4 Meters - North America?

Discussion in 'VHF/UHF - 50Mhz and Beyond' started by N5AF, Aug 4, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
ad: Radclub22-2
ad: l-BCInc
ad: abrind-2
  1. N5AF

    N5AF Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I was on pskreporter.info checking out the various activity by modes & bands. Was looking at the 4 meter activity in the EU for the past 24 hours and something caught my attention. See image attached below.

    Fluke? Something mis-configured? Lost UK Amateur? :D

  2. KY1K

    KY1K Ham Member QRZ Page

    It wouldn't be the first time someone selected a different band on the computer than what was on the radio dial. I see it often on 2 meters, and have probably been guilty of it myself at least once.
    K3RW likes this.
  3. 4X1SO

    4X1SO Ham Member QRZ Page

    Signal reports for stations heard? Crossband contacts were not uncommon, with US stations on 50 Mc. listening to EU stations transmitting on 70 Mc. and listening on 50 Mc.
  4. K9STH

    K9STH Ham Member QRZ Page

    Years ago, I used to work U.K. stations cross-band between 6-meters and 4-meters. Somewhere, I still have the 4-meter converter that I built for this.

    As for getting the 4-meter band in this country: I made a formal request for a rule-making to allow such with the FCC. It was "shot down" in a hurry!

    Glen, K9STH
  5. KL7AJ

    KL7AJ Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Was that before or after the demise of VHF analog TV? Might be worth re-visiting!
    KC1DR likes this.
  6. K3RW

    K3RW Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I emailed the one US ham I knew had an experimental license on 4m--WE9XFT. He's a really helpful guy and more than willing to answer any questions on how to deal with the FCC on this.

    In a nutshell, he got an experimental license but it is severely restricted. Basically a beacon. No QSOs, just a beacon for cross-Atlantic activity.

    I was giving consideration to perhaps trying to coast-to-coast him. But the hassle factor he went through was enormous. Like engineering proofs, all sort of things over my paygrade. Guess I'll operate 4m overseas if I'm able. At best I'd only be able to do like he did, and I don't need a beacon to see if I can hear his.

    I'd think that post-digital HDTV migration some of this would change, but maybe not.

    Random thought: if we go some specific distance offshsore into international waters--can we operate 4m then? Transverters for 4m are rather cheap.
  7. W6RZ

    W6RZ Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    VHF channels 2 through 6 are still allocated to television and there are full power and Class A digital stations using those frequencies. Also used by many digital LPTV stations.

    TV channels are being reallocated from the top down. UHF frequencies are much more useful for mobile.

    Channels 70 through 83 (806 to 890 MHz) in 1983.

    Channels 52 through 69 (698 to 806 MHz) in 2008.

    Channels 38 through 51 (614 to 698 MHz) in 2017.

    After July 3, 2020 only channels 2 through 36 will remain. 12 VHF channels and 23 UHF channels.

    W2VW likes this.
  8. 4X1SO

    4X1SO Ham Member QRZ Page

  9. 4X1SO

    4X1SO Ham Member QRZ Page

    If I'm not mistaken 4M is an IARU Region 1 allocation only. We just got 4M privileges recently but you have to apply for permission to use the band. I'm looking for a xverter myself. Maybe I can re-purpose my TenTec 1208 6m xverter for 4M.
    Shalom from Jerusalem, Kal 4X1SO/KE2SO
  10. K9STH

    K9STH Ham Member QRZ Page


    The proposal was sent in after the abandonment of most VHF television channels on 27 January 2010. However, the FCC did absolutely nothing in response. It was again submitted on 5 May 2014. At that time I go not a "no" response but a "HELL NO" response. This response was publicized including in the ARRL Internet newsletter.

    Attached is a PDF of the proposal:

    Glen, K9STH

    Attached Files:

  11. KA0HCP

    KA0HCP XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    No. Not using your US license or on a US registered boat. There is no FCC 4m band allocation.
  12. W2VW

    W2VW Ham Member QRZ Page


    As mentioned several times previously, VHF television was not abandoned in 2010 or later.

