Archive for the ‘arrl’ Category
FCC’s Noise Floor ‘Study’?
February 7th, 2018 | 
Author: 
It seems like the FCC's recent interest in doing an in depth study of the growing RF spectrum noise floor has taken a new twist.
The FCC's apparent lack of real action in gathering the data needed to make serious inroads into RF noise pollution has drawn the attention of the ARRL, which voiced their concerns in a recent ARRL Letter as well as in their formal response to the FCC.
In response to the FCC's Public Notice (ET Docket No. 17-340) Spectrum Management proposals.
The ARRL "took the opportunity to strongly urge the FCC to reinstate a 2016 TAC noise floor study, which, ARRL asserted, apparently was terminated before it even got started." It would seem that the proposed in-depth study never even happened and the term 'noise' has morphed into an 'interference' issue!
The FCC's paper proposed a number of guiding 'principles' in going forward with spectrum management policies, loosely based on the concept that more emphasis on eliminating 'interference' should be placed on receivers along with continued development of transmitter spectral purity and that with increased spectrum crowding, users will simply have to expect and accept certain, as yet unspecified, levels of interference!
It sounds suspiciously as if the FCC has decided that the source of any noise / interference problems have become too large to control and have passed the buck to equipment manufacturers in order to solve the growing problem for users!
“Indeed, it is difficult to imagine how the Commission can now…suggest the adoption of specific spectrum management principles, incorporating such concepts as receiver immunity, HCTs [harm claim thresholds], and interference temperature determinations without having…a firm grasp on ambient noise levels in basic RF environments and geographical areas,” the League told the FCC.
In their series of guiding principles relating to 'interference realities', the FCC has issued a number of broad, somewhat ambiguous statements, that might be interpreted in any number of odd ways ...
"Principle #1 -- Harmful interference is affected by the characteristics of both a transmitting service and a nearby receiving service in frequency, space or time;
Principle #2 – All [radio] services should plan for non-harmful interference from signals that are nearby in frequency, space or time, both now and for any changes that occur in the future;
Principle #3 – Even under ideal conditions, the electromagnetic environment is unpredictable. Operators should expect and plan for occasional service degradation or interruption. The Commission should not base its rules on exceptional events;
Principle #4 – Receivers are responsible for mitigating interference outside their assigned channels;
Principle #5 – Systems are expected to use techniques at all layers of the stack to mitigate degradation from interference;
Principle #6 – Transmitters are responsible for minimizing the amount of their transmitted energy that appears outside their assigned frequencies and licensed areas;
Principle #7 – Services under FCC jurisdiction are expected to disclose the relevant standards, guidelines and operating characteristics of their systems to the Commission if they expect protection from harmful interference;"
The ARRL response argued that:
“Requiring better performance from receivers or RF-susceptible devices is a valid, reasonable, and long overdue requirement,” ARRL said, “but the major goal of doing so should be to prevent instances of interference ..."
Specifically they argue that amateurs are unique users and able to recognize harmful interference beyond their control and should not be subjected to the same restrictions (ie. get ready to accept new levels of yet undefined interference levels) as commercial users.
"ARRL argued, however, that the Amateur Service should not be subject to receiver immunity standards, because licensees employ a wide range of propagation, emissions, bandwidths, power levels, receivers, and antennas, making any receiver performance standards arbitrary and compromising the Service’s experimental nature. They also are able to differentiate between interference from nearby spurious or out-of-band signals and that caused by receiver deficiencies. The HCT concept does not fit the Amateur Service particularly well, either, the League said; any interference hams suffer from each other is resolved cooperatively. Brute-force overload also occurs occasionally but is resolved by licensees without FCC intervention."
The ARRL seems somewhat forgetful when it comes to several long-standing complaints of inappropriate amateur-generated interference and bad behaviours which have been ignored for far too long ... problems well beyond 'cooperative resolution' by affected amateurs.
Although the ARRL does agree with many of the FCC's proposals, they doggedly insist that the FCC's apparent quashing of their original noise data investigations is critical to going forward:
“That, in ARRL’s view, is a big mistake,” the League contended. “No system of spectrum management incorporating [harm claim thresholds] and receiver immunity levels can be accurately implemented” without the noise study data.
“That study is more important now than ever before,” ARRL concluded, “and it is increasingly urgent as a prerequisite for any new spectrum management policies.”
