i'm glad that the military has finally learned that these "high frequency" waves have unusual propagation characteristics. hopefully this leads to more advancements in the world of wireless
don't they already have all sorts of incredibly obnoxious-sounding OFDM modems? why do they need to announce this
OK but, certainly this would not be allowed by international convention on HF, which is what the original post was about. Tom WA4ILH
I don't think the convention is going to stop USMIL...Harris wouldn't build it if they didn't think anybody was going to buy it. And they are: http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsharris-supply-rf-7800h-radios-to-us-dod-foreign-customers
24 kHz = 8x3 kHz bandwidth is going to be the first standard for large-scale implementation of "wideband-HF". All present major actors in the military HF field have implemented such waveforms for both strategic and tactical HF use. The next step will probably be 48 kHz, for which Thales is pushing to be introduced into the NATO HF waveform inventory. Practical bandwidth limitations are in antennas, propagation and medium coherence bandwidths. With regard ot any ITU limits on bandwidth, there are none, as long as the emission is kept within the limits of the fixed or mobile allocations. Besides, the militaries very seldom take any notice of the ITU band allocations. If they feel that a frequency or band is necessary, they will operate there. 73/ Karl-Arne SM0AOM
OK, I agree, some of the old over the horizon radars were nearly that wide. 24 KHz is 8 voice channels. Now that you mention it, there are vast regions of frequencies in the commercial bands that are silent and have been for many years. Has anyone recently heard phone patches being run on the old maritime duplex channels? 25 years ago, they were quite active. Tom WA4ILH
Not just the military but the Federal Government also. In times of national emergency, ITU band allocations will not be enforceable.
