[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: SSTV in violation

I'd like to second Brendan's comments about the importance of frequency
coordination.  The point that needs to be made is that because low Earth orbit
satellites circle the globe every hour and a half (typically) coordination issues
involve the entire world.  Believe it or not, there are a lot of hams that don't
think that human space flight should use OSCAR bands (because it isn't weak
signal.)  In different parts of the world there are radically different band
plans for 2m activities.  Some of the USA 2m frequencies aren't even amateur
frequencies in some parts of the world!  A lot of volunteer effort of the hams
putting amateur radio on shuttle, Mir, and ISS is spent working on frequency
issues.  You can't just look at your local band plans and decide that it is OK to
use a frequency when you are doing satellite work.  I'll dig up the URL for the
paper that Frank Bauer, KA3HDO, did for the APRS QSY if anyone is interested.
That was a classic example of different ham user groups with different interests
having a VERY serious conflict, which was worked out amicably.  Who would have
thought that the use of APRS and Mir packet would have caused such a furor?  We
spent hundreds of volunteer hours and thousands of dollars working that issue.
That was money and effort that was sapped at a critical time for the work for
amateur radio on the ISS.  Frequency coordination is very serious.  Thanks for
reading this far.  (And if you can't tell, I'm a fanatic supporter of amateur
radio in human spaceflight! 8)

B Keyport wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Dec 1998 21:24:47 -0600, John R. Moore wrote:
> >At the possibility of being flamed, I find the SSTV very interesting and
> >apparently from the amount of
> >email traffic generated here so do a lot of others.  Please lets just let
> >them get the bugs out of their
> >procedures.  Besides what is the Violation exactly, I haven't researched the
> >international rules but I dont believe
> >it is in violation of any rule in the U. S.
> The "violation" is frequency coordination..... One thing that was
> hammered into me, was that although frequency coordination is a
> voluntary effort, people will get all bent if it is not followed.
> Gentleman's rules and all that...
> As far as I'm concerned, as long as the previous users of that
> frequency don't mind (was it MIR?) -- I don't care a short, but
> beneficial use of the band.
> According to the FCC rule book I have, the entire band is ruled mixed
> mode (CW, RTTY, DATA, MCW, _TEST_ , phone and image), except for a
> small section of CW only... That's the only "rule". 145.80-146.00 is
> OSCAR (satellite) -- per 'typical operation' (ARRL band plans)
> Given these facts, I can only conclude that I see no "violation" of any
> rules. Bending of the voluntary band plan for a bit of testing that's
> satellite related. There is NO violation of any rules, at least at FCC
> level.
> Per: The FCC Rule Book, 10th edition.
> --- May Peace and love be yours,
> Poohbear/Brendan Keyport
> poohbear@poohbear.net (Admin)
> ----
> Via the sarex mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe sarex" to Majordomo@amsat.org

Will Marchant
kc6rol@amsat.org http://www.citizen.infi.net/~wmarchan/

Via the sarex mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe sarex" to Majordomo@amsat.org