Who is re-writing the HF band plans?

[wj5o]

Look at this group of digital Ops that are attempting to run a revised HF band plan down our throats.......
http://hflink.com/bandplans/USA_BANDCHART.jpg
:(

Thanks WU8Y... I must have had My head "Up & Locked" when that came out...... I just see more and more infringement of CW portions of the bands.

[wu8y]

The FCC. Or, don't you know your Part 97? (97.221(b))

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/16nov20071500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2007/octqtr/47cfr97.221.htm

Read it and weep. :D

[ne3r]

Look at this group of digital Ops that are attempting to run a revised HF band plan down our throats.......
http://hflink.com/bandplans/USA_BANDCHART.jpg
:(

Thanks WU8Y... I must have had My head "Up & Locked" when that came out...... I just see more and more infringement of CW portions of the bands.

It looks pretty normal - the problem isn't the sub bands, it is automatic and semi automatic operation at such wide bandwidths both in and out of the auto sub bands.

[KQ6XA]

I must have had My head "Up & Locked" when that came out...... I just see more and more infringement of CW portions of the bands.

Infringement?
That is absurd.
The "CW portions of the bands" are virtually the entire bands.

[ad4mg]

Infringement?
That is absurd.
The "CW portions of the bands" are virtually the entire bands.

Only if the charts are viewed through delusional digital lenses.

[w4nti]

Look at this group of digital Ops that are attempting to run a revised HF band plan down our throats.......
http://hflink.com/bandplans/USA_BANDCHART.jpg
:(

Thanks WU8Y... I must have had My head "Up & Locked" when that came out...... I just see more and more infringement of CW portions of the bands.

What cw portions. The real CW segements (Like the ones actually used) are not indicated. But you have 3525 to 3600 as CW Only.

And I note there is NO CW allocation at all on 160 with this chart.

Duhhhh?? Whats up with that?

Now to the automatic digital. Looks reasonable. But why is there none on 160?

Looks to me like they need to do some more homework.

Look folks auto digital is gonna be here, whether you like it or not. I would gladly give up some CW space if the dang digital would stay out of it. Like on 40 for a example.

Dan/W4NTI

[N2RJ]

Infringement?
That is absurd.
The "CW portions of the bands" are virtually the entire bands.

Yes, the CW portion of the bands. You know, a "gentleman's agreement" which you apparently don't know anything about, Bonnie.

[N2RJ]

What cw portions. The real CW segements (Like the ones actually used) are not indicated. But you have 3525 to 3600 as CW Only.

And I note there is NO CW allocation at all on 160 with this chart.

Duhhhh?? Whats up with that?

Now to the automatic digital. Looks reasonable. But why is there none on 160?

Looks to me like they need to do some more homework.

Look folks auto digital is gonna be here, whether you like it or not. I would gladly give up some CW space if the dang digital would stay out of it. Like on 40 for a example.

Dan/W4NTI

160 is a useless band for most because of the large antennas required.

Bonnie's group don't really use large antennas from what I tell, much like the WinLink group that may use a small antenna on a sailboat.

[K0HWY]

I would gladly give up some CW space if the dang digital would stay out of it. Like on 40 for a example.

Dan/W4NTI

I would be even more glad to give them phone space and keep them out of the CW portions of the bands. In fact, I'd be really happy to see them take over the entire phone allocation in the 75m band.

[N2RJ]

Look folks auto digital is gonna be here, whether you like it or not. I would gladly give up some CW space if the dang digital would stay out of it. Like on 40 for a example.

Dan/W4NTI

Not gonna happen, Dan.

Bernie WG3G/9Y4 and others have started up Pactor as low as 7.036 on 40m. Their attitude is that if you don't like it, use your filters.

Well, I don't like it, and I'll use my amp and beam antenna in addition to my filters.

[wy6k]

Infringement?
That is absurd.
The "CW portions of the bands" are virtually the entire bands.

This person has obviously never actually used CW if she thinks the whole band is used for CW.

I'm all for an automatic ghetto, errr subband. Let them collide with each other all they want.

[KD6NIG]

Hilarity ensues.

