The Buzzer - the mystery Russian radio station “MDZhB” http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20170801-the-ghostly-radio-station-that-no-one-claims-to-run KB9OLM
How am I to remove the S-9+ over 100 interference I get here on 15m and occasionally on 12m? Even with narrow filters, DSP, you name it, it renders nearly both bands completely unusable here--on both a resonant dipole, a vertical, and can be picked up with ease on mobile antennas too. Our powerlines are all underground, so my minor DFing only seems to indicate the source is within a block or so. The proposal goes a bit beyond spin the dial and more like 'learn to live with it' and puts the onus on me to fix my reception so I don't complain about it. IF I was able to now, I wouldn't be irate at the interference. But it would also be interfering with my TRANSMIT too, wouldn't it?! Its as if the FCC is no longer interested in tracking down big RFI sources (if they ever were) and just want me to filter it better. Seems backwards to me. Maybe I am missing something.
I've seen some pretty racist crap coming across on CW lately. CW doesn't guarantee a better reputation in that regard, it just masks the problem.
I think that's one of the general ideas they are considering -- receiver standards. It's unclear how they would attempt to apply that to us, if at all. Some digital-based services can probably play games with the receiver specs to provide good reception at a "reasonable" range, without fixing certain kinds of RFI. That's not going to work for the example you provide. We're not the only service that isn't going to like the idea of offloading RFI responsibility, even partially, to the receiver. There's still a lot of analog broadcast, and 2-way stuff going on outside of amateur radio.
A lot of us are retired and to continue to increase membership and start a new organization is out of the question. Remember, it was the older pioneers who have brought us this far.
The ARRL will support whatever is the dumbest plan as usual.They are totally USELESS & a pathetic excuse for The Voice of Amateur Operators.So many refuse being a member because they are a pathetic laughing stock of folks who are so out of touch with the vast majority of the Amateur Community & membership numbers will continue dropping (as they should) as time goes on.I tell every new Amateur Operator I meet or know that they should NOT support the ARRL & to save their money for a worth while cause. The FCC does NOT care what the ARRL says or does because like all government they don't care about anything that does not put money in their pockets & the ARRL has holes in their pockets & can't afford a down payment on a 2nd thought.Folks should open their blinded eyes & stop what little support they give the ARRL & let them go the way of the Doo Doo Bird.Nobody will miss them & look at all of the new vendor spaces that it will open up that they waste at so many Hamfest across America.Now there is some good news & motivation for you! Clayton W4KVW
Today's news about comments from the ARRL to the FCC TAC is actually quite laudable, IMO. I did not realize that the FCC was stonewalling the past proposed noise floor study. Hopefully the SBE hits them up on that as well. http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-comme...isory-council-spectrum-policy-recommendations Notable quotes, "“Indeed, it is difficult to imagine how the Commission can now…suggest the adoption of specific spectrum management principles, incorporating such concepts as receiver immunity, HCTs [harm claim thresholds], and interference temperature determinations without having…a firm grasp on ambient noise levels in basic RF environments and geographical areas,” the League told the FCC." "“Requiring better performance from receivers or RF-susceptible devices is a valid, reasonable, and long overdue requirement,” ARRL said, “but the major goal of doing so should be to prevent instances of interference, not solely to allow the overlay of otherwise incompatible sharing partners in deployed spectrum to the detriment of incumbents.”" "“Receiver immunity is not an intra-service issue in the Amateur Service,” ARRL said. “The issue…is, rather, protection from spurious and out-of-band emissions from other services.”" "... the League contended. “No system of spectrum management incorporating [harm claim thresholds] and receiver immunity levels can be accurately implemented” without the noise study data." "“That study is more important now than ever before,” ARRL concluded, “and it is increasingly urgent as a prerequisite for any new spectrum management policies.”"
