eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests

from Bonnie Crystal KQ6XA on January 16, 2012
View comments about this article!

The 60-meter ham band has quite different operating privileges in various countries of the world. The frequencies, rules, purpose, regulations, operating procedures, and levels of priority are all different in each country.

In USA, the 5 MHz channels for ham radio were specifically requested, justified, and approved primarily for Emergency and Disaster Communications. The stated justification is the need for NVIS and regional disaster response communications to fill in the propagation gap between 40 meters and 80 meters. The process of the Amateur Radio Service gaining access to these 5 MHz frequencies was long and exacting.

Recently, due to another multi-year process of proposal and rulemaking, FCC increased the privileges slightly for hams on 5 MHz. However, the FCC put even tighter technical restrictions on 5 MHz operation than on any other ham bands. 60-meters is not a normal ham band.

In this new ruling, FCC re-affirmed and clearly spelled out major restrictions for hams on 5 MHz. Hams are secondary users (or less) and the Primary users of the 5 MHz channels must not be interfered with in any way.

Non-interference with a Primary user isn't just a matter of stopping transmitting if you are asked to. It can also mean refraining from transmitting, if there is *any chance* that you might be preventing a Primary user from utilizing or starting communications on the channel, even if you are not asked specifically. The only way we can hope to fulfill our requirement for non-interference, is to use very short transmissions and listen/watch carefully between transmissions.

What are some common amateur radio operating practices that may not be suitable for 5 MHz 60 meter band operation in USA?

1. Calling CQ DX.
2. Long CQs.
3. Longwinded ragchews.
4. Calling in pile-ups.
5. High power transmissions.
6. Contesting.
7. Sending a long 'brag file' on PSK31.

In order to be ready for Emergency/Disaster Communications, hams need to have good familiarity with the band and have equipment capable of operating 5 MHz. Hams can only do this by participating in active operating on the 5 MHz band. Somehow, we need to achieve a balance between a good level of activity and the requirement for non-interference. Finding this balance may be difficult, but for the most part, hams are quite adept at good operating habits.

Every ham operator transmitting on 5MHz must pay special attention to the different operating methods and procedures that this unique authorization requires.

There are proposals in the works to create an international ITU allocation of a 60-meter Amateur Radio Service band with Secondary status.

If hams in USA are found to be operating in ways that disregard the spirit of the requested, justified, and approved reasons for which we obtained 5 MHz privileges, then it may be extremely difficult to ever get FCC support for increased spectrum.

More information:
60 meter band

5MHz

© 2011 Bonnie Crystal

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KF4CQR on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
If the intent was not to use 5 MHZ for ragchews, the Government should prohibit such by regulation.

I see that they do not, so ragchews are fine.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W9PMZ on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
oh dear...

another frequency police article...

should be intersting...
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by NA4IT on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie,
While your intent is good, you need to re-read FCC97. They no longer set aside, declare, or otherwise determine frequencies for emergency use. While I personally believe they should, and the fact they no longer do has caused problems in recent disasters, they don't.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KQ6XA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
USA FCC "Emergency Communications Declaration" information for USA emergency net operators using 5MHz:

In 2004, the FCC changed its general policy for issuing Emergency Communications Declarations (ECD) on Amateur Radio Service frequencies. ECDs typically are issued to temporarily protect certain frequencies for emergency net use only. The policy says that ECDs may now be issued for one or two 5MHz channels and/or VHF/UHF frequencies. Prior to this policy, ECDs typically were issued during weather-related and wildfire emergencies for frequencies in the 75 and 40 meter bands. The FCC also said that frequencies in other Amateur Service bands where emergency nets already have been established may be used during emergencies under the provisions of rule §97.101c (which stipulates that Amateur Radio Service operators give priority to stations providing emergency communications at all times and on all frequencies).
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KY6R on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Too bad there isn't a whole lot more spectrum on 60 meters. Too bad that it is channelized.
 
New 60m rules in limbo?  
by N4QA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Regarding new FCC rules for the US 60m amateur band:

The following URL:

http://tinyurl.com/60m-R-O-in-PR

redirects to a search of *all* US Gov't publications for FCC-11-171.
The first hit there was for the document sent from FCC to the Pres. of the Senate, which was then sent to committee. Apparently, the new rules are being held up by the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation !

To search only the Federal Register for same, I created the following Tinyurl :

http://tinyurl.com/Search-FR-only-FCC-11-171

Use either of the above URLs for up-to-the-minute notification of the publishing of the new 60m rules in the Federal Register, straight from the horse's mouth !

72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: New 60m rules in limbo?  
by AF3Y on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Looks to me that the first three channels ARE approved for QSOs.

Sound like another frequency grab for something like that Marine Mobile or whatever they call that unauthorized POS old fart net. I guess they want to lay claim to 60m for their little get togethers. Screw them....

Looks like to me it is PLAINLY spelled out. If I want to QSO on 60 meters,(which I dont) I will. As long as QSOs are allowed, QSOs can and will take place.

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by WB6PWD on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie, does the copyright notice at the end of your article mean I must not copy your chart of rules and regulations for posting on my radio room wall of compliance?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KQ6XA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
More information about the 2004 FCC policy change on ECD Emergency Communications Declaration:

http://hflink.com/EmergencyCommunicationsDeclaration/

Regards
Bonnie Crystal KQ6XA
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KQ6XA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
> WB6PWD wrote
> Bonnie, does the copyright notice at the end
> of your article mean I must not copy your
> chart of rules and regulations for posting
> on my radio room wall of compliance?

To WB6PWD,

You can post the charts on your shack wall.

If you or anyone else wants to publish it or reprint the article on a website or other publication, please contact me via direct email for details. See website for contact info:
http://hflink.com/60meters

Regards,
Bonnie Crystal KQ6XA
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by AA4HA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
This is one of those "be careful of what you ask for". Since these blocks of channels were shared out to the FCC by the NTIA we could end up facing the same set of criteria for transmitter carrier suppression and frequency stability as the NTIA issues for most of the channelized operations and how the maritime and MARS operations have a very narrow list of approved pieces of equipment that can operate in those systems.

Most amateur gear does not meet the carrier suppression or frequency stability requirements of NTIA. You best have a clean set-up if you are going to run on 60 meters. They are not joking when they speak of primary channel interference issues or co-channel problems. If we ever let some of our bad operating practices that appear on the nightly 75 meter band bleed over into the 60 meter channelized allocation they will yank that rug right out from under our feet.

While I do agree there is a place for EMCOMM operations and I would encourage the FCC/ NTIA to make some channelized frequencies available across the entire HF, VHF and UHF spectrum it would practically require that a conditional license class be created within amateur radio to ensure compliance with EMCOMM ops with type accepted gear (very much like MARS is an offshoot but for civilian EMCOMM provisional operations).

Basically my point is that to play and exist in those areas of the RF spectrum is going to end up requiring the use of higher quality amateur radio gear that is more on par with maritime/ aviation/ military HF standards. I do not think that every amateur is ready to pay the price for something like a Motorola Mobat MICOM rig. I will definitely not be trying to convert over an old ARC-5 to operate on 60 meters.
 
Question fro NA4IT  
by N9JFG on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I am curios about your comment that QSO's have "caused problems during recent disasters".

How about some details - By understanding the situation responsible individuals may be alerted to unintentional interference. Of course intentional interference should be dealt with firmly and publicly.

Thanks 73 John N9JFG
 
By rules, not by dreams  
by N4QA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
US hams are governed by FCC rules & regs, not by anyone's dreams.


Current FCC 60m rules are found here:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2003-06-03/pdf/03-13781.pdf





New FCC 60m rules, effective once published in the Federal Register, are found here:

http://www.fcc.gov/document/amateur-radio-service-5-mhz


Copy & paste the above URLs into your browser and read them for yourselves.

That's all there is and there ain't no mo' ... period


72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: By rules, not by dreams  
by WS4E on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Really, from the reality standpoint that ham radio is a "hobby", the band is not much use. For those that have big emcomm dreams, it might be of more use I guess.

Cue the masses calling for "How about we just give the emcomm guys 60m all to themselves and require all emcomm traffic to use ONLY 60m, and let the rest of the bands alone?"
 
RE: By rules, not by dreams  
by N4QA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Correction:

New FCC 60m rules are effective 30 days after they are published in the Federal Register.

72,
Bill, N4QA
 
Just plain weird  
by AI2IA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I see absolutely nothing in this somewhat weirdly worded article that prevents any qualified and licensed ham from engaging in QSOs on the 60 meter band.

It seems to me that the author goes out of his way to interpret the plain and clear regulations in such a way as to diminsh the hallmarks of the amateur spirit and to lessen the pleasure of others without the slightest justification.

As licensed operators who understand the rules and regs, simply go about using the band with due care and ignore this kind of nonsense. - ai2ia
 
Just plain weird  
by AI2IA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I see absolutely nothing in this somewhat weirdly worded article that prevents any qualified and licensed ham from engaging in QSOs on the 60 meter band.

It seems to me that the author goes out of his way to interpret the plain and clear regulations in such a way as to diminsh the hallmarks of the amateur spirit and to lessen the pleasure of others without the slightest justification.

As licensed operators who understand the rules and regs, simply go about using the band with due care and ignore this kind of nonsense. - ai2ia
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1DA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I like 60 and will continue to use the band. When and if an amateur gets a published, official citation for a particular use such as "ragchewing" when the frequency is not otherwise in use , I will make note of the circumstance and operate accordingly. Until then, please turn off the radio police lights. Why is it, today, that saying "NO" to things is so popular among a cetain set? Or to put it another way, who put this radio cop in charge? 'DA
 
RE: Just plain weird  
by AF3Y on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
This article and her QRZ page really makes me want to go chop down a tree or two.

Think I will go oil up the chainsaw, after I finish destroying a Manchurian Muskeloner Masturbating Mulehead Mega-Minnow colony or something similiar. A little burnt oil in the sewer always gets em!
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by EX_AA5JG on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Who made up the 60 meter bandplan that was published anyways? I don't recall seeing it on the ARRL website.

73s John AA5JG
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1DA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
By what authority, expressed, implied, or otherwise, does this woman presume to lecture ANYONE, ANYWHERE, on how to use the band?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by EX_AA5JG on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Could someone please post a link to the section in Part 97 that prohibits DXing, contesting, ragchewing, and long PSK brag files on 60 meters.

73s John AA5JG
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1DA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Having examined to QRZ page as suggested, I REPEAT my previous comment. ^
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N3QE on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
What I like is how the subject line presumes that there is such an activity as a "Ragchew DX Contests" :-). I thought those were three disparate activities!