Funny, when I made a suggestion to give them their own patch 6 months ago or so, I was branded as a supporter of them and damned for even suggesting they be 'rewarded' with an exclusive segment.

Then after people found out I was an NCT I was basically told I didn't have the right to comment because I didn't "know anything" about HF.

Funny how time changes things :p

[kj3n]

I would be even more glad to give them phone space and keep them out of the CW portions of the bands. In fact, I'd be really happy to see them take over the entire phone allocation in the 75m band.

Spoken as a true hater of phone operations, apparently.

Just keep the bastards out of the DX window and above 3800, thank you.

[w3wn]

Infringement?
That is absurd.
The "CW portions of the bands" are virtually the entire bands.

Obviously he meant the "CW Only" sub-bands. Technically, CW is permitted on all Amateur frequencies EXCECT the 60 meter SSB only channels; but only certain sub-segments are designated for "CW only" (ie no phone or SSTV or other non-digital modes; I'm not going to quibble over the digital modes segments either)

With that caveat in mind, infringement is the exact term I'd use.

[km4ba]

[QUOTE=wj5o;1204905]Look at this group of digital Ops that are attempting to run a revised HF band plan down our throats.......
http://hflink.com/bandplans/USA_BANDCHART.jpg
QUOTE]

Pretty sad, this is the normal bandplan as published by the ARRL with the automatic sub-bands from Part 97 overlaid on top of them.

Nothing new, just a single view intended to show how the current automatic sub-bands line up with the US bandplan.

It's sad commentary that most hams don't even recognize their current bandplan!

And for the CW bigots commenting.... hflink operators do not operate in the narrow bandwidth segments. So you won't find 3kc ALE operations down there.

Have fun,

Alan
km4ba

[km4ba]

This person has obviously never actually used CW if she thinks the whole band is used for CW.

Actually, Bonnie is a quite proficient CW operator. And CW is allowed and heard from one end of the band to the other.

One some frequencies and net's it's not unusal to hear people switch seamlessly from voice to cw as conditions fade.

And it's also not unusal to hear self-appointed police yell "This is the phone band, no CW allowed".

Have fun,

Alan
km4ba

[K0HWY]

Spoken as a true hater of phone operations, apparently.

Just keep the bastards out of the DX window and above 3800, thank you.

No, I don't hate phone operations. In fact, I do operate phone rather often. I just feel we could afford to sacrifice the 75 meter CB band or at least a good portion of it, if the digital ops really need their own space.

[km4ba]

Yes, the CW portion of the bands. You know, a "gentleman's agreement" which you apparently don't know anything about, Bonnie.

160 is a useless band for most because of the large antennas required.

Bonnie's group don't really use large antennas from what I tell, much like the WinLink group that may use a small antenna on a sailboat.

1) There is no identified CW sub-band as CW is allowed on all bands everywhere except for 60m. This chart is virtually identical to the one published by the ARRL except it overlays the auto sub-bands as defined in part 97

2) Your dismissal of 160 shows your ignorance of the band's capabilities

3) There is no "Bonnie's group". There is a group of people interested in ALE operations who have aligned operating frequencies and procedures for more effective operations called HFLink.

4) HFLink operators are active on all HF bands, including 160. up through 10m. There is no indication on the chart for 160m because there is no automatic operation allocation defined in Part 97. Your ignorance is showing!

5) I'm a core HFLink operator. I have and use a 240' V-Beam amongst other antennas. I know several others with similar large antennas.

So I'll ask.... How big is your antenna?

Your assumption that ALE needs/utilizes only small antennas is again demonstrating your ignorance. We operate all bands, so you'll find most ALE ops have a very good understanding of antennas, what works, what does not.

This whole thread has been a poster child demonstrating how poorly a majority of hams understand their bands, allocations and regulations. Is this the best we can do?

Have fun,

Alan
km4ba

[w5dwh]

How about the FCC give some of the CW space to the PHONE folks. After all, CW is dead.

Just ask the FCC.

