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

[k4kyv]

For "those" who keep track of these things, the summary proceedings of third & final plenary - XVI General Assembly - Region 2, Brasilia 2007, modified 12/23/07, are now on line. This includes with detail, all the Resolutions passed at the September 2007 meeting.

RESOLUTION B-03. The General Assembly acknowledging the Committee B report that reads:
“PY-B-06, Proposed 160-10 Band Plans for IARU Region 2. The Committee considered the detailed band
plan in document PY-B-06 in conjunction with documents PY-B-03, PY-B-04 and PY-B-04. The
Committee noted that frequencies were presented in both frequency bands and specific frequencies. The
Committee found it desirable to revise the tables to consistently list frequency bands and to note specific
frequency or centers of activities within specific bands. It was also felt desirable to harmonize band
segments and their usages with other Regions to the extent possible”
Adopted the HF Band Plan detailed in the annex IARU REGION 2 MF/HF BAND PLAN.

Doesn't go into much detail, does it.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

It probably would have more interesting if they posted the "PY" documents. That's where the meat is!

Got to go post the band plan on the wall.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

The supposed band crowding issue is a moot point as most AM'rs end up in small groups dotted amongst the band. I expect the real impact of the IARU's foolishness will be the fallout of ignorant operators claiming the IARU band proposal as law. Dollars to donuts it will start tomorrow.

That's why we need to make it a  special point starting at midnight to-night local time, to  show a massive AM presence OUTSIDE the IARU AM windows,  on 3625-3875, and on as many separate frequencies as possible throughout 160.  Continue this operation through the coming weekend.  Let this be an educational exercise for the benefit of the rest of the amateur radio community.

Got on the radio about 1:30 AM (1/1/08). Heard one AM QSO on 3718 (QIX, IA, GFZ, and several more); around 3885 were some weak carriers but in the noise. Since I wasn't in the mood for "roundtable" action I went over to SSB and worked a bunch of European's with my non-plastic transmitter and plastic receiver.

[ka3zlr]

Interesting,

 After reading the:

CAPABILITIES OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS FOR
DISASTER RELIEF
HEALTH AND WELFARE

Especially:

The question that we are here to address is what resources and
telecommunications capabilities are available to the disaster
agencies, my contribution would focus on the amateur radio
service. Computer technology over the last few years triggered the
introduction of smart radios and the development of interesting
software that laid the platform for seamless interfacing of
telecommunications networks, radio amateur special interest
experimental groups recognizing the possibilities developed
systems and software applications to improve earlier digital modes
and introduction of new error free methods that can be effective
for disaster relief operations, bearing in mind that in most disaster
situations the public service systems are the first to go down
alternative routing for disaster relief messages must be considered.

Question:

 In consideration of "Error Free" methods, I'm at a loss as to why so much is stressed on HF, when the technology employed today is LEO Sat Linking, once again The Amateurs Code staying abreast of todays technology.

Their Thought:

GARC-05 presented a proposal for the IARU Regions 1, 2 and 3 to
implement centre of activity frequency for emergency traffic on
the 15,17,20,40 and 80 meter bands IARU R2 HF committee was
at the time engaged in revision of the band plans and was given the
additional task to accommodate the proposal in their discussions.
Their recommendation was adopted at the IARU Region 2 General
Assembly Brasilia in September of 2007 and would be effective on
January 1st 2008.

A Better Logic:

 Obvious reasoning would be, so much more information, data traffic, can be handled at such a higher rate and be more dependable than relying on HF with the known characteristics that Plague HF, there also needn't be the hassle of so many middle traffic handlers and the muddling of slower data rates dependency placed on smart radio equipment dependent on VOIP in the HF region that rely on land line connectivity issues, that in itself is questionable in any EmCom scenario in landing the system in a bottle neck on the twisted pair that is even more susceptible to environmental and disaster conditions.

 The size of Equipment needed in line of sight technology to full fill the needs would be much smaller the cost in manpower and equipment would be considerably less, with greater portability and much more ease of use, when their thoughts were concerned around antenna problems encountered by VHF UHF Repeater sites.

As they stated:

Local amateur radio societies operate a number of VHF and
UHF repeater systems with simplex and HF/ssb capability in
event of tower destruction, some systems are linked for VOIP
over internet for integrated communication and information

It begs the question:
I'm surprised a MOU wasn't pursued in the LEO Sat Technology, is it possible that this committee has been steered in a relatively narrow view of possibilities, I wonder.

Opinion:
Interesting, lets place all our Emcom eggs in the HF waste basket., does the "controlled" Visual Media do such things.?



Keeping Track of Alternative Routing.

[W3RSW]

I and many knowledgeable hams are upset and amazed that the band closest to medium wave domestic service, i.e., the 160 meter band, has no provision for full carrier, double sideband AM.  Reviewing what many of us have said on AMfone net, the 160 meter hamband is a natural for surplus broadcast service transmitters to find extended and useful life where 24 hour energy consumption concerns are not paramount.  The rejuvination and conversion of such BC transmitters adds significantly to the knowledge pool of ham radio. 

The U.S. FCC deemed amateurs knowledgeable and self policing enough to work out gentlemens' agreements for frequency/mode usage.  To a great extent this has worked well, the Dec. 15, 2006 phone expansions with the subsequent compression of small bandwidth modes notwithstanding.  These issues will be worked out in time by hams and for hams, especially "if left alone" and not overly controlled by over-zealous regulators, computer happy representatives with all to easy to use forms generators and digitization complexes, no matter how well intentioned.  Ocam's razor and "KISS theory" (keep it simple, stupid) should be the modus operandi of all regulation.

I certainly hope the U.S. FCC continues to allow ham self regulation despite IARU band plans and ARRL promotions, support and rubber stamp agreements of the IARU's Region 2 proposals.

Not only should we "expand" DSB AM presence into the relatively unused 80 meter wavelengths not "sanctioned" by the IARU's asterisk (*,) freq's. 3875 to 3900 kHz , we should also transmit, loud and clear, on 160.  We should promote DSB AM in the entire gentlemens' agreement range from, say 1850 to 2000 kHz.  So load up your transmitters all across 160 tonight as well as 80/75.