FCC Orders Amateur Access to 3.5 GHz Band to “Sunset”

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by AD8BU, Oct 8, 2020.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: abrind-2
  1. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    There are several well-informed board members at the ARRL, IMO, but their expertise and voice do not appear to be leveraged to the advantage of the enterprise on this topic.
     
  2. KE8OQZ

    KE8OQZ Ham Member QRZ Page

    They would be the ones that steal liberties from The People and then sell them back and tell you that you should be gracious that they allow you to do it.
     
    K7GYB likes this.
  3. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    I don't see these issues as political. I see them as competence-challenged.

    73
    Chip W1YW
     
    W0PV likes this.
  4. K9CTB

    K9CTB Ham Member QRZ Page

    I actually know a couple of hams who do microwave stuff .... both of them in the Golden State (Calif), and they had really good attitudes about losing 3.4 GHz. Both of these guys run 10GHz contesting, I think, and neither has gear for the band we're losing, but it sure is good to see the great attitudes. I remember all the grumbling (I grumbled too - cussing UPS for no reason) when we lost part of 220 back in the day ... and my friends who were grumbling didn't even run any 220 gear mobile that I ever saw!!! :D :D :D
     
    K7GYB and K7JEM like this.
  5. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Yes, there is a lot of faux anger and resentment, and blaming people for things beyond the control of anyone, really.

    It shouldn't be surprising if bands are removed for some better use, or a use that could benefit more people in many ways. I don't know what hams were doing to justify having that much unused spectrum in a prime location. I do think that a smaller allocation could be warranted, and perhaps that is something to pursue. Maybe 20-50MHz or so.
     
    K9CTB, K7GYB, W1YW and 1 other person like this.
  6. W0PV

    W0PV Ham Member QRZ Page

    O'Rielly seems to be on his way out anyway for politcal misteps, but also because he supported the re-emergence of the Ligado proposal that threatens GPS.

    Another angle, IMO it seems the NTIA can be a balancing force against overly zeolous commerical pressures on the FCC. Also the NTIA seems a bit more understanding and sympathetic with the Part 97 "basis and purpose". Perhaps NTIA has more ham-engineers / fewer non-ham lawyers. :rolleyes:

    The press release cited by @N2RJ says,

    "Through collaboration with the Department of Defense, the Administration has worked carefully to ensure commercial use of this critically-needed mid-band spectrum does not compromise military preparedness or national security."

    The DoD are active users in that spectrum too, I wonder what kind of deal they got? Supposedly the ARRL was working together with the NTIA to make plans.

    NTIA Targets Portion of 3.4 GHz Band for Potential Wireless Broadband Use - 02/28/2018

    NTIA Administrator David J. Redl said, "... the Defense Department plans to submit a proposal under the Spectrum Pipeline Act to carry out a comprehensive RF engineering study “to determine the potential for introducing advanced wireless services in this band without harming critical government operations.” ARRL intends to contribute to NTIA’s study.

    What ever happened with this allegedly cooperative study? What were the ARRL's "contributions". The NTIA ought to be an ally of ARS interests and have the clout to influence the FCC on these matters. Or was this the source of a problem? (ie, alleged WH influence) :(

    73, John, WØPV
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2020
  7. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Some microwave hams are experimenting with RX MIMO. But the antenna arrays get pretty big pretty quickly. At 3GHz, you reach a transition--physically-- where a MIMO system becomes practical to build and to mount. That is an example where we could use a carve out at the 9cm band to do something new and unexpected, and not locked into the modalities and approaches presently adopted commercially for 5G.
     
    W0PV likes this.
  8. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    The NTIA was assumed to be building its own 'X' G network in the 3.3-3.45 GHz allocation, leveraging technology from commercial 5G. This is likely to still happen. One can envision circumstances where Part 97 can justify a carve out in that example, under secondary use.
     
    W0PV likes this.
  9. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Commissioner O'Reilly has an opinion.

    SO what?

    That's my take-away...

    Its damn outrageous that WHATEVER happens to 3.3-3.45 GHz, we've ALREADY been removed for future use.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2020
  10. W0PV

    W0PV Ham Member QRZ Page

    It's already been published in the Federal Register, as has the application fee.

    A few days ago on the My ARRL Voice FB forum, in a short thread started by Brennan @N4QX, ARRL Washington Counsel Dave @K3ZJ made this statement regarding the effort in defense of the 3 Ghz NPRM,

    " ... Remember the interests aligned against 5 GHz WiFi? Some of the same interests here, still with the same lack of spectrum knowledge & vision even though today they are among the heaviest users of the WiFi that they tried to block."
     

Share This Page