Maybe more than anything, this tells us how the Emcomm wannabes think of ham activity. If they think we're DX'ing on 60 Meters during the day, they don't know propagation. (Which may be OK, after all, the very idea of 60MHz emcomm was that someone who doesn't know anything about propagation ought to be able to use it.) If they think we're contesting on 60M, they don't know contesting.
 
Author of "The World of CB Radio"  
by N3QE on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Oh, now I get it. I looked at the author's QRZ page. Her qualifications include being the author of "The World of CB Radio".
 
RE: Author of "The World of CB Radio"  
by EX_AA5JG on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
If you ever needed another reason to hate terrorists, here it is. Ever since 9/11 the hobby (including QST) has been hijacked by Emcomm Nazis, and now all we hear about are go-kits, Anderson power poles, APRS, interoperability, and NVIS. No longer is ham radio a hobby to communicate with other, now we have to use it to save the world.

Remember, NVIS stands for "Not Very Intelligent Selection."
 
RE: Author of "The World of CB Radio"  
by EX_AA5JG on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"Oh, now I get it. I looked at the author's QRZ page. Her qualifications include being the author of 'The World of CB Radio'".

Wouldn't CB be better for Emcomm communications? There are more channels to use, the gear is cheaper and more readily available and more people have CB radios than ham radios.

Maybe once the authors runs for FCC commissioner and is appointed by President Romney, she can then set the rules for how to use 60 meters (as well as the rest of the bands).

73s John AA5JG
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1DA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I am especially impressed by the fact that in this long "do as I say" article there in nowhere to to be found the DATE new regulations regarding the band plan are to be implemented. I AM, of course, professionally familiar with the Federal Register, and so forth.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W8JI on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Certainly we should all cooperate and try to not disturb or provoke each other.

We all know, or should know, if everyone in the world did everything to the fullest extent allowed by the law, the world would be a real mess. Only the lowest life forms intentionally make others miserable, or ruin their fun, when they can reasonably avoid making others miserable.

The best example I can think of are the fools (fools is a nice word, the real word starts with a "p" and ends with "k") who drive the speed limit or below in the passing or center lanes, just to force others to go the speed limit or because they don't care. I've actually listened to people brag about setting the cruise control and backing up long strings of traffic, just because they legally can, and because they object to others going faster than they think they should.

The point "we don't need to be jerks because we legally can" aside, the article lacks compelling logic, justification, or reasoning for the operating guidelines it dictates.

If a group of hundreds of people were behind the article's suggested operating styles, or if the reasoning made logical technical sense, I would view the article differently.

I would not ignore it and be an A$$ just because I have a legal right to operate differently. I would ignore it based on the fact it seems to not be based on logic or technical fact, reasonable, and seems to be just one person's opinion.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9MHZ on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
EMCOMM (I don't do it) has a big role in our world, no doubt....keeping us allocated with bands.

But, I wonder if Bonnie might consider that ragchewing etc, means that those hams have taken the time to set up a 5 MHz capability at their QTHs or mobile setups. Ragchewing might actually enhance an EMCOMM capability on 60 meters rather than conflict with it.

 
RE: Author of "The World of CB Radio"  
by K1DA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I doubt Rommney would appoint her an animal pursuit officer.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB7AIL on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
There seems to be a lot of selected reading of this post. Some of the posters are commenting on what they think is there, not what is actually there. Read it again and try to suppress your biases and find out what is really stated.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1DA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Perhaps those who tell us we didn't read it properly will, from their exaulted position, tell us what we missed.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KK2DOG on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
60 meters is already starting to get chaotic at times.
The other night I was listening to a guy who claimed he was running 100 watts into a 3-element SteppIR beam, and didn't seem to care that the current rules state 50 watts PEP into a dipole. Evidently he was just 'practicing' for the upcoming rule changes. Also, I wonder what 'channels' the PSK and CW folks are gonna' try to bogart even leaving less space for phone transmissions.


Mike KK2DOG
www.hamwave.com
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by EX_AA5JG on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
A three element steppir beam doesn't cover 60, as designed. Given the losses of that antenna at 5mhz, he probably needed to run 100 watts to get 50 watts ERP.

73s John AA5JG
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KO3D on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Just another attempt by the orange vested load bearing suspender wearing firemen wanna-be ARES emcomm crew to dominate amateur radio. If the FCC wants 5MHz for emergencies only they can easily make a rule. Five channels is a joke anyway.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB7AIL on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Why the animosity towards the public service parts of ham radio? I must agree that sometimes they look a little goofy all dressed up in their emergency duds but they are actively participating in an activity which is constantly used as justification that ham radio can exist!
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by WA0ZZG on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I can see the need for two articles that may help many people.

1. Using channelized HF communications, how it's different.

2. Understand type accepted radios and how to verify your rig will meet these standards.

There are many of you that already know about this. I'm hoping one of you, with better writing skills, will be up to the task.

Running CW on channel center, with a type accepted radio while monitoring for USB???? Really???
Dave.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB7AIL on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
5 mHz is a worldwide, mainly channelized band. Have a look at this link to get a picture of what is up on the band worldwide:

http://hflink.com/5mhz/
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by ONAIR on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Didn't they once prohibit "idle chit chat" on 11 meters as well? Question is... If no one is allowed to ragchew, who will be monitoring?
 
A squawk about nothing  
by AI2IA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I listen a fair amount on 60 meters. I don't hear any abuse of the rules and regs. Where are all the notices of violations for infractions on 60 meters handed out by the FCC? I don't know of any.

Also, there is no need to bash Emcomm hams in regard to this article. There are all sorts of lids in ham radio, but they are individuals, not representatives of a whole class of hams.

Just ignore all this nonsense and operate as you ordinarily do, in a considerate, friendly, balanced way.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K8AC on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
You've convinced me. I will stay as far away from the 5 MHz band as possible. Thanks for the reasons!
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by LA9XSA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
In case not everyone noticed: The suggested restrictions follow from the 60 meter band being shared with other users who take precedence, and it being channelized. 10 minute overs, pileups, etc. would tend to break the rule about non-interference to the other users of the band.

It is not like the bands where the amateur service is the primary or exclusive user, where us amateurs can use our own community standards for what traffic goes where.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9MHZ on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
>>>by LA9XSA on January 16, 2012 In case not everyone noticed: The suggested restrictions follow from the 60 meter band being shared with other users who take precedence, and it being channelized. 10 minute overs, pileups, etc. would tend to break the rule about non-interference to the other users of the band.
It is not like the bands where the amateur service is the primary or exclusive user, where us amateurs can use our own community standards for what traffic goes where.<<<<


Do you mean like 440 and 902 MHz? Lots of use on those amateur bands (depending on location) and nobody needs to first ponder if they're going to possibly interfere with that nebulous, unknown user or device out there. Yes, if it's determined that interference exists, then we are lower priority and must take corrective action....eg. PAVE PAWS at Beale AFB, CA and others.

But to sit back and not use an allocation because of what MIGHT happen is silly. 5 MHz isn't supposed to be just a first aid kit. Reasonable people can make this work.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by LA9XSA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
HF tends to propagate more than UHF or SHF. I guess it's a case of both "use it or lose it" and "over-use it and lose it" here?
In my country we have a wide 5 MHz allocation, no mode restrictions, and 100 W out already, so we actually want to use those channels coinciding with other countries for DX work and use the rest for local communications. Obviously, since we're secondary in the band too, we don't want to interfere.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB2HSH on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
This is YET ANOTHER attempt at a frequency grab from Her Holiness St Bonnie and her band of emcomm minions. 5 MHz is being expanded, so they better "mark their territory" so yet another band can be infested with ALE and "all the good it offers".

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by G0GQK on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Why do some American radio amateurs make using the hobby so so difficult with quotations from incomprehensible rules and regulations ?

Mel G0GQK
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W1EL on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
What a load of bull!
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9MHZ on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
>>>>I guess it's a case of both "use it or lose it" and "over-use it and lose it" here?<<<<

Agreed. I guess the whole topic makes me wonder what problem it is that we're actually trying to fix with regard to use? Are there some primary users out there squealing about those darned amateurs on 5 MHz?

The OP suggested limiting long PSK31 macros, long ragchewing, etc. Well, OK....maybe those ideas have merit on a different level, but to just regulate because we MIGHT interfere with whom or with what (and we don't know), just doesn't make any sense.

If an emergency does occur and if those freqs are needed, I'd rather have a group of people who have their equipment already set up for 60 meters and who are also comfortable with handling traffic with modes (eg. PSK31) that will efficiently do the job.

I don't get the feel-good regulation....she needs to more clearly define an actual problem before launching into a direction like this.

Cheers,
Brad, K9MHZ


 
RE: Author of "The World of CB Radio"  
by K5END on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"Oh, now I get it. I looked at the author's QRZ page. Her qualifications include being the author of 'The World of CB Radio'."

How elucidating.

We all have things in our past we wish we could erase. However, this example is probably more depressing than embarrassing.

What an albatross. My sincerest condolences to the authoress.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KM6CQ on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Looking at the points Bonnie cited. The first four happen every day on a regulator basis. The last three I have not heard on the band.
That being said, it is a great band to hear and work stations on around the country. And that is the normative practice on the band. I don't know much about emcomm stuff. But I have never heard it on 60.

Best Regards, Dan KM6CQ
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N2OBM on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Hummm....

K9MHZ> Agreed. I guess the whole topic makes me wonder what problem it is that we're actually trying to fix with regard to use? Are there some primary users out there squealing about those darned amateurs on 5 MHz?

N2OBM: Yes, twice in the last month. Report submitted to AFMO CONUS.

AA5JG> Remember, NVIS stands for "Not Very Intelligent Selection."

N2OBM: Works as a great 'gap filler' and reduces traffic on SATCOM channels. 20 watts with a AS-2259 to the fleet of MRAPs using 16' bowed whips; 2 to about 13 Megs. But you know this.

73,
Trent
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB4XV on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
The FCC decides what operating practices are used on the ham bands.Unless the FCC has stipulated the list she offers then it is just her opinion. Besides ragchewing is ham radio and if the FCC did not want ragchewing they would have stipulated this.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1DA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
BTW despite all the exalted talk about "type accepted" radios, most new ICOM radios with the
high stability TXO option meet the same specs as the marine radios ICOM sells. If you take the covers off you see the same component quality. Nice try, though.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1DA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"Report submitted to 'AFMO CONUS'" sounds impressive, what was the content??? Anyone CITED?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9MHZ on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
>>>>N2OBM: Yes, twice in the last month. Report submitted to AFMO CONUS.<<<<

So what's your point? The FCC has allowed potentially several hundred thousand users access to just a few discrete freqs, albeit on a secondary basis, with full knowledge of who already resides there. They're hardly anything but a stoic, bloated bureaucracy that won't move much in their thinking or very quickly, so to actually allow 60 meters amateur meant that they were hardly impressed with what might pop up later there.