With Washington's drastic cutbacks in FCC field-office investigators and overall budget trimming, it seems that the FCC is still relentlessly driven to eradicate all forms of illegal (pirate) broadcasting. It's a pity that they don't display the same zeal for dealing with the illegal imports and distribution of the offshore equipment that is quickly killing our ability to hear anything on the ham bands ... without selling-off and moving to several acres in the country.
ETH096 – School Club Roundup, Hamvention Update and More…Everything Ham Radio
Hello everybody! In this episode of the Everything Ham Radio Podcast, I am stuck by myself talk to yall. I unfortunately didn’t remember that I my next scheduled update was due until 4pm the day before. So I worked all afternoon, while at work, trying to figure out what I was going to talk about. When I got off work at midnight, I ran home and did my couple honey-dos and then went straight to recording the episode.
So what is in this episode?
First off, I made a mistake! Yea, I know, nobody is suppose to make mistakes right? Well, in my last episode I did. In last episode, my semi regular co-host Ian KM4IK and were talking about the big stink that was doing on with some things that the ARRL Board of Directors were going to be voting on. Neither one of us were really up to speed on the whole thing as much as we should be, but we did our best, and we even said that we weren’t. However, after the episode I did receive multiple emails saying that I said something wrong, so I corrected it in this episode.
With that out of the way, I went on to talk about an upcoming event called the School Club Roundup. It is this month only a few days away actually. The event run February 12-16, 2018. It is an event that is geared for school amateur radio clubs to get on the air and make some contacts. Even if you are not in a school club though you can still get on the air and make contact with the school clubs that are on the air and help them make the points.
After that, I moved on to Hamvention. Another correction from last episode. Well I say correction, this time it wasn’t me though. In last episode we talked about how a new building was going to be built and available by this Hamvention. However, this week, the Hamvention committee released that it wouldn’t be started on until later in the year due to a material shortage.
I wrap up the episode reading some emails that I have received over the past few weeks. The last episode of 2017, I told yall what my plans were for 2018 and asked what some of yalls were and also asked some questions about what were yalls opinions on how my show is. I got a few responses, wish I would’ve had more though.
Until Next Time Yall…
73 de Curtis, K5CLM
LHS Episode #204: Jump Around
In this episode, your hosts discuss the monkeyshines at the ARRL, the overwhelming popularity of a certain digital mode, Spectre and Meltdown (of course), WINE 3.0, WSJT-X, twclock, CLLOG, dxSpot and a whole lot more. Thank you for tuning in and hope your 2018 is going well.
73 de The LHS Crew
LETTER TO ARRL REGARDING CURRENT BOARD OF DIRECTOR ACTIVITIES
The following open letter to the ARRL Board of Directors and Leadership is in concert with many others coming from current members in response to the activities occurring at the ARRL Leadership level.
To join in and voice your thoughts, please visit:
(More information is found after the following open letter)
To: All ARRL Directors and Officers
From: NW7US
Many actions–policy and governance–taken by the League’s leadership over the past two years trouble me. Formalization of specific actions planned for the Board meeting on January 19, 2018, specifically worries me.
At this time, any action taken by the ARRL Board of Directors cause me concern. As a result of this, I add my name to those seeking that the Board delay consideration of any ByLaw changes at the January 19 Board meeting.
In particular, I strongly urge you to:
1. Reject any proposal to allow the President and individual Vice-Presidents to vote as Directors.
2. Reject any provision that allows expulsion of an ARRL member “for cause” without delineated criteria.
3. Reject any provision that allows expulsion of any Director, Vice-Director of Officer for bringing ARRL into “disrepute” without specific criteria.
4. Reject any provision that reduces Members’ ability to recall a sitting Director.
5. Reject any current or proposed provision that allows the Board to disqualify candidates for elected office without full disclosure of the reasons for such disqualification.
6. Reject any proposal that would allow the Board to designate replacements for Directors instead of appointing an elected Vice Director or other elective processes.
7. Reject any current or proposed provision that allows censure, removal or other disciplines of a Director for revealing or openly discussing any view expressed at a Board meeting that is not consistent with the Board’s action.
8. Adopt a policy that elected Directors, and Vice Directors are not “personnel” for the purposes of declaring that any information about removal or disqualification is confidential and may not be released.