    The Spectrum Auction pushes even more television transmitters down to the 70 mhz area.

    Your proposal may have about the same chance as asking for space on the medium wave AM broadcast band.

    At least the television broadcasters have a viable business model for the future. Many medium wave AMs do not.

    Continued unworkable proposals dilute the solution for feasible ones.



  13. K9STH

    K9STH Ham Member QRZ Page


    The proposal was originally sent in 9.5-years ago when it appeared that the Channel 4 segment would be abandoned. After 4-years of hearing absolutely nothing, I sent a follow-up letter. At that time, I got the "Hell no" reply. This was 5-years ago. As such, at least for the time being, I have no intention of submitting any petitions concerning the 4-meter band.

    Over the years, I have received a fair number of E-Mails concerning my petition. Most of the inquiries were not aware that the FCC had rejected the proposal. The inquirer had heard, "through the grape vine", that I had submitted the petition and were wanting to know what was happening.

    Unlike those who keep saying that "something" needs to be done and then do nothing, I will submit a petition, to the FCC, when I believe changes need to be made. However, unlike a very few individuals who are constantly submitting petitions, I am very selective in what I submit and it is often a fair number of years between submissions.

    Glen, K9STH
  14. W2VW

    W2VW Ham Member QRZ Page


    I do not doubt your sincerity and purpose.

    The research could have used a little work.

    Yes, you certainly are not the same as some of the total crackpots who regularly send silly proposals to the FCC.

    BTW, my strongest television station here is WACP on RF channel 4. I visited their site back in 2013 to check out a co-located installation which has since been taken dark.



  15. K9STH

    K9STH Ham Member QRZ Page

    At the time, the "word on the street", plus from my few remaining contacts within the FCC (for a couple of decades I had worked fairly often with certain FCC personnel having to do with the commercial two-way arena), who had not retired, was that the FCC was trying to eliminate all of the "low band" (Channels 2 through 6) operation or, at least, severely curtail such operation. The time was "ripe" for trying to get a 4-meter amateur radio band. There was a fair amount of discussion about such a band but no one was really doing anything about submitting a petition to accomplish this. So, I submitted the petition.

    In all of my dealings with the FCC I have found that using "plain English", rather than "legalese", works much better. Over the years, I had gotten approval for, sometimes was granted even more than what I had requested, things that law firms, who specialize in dealing with the FCC, said were impossible! Quite often, with their proposals submitted in many pages of legalese, the law firms had no favorable reactions from the FCC. Then, a 1 to 3 page submission, in "plain English", got everything that I wanted and, as I said before, often even more. Frankly, I believe that the "worker-bees", at the FCC, who really do the work, get tired of dealing with law firms and, when something is straight forward, they are inclined to immediately grant the request.

    In 1989, within the administration of President George H. W. Bush, I was nominated, by U.S. Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, for appointment as one of the FCC commissioners. This was based on my work in the commercial two-way radio arena and the microwave radio arena and had absolutely nothing to do with me having an amateur radio operator's license. I made it until the last round which was, by then, only Washington, D.C., lawyers. Although I did not get the appointment, I felt honored that I had even been nominated in the first place!

    Dealing with Federal agencies is "something else". The only 2-agencies with which I have had any real interactions are the FCC and the FAA. The FCC for all sorts of things and the FAA with towers 200-feet above ground level and higher. I have been fortunate in that my dealings with those agencies have really gone very well. Many years ago I did have to work with the NRC, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, at their Sandia Base and then again when the Comanche Peak Nuclear Steam Electric Station (nuclear electric generating facility) was being constructed. The Sandia Base was because of thin-film circuits being manufactured by the Collins Radio Company and that interaction was pretty much non problematic. The Comanche Peak situation had to do with things like emergency communications drills as well as providing communications systems to school districts that were within a 10-mile radius of the plant.

    Glen, K9STH

    K3RW likes this.

Share This Page