You can't tell me that this is a show stopper or a game changer for us just because two reports got filed to some level in the chain over a minuscule HF allocation, compared to what the military is entitled to as a primary/sole user. Yes, we're secondary users, but I think you're being a little dramatic.

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N0AH on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Nets..........................one ragchewer and 40 part-timers at a time.....

People need to know how well their equipment is working- ie: calling CQ, getting well versed reports, etc....I see your angle on zero tolerance on contests, etc, but to just say it is about a net, not in agreement-

73
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N0AH on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
OK,

So I have a question for Bonnie.......

You don't want to except paper qsl's to save a tree, yet you are the writer of the number one radio selling book ever?? I saw this on qrz.com but missed the name of the book-

Nice qrz.com page- fb

73

paul
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K5SBR on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
RE: W9PMZ's comment.

Ditto.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KD6KWZ on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"In order to be ready for Emergency/Disaster Communications, hams need to have good familiarity with the band and have equipment capable of operating 5 MHz. Hams can only do this by participating in active operating on the 5 MHz band."

If they make using 60 meters too strict, it will be a turn off to just buying equipment specifically to get it's capability. Building a NVIS antenna takes a little planning & work beforehand. Yet, what's the allure to use a 60 meter NVIS antenna, when propagation is good? DX is a part of this hobby.

How do you define long CQ's & long ragchews? 3 minutes? 15 minutes? Yes, I can see no contests, for that would really make "primary users" elsewhere blow fuses from QRM.

I keep wondering if the foreign complaints about 60 meter "abuses" are just from a good propagation day/night letting those foreign users hear 100% of 60 meter operations in the US. Is the FCC going to beat up on all of us for what may be normal ham operations, or misconduct of .01% of hams? Over the years, I've read about a very few hams that did things like run 5KW of power, or operated on Police frequencies, etc. No one said all hams should be banned because we can't self police 100%.

Call signs come in handy from these foreign complaints.
Freebanders are known to be active as well in many parts of the world.

In a real disaster, I don't think anyone will fuss about being a few KHz off of frequency there, heck, I don't care if they're using AM in the CW areas of various bands, in a real disaster, as long as they get through. I'm not saying be a lid in a disaster, but you make what you have work when all H--- breaks loose.

Funny that the US Gov't. (at least most of them) want amateurs to help in a Disaster, but it grants a lot of band spectrum as us as a secondary user. We have to fight PAVE PAWS restrictions on 70 cm, so forget about full, high power repeaters to help that band out in some localities. 70 cm is also used by some car alarms, ATV users find that out the hard way. 900 MHz shares with child monitors & utility smart meters.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by NO6L on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I could never understand this either. Many years ago I was reading the letters to the editor department of Sky and Telescope. I perused a particular tome about how it was some kind of a crime for Sky Publishing, the publishers of Sky and Telescope, to sell huge posters of photos of beautiful deep sky objects because they were on paper.

The writer of the letter was Arther C. Clark.

I will concur that he was a very masterful and prolific author, of PAPER books, but I must say that if the author of this article were related, "The road apple would not have fallen far from the horse".

Not only that, it's a fact it does more damage to the environment to use electronic QSL cards than paper. Check out how much energy it takes to run your computer, the mail servers and thousands of routers, etc. just to transport an "environmentally correct" eQSL. To me, they're just another way to confirm a contact, nothing else.

Back to the original topic; Mark my words. The first time a CW op is on 60M and a primary user needs the frequency and they can't get the OMs attention because he's using a very narrow bandwidth, there will be hell to pay. And remember, I told you so, once before, and here again, any mode other than what the primary user implements is a stupid idea. But no, they've just got to have CW on 60.

Between that and people abusing the 50W ERP rule, let's see how long we keep 60M. Maybe I'll start a betting pool, just to make it "interesting". It's a shame I'll have to re-trim my 60M wire to another band in the end. Oh well, I know I'll get over it.

73
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KQ6XA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
The original Title of this article is:

USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests.

However, eham editor(s) removed the punctuation, and added their own headline comment, thus changing the meaning and intentions somewhat.

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB4QAA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
This article needs to be stamped with big red letters: "One nGals' Opinion & Wishes Towards an Emcom Domain".

Thanks for the frequency lineup info.

Otherwise, this is a large opinion piece, most of which I disagree. 60M, use it or lose it. Be courteous, but use it.

Is it really necessary to list "LBT" on every line? What about "Inhale before talking, exhale after releasing the PTT"?

b.
 
USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests  
by KQ6XA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I've really enjoyed reading all the comments.
Many are unclear about how to operate in a shared
spectrum band where hams are less than second
class citizens.

I suspect that some of the childish comments are
from hams who probably don't or won't operate
on the 60 meter band anyway. Some comments are
anticipated "pushback" by those who see this
as an affront to their plans to use the band for
QRO DXing and longwinded ragchewing.

Yes, I've been active on the air.
I've personally heard USA hams running high power
to chase DX on 5MHz, even though they are authorized
only 50 Watts maximum limit. If you are active
on 5MHz, I'm sure you hear them too.
Although ARRL does not issue DXCC for 60 meters,
many ops will work anyone who can send them a
QSL card, even stations who are in countries
where 5MHz hasn't been authorized for hams yet :)

Sadly, within the past month or so, Czech Republic
had their new 5MHz authorization taken away, due
to government Primary users objecting to all
the QRM from DX pile-ups and constant ragchewing.

It is no surprise to me why the efforts
to get an international 60 meter ham band
(secondary) through ITU negotiations have been
bogged down for several years... due to lack
of support from the administrations of many countries.

In 2002, I started two groups to help track
changes in 5MHz/60meters internationally. At that
same time, we initiated the HFLINK 5MHz web page
http://hflink.com/5mhz
to document all the various amateur-related
frequencies, channels, and the hodgepodge of rules.
The site is a well-known reference and near the
top of Google rankings. With the recent announcement
of USA FCC rule changes for expanded privileges, I
felt compelled to help foster a greater understanding
of the new responsibilities for hams on this band.
Undoubtedly, the changes will bring more activity
by operators who are new to the band.

Writing and publishing articles about ham radio
is often a thankless endeavor. Some of my articles
have been widely reprinted all over the world, and
translated into other languages.
Some of my articles have instigated a torch-burning
mob demanding my demise :) For example, my 2001 article
"Morse is History", published widely in the ham
press, advocating abolition of morse testing.
http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?29724-Morse-is-History

I've learned that some articles, while garnering
vehement objections and corrosive attacks, can also
produce lasting beneficial results, and perhaps
can budge ham radio somewhat towards a brighter future.

Warm Regards,

Bonnie Crystal KQ6XA

.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests  
by KQ6XA on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
5MHz is not a "Use it or lose it".

5MHz is "Use it improperly, and we all lose it."
 
RE: USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests  
by N8NOE on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie;
#5 & 6........


The Rest is B.S....
Cant Call CQ?
Emergency Use Only?..
YOU could say this about ALL AMATEUR BANDS, and as far as that goes, All Broadcast bands.
I Sure HOPE you re-read and Understand what the bands are for.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N8NOE on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
This is YET ANOTHER attempt at a frequency grab from Her Holiness St Bonnie and her band of emcomm minions. 5 MHz is being expanded, so they better "mark their territory" so yet another band can be infested with ALE and "all the good it offers".


THANK YOU!.... I Didn't have to Say it, and you Did WELL!...........

A.L.E. Causes Harmful interference as I'd been in QSO and Found this Fine A.L.E keying and causing QRM.. She Don't think of this!. But "THE QUEEN" has Spoken!
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N8NOE on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
5403.5 RTTY, Better "PEE" and mark my Spot Fast...

SORRY ALL, I Don't Normally Post or Reply, but I Agree this is Bonnie GRABBING frequency spaces again, YES AGAIN! Please Look at A.L.E., HF-PACK, etc. Groups she is involved with or Started, YOU will see for Yourself. I have Left ANY and ALL Groups she has been involved with just for this reason alone. Her Followers are not bad Hams or People, just Mis-Informed and think there all doing the RIGHT-THING...
PLEASE, Read the RULES and Follow them, and have Fun! If we all listen to this Dribble, We'll loose the 5Mhz band due to LACK of USE by anyone NOT running ALE, or Not Calling CQ... HOW Ridiculous!..
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by NN4RH on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Serious question -

Doesn't the fact that the primary users could boot us off 60 meters any time, make that band unsuitable for emergency/disaster communications anyway?

I mean, if we cannot rely on having access to it, does it make sense to rely on it for anything serious?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W6GQ on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I run full power on 60 meter ALL the time with my FT-817ND.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KG4RUL on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I like the idea that WS4E suggested in his comment:

"How about we just give the emcomm guys 60m all to themselves and require all emcomm traffic to use ONLY 60m, and let the rest of the bands alone?"

Then the 'experts', like Ms. Crystal, can run the band as they wish and leave every body else alone. Wait, one flaw, they would lose their WINLINK/PACTOR robots. Actually, not so bad at all!
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by LA9XSA on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I would imagine that the restrictive nature of 60 meters would prohibit it from being used for ALE/DSC or other automatic operations.

WN9HJW > "Doesn't the fact that the primary users could boot us off 60 meters any time, make that band unsuitable for emergency/disaster communications anyway?"

Actual emergency communications take precedence over other traffic. If no other paths are available and it's a life-or-death situation, it's even legal to operate out of bands and to talk to radio stations that aren't amateur licensed. The problem with amateurs being thrown out of 60 meters, besides losing band space and perhaps bringing us into disrepute due to poor behavior, would be that people can't do propagation tests and check their equipment on 60. It might still be used for emergency communications, but not as reliably.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by AF3Y on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
One last comment........ Seems that is IS true.... PMS causes females to become delusional and suffer with frequencygrabitis. No know LEGAL cure for this malady, but there ARE several that might border on law breaking..............................
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KC5CQD on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"By what authority, expressed, implied, or otherwise, does this woman presume to lecture ANYONE, ANYWHERE, on how to use the band?"

By the authority of "Self Importance". That's the problem with these obsolete, useless "emergency" clubs that now populate the ham radio world. A bunch of "cop-wannabes-that-never-packed-the-gear-to-be-one" running around with their beer bellies, orange vests and rubber-ducky antennas, attempting to exert authority that they don't have by virtue of the idea that "we're here to help". In reality....they're there to try and make up for something that is lacking in their lives. We learned in Katrina that the cell phone companies were fully capable of restoring communications before the hams could even get their tents erected.

For God's sake, people......IT'S A HOBBY!!! The days of us being the frontline of communications is over. Get out there and have fun. If you want to be a "Rescue Ranger".....join the military or go to a police or fire academy.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests  
by W5TTW on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Miss Bonnie opines: "Writing and publishing articles about ham radio is often a thankless endeavor."

