Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by WY4K, Mar 15, 2019.
The point is 60 m is our newest warc band, it's also shared by ntia government frequencies. It's a work-in-progress don't screw it up with a bunch of contests and special events that all the world's countries agreed would not be allowed on WARC bands. Also 60 meters is on a secondary basis shared with NTIA government agencies. Maybe eventually the U.S will get more band Spectrum there like some of the other countries have already done. But let's not screw it up now for everybody. It's a great band particularly with Sunspot conditions so poor and limiting the use of the higher band
For sixteen years running.
Yes, this is very true.
Love that 60 meter Channel 3 FT8 "mini-band"!
Nearly 100 DXCC listed entity QSO's logged here across all modes on 60m. Great fun to pick them off with a low angle lobe antenna.
Concerns about "center frequency" long ago dispelled per ARRL in 2012.
"In an e-mail response to ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ, Karl Nebbia, Associate Administrator of the NTIA Office of Spectrum Management, stated, “NTIA has no interest in limiting the types of emission used by the amateurs as long as the data emission does not exceed the 2.8 kHz bandwidth generated by the upper sideband transmitter.”
Obviously if in seven years the NTIA hasn't objected to de facto 60m FT8 operations using the whole allocated channel, the FCC doesn't give a hoot either. No harm, no foul. It wouldn't be the first time a weakness or ambiguity in Part 97 has been sidestepped (see §97.313 (a))
If you actually read the document you linked, you will see that it actually does contain very specific language limiting all digital modes (whatever modes are used) to being centered 1500Hz above the suppressed carrier frequencies listed by FCC (and by ARRL in that same web page):
The requirement of only one signal per channel remains, as well as the prohibition against automatic operation. The FCC continues to require that all digital transmissions be centered on the channel-center frequencies, which the Report and Order defines as being 1.5 kHz above the suppressed carrier frequency of a transceiver operated in the Upper Sideband (USB) mode.
The only extra degree of freedom that seems to have been "clarified" is the ability to use more than CW and PSK31.
YAWN ... Matt, of course we all read the document. The interpretation of "centered" is central (pun!)
WSJT-X positions its range of AFSK according to the specified parameters. Hey, if while on SSB somebody whistles off key from 1500 khz, does that make that CW xmsn illegal? Again, like any other discourse, these issues are just an absurdly moot SEVEN year old fuss over nothing.
Can't wait for the next DX'ped to use 60 meters. Wish more would do SSB/CW split.
Imagine the chaos with FT8 Fox/Hound!
So the problem is understanding, then?
Digital mode emissions not centered on the frequencies specified are prohibited by the rule. You can choose either the "center frequencies" table, and center your emission on one of those five frequencies, or you can set your USB transmitter to one of the suppressed carrier frequencies specified, and then emit digimodes 1500Hz above that. The two are technically equivalent, but they specified both methods just to make sure everybody got it right.
...which they didn't.
Obviously FCC isn't enforcing the centering rule. They aren't enforcing a lot of rules in the vicinity of 7200kHz and between 3600kHz and 4000kHz. That doesn't delete the rule, it just means they aren't enforcing it.
I suspect that has a lot to do with why we still don't have a band at 60m, closing in on two decades now. If people won't follow instructions with small allocations, why make the allocations bigger?
The problem is choosing to be argumentative rather then being productive.
Another absurd example of that - comparing other infractions as cited to this FT8 60m issue.
The FCC wouldn't need to do any enforcement regarding FT8 on 60m. All they would have to do is drop a line or mention something to an ARRL rep for clarification and it would be published. But as their #1 partner the NTIA doesn't seem to care, they don't even bother.
Since when is it argumentative to encourage people to follow the rules? Or to point out where many people are breaking the rules? Is a traffic cop argumentative when he writes you a ticket?
Both are rules violations. What's the problem?
They certainly could clarify, but why should they when they already have? But you are quite right, neither FCC nor NTIA seems to care. They also don't seem to care about expanding 60m into a real band. I suspect the two are strongly related.