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

I would like to hear what our new but silent New England ARRL Director has to say. After all he is a Communications Lawyer. Speak up Fred.

BTW I have never been on 3,3 GHz but have been on the other bands thru 10 GHz. I would still support a small segment for future ham use as technology catches up to equipment availability in the form of surplused but easy to modify commercial gear.

Carl

 

AT least THAT director isn't defaming the messenger!

 

In my humble opinion Chip could align his energies WITH the ARRL, rather than constantly pointing out their alleged faults, and it would be a WIN-WIN for him and the organization.

 

Your characterization is false. I have made plenty of positive remarks about the ARRL, and I am a Life Member. I am certainly NOT "constantly pointing out their alleged faults".

The ARRL is not a cult. Please don't use a cult tactic here, IMO, to poison the reputation of someone who dissents on a specific issue.

If you believe the ARRL did a great job on handling this 9cm (debacle) , then fill us in: tell me what I missed.

It would be naive and incorrect to assume my efforts have not reached the ears of at least some of the board and others at HQ. Failure to acknowledge these concerns--and they are *OUR* concerns, not 'Chip' concerns-- is typical of how the board deals with at least some of informed membership opinion, IMO. In a word, IMO: 'dysfunctional'.

You are seeing some of that right here: 1) incorrect presentation of facts and citing therein; 2) characterization of dissent as a personal and global 'anti-ARRL' (false) assertion by a director.

I have no problems with my NE Division Director BTW. Nada.

73
Chip W1YW

 

In other words you are not interested in doing so. I get that. It was just a suggestion.

 

I am not interested in being called something I am not,such as you having said: "constantly pointing out their alleged faults".

Your suggestion has already been attempted, as I discussed,

My NE Director knows my background and my opinion on the matter of the 9cm situation. That is the path. As for dealing with other directors.... are you suggesting I work with Ria when she characterized me falsely? What would be the incentive to work with any person who has such an approach?

 

I like how many hams suggest that I should join the ARRL to save our frequencies. First, no one from the commercial sector wants HF frequencies, not even shortwave broadcasters. Has the ARRL pushed for amateur radio to obtain some of the HF frequencies that were abandoned by shortwave broadcasters? Nope! Of course new frequencies would have to be approved by the ITU. To me the ARRL has given us a lowered license standards including the elimination of the CW requirement, published test questions, vanity calls, Contests that are not restricted to one area of a band so that others not partipating in contests are not impacted. Has the ARRL assisted with defining the standards for virtual testing during this pandemic? Not from what I have seen. Have they done extensive outreach to youth to bolster the ranks when many of us become SKs? They should just stick to being a publishing house as they are not good in my opinion in being an advocate for amateur radio. If it is not apparent. I have never been nor never become a member of the ARRL

 

OK Chip, you have stated your point again & again. I give up! You win and ARRL loses.

 

....and you believe them blindly, don't you?! The ARRL has taken our money for so many years, we don't even paying attentions anymore. The only time we do pay attention, is when the give us more bad news...... AGAIN!

 

WELL I GUESS THE "FCC" DOESN'T GIVE A CRAP ANYMORE!! It really shouldn't SURPRISE the Ham community @ ALL!!! Even under past DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATIONS they were BUSY SELLING OFF OUR SO-CALLED BAND SEGMENTS AS WELL!!!

 

The US amateur radio service has lost, both an opportunity for innovation at C -band, and a strategy for dealing with future potential loss-of-allocation issues. All we needed was 5 MHz, or 20 MHz, bandwidth, max. Wouldn't it have been cool if the ARRL had initiated an INNOVATION initiative to push the limit of channel capacity via Part 97 on a revised 9cm band!

I do not see how the ARRL can go ahead with 'spectrum defense' moving forward. Maybe at HF and VHF....

The sad thing about it is that 5G really doesn't NEED another 100 MHZ of 3.35 to 3.45 GHz. '5G' NOW uses re-strapped 800 MHz, for example and among other bands, and MIMO is more than capable of generating substantial increases in channel capacity across the 3.45 to 5 GHz C-band ('midband') allocation. Your ''5G" phone doesn't have, and doesn't need, 3.35-3.45 GHz in the US. It might never need it.

The 28GHz stuff is not panning out for 5G. But that is a different story.