Thanks is usually given in exchange for something of value. If you are not receiving thanks for your work, well........
 
RE: USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests  
by K5TED on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I had a very enjoyable QSO last night on 60m phone with N5AQR in Beaumont using my newly acquired SG-2020, 20 watts into a 40' random wire, fed with an SG-230 auto-coupler. Armchair copy throughout.

It'd be nice to keep it that way.

I read with some horror the revision allowing digital modes on this limited and channelized allocation. Even greater horror at the power increase. The idea of a contest free, phone only, low power, low band, is great.

If you were to take a look at my log, you'd see mostly digi mode contacts on all the other bands.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9CTB on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I have to agree, Bonnie. 60 meter guidelines do not specify anything about excluding one "service" over another. The only difference here is the channelization. Who knows why? Personally it's my belief that the FCC wants the entire amateur spectrum to be channelized at some point. Gear is becoming more accurate in frequency, the all-important NTIA has everybody scrambling to put high-accuracy frequency standards in their gear ... I guess I sort of "see it coming". That aside, there really isn't an emphasis on "ECOM" or "Data modes" with regard to 60 meters. Simply because some of us "will it so", doesn't codify it. Let's allow everyone to enjoy amateur radio as was intended and allowed under the FCC rules, and cut the spurious nonsense. It's damaging our hobby/service.

73,
K9CTB
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W9PMZ on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
AF3Y - you can agree, disagree, or even belittle the authors comments. But your last comment was absolutely uncalled for.

73,

Carl - W9PMZ
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K3GAU on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
To KC5CQD:

I don't know where you were after Katerina hit but we were in southern MS a week AFTER Katerina hit and the cell phone coverage was still very marginal and ify at best.

I have been in areas of the country were, even on a good day, cell phone coverage is spotty. All it would take is one or two cell towers to go down for some reason and there would be NO cell phone coverage period!

So, for my money, depending on the cell phone for all your communications needs is fool hardy as best! Ham radio is still a viable option although it is becoming less needed as time goes by.

Dave K3GAU
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB6QXM on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I appreciate a well thought out subject posting such as the author's post. I also appreciate the author's accomplishments. Where I do agree is that the author is making statements that 60 meters is by directive for ecomm. The ARRL can suggest all day long on how they want the frequencies used. The only 2 governing bodies that have any authority over the frequencies are the FCC and the ITU.

The ecomm people try to dictate all in the spirit of disaster readiness. Well I hate to say that in a true emergency, hf frequencies are too unpredictable for reliable communications.

In the days before satellite and cell infrastructure ham assisted communications was highly desired. I know personally. I was a Fema trained ARES AEC during the 1989 Loma Prieta quake. I was in charge of health and welfare communications coming out of the Santa Cruz mountains. 2,meters line of site communications.

Do I still believe that amateur ecomm is needed. Somewhat. Not as much as technology and infrastructure have caught up for Public Service. Maybe a ham to shadow a firefighter during a wildland fire

What frequency, 2 meters of course. In my personal opinion HF serves little purpose for ecomm. I personally believe that ecomm people are passionate about what contribution they are providing to the community and ham radio in general. The perspective should come from the agencies you are providing the service to. There is nothing worse than over estimating your worth to an organization.

When a directive from the FCC states that 60 meters is specifically forecomm, I will respect it. All I know now is that 60 meters is spectrum free from big guns with signals as wide as a barn door and ARRL driven contests. 60 meters is a place a ham can go and relax and have brief uninterfering qsos with his or her fellow hams and not have to worry about QRM from another contester or big gun DX chaser. Now that they have changed the rules adding digital and CW, that will bring it's own can of worms. I respect the accomplishments, the delivery of her message was a little harsh in my opinion.

I own a yahoo group called Ham Radio Open Conversation where we can discuss this when this discussion on eham has been closed.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W1CTN on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I operate 60 meters and will continue to do so with 50 watts ERP to a zero gain antenna.

We are a secondary service and if the "channel" is occupied by a commercial or government signal I simply pick another.

That's the extent I will exercise not to harmfully interfering with a primary service. I will continue to use the 5 mHz amateur allocation to simply "PLAY RADIOMAN" LIKE EVERYONE ELSE DOES. IT'S ONLY A HOBBY !!

If the author of this article wants to play Emcomm that's her right. When the FCC has a problem with how the rest of us operate I'm sure they are not short of "pink slips". I'll alert my mail carrier.

73
Dave
W1CTN
Radio Ansonia
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N9AOP on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
EMCOMM for sure runs the gamut from 'simple assisting to saving the world' and there is no lack of CIA types out there to tell you why the freq. is theirs and not yours. I am looking foreward to using P3 and when allowed P4 on the 60M slots.
Art, N9AOP
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W0FM on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
The Author stated:

"Yes, I've been active on the air.
I've personally heard USA hams running high power
to chase DX on 5MHz, even though they are authorized
only 50 Watts maximum limit. If you are active
on 5MHz, I'm sure you hear them too."

Really?

For more than fifty years in this hobby I have searched for an instrument, a device, some software or special meter that could accurately inform me of the TX output power of the station I was "hearing" on the ham bands. And it would have a switch you could flip to take into account the line loss, antenna gain, etc and give you real-time ERP. I've never found one. And I certainly can't do it "by ear"!

You've lost even more credibility with shallow statements like this one.

Terry, WØFM
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W5DQ on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
60M + more Gov't regs + articles like this = NO THANKS!
 
RE: Author of "The World of CB Radio"  
by W5DQ on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
AA5JG writes "... now all we hear about are go-kits, Anderson power poles, APRS, interoperability,
...."

John,

What's wrong with Anderson powerpoles. I have them on everything :)

Gene W5DQ
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by AE6RO on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
You know, I have a very nice Heathkit HW-18 which was originally designed for Civil Air Patrol frequencies. Only 800 KHz from the 60 meter "ham band". It has Crystal control and a 2.8 KHz bandwith. So I thought I could put it on 60.

I got the reciever to work well but not the transmitter. Then I found out that the National Telecommunications & Information Agency (NTIA) administers the CAP channels just as they do the 60 meter band. They decertified the HW-18 in 1996 for stability problems so with that and other difficulties I gave up on the conversion.

Originally the 60 meters band was supposed to be a real ham band, but the NTIA weighed in and only allowed the channels we now have. And USB voice only, no data or CW. This was to allow primary users to be able to kick hams off the channel should it be needed. If data or CW was allowed they might not be able to clear the channel.

It's like getting permission to pitch a tent in your neighbor's yard by asking his nephew who lives in Hawaii.

John
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by ZENKI on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
The fact is that amateur transmitters have such poor IMD performance that the NTIA deemed that it was necessary to have buffer guard bands around the ham channels.

If ham equipment had mandatory IMD specifications they would not be hesitant in the future about relaxing amateur operation requirements in the 5mhz band. We need to clean up our act, in regards to the transmitter IMD performance.

The NTIA has an excellent Redbook Standards document on their web page. It really demonstrate how professional they are regarding standards for HF equipment. All we can manage is dumb self centered selfish arguments about what we want to do without regard for others. No wonder the NTIA was so opposed to ham operation near their frequencies! We cant seem to agree on anything and our equipment is crap. Amateurs got what they deserve because of their unprofessional attitudes!

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB2HSH on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
What I find probably the most amusing as well as upsetting is that Ms. Crystal has the nerve...no...the AUDACITY to create a band plan (mind you...when NO ONE asked for her opinion) that includes the notion of LISTEN BEFORE TRANSMIT, when she is a staunch advocate of a "mode" that is notorious for NOT LISTENING for activity on that particular frequency. Towards the end of 2011, there were 3 RTTY contests that I worked, and in 2 of them, the same station from Cyprus was handing out points. I wanted it for another DXCC entity. Unfortunate for me...we were near 14.109 MHz. Just as the Cyprus station was calling me, one of those stupid ALE stations started sounding, and I lost my chance. Couldn't break the pack with my 5 watts again.

Stick to CB, Bonnie. We'll all be happier if you do.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by AE6RO on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I thought those channels were there already and they just loaned them to us hams because they were lightly used & would not inconvenience the Government very much.

Anyway it's supposed to be a Hobby. Not work. So why must we be so Professional? John

 
RE: USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests  
by KO1D on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie...Bonnie...Bonnie,

I could see this coming a couple weeks back from a previous email that went around. I would like to clarify one item:

When you say folks are running more than 50w max I hope you understand that it is ERP. From the ARRL Web page < http://www.arrl.org/60-meter-faq >:

The FCC has said hams may run 50 W effective radiated power (ERP) on the five 60-meter channels. The new rules say, "For the purpose of computing ERP, the transmitter PEP (peak envelope power) will be multiplied by the antenna gain relative to a dipole or the equivalent calculation in decibels. A half-wave dipole antenna will be presumed to have a gain of 0 dBd."

So please do tell how you know they are running high power? I myself ran 100w PEP from my mobile. With my crappy set-up I know I struggled to get 10-15w ERP. Rather significant difference yes?

As many have noted this is another grab for spectrum. ALE is a fine mode, as fine as any other mode anyone else uses and you have done good work promoting its use and expansion. It has its pluses and minuses much as every mode does. If you think you are going to move everyone away so you can have an open and clear frequency all to your own, why not go to 75m SSB and ask folks there how well that works. Apparently many folks have bought and paid for them somehow as I notice the same type of activity there you are promoting with this piece.

As for Dx'ing and other activities. Were it not for folks testing the limits of gear and propagation we would not gain the experience and knowledge necessary to use it when a situation arose. Think about it. Hand it to you for non-use and then when game day actually does come (probably interacting with /MM stations who are quite entertaining to monitor) which ops will know what works and what does not at a given time if they have never used the band for QSOs and DXing and learned the intricacies of the band?

The ARRL is asking folks who use the band for their input on how to better utilize the band once other modes are finally allowed. I do expect you to complain loudly that someone is using your personal frequency choices even though ALE is not a mode that many use. My hope is you do not cause a really good thing to fall apart. 60 is a great band with real ladies and gentlemen operating. Personally, this band should be available to Techs to learn how to properly operate with proper power, antennas, and techniques. Then again, you wouldn't want that because they would not run ALE....

 
Being greater than you seem.  
by AI2IA on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
There is ample information available to tell us how to use 60 meters lawfully and considerately. We don't need Bonnie telling us what to do or not to do in this regard.

So far, ham shared use of 60 meters has had a good record, the proof of which is that the FCC is opening it up for more variety of use by hams, and hams can handle that without stepping on each others toes or those of primary users.

The emcomm bashers try unsuccessfully to skew this thread for their own warped purposes, but this is nothing new. They just continue to make the eHam site look somewhat low class.