From the same article, "any interference hams suffer from each other is resolved cooperatively". When? Where? Winlink? OO's? 7200? They should sell this by the pound for fertilizer.
ok so when all of the digital frame work gets the snot kicked out of it by a EMP or major solar flare the only operators left will be the amateurs with the knowledge to build and tune Radios using the most Basic of items when this happens and trust me some day it will digital communications will be non existent the FCC needs to Leave this Alone not take Frequency's allotted to the tech general and extra class licensees and a lot them to other forms we as amateurs can and have diplomatically figured out a way to share our assigned Frequency's without the FCC getting involved this is my own opinion
Preface: I have been up for 2 days? Holy Bat Sh!t Robin, Amateurs are now talking about the same problems of 'transmitter centric' spectrum management that the <redacted> has been attempting to fix.....for years, and hitting the same resistance and <redacted> too!! So...I wish to point out a few things that vex me (daily....at work, yes at work)...Why does the eCFR version of Title 47, Part 97 'read' so different than the NTIA RedBook? Look at all those beautiful Footnotes! (Who is in Florida? US 270) Look at that lovely Chapter 4. Look at radio services in all CAPITALS, and those like "Amateur" in the non-federal table. Now, please re-read and look for the implied intent of: the 'Presidents Broad Band Plan' (excuse my choice of words but just where does one shit 500 MHz of spectrum?), Jobs Creation Act (FirstNet; First Responder Broadband network with PTT services too....where did those EMCOMM Guys go?).....and other beautiful things in the Federal Register. I now ya'll really don't have time to research all of the nuances....so let me summarize....EVERY increment of RF spectrum (heck throw in light too)/ hertzian wave(s) is/are useful for something now, or in the future, and just as in real estate....'Folks' are setting the groundwork to support wireless mobility and make fortunes by hook or crook. 'Our' spectrum is under scrutiny (and if you think otherwise you are a fool)- 1. HF - Wide-band (I am not talking about wide audio SSB) is already here...right Bonnie? KNL Networks, those Collins boys are still at it, BFTN (Google is your friend)....do 'we' really want 'dial-up' performance data over HF taking up *24-500 KILO Hertz* occupied bandwidth? Who is 'leaving' HF? NO one. Look at ITU Radio Regs in force 1 Jan 2017....Maritime HF.....not leaving. ITU Radio Regulations for AERO HF services (ICAO got all over this one)...not leaving and expanded! I would rather everyone use a 'JT' app and leave others to talk analog voice, or 1K24 RTTY, 2K (??)Jxx Pactor or the original digital mode of the first wireless electronic social media.....what was that again? Continous Wave (OK, really it was spark). 2. 144-148 MHz; 2 Meters....all those repeaters, linked or not. Last road trip across 36 Denver to Peoria.....N0LL my only contact. 3. 220 MHz What ever became of compandered SSB? Oh well....makes my day job easy At least the guys in MO are making 220 repeaters! 4. 420-450 MHz; ON LOAN.....He giveth, he can taketh away. Really applies to all....sad thought;( 5. 902-928 MHz; "Amateur" refer to PDF Page 154, RedBook....non Federal Table (got footnotes; no milk). I am tired....do you get the picture? AND we are low in the pecking order. So, my fellow Amateurs.....don't bicker amongst 'friends', support (or not) the ARRL....(I was going to type something about writing our Law Makers.....but they are not at work).......sorry....tired and incomplete thought(s). Bottom line: We, as Amateurs need to come up with something, a strategy, yesterday to solidify meaningful spectrum access or we will no longer enjoy the propagation challenges, the rare DX joys, the QRM frustrations, the nagging neighbors.......but most important the never ending 'entertainment' and thought provoking (imagination) that radio 'plays' in various roles of our lives. One of you Folks that are related to Einstein come up with something. Now get off the damn internet and get to work. (And be safe out there!) Is 00H00N0N a valid emission designator? Zero occupied bandwidth. Does a signal exist that has no measurable occupied bandwidth? Infinite frequency? How far can you run into the woods? How long is a piece of string? What is a one sided, three dimensional object? Can you overdose on Melatonin? The Boss is furloughed....What shall I do? CQ,CQ,CQ.......