 

The F.C.C is just another criminal agency without civil control.
Take what they want, and sell our bands to business, then keep the money, but always demand more in taxes and theft.
If the F.C.C were responsible, we would be served properly, not stepped on like roaches.
Personally, since business wants our (people's) bands, then they should be forced to provide free service for emergencies.
We the people own this nation, and our bloated governments, but the sheep forgot hgow to say NO, and take back control. Begging is not what we should be doing. Business does not own the spectrum, and neither does government, but we are forced to become complacent and bow down as they routinely steal from us.
Hams put their lives on the line during disasters, has any business provided free service during those times?
Maybe they SHOULD be REQUIRED, in order to make use of the frequencies they are using!
Relocating hams...maybe business should be relocated this time!
We are already there, let the businesses relocate.
I will say what I think SHOULD be stated, no more bowing down...we do not have to.
I apologize for my directness, but it MUST be said!
WHY ARE HAMS ALWAYS KICKED ASIDE UNTIL NEEDED?
Let the next flood or hurricane come, and the glorious cell sites are all dead...see who gets begged to help with communications....IT WILL NOT BE BIG CORPORATIONS coming to help, it WILL be the HAM COMMUNITY stepping up and risking life and limb to ensure people are safe!

 

Pretty simple; Use it or lose it. Like most HF fans, I'm personally fresh out of microwave gear and have little use for even the 2m and 440 bands. The only thing I might possibly use those bands for is space coms; Back in the RS days a 2m uplink was a lot of fun.

 

This is what happens when you have big business being put in charge of the public commons. They are not public servants who are looking out for the public interests but being rewarded for doing the bidding of the billionaires and for not standing in the way of policy that is friendly to banksters and corporatists. The same thing is happening with many other agencies that are supposed to protect public resources and interests. Ajit Pai was a lawyer for one of the band-hungry telecons, Verizon Communications. The current appointee to Department of Health and Human Services, Alex Azar, was a lobbyist for big-pharma and later became the president of Eli Lilly, whom under his watch doubled the price of insulin - a drug that was unpatented by its inventor with the hopes that it would be made cheaply available to millions of those who need it. The Department of Interior and The Department of Energies Secretariat Charis were both given (awarded) to coal and oil lobbyists/executives who could be counted on to de-regulate their respective industries and make it safe for billionaires to get even more control of our resources. This is happening in just about all of the important positions that are supposed to balance the interests of The People with that of industry. Remember who you voted for before whining about losing bandwidth...

 

Except that's not what's happening.

ATT has been in the hole and is slowly crawling out from debt, because of expensive acquisitions --they are in no position to spend billions on new auctioned spectra at C band.

Verizon has the money but is likely to be very picky on bidding on spectrum unless it is city/region specific and even then, will hold the bucks close to vest.

What, exaactly do you see as the enemy here...Boingo??

And why, please.

Basically the 3.45-3.55 GHz auction may not go as planned, so assuming that a --way-- future auction for 3.35-3.45 GHz will be champagne and roses is both uninformed and unsupported.

There are no 'plans' for 3.35-3.45 GHz and it was stupid ,IMO, of the FCC to assume that. We had an opportunity to 'carve out' for Part 97 and we lead with our very best ignorance, IMO.

The ARRL should not be representing the Part 97 amateur radio service in spectrum allocation planning with the FCC. There is no evidence that they are in a position to 'defend' spectrum above UHF. The outcome(s) demonstrate failure.

IF the ARRL had its act together on said 'spectrum defense', then the minority small percentage of hams who are ARRL members could be aptly representing the whole , in formal Part 97 matters. As it stands, the 'voice' of the ARRL is dysfunctional on these matters--just look at the outcome!-- and does not represent a majority share of Part 97 licensees.

It is time for the ARRL to 'stand down' from being the 'voice' of amateur radio in such formal matters.

It is apparent that a formal coalition of Part 97 licencees is needed, in which the ARRL participates but is in no position to claim full representation for Part 97 licensees.

The 'sunsetting' of the 9cm band is an inflexion point for the future of the ARRL. It is no longer 'business as usual'. The ARRL needs to define and focus on the aspects it does well, and become a role participant--not leader-- in those aspects it does not.

MO. Yours may differ.

73
Chip W1YW