We can all be happy to have some 60 meter allocation even in its present limited form. It's a good feeling to be thankful for what we have, and to be busy using it for enjoyment, self-education, and when needed, even emergency use.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests  
by KA4KOE on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
As to the motives of the Author's submission, I will refrain from comment or derogatory non-sequiturs.

From the studios of KA4KOE on the east coast, it seems that 60m usage has actually DROPPED in the past few years. Either activity actually has, or I'm simply not listening as much as I used to.

Recently, I crossed paths with a grossly misinformed/negligent ham who was running a "linear" on 60m. I informed him of the ERP regulations. The fellow seemed surprised.

On a positive note, the over-the-horizon wave-scanning radar has abated. I was one of those who took time to file signal reports.

I will indeed continue to operate whenever I please on 60m within the Part 97 rules.

If all the fun is taken out of ham radio, then why bother???

Respectfully yours,

Philip Neidlinger, PE
Richmond Hill, GA
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K7NNG on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Well,,,,my goodness....it appears about all of you missed the whole point of Bonnies article, and proved to me most of you read, but do not comprehend well.
We are SECONDARY USERS ON 5 MEGS. and it is well known that the primary users such as military operator have complained about Ham radio operations on 5 megs.
Because of warped attitudes, I believe we will soon lose 5 megs to ham radio.....
Isn't funny, most east coast and SE USA operators don't seem to read and comprehend well????
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by AE6RO on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I believe her major push is Automatic Link Establishment. ALE, not Ale, which is a refreshing alcoholic beverage. But I don't understand why ALE should be on 60 meters if it uses Spread Spectrum techniques. If Someone Important, as opposed to hams, needed the channel clear while being used by ALE they could not clear it if occupied part of the time.

If only I could find a lovable and yet qualified boat anchor to use there. John
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K6AER on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Just some thoughts in reading this.

This is a must read for the masses of overweight hams in their 60's and 70's marching to Dayton with their orange vests and 5 ht's on their belt, looking for something important to do.

Let's face it. Most modern emergency organizations would be perfectly happy if the hams just got out of their way during an emergency.

I'm not sure how clean the modern HF radios have to be when the frequency channelization is more than 5 KHz in spacing. Today’s transceivers, unless greatly over modulated, are well within bandwidth of the current channelization spacing.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KC2RGW on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
If you don't want to actually talk to people in a meaningful way in your participation in the hobby, fine.

For the rest of us who are in this hobby to communicate, buzz off with your insanely megalomaniacal fantasy that ham radio is somehow police dispatch. What gives you the right to ruin the hobby for everyone else?

I'm an anchor RACES member locally and this type of warped psychosis that too many EMCOMM types have is just plain disgusting.

Go back into your prepper bunker and key a pair of GMRS radios back and forth in the lead vault to keep yourself amused. Leave the small handful of us communicating as the hobby intends alone.

700,000 hams. 640000 interrupt QSOs to 'test' antennas for contest use only to disappear afterwards. 20000 want to channelize the bands and require a writ from the President to key a microphone only in the presence of net control, and I'd guess 40000 who got into communications as a hobby to actually communicate.

Stop trying to drag the rest of society down into your Asperger's social ineptitude. The bar is already low enough.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB0SFP on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I have never posted to an eHam thread, but I felt compeled here because 60 meters is very dear to me. I tend to agree with most of what Bonnie has said. I'm sure that those hams with a marginal degree of common sense, & courtesy do to. To dispute EMCOM as the primary argument for access to 6o meters by Hams to begin with is just stupid. You need only to look at the latest proposal put forth by the ARRL for rule augmentation to immediately realize that. I have read nearly all those that have contributed to this thread & see an awful lot of extremely uninformed commentary.


I like 60 meters! Just the way it is. Most, if not all, those that have been using the band for some time would agree. They are for the most part far more courteous than those found on any other allocation. BUT! There is a new bread of ham that has very few of the values we require on this specialized band.


These are among the most rude & inconsiderate hams I have ever experienced. Only 17 meters has suffered more at their hands than 60. Their operational procedure boarders on, & is in fact, illegal in some cases. These are the DX chasers!


They have claimed curtain 60 meter channels as designated DX frequencies & I have in fact heard them chase casual users off the channel who would venture on during gray line propagation periods. They will then set around & chat among themselves in contemplation of that DX contact. I/E it's ok for them to use the frequency, but not others. I have heard them MANY times pounce on a frequency completely ignoring the preexisting traffic in an attempt to claim a DX contact.


EVEN worse, is the resent practice of operating split frequency. Here, as with other bands, they transmit their calls(often recorded) over & over again at length on a US allocated 60 meter frequency. All the while listening for a response on another frequency, or band, that is licensed in another country. I have listened in extreme dismay at the resultant pile up's and illegal operators, many of whom have no idea the peculiar restrictions for the use of 60 meters.


Yes, illegal! These DX chasers are transmitting in the blind on 6o meters & listening elsewhere where they can not be contacted, or advised, that they are causing interference. By law, you must immediately yield to the primary user. How can you do that if you can't hear them, or anyone else for that mater.


Last week I documented about ten of the absolute worst offenders. I tried repeatedly to contact each of them on the air under conditions that it was impossible for them not the hear me. Not one responded. They couldn't. They were receiving on another frequency & transmitting blind on 60. I found as many of their email addresses as I could & sent them messages. Those that responded either agreed after their error was pointed out, or they denied their inability to receive on the primary frequency. One accused me of operating QRP.


Currently only a couple 60 meter channels have been so afflicted. But if this split frequency DX chasing is allowed to continue it could encompass the entire band because this method is not limited to frequencies in common with other countries.


At first I did not agree with any changes to the 60 meters bands except the replacement of channel 3. Recent events have changed my mind. The below messages were sent to the ARRL & FCC in response to their request for input:


New frequency good.
New frequency with 1kc vice 500cps carrier frequency good.
100 watts good.
Digital modes bad.
DX chasing cross band(split frequency) VERY BAD!

A new frequency is absolutely needed. One that ends on a even frequency will simplifies the use of many available surplus commercial & military radios which also find utility in emergency services.

Though I like very much the current 50 watt ERP limit, I can see the advantage of raising this to 100 watts. I use a lot of commercial/military equipment. These do not lend themselves well to reduced power operation. These radios must be opened up, & tuned back to 50 watts which then limits their versatility on other bands. Radio produced by Transworld, Mackay, Sunair, Harris, & a host of others currently in use by many government agencies are so affected. I currently use as a Transworld TW100 to continuously monitor the 60 meter band. I've adjusted it's output power as low as it would go to achieve 50 watts ERP & is now dedicated solely to 60 meter use.

Digital modes bad. I originally thought this might be a good thing, but no longer. A very good demonstration took place a couple nights ago. Several East Coast operators, wrongly thinking that 30 days had passed & that is was now legal, fired up digital traffic on 60 meters. They were unable to hear traffic on the West Coast and caused them significant interference. There was no way to advise them of interference they were causing nor their illegal operation. Those operators on the West Coast just had to vacate the frequency.

DX chasing on 60 meters has become a very serious problem that if not stopped very soon may threaten 60 meter operation for all Amateurs. Over that last week DX chasers have set up automated/recorded calling messages. Sometimes just repeating their call over & over again at length. All the while they listen for a response on another band from a DX station. You can not even advise them when they are causing interference because they are listening elsewhere. We've all seen this destroy other bands for normal Amateur operation. Pleas don't let it happen on 60mtrs. DX chasing of any kind totally defeats the purpose of 60 meters. At least, possibly simplex only should be mandated except for emergency traffic handling on 60 meters.

For multiple reasons there should be mandatory stop/listen intervals to check for an additional traffic, or other that need access to the frequency.


Dennis Starks
KB0SFP
HFpack/Milpack Monitor(all USB):
3996, 5403.5, 7296, 14342.5, 18157.5
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K8QV on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Sheesh. So many Barneys, so few Andys.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by EX_AA5JG on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"DX chasing of any kind totally defeats the purpose of 60 meters."

According to Part 97, what is the purpose of 60 meters? Let's hear it straight from the FCC rules, not the 100s of different opinions floated here on what 60 meters should be used for.

"All the while they listen for a response on another band from a DX station. You can not even advise them when they are causing interference because they are listening elsewhere."

How do you know this? Many DXers have dual receive radios where they can listen to the frequency they are calling on, and another frequency at the same time.

73s John AA5JG
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9PU on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
So you want to set aside a handful of secondarily assigned frequencies that few people use and that require lengthy explanations to program, (and only on the newest radios,) for emergencies? And we are supposed to monitor for activity all the time but not use, unless there is an emergency? And only if the primary users aren't there? OK I can do that.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB0SFP on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
>How do you know this? Many DXers have dual receive >radios
-------------------
I know this because I tried Duuuf. I also corresponded with some of them via email. Of course, that was stated but you apparently suffer from selective reading, or comprehensive skills.

>Let's hear it straight from the FCC rules,
-------------------
Why not read the FCC's own correspondence on the 60 meter band augmentation? Oh, I forgot, you have that "selective reading, or comprehensive skills" problem.
<http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db1118/FCC-11-171A1.pdf>

>require lengthy explanations to program, (and only on the newest radios,)
-------------------
Every radio I operate is in excess of 20 years old. I didn't have any trouble at all getting them on 60. If you have that much trouble operating a radio, maybe you shouldn't?

>monitor for activity all the time but not use, unless there is an emergency?
-------------------
Another one with selective reading skills.

>And only if the primary users aren't there?
-------------------
Absolutely!

I have been amazed in the past when listening to QSO's on 60. On one occasion I couldn't contain myself & had to pipe in. I overheard a station complain profusely about some occasional digital signals common on the band. I had to break in & explain to him how I am myself very happy to be able to hear that noise because our presents on this band is a privilege, not right, and if we can't behave, the privilege can be revoked.

I am convinced that most, if not all those who have been in disagreement with Bonnie's comments have totally misunderstood. As for her band plan, maybe that is a bit premature.

kb0sfp
 
RE: USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests  
by KQ6XA on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
On 16 November 2011, in the opening statements
of the the FCC's Report and Order on 5MHz
60 meters, they gave the reason for allowing
hams on this part of the spectrum:

FCC: "The Commission added the secondary amateur
service allocation after determining that such
frequencies could be useful to the amateur radio
community for completing disaster communications
links at times when existing frequencies in the
3500-4000 kHz (80 and 75 meter) and 7000-7300 kHz (40 meter) bands are not available due to ionospheric
conditions. It concluded that such an allocation
represented the best compromise available to give
the amateur service access to new spectrum while
assuring the Federal Government agencies that
their use is protected."