[N2RJ]

1) There is no identified CW sub-band as CW is allowed on all bands everywhere except for 60m. This chart is virtually identical to the one published by the ARRL except it overlays the auto sub-bands as defined in part 97

And you'll find CW mostly in the CW only segments of the bands, because it doesn't play well together with SSB.

2) Your dismissal of 160 shows your ignorance of the band's capabilities

Um, yeah right. 160m is great for local and regional communications, but needs large antennas to do well.

3) There is no "Bonnie's group". There is a group of people interested in ALE operations who have aligned operating frequencies and procedures for more effective operations called HFLink.

Who exactly defines "more effective?" Don't make me laugh.

As for "Bonnie's group" that's exactly what it is. She's been cheerleading and she's been picking the fights. So it's Bonnie's group.

4) HFLink operators are active on all HF bands, including 160. up through 10m. There is no indication on the chart for 160m because there is no automatic operation allocation defined in Part 97. Your ignorance is showing!

Yeah you just want an excuse to flame away people who point out the truth about you guys.

5) I'm a core HFLink operator. I have and use a 240' V-Beam amongst other antennas. I know several others with similar large antennas.

So I'll ask.... How big is your antenna?

http://www.qrz.com/hampix/j/r/n2rj.1209055216.jpg

(That's me in the middle of the tower, climbing it)

Your assumption that ALE needs/utilizes only small antennas is again demonstrating your ignorance. We operate all bands, so you'll find most ALE ops have a very good understanding of antennas, what works, what does not.

And your reactionary flaming shows just how little a leg ALE has to stand on. I've never said that Bonnie's group only uses small antennas. I do say that they do, at least that's the impression I get from the ALE webpages.

This whole thread has been a poster child demonstrating how poorly a majority of hams understand their bands, allocations and regulations. Is this the best we can do?

Have fun,

Alan
km4ba

Exactly, and it's precisely why ALE is hated by so many. You guys simply think that stepping on CW and other modes to make room for ALE and WinLink can simply be defined as "progress" when in fact it's displacement of operations that have been on the bands for years now.

[km4ba]

And you'll find CW mostly in the CW only segments of the bands, because it doesn't play well together with SSB.


Your criticism: CW was not listed on the chart because hflink apparantly hates CW.

My answer: CW is not listed because it is allowed on all bands everywhere, except for 60 meters. Verbatim from the ARRL bandplan chart.

It does not have to be listed, and the entire band is a CW allocation. It's phone, rtty, date, etc, that is restricted to sub-bands.


Um, yeah right. 160m is great for local and regional communications, but needs large antennas to do well.


160m is far more useful than just that. I can tell you've not operated on it from the comments.


Who exactly defines "more effective?" Don't make me laugh.


We do. As in "more effective for use of ALE on the ham bands". Which includes things like defined operating practices to minimize impact on other modes and allocations. What we refer to as "Ham Friendly ALE". Including things like busy channel detection, aligning operating frequencies in support of good neighbor and defined band plans, etc.

You seem to have confused ALE ops with the other digi guys you don't like.

Digital modes are far more effective if people align settings, practices, etc. That's exactly what HFLink is about, no more no less.


As for "Bonnie's group" that's exactly what it is. She's been cheerleading and she's been picking the fights. So it's Bonnie's group.


HFLink has over 2000 members. We don't always agree, nor think alike. We do have a common interest and see that working together is far more effective.

Yes, Bonnie is an active promoter/supporter of new modes. What have you contributed to the hobby? Ever sponsored a mailing list? Web site? Travelled to speak at conferences as an invited member? Designed a radio? Patented a radio related concept?


Yeah you just want an excuse to flame away people who point out the truth about you guys.


What truth have you pointed out? That someone took the bandplan as published by the ARRL and overlaid the automatic band segments as defined by the FCC???

You are the flamer, and clearly in ignorance as most of what you are complaining about is not even relevent to ALE operations.

You said we don't use 160 because we have small antennas on sailboats. Bzzt, wrong answer. You've mistargeted your whining.

Typical Yagi install photo deleted.....

