen to ALL U.S. ham opinions. ARRL membership status and agendas SHOULD NOT come into play here. However, since their restrictive bandwidth agenda already has they must be reminded that THEIR agenda is unexceptable.