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KM6CQ on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I don't think you have to worry about emcommers taking over the band. About the only thing I ever hear from them are their 2 meter nets. 2 meters is great for them. Good reliable communication. And, they can get the new hams involved without much cost. You really only need an inexpensive HT to be effective. Setting up and operating 60 meters takes, time, talent, and resources. Which is probably why we do not hear them on 60. Those assets are better utilized on channelized FM rigs. This way they can spend more time on their mission and less time fooling around with antennas, tuners, and costly mistakes. The emcommers in our area use 2 meters simplex and mostly the repeaters. They also use some linked repeater systems. I do not think they even use HF, I never hear them talk about it. They do not bother anyone and they are very polite. I would expect the same from them if they were on 60. In the end, 60 meters is not theirs to take, and it is not ours to give.

73, Dan KM6CQ
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KD6KWZ on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"...A half-wave dipole antenna will be presumed to have a gain of 0 dBd."

How do you calculate gain from some "odd" antennas? Are you not supposed to use odd antennas on 60 meters? Take a look at the various gains from a full length of wire:

http://pa0fri.home.xs4all.nl/Ant/Quad/quadeng.htm

"So please do tell how you know they are running high power? I myself ran 100w PEP from my mobile. With my crappy set-up I know I struggled to get 10-15w ERP. Rather significant difference yes?"

You bet. I heard one ham on 40 meters dropping his power to show another ham the signal difference. Yes, a big drop going from 200 to 3 watts, but I would not been able to guess his ERP from that. When conditions on 10 meters are good, I shock some when I tell them I'm running 22 watts PEP. They think I'm running 100 to 200 watts.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KA4KOE on January 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
See the ARRL FAQ:

http://www.arrl.org/60-meter-faq
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by WV4I on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Need to know how to compute ERP, RF exposure, etc., on any band, not just 60M.

Common misconception on 60M is that power limit is 50W PEP out the back of radio.

 
RE: By rules, not by dreams  
by N2RRA on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Really, from the reality standpoint that ham radio is a "hobby", the band is not much use. For those that have big emcomm dreams, it might be of more use I guess.

Cue the masses calling for "How about we just give the emcomm guys 60m all to themselves and require all emcomm traffic to use ONLY 60m, and let the rest of the bands alone?"

END QUOTE:

I couldn't agree more and is actually a great idea. I am for Emcomm but not like the fanatical Emcomm guys living out their pathetic dreams 24/7 because they get high off of it.

I do wish they would move from 20m to 60m. Good idea!

73!
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1OU on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie, please build a bridge and get over yourself.
 
Although I disagree ...  
by K9CTB on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
It really upsets me to know - by reading some of these posts - that we amateur radio operators will never EVER have the sort of "peer review" we see in other professions. "Of course not", one might argue, "we're AMATEURS!" Well, that doesn't hold water with me. Like it or not, we are an especially privileged group by virtue of our licenses. Not that much different than other peer groups, professional or otherwise. It pains me to see ridiculous reviews of other peoples' work, just as it pains me to see a fellow ham submit a ridiculous piece of work for "peer review", knowing he (or she) is gonna get slammed by people who want nothing more than to see their callsign in print. Having said that, and with regard to your article, Bonnie, I applaud it for it's appearance here, and my review is only negative due to the opinion you are obviously trying to sell as fact. No good "peer" of yours would allow you to get away with such an article and, were I writing what you did, I would expect the same treatment. Still, you contributed and that is a positive I did not want to appear as if I overlooked. Hence, my additional comment.

73,
K9CTB
 
RE: Although I disagree ...  
by KF4HR on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
It seems some hams feel the need to go overboard with the Emcomm issue. Well why not take it to the next level? Here's an idea. No one transmits on 60 meters. Instead we all take turns monitoring the 60 meter channels for 24/7 coverage, then if an emergency occurs (and only then), make a specifically timed transmission. Then maybe we can get rid of our title as Amateurs and get paid by the gov't for our Emcomm activities. Heck, we can probably generate a whole new gov't agency around this! No wait, that might interfere with another agency... like FEMA? Jeeze, come on...

The best part of this article is being so specific about interrupted do's and don'ts on 60 meters, then posting copyrighted information. Ya gotta luv that.

Next article please.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K7SGJ on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I've read every single post in its entirety in this thread, and it really saddens me to see some the hateful comments toward a fellow amateur. While a pro/con discussion of the post by those that use 60M is a good thing, some of the disparaging comments have no place. I've been a ham for close to 50 years, and I've never been more disgusted by the activities of some hams as seen on the bands, and in print. The whole idea that made ham radio what it was, and should be still, has been lost. So many seem to have an "it's all about me" and fu problem. I don't get it. The principals of experimentation, discovery, communication, camaraderie, and everything else is gone.

The Emcomm group can't seem to accept the fact that any more except in rare occasion), ham radio is more of a health and welfare support function. Important yes, but not as "life and death" as it was prior to modern communications equipment. We need to get out of the way and LET THE PROS do their job. I'm not suggesting ham radio has no importance to emergency communications, it is just that others are better trained and equipped to be PRIMARY COMMUNICATORS.

We have plenty of unused space in the present ham bands to fully support this HOBBY. The only time it appears there is a problem is during contests, and it's always the same people complaining. Where are all these people the rest of the time? I hear beacons from Timbuktu on 10M all the time, but little activity. I doubt that these contests are scheduled around band openings.

Yes, some additional operating bands are nice to use for any number of applications. There is no need for "SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS" to try to lay claim to any of it. In fact, the rules so state that no ham has exclusive RIGHT to any radio frequency. Everyone knows (or should know) that this is how it's always has been, and probably always will be.

The rules and regs and not difficult to understand and abide by. I for one, don't need some self appointed individual to explain their version or interpretation to me. I had to pass a test on that stuff in order to be licensed to operate my station in accordance with these R&Rs, or lose my privileges to operate.

It seems to this OM, that if all the me me me games, hate and discontent, I'm more important to the HOBBY than you attitude, and special interest groups thinking they are what this HOBBY is all about, don't get it together and learn to coexist, the FCC, ITU, or someone else will end up pulling the plug on all us. Then you will have to find another HOBBY to bitch about.


 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N8CEP on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Well I have never had the pleasure of a 60 meter contact. After reading this article I will definitely get on the band and have a "long" rag chew. I will be sure to identify every ten minutes so the frequency police know who is legally on the band. Some people love to tell others what to do.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N1KDO on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Sounds like a nutjob.

Those are not the FCC regs as I read them.

Ignore this nonsense. Depressing that eHam considered it newsworthy.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1OU on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I was thinking of putting together a DX ragchew net on 60. Any thoughts?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by AE6RO on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
So where would one get a radio for 60 meters by Transworld, Mackay, Harris, and others? And how hard would it be to get it working on odd frequencys? Jophn
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KC8RWR on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Following these guidelines I doubt 60 meters would see any use at all by hams outside of emcomm. Where then is the equipment going to come from? I suppose the majority of hams are going to go out and buy 60 meter gear and set up a 60 meter antenna that they don't intend to use except if and when a disaster strikes?

Right...

Instead you will end up with a handfull of emcommers desperate to use their special band but unable to do so because the people they need to communicate with have no 60 meter capability.

No DX? Because the limit is 50 watts? I suppose QRPers never work DX then huh?

No ragchewing? Can't ragchewers just take a pause now and then? If nobody else is using the frequency during the pause then why shouldn't they continue the conversation?

Just follow the rules AND keep out of the way of the primary users (which is one of the rules anyway) and we will all be fine. Or... come up with a bunch of extra guidelines... cow other hams into following them.. watch nobody use 60 meters and see it go away like the bottom part of 220.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by NN3W on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
What an unbridled attempt at a power grab.

Luckily KQ6XA represents the fringe of amateur radio and hams around the country will ignore this tripe.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KA4ETV on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I cite the nice lady's article a few days back and say here we have yet more proof of that perplexing phenomenon she wrote about.

 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by LA9XSA on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Yeah, KA4ETV, hers wasn't a particularly good article, and it was misrepresented by the editors as an operating article, but it turned out to be dead on about the type of hatred, misogynist views, and plain weirdness of some hams. However, this time it wasn't an emcomm enthusiast but anti-emcomm enthusiasts that were the problem.

Guys, we've been given these frequencies to use as a privilege, and for a number of reasons - let's use them in the spirit of friendship, experimentation, public service and the enjoyment of radio.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB6QXM on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
This is another example how polarized that the world and especially the US has become. You can see this in the politics of the US and I would say many parts of the world. Special Interests will spin information to justify their position. Politicians do it, corporations do it, special interests do it. The spin and sometimes the reason for the spin is based on a lightly vailed agenda.

The Emcomm proponents versus the opponents. Give me verifiable data supporting either position. This also reminds me of the days of proponents of the no-code license versus the traditional code requirement supporters. The code versus no-code has polarized the ham community. The ARRL supporters versus the ARRL hatred have also polarized ham radio operators. Contest supporters versus Contest hatred. DX chasers etc. There are many subjects to get passionate about. Unfortunately, each side of the debates over multiple ham radio subjects the players are usually very entrenched and neither side bushes. The same happens for the most part in our political system. Remember, it is a hobby. Treat it like a hobby and everyone's blood pressure will be a bit lower.

As these type of passionate debates can quickly come to an end, I would encourage anyone reading my post to come to my Yahoo group where I allow a passionate debate. The name of the group is called Ham Radio Open Conversation. I will not moderate on my group short of verbal threats.

I am in the process of building a 60 meter antenna as we speak. Hope to meet you all there. It is a band where the playing field is leveled for everyone. No broad splattering high power stations, no contests and no DX pileups. Let's see how the paradise changes once the rules change and the new modes are added.

73
Robert
Ham Radio Open Conversation group owner
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KC0TJO on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
How rediculous American hams must look to the rest of the world.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K8QV on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Put EMCOMM on 11 meters. Problem solved. More radios, more potential operators, amateur radio ops don't get irritated, and none of that difficult programming on complicated equipment. Just don't forget to refrain from working skip land, and please keep non-emergency conversations short, m'kay?

 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by EX_AA5JG on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"All the while they listen for a response on another band from a DX station. You can not even advise them when they are causing interference because they are listening elsewhere."

This happens all of the time on another shared ham band, the 70cm band. When you get on a repeater, do you listen to the input frequency as well? Probably not, you are listening 5mhz up most like. Suppose your transmit frequency is causing problems with a primary user of the band? How are they going to let you know? If the repeater has CTCSS on it, they might not know the correct tone, or even be able to access it.

73s John AA5JG
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by WZ3O on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
OK, so until 30 days after Federal Register Publication most of this is moot?!?! Yes?