(That's me in the middle of the tower, climbing it)


And how well does it work on 160? (per your original point.... ALE Ops don't use 160 because it's useless and don't have antennas)



I've never said that Bonnie's group only uses small antennas. I do say that they do, at least that's the impression I get from the ALE webpages.


Actually, that's exactly what you said. And I have no idea how you got that idea from the HFLink web pages, as it clearly shows the focus on all bands from 160-10m.

Clearly you just wanted to throw rocks at something you don't understand.


Exactly, and it's precisely why ALE is hated by so many. You guys simply think that stepping on CW and other modes to make room for ALE and WinLink can simply be defined as "progress" when in fact it's displacement of operations that have been on the bands for years now.

Who is the "you guys"?

ALE as practice by hflink operaters is focused in a very narrow sub-band. One data frequency per band is where 99% of operations takes place. Which happens to be the segment defined by the FCC allowing 3kc data operations for over a decade. It does not encroach on CW space, and has displaced no one. It certainly does not "step on CW ops".

You seem to have confused us with some other mode, perhaps RTTY? Pactor 1? Or any of the other modes commonly heard down in the lower CW focus parts of the bands? But not ALE, you won't hear it there.

These flame wars are probably our best recruiting tool for ALE operations. Every one yields us 50-100 new mailing list members, and about 10% get on the air. So people are clearly seeing through the FUD and interested in trying new modes.

Thanks for the support and helping us grow! :-)

Have fun,

Alan
km4ba

[kj3n]

No, I don't hate phone operations. In fact, I do operate phone rather often.

Well, I'd be hard-pressed to come to any other conclusion with blanket statements like:

In fact, I'd be really happy to see them take over the entire phone allocation in the 75m band.

and:

I just feel we could afford to sacrifice the 75 meter CB band or at least a good portion of it, if the digital ops really need their own space.

The above leads me to believe that you spend (or spent) way too much time (or maybe all of your time) above 3800. If that's the case, then I could possibly see you calling it "the 75m CB band". You'll find, however, that it's quite different below 3800.

All 5 of my HF radios have the same problem; they don't tune above 3800. I have found that this is a "problem" I can live with. When the K3 gets here, I expect it to exhibit the same "problem". :D

I'd suggest spending some time in the "other" part of 75m before you throw the whole thing to WinLids. Where I go, it's much nicer. ;)

[K0HWY]

The above leads me to believe that you spend (or spent) way too much time (or maybe all of your time) above 3800. If that's the case, then I could possibly see you calling it "the 75m CB band". You'll find, however, that it's quite different below 3800.

All 5 of my HF radios have the same problem; they don't tune above 3800. I have found that this is a "problem" I can live with. When the K3 gets here, I expect it to exhibit the same "problem". :D

I'd suggest spending some time in the "other" part of 75m before you throw the whole thing to WinLids. Where I go, it's much nicer. ;)

You're correct, at least for the most part about me spending most of my time above 3.8 MHz. In fact, I spend most of my time at least 3.2 MHz above 3.8, with the exception of some AM on 3.885 when I can manage to find a time when the QRMing lids operating LSB on 3.888 aren't around. I also occasionally visit the CW portion of the 80m band as well as the 160m band (AM, CW and occasional LSB). I'm aware there are some courteous operators in the band, just as there are lids in the other bands. But 75m has earned its reputation fairly.

BTW, I wasn't really serious about giving the phone portions up to the other modes. That idea is just as absurd as allowing them to infringe in other areas. If there are to be more allocations given for exclusive digital ops, I'd say take away equally from phone and CW rather than pulling all from one. But in the end, no one is going to really care what you or I think. The FCC will do exactly as they always do, acting in their own best interest.

[K8MHZ]

I think it's time for popcorn!

[kj3n]

But 75m has earned its reputation fairly.

I'll pick a minor nit and say that the General portion of 75m has earned that reputation. Again, that's not how it is where I'm hanging out. ;)

[w4nti]

Aint that the way of it these days. No matter how ya try to be cooperative some clown will push the envelope.

I'll be running CW and get clobbered by a digital wizz kid a lot on 40 these days.

