The AM Forum

From the ARRL Web Site:
On Monday, October 20, the ARRL filed a Petition for Modification or Cancellation of Experimental Authorization (Petition) with the FCC with respect to WE2XRH. According to the FCC, this experimental license -- issued to Digital Aurora Radio Technologies (DART) -- proposes to "test digital transmissions in 4.50-5.10 MHz, 7.10-7.60 MHz and 9.25-9.95 MHz for a terrestrial digital radio service to the citizens of Alaska."
....
"It is astonishing that the FCC would grant this experimental license for operation at such a high power level in a band that is allocated exclusively to a service with which such operation is clearly incompatible," said ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ. "The only possible explanation is that it was an error; the only reasonable step for the FCC to take is to correct its error immediately, either by cancelling the license or by amending the frequency ranges to delete 7.1 -7.3 MHz."
...
DART has been permitted operation in the 7.1-7.6 MHz band using a 20 kHz bandwidth digital emission at a transmitter output power of 100 kW and an ERP of 660 kW within a radius of 1500 kilometers of Delta Junction, Alaska.

For the complete story, go here:
http://www.remote.arrl.org/news/stories/2008/10/22/10396/?nc=1

My Gawd,
What the heck is going on at the FECES??? That is a horrendous amount of RF power. Jeesh!!! that can be World-Wide communications. DART could get by with 5 kw for the citizens in Alaska!!! Is Sarah Palin behind this??????
And yes, change the freqs to anything under 7 mhz.


Fred

Nice, 660 kW ERP. Can you say STRAP!

The FCC like the rest of the US government do not have thinking minds at the helm. All of them are incapable of thinking of the ramifications of their dumb knee jerk decisions and that's why we are where we are at.

Gee.

I wonder what center frequency their 20 KHz window is on?

I could see a new ARRL contest on the 40 M band.

I think they're very aware of the ramifications of their decisions: allocations outside the ham bands have well-funded interest groups behind them, and hams don't. 

Google and Yahoo and Mickeysoft and Intel and Apple and all their suppliers want the citizens of Alaska to enjoy the "benefits" of receiving digital broadcasts, and the oil companies want real-time pumping data and remote control capability from/to the wells that they'll be drilling everywhere once the election is over, and both of them want the government to pay for the fiber network needed to do it. The government isn't eager to do that in an election year and a certain Senator from Alaska is minding his P's and Q's until the "Bridge to nowhere" is forgotten, so plan B: do it with incredibly powerful automatic data broadcasting networks,  and a few disatisfied ham operators who don't count for anything in Washington DC.

I've said it before: this is going to get worse. We used to have a place at the allocations table because the military wanted a corps of trained operators that they could place in service quickly during wars. Now, our skills are out-of-date and the Pentagon is just a purchasing department for the military-industrial complex. Ergo, bye-bye to 40 meters or any other band that's usable for making a profit.

YMMV.

Bill, W1AC

Bill,
I totally agree.  It's going to get worse. 

The Amateur Service is still a legal service.  Granted we do share but the level of ERP is beyond the pale.  On the other hand, will the mainland give a crap about this level? Probably not. I don't know how it would effect us. I have no expertise in this area however, common sense might tell me something.  I'm sure those in Alaska may have some grave concern.

I'd be curious to know the FCC thinking on this decision, engineering wise. I'd be willing to bet it has engineering flaws. Sort of like the BPL issue.

A simple Google search will give you answers.
Here's one:
http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0049/t.14280.html

What portion of Alaska isn't already covered by terrestrial or satellite broadcasting?

Uuhh.... no. DART is funded by the US Government.

http://earmarks.omb.gov/2008-earmarks/earmark_344309.html


It will use DRM. DRM consortium members are listed below. I do not find Microsoft, Intel, Apple or Google.