ARRL link for those who care.....

http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-releases-new-rules-for-60-meters

So we wait & wait & still we debate!!!!
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KH6DC on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
If there's lots of DO's and Don'ts, why did the FCC release this band to the public to use without realizing not very many hams have or will buy narrow band equipment? Yes per FCC Regs as I remember from ticket exams, in case of emergencies, any portion of the ham frequencies can be commandeered and reserved for emergency use, such as Hurricane Katrina, Japan Earthquake, etc.

In my mind now that 60m has been released to the ham community, it's fair game to be used for DX Ragchewing, DX contests, digital, etc.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N8NOE on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
QUICK:


OCCUPY 60 Meter Band, just like Wall Street... Then We can get it done! We can all wear masks and hang out like Hippies...

OCCUPY OCCUPY OCCUPY

(So this is the "Change We got and Promised", Huh )
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N6RK on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I would like to know who the "important" government users are and why they need this band. (I know, its classified). But really, if you have a cell phone or a satellite phone or a VHF/UHF radio in contact with a repeater , why would you need this band? How could some communication be ultra important yet subject to the vagaries of HF radio? Are these users sending voice unencrypted? In this day and age, it is hard to see why government communications would need 5 MHz. Are these so called stations mobile or fixed? The latter seems really hard to justify. If us little old hams can bring government communications to a halt, what about terrorists?
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N6TZ on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie ? Who is Bonnie ? I don't recognize her as an official from the Commission, so maybe she needs to take a hike.
I love the comments by K6AER , AI2IA , NY7Q , KC2RGW , and others.
Hey guys - we don't need to worry about the Emcomm people as I view the situation they are like the CB craze of the 70s. They go to Ham school, get all hyped up that their radio will save the world, then get a Tech license and buy a handheld, build a "go bag", buy a bunch of batteries, and expect to be able to talk simplex from sea to shinning sea, and after they make two contacts the handheld is lost in the sock drawer. So this too will pass ! I have personally seen this happen to a half dozen of them.
It keeps the handheld manufacturers in business, so I guess that part of it is good.
So while the ARRL is bragging about 700,000 Hams, less than 100,000 are really on the air. - maybe?
Hal, N6TZ


 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KQ6XA on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I don't make the rules... FCC does.
If you don't like the rules, don't get a license.

It reminds me of something Scoop Nisker (broadcast radio personality) used to say:

"That's the news. If you don't like the news, go out and make some of your own."
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KC8VWM on January 18, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
These threads are rediculous because they are always attacking the author for the content they post.

What's the problem with all these people? I suspect they don't go outside much or something...

 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by LB1LF on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
by KQ6XA on January 18, 2012
I don't make the rules... FCC does.

-True - if you're in the US or one of its possessions, that is.

However, what has been discussed in this thread (Part of the time in much the same way as one would discuss the merits of various sporting teams, in a bar, just before closing time!) is not as much the rules (As laid down by the FCC) as your interpretation of said rules - which is not quite the same thing.


 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by LA9XSA on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
LB1LF, yes we wouldn't want our respective regulatory agencies to have to restrict our privileges or having to micro-manage us. Their rules require us to follow good operating practice, without necessarily having to spell out every single detail of what that means.

Sure, there might not be a specific national rule against contesting on a "WARC band" or sending AM in a CW band plan for example, but it would tend to go against good amateur practice and could be construed to be against the rules on that basis. Just mentioning that for those who want to exercise their sovereign freeman rights to the fullest extent of the law and all that.

By the way: Those who question why the government would use HF and why emcomm can't stay on one band, need to learn their fundamentals on propagation.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by NN4RH on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
This concept of "Ragchew DX Contests" is intriguing.

What's the exchange? CQ Zone, signal report, and favorite medical condition?
 
Dear Nanny Martin  
by AC2Q on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Actually there is quite a bit of "Guidance" in this article. Unfortunately what is useful and informative is negated by too much "Nannyism"

But if it gets someone to actually OPERATE on 60m, even out of spite, it will be all the better =0)
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K6RIM on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
CQ DX!
 
Rules cut and pasted from ARRL PDF Part 97  
by KA4KOE on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"97.303

(h) Amateur stations may only transmit single sideband, suppressed carrier (emission type 2K80J3E), upper sideband on the channels 5332 kHz, 5348 kHz, 5368 kHz, 5373 kHz, and 5405 kHz. Amateur operators shall ensure that their station's transmission occupies only 2.8 kHz centered at each of these frequencies. Amateur stations must not cause harmful interference to, and must accept interference from, stations authorized by:

(1) The United States Government, the FCC, or other nations in the fixed service; and

(2) Other nations in the mobile except aeronautical mobile service.

97.313
(i) No station may transmit with an effective radiated power (ERP) exceeding 50 W PEP on the 60 m band. For the purpose of computing ERP, the transmitter PEP will be multiplied by the antenna gain relative to a dipole or the equivalent calculation in decibels. A half-wave dipole antenna will be presumed to have a gain of 1. Licensees using other antennas must maintain in their station records either the antenna manufacturer data on the antenna gain or calculations of the antenna gain."

97.303H(2) has a typo, it seems.

If anyone has any other parts of Part 97 pertaining to the discussion that I may have missed, then please cut and paste them.

Now, unless I have missed something, these are the rules. Draw your own conclusions.

Respectfully yours,

Philip Neidlinger, PE
KA4KOE
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB6QXM on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Here is a thought. Has anyone ever heard the Primary users on the band? If so, has anyone heard the Primary user state to the ham on that specific frequency to stop transmitting because they cannot complete their communications.? Has anyone heard of a ham obtaining a citation because of interference to the primary user?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB6QXM on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Here is a thought. Has anyone ever heard the Primary users on the band? If so, has anyone heard the Primary user state to the ham on that specific frequency to stop transmitting because they cannot complete their communications.? Has anyone heard of a ham obtaining a citation because of interference to the primary user?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB6QXM on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Here is a thought. Has anyone ever heard the Primary users on the band? If so, has anyone heard the Primary user state to the ham on that specific frequency to stop transmitting because they cannot complete their communications.? Has anyone heard of a ham obtaining a citation because of interference to the primary user?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB6QXM on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Here is a thought. Has anyone ever heard the Primary users on the band? If so, has anyone heard the Primary user state to the ham on that specific frequency to stop transmitting because they cannot complete their communications.? Has anyone heard of a ham obtaining a citation because of interference to the primary user?
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W4HV on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
More often than not we hear from Bonnie on her pet modes( Digital)! Okay folks being very real here, it is way past time that we got off the personal kicks of emcomm addicts who are very much like the SS in Hitlers regime. It seemed that each rejected member of society became an ardent follower of der Furher and was given some position of importance (at least in their own minds). Many of the emcomm folks are like that! Get a life! We do not have that many communications emergencies!
Really the rules do not specify anything for Emcomm specifically! The funny part of all this is that the wonderfully complex world of digital communications is mostly worthless in an actual emergency because it is what it is! In an emergency, the more complex a system the less likely it is to function. Sorry Bonnie, but even you know it is true!
Since there is no emergency, why would you begin to ask for such rules? I promise as needed the commision can clear emergency frequencies at a moments notice as has been the case for the better part of a century now! Just as any ham who was around during WW2 would tell you!
Further if its that bad, I doubt there will be a commission to answer!
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KD7YVV on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
You know, reading a lot of these comments makes me shake
my head in wonder. We, as amateur radio operators are
supposed to be ambassadors of goodwill. Instead of
discussion of the author's article, I see replies that
are hateful, sexist, and even downright rude.
Even though I am involved in emergency communications
and have been for almost a decade, I see a lot of
disparaging comments regarding those hams that take the
time to at least perform some manner of public service.
The Amateur SERVICE, and yes, I capitalized service
because it seems a lot of people have forgotten or choose
not to remember why we have our frequency allocations.
Since I can't and won't speak for others, I'll speak of
my own experiences. I'm a member of my local ARES group. I also pass message traffic via the Washington
Amateur Radio Traffic System (WARTS) Net.
Am I there every day? No, of course not. Some days
I don't make it home in time to get on the air.
What about the older ham who is in a nursing home?
They may get a message via ham radio wishing them a
happy birthday even though they may not have been on
the air in years? Someone took the time to remember them.

As I write this, Western Washington is under an ice
storm warning, and I heard the Seattle EOC was
activated, and as of 9:52AM a state of emergency
was declared because of tree limbs etc falling over
roadways.

For those thinking that EmComm is just orange vests etc. etc., it's more than that.

How about the ham that drives the sag wagon at the end
of a race to be sure everyone makes it to the finish
line? And for those making comments about go-kits,
a couple of months ago, there was a power outage
and my neighbor a few doors down was lighting her house
with candles. I brought over a couple of glow sticks.
So my question is, what's wrong with being prepared?
I'm not saying it would have happened, but what if her
dog knocked over a candle and set her house on fire?
Maybe it's just me, I come from a different time when
neighbors helped each other.

What about the hams that take time for search and
rescue training? Those living in Washington know
full well that hikers and snowshoers get lost on
our various mountains throughout the year.

Just last week here in Ocean Shores, a woman was
missing, her car found on the beach. Search and
rescue teams from various counties volunteered their
time to help search for her. She was found alive btw.
How about the crowd posting here bash those people
for taking the time to look for her?

Now as far as the 11 meter crowd goes, back in the
1970's when my dad had his license, he'd meet up with
a bunch of people on channel 25 after getting home
from work and they'd have a ragchew "how was your day"
type of net. It gave him time to unwind and chat with
people from all walks of life. There are still some
nice people on 11 meters that at least take the time
to say hello.

My final question is, would it have made a difference
if the author had started the article with:
"Hi everyone, what do you think of this?"

Now, on to the subject of the article.
Ms. Crystal. It is my belief and opinion that HF is
not the place for emergency communications.
Granted, there are places in the world where ham radio
is the only form of communication available.
I've seen several articles on QRZ and other sites
asking that hams keep a frequency clear during hurricane
season for example. As a matter of fact it has been
known that 20 meters is usually where the hurricane
net is. While your ideas for 5 mhz are interesting,
I just don't think that with the limited bandwidth
that 60 meters offers, that data modes such as
packet/ALE etc. are suitable for that band.
Can anyone operate those modes on those frequencies?
Of course they can. Should they? As a common courtesy,
I believe they should not. Hams are allowed to use
any frequency for which they are licensed, except in
an emergency where any frequency is allowed.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't
30 meters the band where voice operation has been
refrained from use or am I thinking of 17 meters?

For all the bashers out there:

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Translated in to more modern English:

Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?

An interesting quote I once came across, says,
Amateur Radio is the hobby, service is the commitment.
Sure there are whacker wannabe emcomm people who think
the world can't get along without their 12 HT's on a
belt, car with wag lights etc. but you're going to
find extremists in any group. I know it isn't much,
but for those that take the time to pass message
traffic, who volunteer at parades, and volunteer in
their local communities and help when there is a bad
storm or other local emergency, thank you.

