Late last month, the ARRL rolled out three new online groups aimed at facilitating direct interaction with ARRL staff and leadership: ARRL-Antenna-Law-and-Policy, moderated by Fred Hopengarten, K1VR ARRL-New-Hams, moderated by Steve Ford, WB8IMY ARRL-Regulatory-Affairs, moderated by Dan Henderson, N1ND These join four online groups that were already in operation: ARRL-Awards, moderated by Bart Jahnke, W9JJ ARRL-Contesting, moderated by Dennis Egan, W1UE ARRL-IARU, moderated by David Sumner, K1ZZ ARRL-LoTW, moderated by Michael Keane, K1MK These groups are open to ARRL members and non-members. Today, the ARRL deployed the ARRL-HF-Band-Planning group, moderated by Mike Raisbeck K1TWF. This group enables its participants to ask questions of the ARRL's Band Planning Committee, critique the Committee’s recommendation, and suggest better alternatives. If adopted, the proposed band plan will have a significant impact on HF operations. Please take the time to review this plan, and express your perspective. The Committee’s report is here, and its Draft Band Plan is here.
The 40meter band is already in trouble above 7.200 with daily nets and interference fighting between them. These changes need to be heavily policed by the new enforcement that is supposed to be coming soon. Example a net on 7.2535 only 1500 hertz below one on 7.255. 1500 hertz are you understanding what this means? Who is going to settle this. Then add T and N class on the upper end to fight with AM operation. There needs to be some teeth and some biting done to get the message across. Couple this with an increased in IMD on SSB and even 5 khz is not enough separation between nets. If nothing is done, these changes are like adding gas to a fire. Don't just listen to some desires of what is wanted but listen to what you have now, plan on corrections before making change and make things worse. A lot of ops are gone because of it. They don't enjoy being hassled and argue every time they try to operate.
The BandPlanning Committee will not see comments posted in this thread. If you wish your comments to be considered, post them here.
The band planning committee should be aware of what is going on and what is being said in the real world, not just on their limited forum. Not everyone will know about or have a desire to join a forum that is the only place to leave comments. Of course this could be the ARRL's desire, to limit where comments can be heard so that those that have already made up their minds on how they want things can all be in agreement and then fall back on "but nobody said anything". Nets have ruled the bands for decades and I doubt anything the ARRL says is going to change anything. Mike
For decades, the ARRL has solicited comments on its proposed actions, and then issued a summary of what it claimed the comments said before proceeding. At long last, the ARRL has begun providing online forums accessible to members and non-members in which questions, critique, and better ideas can be posted for all to see. This is a significant step forward; I strongly suggest that we take advantage of it.
I joined one of the forums and it is surprisingly quiet. You'd think with all the talk here, on Facebook and elsewhere the new ARRL group would light up like the proverbial Christmas tree.
The ARRL-LoTW Group has been relatively quiet since LoTW's availability and reliability were significantly improved in 2017. The ongoing absence of any new development -- to make LoTW easier to use, and to support additional awards -- did prompt enough discussion to help convince the Board of Directors to approve the hiring of two software developers for LoTW. The ARRL-Awards Group has hosted two spirited discussions: one about remote operation, and the other discussing a proposal to change the rules of the 5-band DXCC award. Members of the DX Advisory Committee (DXAC) and ARRL Board participated in both discussions. Based in part on the latter discussion, the DXAC chose not to recommend changes to the 5-band DXCC award. The ARRL-Contesting Group has covered multiple topics since its creation; I am not a contester, and so have not been closely monitoring it. The ARRL-New-Hams Group has hosted a discussion exploring the possibility of creating a Knowledge Base accessible to members and prospective members. The new ARRL-HF-Band-Planning Group has been quite active with discussion of the ARRL Bandplanning Committee's proposed band plan, averaging more than 25 new posts each day.
