Spectrum Theft?

[AE6IP]

OK, I'm confused.

I read, in many places, that there are those out there who want to steal ARS spectrum.

But everyone I ask says I should ask someone else.

We all know about BPL, so no need to go into that.

And we all know that there are freebanders and other illegal invaders.

Besides that what are the threats to HF spectrum?

Marty

[N7WSB]

Broadcasters. I don't think right now they are - but there are technologies coming out like drm - which require more bandwidth to operate. If it ever became a commercial success - even in Europe or Africa (where shortwave is considerably more popular) it could be a problem.

[AE6IP]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n7wsb @ Nov. 21 2003,22:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Broadcasters. I don&#39;t think right now they are - but there are technologies coming out like drm - which require more bandwidth to operate. If it ever became a commercial success - even in Europe or Africa (where shortwave is considerably more popular) it could be a problem.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
It is my understanding that broadcasters are moving away from HF and, instead, moving to satellite broadcasting. This has been claimed to be the reason why the broadcasters are moving off 40m, albeit slowly.

Is this not correct?

[kc0ebm]

1--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AE6IP @ Nov. 21 2003,221)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">OK, I&#39;m confused.

I read, in many places, that there are those out there who want to steal ARS spectrum.

But everyone I ask says I should ask someone else.

We all know about BPL, so no need to go into that.

And we all know that there are freebanders and other illegal invaders.

Besides that what are the threats to HF spectrum?

Marty[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Martin,

I&#39;m a little confused too. #I thought you were an expert on this subject. #Seems not long ago, I issued a comment suggesting that if amateur radio didn&#39;t clean up its act, that maybe our spectrum might be sold off to commercial entities.

Your reply indicated that I was full of BS and nobody wanted our HF bands.

Now you&#39;re asking questions. #What&#39;s up buddy?

EBM

[AE6IP]

8--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc0ebm @ Nov. 22 2003,168)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I&#39;m a little confused too. #I thought you were an expert on this subject. #Seems not long ago, I issued a comment suggesting that if amateur radio didn&#39;t clean up its act, that maybe our spectrum might be sold off to commercial entities.

Your reply indicated that I was full of BS and nobody wanted our HF bands.

Now you&#39;re asking questions. #What&#39;s up buddy?

EBM[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>


I don&#39;t know about where you are, but in my line of work, the difference between the pros and the amateurs is that the pros continually check their assumptions to see if they still hold.

I am, to date, unaware of any credible challenge to amateur HF spectrum. I believe that there is no such challenge. If someone points it out to me, I&#39;ll change my mind.

You see, guy, the wisest thing I ever learned was that wisdom comes from asking questions and understanding the answers.

Marty

[W5ALT]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc0ebm @ Nov. 22 2003,1900)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I&#39;m a little confused too. #I thought you were an expert on this subject. #Seems not long ago, I issued a comment suggesting that if amateur radio didn&#39;t clean up its act, that maybe our spectrum might be sold off to commercial entities.

Your reply indicated that I was full of BS and nobody wanted our HF bands.

Now you&#39;re asking questions. #What&#39;s up buddy?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Tom:

Marty gave you the perfect chance to show your intelligence by backing up your conjecture with information. You chose not to provide any information, so I assume that implies your previous comment was nothing more than conjecture.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Marty:

I think that the data clearly shows that many small SW broadcasters have been abandoning HF for the last 20 years or so. Most of those are locals that provided a communications service in addition to broadcasting. (See my article in PopComm a few years back for examples.) As normal communications to remote areas is provided, the need for local SWBC is reduced. The trends are documented annually in the various broadcaster surveys published. I can try to track some down for you if you haven&#39;t already found them.

What seems to be happening, and this is my conjecture, is that SWBC is becoming dominated by a few government broadcasters (VOA, BBC, DW, etc.) and religious broadcasters who have a need or desire to reach remote audiences.

I think there may be a desire for some expanded BC segments in the vicinty of the 49, 41, 31 and 25 meter SWBC bands, since those bands are fairly reliable year round over most of the solar cycle. Of those, only the 40/41 meter band affects us and the ITU has handled that conflict, albeit with a long term plan and nothing immediate. Our 30m allocation already has a commercial band buffer between the broadcasters and past expansions have been downward rather than upward in frequency. We have no allocation near 49 or 25m. Our other bands are normally either less reliable for world wide communications due to propogation or in spectrum reserved for tropical broadcasting, which is declining and has high noise levels over much of the world.

The net result is that I do not see a big push to gobble up the ham HF allocations. As was mentioned, the development of higher bandwidth HF broadcasting could have an impact, but that would require fairly sophisicated equipment (relatively speaking) of both the broadcasters and the listeners. But the remote target audiences are not likely to have the resources to invest in the receiving equipment, so I do not see that as a major consideration.

73,

[KB9AX]

Marty,

To date I have not seen much on anyone wanting HF Spectrum. In fact, I haven’t seen anything other than some personal feelings of other posters that ever said HF was endangered in any way. There is quite a bit of bickering going on over UHF spectrum, and some areas of VHF, but that’s all I have seen. I am not sure where you heard any official word of someone wanting HF Spectrum. Where did this come from?

Oh, and to be really wise you need to thoroughly understand the question, not the answer.

Dan KB9AX

[w0lfs]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc0ebm @ Nov. 21 2003,17:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AE6IP @ Nov. 21 2003,22&#60;&#33;--emo&amp;)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">OK, I&#39;m confused.

I read, in many places, that there are those out there who want to steal ARS spectrum.

But everyone I ask says I should ask someone else.

We all know about BPL, so no need to go into that.

And we all know that there are freebanders and other illegal invaders.

Besides that what are the threats to HF spectrum?

Marty[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Martin,

I&#39;m a little confused too. #I thought you were an expert on this subject. #Seems not long ago, I issued a comment suggesting that if amateur radio didn&#39;t clean up its act, that maybe our spectrum might be sold off to commercial entities.

Your reply indicated that I was full of BS and nobody wanted our HF bands.

Now you&#39;re asking questions. #What&#39;s up buddy?

EBM[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Again you let ebm attack

[AE6IP]

Walt and Dan,

Thanks for the information. It is consistent with what I&#39;d learned. I wasn&#39;t, however, aware of the distinction of small versus large broadcasters. This is good info.

Thanks,

Marty

[N7WSB]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AE6IP @ Nov. 22 2003,12:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n7wsb @ Nov. 21 2003,22:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Broadcasters. I don&#39;t think right now they are - but there are technologies coming out like drm - which require more bandwidth to operate. If it ever became a commercial success - even in Europe or Africa (where shortwave is considerably more popular) it could be a problem.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
It is my understanding that broadcasters are moving away from HF and, instead, moving to satellite broadcasting. #This has been claimed to be the reason why the broadcasters are moving off 40m, albeit slowly.

Is this not correct?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I think shortwave still holds its marketshare in other countries - the reason being is many may not be able to #afford satellite radios - and many satellite services like XM require localized transmitters. To me the big problem comes into play with digital shortwave. It uses more bandwidth than than conventional am (5 to 15 KHz or more) and it has similar quality to satellite broadcasts. I know there are already a few new stations broadcasting this in Germany right now. There&#39;s also a new drm station in Ontario - owned by the bbc.

If it did take off there could be a new push for more bandwidth.