It is crucial that ARRL remain a solidly democratic, membership-based organization with principles of openness and accessibility through our elected Directors. I urge you to vote per my wishes at the January 19 meeting.
Beyond these issues of governance, I am concerned about the policy-making process of the ARRL leadership–leadership that I feel has become much less Member-driven, and that no longer reflects the needs of the Membership.
Ham radio is in a time of transition. The ARRL must focus on the issues that make a difference for the future success of the hobby.
73, Tomas Hood / NW7US
More information about this effort:
myARRLvoice is an independent grassroots group of amateur radio operators working on behalf of our fellow Members of the American Radio Relay League (ARRL), monitoring the activity of its leadership and advocating change to optimize the organization’s effectiveness in matters of policy and governance, and to foster ethical and competent stewardship.
myARRLvoice acts as a vehicle for ARRL Members to make their voices heard on matters of governance and policy, and to participate in the policy-setting process, holding our elected and appointed leaders accountable. We strive to make the activities of ARRL leadership more transparent by insisting on the creation and dissemination of records of the deliberations and actions of all ARRL Boards, Committees, and the operational Executive Team.
myARRLvoice believes that good ARRL stewardship can only be achieved through a check and balance system that includes the watchful eye of the Membership.
Visit the website at www.myarrlvoice.org
Big shoes to fill!
The 2018 ARRL International Grid Chase follows on the heels of the successful Centennial operating event and the even more successful National Parks On The Air operating event.
The idea is work as many different Maindenhead grid squares as you can, on any band (expect for 60 Meters) using any mode. Contacts made through satellites will count; but contacts made through earthbound repeaters will not.
So how will all these contacts be kept track of? Through Logbook Of The World, of course! So it is imperative that you have an LOTW account as well as the station you are working. When you both upload your logs to LOTW; and you get a match, you get credit for a valid QSO for the ARRL IGC.
While total cumulative results will be posted at the end of the year, the clock will "reset" so to speak, at the beginning of each month. So each month of 2018 will be like a new operating event; or competition. (I hate to use the word "contest", as we all know that contests are forbidden on the WARC bands.)
Should you not know your Maidenhead Grid Square locator, it's easy to find out. You can either look yourself up on QRZ.com, or go to http://www.levinecentral.com/ham/grid_square.php. What's interesting about these two methods is that you might get different results. QRZ tells me that my grid square is FN20to and Levine Central tells me that it's FN20so. No matter ...... for the purposes of the ARRL IGC, you'll only need the first four places. In addition, exchanging the grid square during the QSO is not required. LOTW will keep track of that. I suppose that for those who will go out and activate rare grids, there will be some provision made for identifying what grid square was operated from when uploading contacts into LOTW.
Will this be as successful as the last two events? That remains to be seen. The Centennial Event was huge success and NPOTA was a monster success. In any event, kudos to the ARRL for continuing to come up with ideas to keep Amateur Radio life a little on the spicier side.
72 de Larry W2LJ
QRP - When you care to send the very least!
Complete Version: On How NCIS Maligned the Amateur Radio Service
Some of you wanted to see the complete version, uncut, of this video in which I discuss the differences between CB and the Amateur Radio Service. This is in response to the recent episode in which the NCIS writers missed a great opportunity to discover the vibrant reality of the current amateur radio service in the United States of America.
The previous version of the video was prematurely cut short by just over three minutes. This version includes that ending. I also remove some of the low-end rumblings from the vehicle. This version should sound a little bit less annoying. Hopefully, the quality of the video is sharper, as well. This version was edited by Adobe Premiere CC 2017.
I appreciate the many comments, views, and shares. Please subscribe, too!
73 from Omaha!
On How NCIS Maligned the Amateur Radio Service
EDIT: Please view the NEW article, in which the FULL VERSION of this video exists.
I’ve been reading some of the chatter regarding the NCIS episode in which they incorrectly portray the amateur radio service. I thought I would make a video (vlog) and express my thoughts.
I use my new headset mic to make the video. If you have a few moments, please check it out, and let me know how the mic sounds.
Of course, share your thoughts on the NCIS thing… thanks!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv5TsoE0AZQ
Yes, the video gets prematurely cut off. The editing software on my cell phone chopped off the ending, and I did not realize it until after it posted the video. I’ll record a follow-up video that includes the ending thoughts, but in a new vlog edition.
Cheers and 73 de NW7US
..