But....guess what? I can run digital in most modes right back at them. When I do and "explain" the situation they either leave or ....here it comes....they can use THEIR filters.

Dan/W4NTI

[w4nti]

1) There is no identified CW sub-band as CW is allowed on all bands everywhere except for 60m. This chart is virtually identical to the one published by the ARRL except it overlays the auto sub-bands as defined in part 97

2) Your dismissal of 160 shows your ignorance of the band's capabilities

3) There is no "Bonnie's group". There is a group of people interested in ALE operations who have aligned operating frequencies and procedures for more effective operations called HFLink.

4) HFLink operators are active on all HF bands, including 160. up through 10m. There is no indication on the chart for 160m because there is no automatic operation allocation defined in Part 97. Your ignorance is showing!

5) I'm a core HFLink operator. I have and use a 240' V-Beam amongst other antennas. I know several others with similar large antennas.

So I'll ask.... How big is your antenna?

Your assumption that ALE needs/utilizes only small antennas is again demonstrating your ignorance. We operate all bands, so you'll find most ALE ops have a very good understanding of antennas, what works, what does not.

This whole thread has been a poster child demonstrating how poorly a majority of hams understand their bands, allocations and regulations. Is this the best we can do?

Have fun,

Alan
km4ba



Alan,

With all due respect to both sides of this particular arguement YOUR BOTH RIGHT. The majority of hams don't know all the ins and outs of the Band Plan. Or for that matter need to. Why? Because most hams are not interested in the modes that they don't use.

The purpose of A bandplan is to attemp to make most folks happy, point them to the so-called agreed upon segments to find those of similar interests. And thats basically all.

I am a CW operater, a SSB operator, a RTTY, PSK31 and various other digital modes operator. I've been a ham for nearly a half a century, and guess what? I still check the "band plans" IF I can figure out which one is in vogue for this particular day.

Beep Beep

Dan/W4NTI

[kr2d]

I am a CW operater, a SSB operator, a RTTY, PSK31 and various other digital modes operator. I've been a ham for nearly a half a century, and guess what? I still check the "band plans" IF I can figure out which one is in vogue for this particular day.



The band plans not only change with time, but there are band plans put forth by various interest groups and ham organizations (national and international). Some band plans are law set down by sovereign nations. The band plans often do not agree. A band plan will only work if everyone, everywhere agrees to follow it all the time. I don't see that happening, it's against human nature.

[KV9U]

There are several points that should be made that some may be overlooking:

- what we used to consider the CW portions of the bands are actually the text data portions. As has been mentioned earlier, CW may be used throughout all ham bands except on 60 meter "channels."

- bandplans are recommendations from groups and while they do not carry the force of law, can be used by government agents to ask why hams are not following these recommendations.

- the most important bandplan for the U.S. is the IARU Region 2 plan along with the ARRL bandplan since they are the larger groups. ARRL instigated some very underhanded railroading at the recent IARU conference to get the bandplan changed when they ran in to so much opposition from rank and file hams.

- ironically, some of the complaints on this subject have been against certain modes being used in parts of the bands where they are permitted. The former ARRL bandwidth proposal would have solved much of that. As it stands now, there are minimal restrictions on bandwidth in what used to be a narrow bandwidth sub band. Typically CW on the lower end and narrow digital above that and wider digital higher still.

- the ALE group is made up of a handful (at most) of proponents of this technology. If you believe their incessant hype, just monitor some of their "channels" for a few days and find out how many actually use these modes. Not many.

- ALE is not a ham friendly mode if it suddenly appears on a frequency you have chosen and found to be unused. It is an older system from the 1980's and used for government/commercial channelized use. It does not work well on the ham bands and the current 8FSK2000 mode is very slow to transmit data, assuming you can actually get it to work with strong enough signals.

- the modified ALE 8FSK400 FAE mode is more of a ham friendly mode (400 Hz), MUCH more sensitive than 8FSK2000, quasi duplex ARQ sound card mode.

- the RFSM sound card modems are quite good for stronger signals and very high speeds, however they are currently illegal on the HF bands in the text data portions. They may be legal in the voice/image portions of the bands.