Commercial Radio Australia (Australia); TDP, TDP Radio (Belgium); Nautel Ltd., Radio Canada International/CBC
(Canada); Academy of Broadcasting Science of China, Communications University of China, Southeast University
Nanjing (China); Electronic Corporation S.A. (Costa Rica); RIZ Transmitters (Croatia); HFCC (Czech Republic);Aalborg
University (Denmark); ESPOL, HCJB Global (Ecuador); Kymenlaakso Polytechnik (Finland); CCETT, DIGIDIA, DRF
Committee, Radio France, SNRL, TDF, Thomson Broadcast & Multimedia (France); ADDX, APR, Atmel Germany
GmbH, Deutsche Welle, DLM, Dolby Germany GmbH, Europa 1, Fraunhofer IIS, Georg-Simon-Ohm – University of
Applied Sciences Nuremberg, Harman/Becker Automotive Systems GmbH, IRT, LMK Rheinland-Pfalz, Medienanstalt
Sachsen-Anhalt, Micronas GmbH, Panasonic Automotive Systems Europe, Robert Bosch GmbH, Sony Deutschland
GmbH, SWR Südwestrundfunk, TRANSRADIO SenderSysteme Berlin AG,  University of Applied Sciences
Kaiserslautern, University of Applied Sciences Merseburg, University of Hanover, University of Kaiserslautern,
University of Kassel, University of Ulm, VPRT (Germany); Antenna Hungaria, National Communications Authority
Hungary (Hungary); Analog Devices (India), Basamad College, Tehran (Iran); RAI Way, ST Microelectronics, World
Family of Radio Maria (Italy); Hitachi Kokusai Electric Inc., NEC Corporation, NHK (Japan); Telecommunications
Technology Association, KETI (Korea); Libyan Jamahiriya Broadcasting (Libya); Broadcasting Center Europe
(Luxembourg); Asia Pacific Broadcasting Union (Malaysia); La Red (Mexico); Agentschap Telecom, CATENA Radio
Design, NXP Semiconductors, OLON, Radio Netherlands, Stiching DigiRadio, Technical University Delft (Netherlands);
Radio New Zealand International (New Zealand); Senter for Kristen Kringkasting,Telenor/Norkring (Norway); RTP
(Portugal); RTRN/Voice of Russia (Russia); Government of Catalonia, Cadena SER, Universidad del Pais Vasco
(Spain); EBU, International Committee of the Red Cross, ITU, VSP (Switzerland); Arab States Broadcasting Union
(Tunisia); BBC, Christian Vision, RadioScape Plc., VT Communications, WRN (U.K.); Broadcast Electronics, Inc., Dolby
Laboratories Licensing Corp., Continental Electronics Corp., Harris Corp., Broadcast Communications Division -
IBB/VOA, National Association of Short-wave Broadcasters, TCI International, Inc., Texas Instruments, Inc., Via
Licensing Corp. (U.S.A.) and Vatican Radio (Vatican City).

--- source:  http://www.drm.org/meta/members/

More on who is behind this.

http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20080718_6523.php

It won't be STRAP it will be digital BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

Like dis....

Would still fit though.

http://www.hfunderground.com/wiki/Strap

If this is not a mistake, I think there may be something else behind this......I would guess they will be using the HAARP site at Delta junction...600 kw or so is but a small portion of what that transmitter site is capable of...
 

From the FCC Web Site:


--  http://www.fcc.gov/oet/faqs/elbfaqs.html


Would appear the ARRL is over reacting.

Here is a quote from the site http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20080718_6523.php (http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20080718_6523.php):

"The company said the purpose of the project is to provide a terrestrial digital radio service for the citizens of Alaska, and if digital transmission proves reliable, it will seek partnerships with content providers with priority given to nonprofit organizations."

I don't know who the "content providers" will be: it might not be Apple &C.: I use those names as strawmen, but someone with lots of government pull wants this to happen, and I want to know who.

My crystal ball is, as I'm fond of pointing out, as cloudy as anyone else's. I may be wrong, and this might be just the backers of DRM flexing their political muscle to try to compete with the existing AM & FM broadcasting infrastructure. Think about it, though: would anyone in Washington want to make radio station owners mad at them just before an election?

I'm sorry to appear cynical, but this doesn't make sense to me: even Barrow, at the Northern edge of the state, is within the footprint of geostationary satellites in the Clark Belt. Why anyone would want to crank up so much RF just to deliver a broadcast signal is beyond me, since there isn't enough of an audience to justify the expense - unless they're aiming at places and people who can't put up a dish, and that means a mobile work force in trucks and planes. In other words, the only use for this that makes sense to me is for delivering data to oilfield roughnecks or other mobile workers while they're moving around. DRM's digital transmission rates is only about 5 Kbps, which isn't nearly good enough for delivering typical wideband content. It is, however, perfectly adequate for delivery of text messages and similar email-like communications.

Maybe I'm off the mark, and/or getting senile. I am, however, old enough to realize that things like this don't happen by accident. Time will tell.

73,

Bill W1AC

Yes, this didn't happen by accident. DART applied for a license and got it. No different than some of our AM buddies getting experimental licenses for 500 kHz. Nothing sinister as far as I can see.

Read up on the already existing non-commercial radio services in rural Alaska. This may make a little more sense to you then.


That rules out Microsoft, etc. ;D

For a live demo of what a DRM signal sounds like, listen almost any evening to 3990-4000 kHz.  The 10 kHz wide digital signal comes from Radio Deutsche-Welle in Germany.

http://www.drm-dx.de/

DRM Forum (http://www.drmrx.org/forum/index.php?s=f267941ea04c81e4c212d1400d71e8b0)

"(unless the experiment is to fulfill a contract with the US government) "


100kw is pretty darn loud... obviously providing "programming" to the citizens of Alaska isn't a high priority, nor is it commercially viable... get ur SDR running with DRM on it and enjoy the programming!!

Who knows, maybe 'BCQ can get a free ride and use them as a "translator" or "repeater"??
Looks like they will need programming... heh.

                _-_-bear

Since Barrow came up in my previous research, I realized that I know a ham who lives there. I asked him to comment, and he agreed provided I removed his id.

W1AC

 -----------------------------------------------------

Bill...

Thanks for asking for my opinion....

Barrow and all northern Alaska communities of any size at all have direct satellite downlinked cable-distributed or wireless TV from at least one service provider. Local FM transmitters already provide good "broadcast" aural "radio" coverage anywhere there is a listening population.

I personally see no advantage to digital aural HF broadcasting anywhere in this state, especially when it will cause certain detrimental interference to amateur operations, not only in Alaska, but in a much greater area, given the power level proposed (660 KW ERP...My God!) The population density is so low there wouldn't be many listening to it anyway.  Is "the Government" trying to pull off something sneaky here?

There just is no good reason to clobber 7.1 to 7.3 of the 40 meter (supposedly exclusive) amateur allocation in this region.

If DART absolutely "has to" experiment in this part of the spectrum, they should be able to do it above 7.3 where it won't bother amateurs.

This has apparently been cooking for a couple years without any knowledge of it by the amateur community anywhere, especially in Alaska.

FCC must be caused [to] modify the temporary authorization to exclude 7.1 to 7.3 mhz in order to comply with international agreed to cessation of ALL broadcast activity in March 2009 in the upper portion of the international amateur 40 meter allocation.

Before everyone goes out and constructs thier tin foil hat and run and hide form the black helo's they see out of the corner of thier eye's...
From the ARRL news letter ( which is only good enough to line the bottom of my birdcage with anyway) ;)


Everyone can now resume to corkscrew themselves into the ground about some other perceived injustice.

 :D

I'm sure something will fill the void.........

This is really good writing.

Bad mouth the ARRL if you wish, I certainly don't always agree with them, but I 'm glad they can do things like this and help protect the spectrum to which we have access.  

Business interests will always command more attention from government agencies....follow the money!!  This could have been a serious threat to 40 Meters.

73,  Jack, W9GT

I don't agree with the ARRL on much these days but I have to give 'em kudos on this one. It was likely just a mistake by the FCC, but I'm glad the league jumped on it so quickly.

73, Mark

I did follow the money. DART is being funded by the Federal Government, not business. Seems people are looking for as boogey man without doing even a modicum of research.

http://earmarks.omb.gov/2008-earmarks/earmark_344309.html


It's highly unlikely that any interference would have ever occurred but the ARRL had to hype it up in order to show they were doing something. Much ado about nothing.

It was really a plan to remotely power the black helicopters that are hovering over the new oil fields, making sure the prehistoric beasts don't come out of hibernation and destroy evidence of the Kennedy assassination ...

Bill, whose tin-foil hat is tuned to the secret frequency so he'll get the word about the next comet that's leaving for home.

Hmmmph!

Here's more on the DART experiment

http://klixie.com/26mhz/index.php?id+13 (http://klixie.com/26mhz/index.php?id+13)

My thoughts on the whole situation is that it is a waste of time anyway. Why use shortwave to cover Alaska when satellite or a MW groundwave could probably cover the state with about 2 transmitters. And why do they need a 600 kw ERP? 5 to 10 kw into a simple dipole could cover the whole state, just with the groundwave.
Shelby KB3OUK

Not likely. A dipole will yield little or no groundwave. You need a vertical for that.

They could place it close to the ground and use it for NVIS, I'm getting that confused with a groundwave, that's what I'm doing. But I always thought that verticals were for low angle DX work( wait a minute, I guess groundwave is a low angle). I better stop before I go crazy>
Shelby KB3OUK

Picked up a random ex-libris copy of Popular Mechanics, was the April 08 issue, but I don't think this item was "april fools"...

page 14.

"Round Trip Moonbeam"

3.6MW "radar signal" bounced off the moon at 7.4mHz, generated by HAARP.

Received in New Mexico...

FYI

            _-_-bear

EME at 7.4mhz? I thought the ionosphere would have reflected a signal at that frequncy, not let it pass through.
Shelby KB3ouk

It was received by hams all over the place, including many forum members.

http://amfone.net/Amforum/index.php?topic=13338.0

No Shelby,  It depends on the angle the wave front hits the region...

At zero angle (ie, straight up) it passes thru...

I was one of the many that listened to that sesson with HAARP...