--KD7YVV, Currently Ocean Shores, WA.


 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by LA9XSA on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
WN9HJW > "This concept of "Ragchew DX Contests" is intriguing. "

This has already been answered: eHam editors removed some punctuation from the title.

KD7YVV, as well as those places where amateur radio will reach on 20 meters such as in the Caribbean, there's places in developed countries - like deep valleys and fjords - where HF NVIS on 80, 160, and maybe 60 meters is the only thing that'll work. It depends on the topography, really. Here in Norway, we often have our emergency nets on 80 and 160 meters. When the arctic conditions make HF unusable we'll have to rely on linked repeaters.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KN4X on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
AR needs "Emcommers" like ARES, SkyWarn, Communication Support (Municipalities, Red Cross, Parades). Just how many we need could be debated forever.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by AE6RO on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
C'mon, youse guys. Play nice together! All this arguing is indeed moot. Why, you may ask?

The NTIA has the final say, not the FCC. We found this out in 2003 when the band went from being a band to being five channels.

Now the ARRL revisionbs are being held up in a Senate subcommitee which advises the Commerce department, which the NTIA is part of.

Lastly, our esteemed representatives at WRC-'12 want to allow oceangoing robots access to those bands. Sort of contradictory, if you want to allow easy emergency access to the band.

I don't want to spend the dough on a new modern radio just to have to listen to robots on 60 meters. Better to wait and see, but arguing is fun for some people.

John
 
"Godwin's Law"  
by KB7AIL on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
OK. Time to invoke "Godwin's Law":

"An internet discussion is over when one party in the discussion accuses another party in the discussion of being a Nazi and/or Hitler."

Nothing more to say here.
 
RE: "Godwin's Law"  
by K9MHZ on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
LOL!

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by NG3J on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!

I agree totally with K6AER :-)

 
It's about time to close this thread!  
by KB0SFP on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
KF4CQR if not for ragchews.....
------------
Maybe "ragchews" was a poor choice of words. However as previously noted, all of those who with negative comments suffer from a selective reading disorder. They completely ignore the preceding word "Longwinded". I/E Extended monologues, & diatribes, that nobody likes to listen to but many Hams inconsiderate Hams inflict on us.

W9PMZ oh dear... another frequency police article...
-------------
Nothing constructive, or intelligent to add, show people your lack thereof.

KY6R Too bad there isn't a whole lot more spectrum on 60 meters. Too bad that it is channelized.
------------
More spectrum, good. Channelizing GOOD. Today's Hams are not smart enough, lack the common courtesy to be allowed free rein on a shared band where we are not the primary users. This thread is an excellent example. You must also realize that the USA, and the FCC, do not dictate the use of the HF spectrum. The use of HF allocations is based on international agreement.

AF3Y
------------
None of your comments bare repeating. You need a filter between you brain & your keyboard. One sick puppy that needs banning from eHam & the air!

AA4HA Most amateur gear does not meet the carrier suppression or frequency stability requirements.
------------
Finally a coherent, informed, & thoughtful comment. Most modern Ham equipment, even the premium models, are extremely dirty transmitters. Some must be operated at 1/2 their rated output to achieve advertized figures for IMD & spurious emissions. Take one of these rigs, put it in the hands of an inexperienced Ham who immediately connects it to as much power as he can muster, it become easily apparent why there is a power limit on 60 meters.

WS4E reality standpoint that ham radio is a "hobby", the band is not much use. "How about we just give the emcomm guys 60m all to themselves and require all emcomm traffic to use ONLY 60m
------------
You too have a filter problem and lack of comprehensive skills. Otherwise what would cause a person to make such a stupid statement for all to read?

AI2IA nothing .. that prevents any qualified and licensed ham from engaging in QSOs on the 60 meter band. out of his way to interpret the plain and clear regulations in such a way as to diminsh the hallmarks of the amateur spirit and to lessen the pleasure of others without the slightest justification.
------------
Finally, someone that can read! Sadly, somebody needed to. The "justification" becomes very apparent when you read the comments in this thread.

K1DA "ragchewing" "radio cop".
------------
Another with selective reading skills that would shoot the messenger. Other ranting comments are equally ludicrous. BTW I own both Icom marine & ham equipment. The build quality is not the same & you totally ignore IMD products are far greater in their Ham gear.

N3QE "Ragchew DX Contests", "Emcomm wannabes", "If they think we're contesting on 60M, they don't know contesting"
------------
Another with difficulty reading past the subject line. What is WAS & county hunting? Odd that you can look up the author on QRZ but are hard pressed to read the article or other references.

AA5JG "Emcomm Nazis"
------------
Another of those that like to demonstrate their limited intellect. The fact is, 60 meters was created for, using the express excuse of, emcomm. The ploy for it's modification was again emcomm. In fact, part of the justification for the existence of ham radio on a global scale is emcomm. Hams, have always, as a by product of their "Hobby", provided this service as well as numerous others both in service & technology. You seem one of those guys that will cause as traffic jam at an accident because your gawking rather than getting out and helping, or getting out of the way. You make some other equally ridiculous comments in the span of this thread that do not even warrant comment.

K9MHZ "that ragchewing etc"
-------------
One of the few considerate responses, but again you fail to read passed the subject line to the word "Longwinded". You will note the charts(which I do not agree with) repeat over, & over again, "QSO". I submit that the word "ragchewing" has different meanings for some and perhaps it's use in this instance wasn't a good idea.

KB7AIL Read it again and try to suppress your biases and find out what is really stated.
-------------
Sharp cookie! Refreshing.

KO3D attempt by the orange vested load bearing suspender wearing firemen wanna-be ARES emcomm ..dominate amateur radio....for emergencies only they can easily make a rule.
-------------
You have a lot of bottled up hate. You need to let it out. But not here! Nobody ever said "emergencies only".

KB2HSH "YET ANOTHER attempt at a frequency grab"
--------------
Thank you. I'm very glad that 60 meters has been grabbed but I don't think Bonnie deserves the credit.

K9MHZ "regulate because we MIGHT interfere with whom or with what (and we don't know), just doesn't make any sense". "she needs to more clearly define an actual problem before"
--------------
Why is that? Isn't it better to have no problems at all!

N0AH "You don't want to except paper qsl's to save a tree...."
--------------
That's it, lets clutter up the issue with more total nonsense.

AE6RO HW-18 which was originally designed for Civil Air Patrol,
--------------
NTIA did not banish the HW-18 for CAP use. CAP did. There has been a great deal of controversy over CAP's inability to interpret equipment requirements.

K6AER Most modern emergency organizations would be perfectly happy if the hams just got out of their way during an emergency.
--------------
Typical arrogance of US ham. Given your statement might have merit(which it doesn't), you forget that the Ham community is an international one. Our signals extend past the confines of US boarders. While you might think our emergency services might be self sufficient in the event of disaster, what of those in Haiti, and various other parts of the world.

KC2RGW
--------------
Too maniacal to even comment on. You've read your meaning into the article. or did you read it at all?

KM6CQ "I don't think you have to worry about emcommers taking over the band."
--------------
You are correct. There is no need to worry about a "taking over" because emcomm is our excuse for access to begin with.

N8CEP After reading this article I will definitely get on the band and have a "long" rag chew......Some people love to tell others what to do.
--------------
Go ahead, fan the fire. Some people need to be told what to do. It's called adult supervision.

K1OU I was thinking of putting together a DX ragchew net on 60
-------------
Your every bit as sharp as n8cep.

AE6RO So where would one get a radio for 60 meters by Transworld........
-------------
Same place you do any item of used Ham gear. Surplus market, hamfest, numerous internet sources.

NN3W "What an unbridled attempt at a power grab"
-------------
What!?

KC0TJO "How rediculous American hams must look to the rest of the world."
-------------
Amen!

K8QV "Put EMCOMM on 11 meters."
-------------
More unproductive rambling from another ineffective brain/keyboard filter.

K6RIM CQ DX!
-------------
Class clown. Can't interact on an intelectual level so disrupt the class with antics.

For the life of me I can not figure out why so many commenters in this thread pounce on emcomm. I simply don't understand what mentalilty would think emcomm is a bad thing. Hell, it's a good thing if for only one reason, we can use it as an excuse to gain more radio spectrum. But then, when we do, there's a segment of the community that would bitch about it.

Why is it so wrong to expect, or demand, courteous responsible proceedures be observed on a shared band. I suppose it's just natural for spoiled US hams to bitch about their gift horse.

Funny thing, I'm not involved in emcomm in any way. I just like Ham radio, the ability to communicate.

Some very, VERY simple facts:
60 meter access is a privilege. A privilege that was originally granted under the auspices of emcomm. It's current augmentation(which benefits us all) will again be accomplished with that same ploy, emcomm.
No statement was ever made, officially or otherwise, that excluded normal ragchew conversation, or QSO traffic, from this band. These assumptions where made, and commented on, by those with a very limited grasp of the English language, or an inability to simply read!

60 meters IS-NOT a HAM BAND. The entire 5mhz segment of the HF spectrum is channelized(not just the 5 channels we have access to) & shared with other services on an international scale. US Hams(as well as a few others) have been granted access to this band on a very understandably limited basis. As such, Bonnie made some common sense suggestions relating to ham related practices that might not be suitable for this very unique band. All where simply common sense, & should be common pactice anyway, but the plain fact is, they aren't. That is evidenced from many of the comments made here.

I use 60 meters every day. I know many extremely grateful hams that do also. I do not connect an MP-3 player up & let it drone out a CQ-DX call for extending periods of time illuminating the possibility of anybody else using this SHARED band.

This thread has morphed into something hideous. It's time to shut it down!

Dennis Starks
KB0SFP
HFpack/Milpack Monitor(all USB):
3996, 5403.5, 7296, 14342.5, 18157.5
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K4KK on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Amateur radio is not about being put into a box. It is about escaping that box! Attempts to claim spectrum space for a largely regional activity is nothing more than trying to put a lid on the box. Forget it!
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB2HSH on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
KB0SFP:

I KNEW it! It was only a matter of time until one of Bonnie's brainless dolts came to her "rescue". Climb off the soapbox, pal. I don't think ANYONE gives two shits about your critiques of others. Bonnie stated her inane position, the ham community at large responded. DEAL WITH IT.

And let Ms. Crystal fight her own battles (that she herself creates)

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N8CEP on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
As a retired asst. fire chief, I know the way Emcomm people are looked at by professionals. This article is just another example of the typical emcomm personality.
 
RE: It's about time to close this thread!  
by K5END on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
KB0SFP: "Your every bit as sharp as n8cep."

---------------

<ahem> That should be, "'you're' every bit as sharp..."

Behold the stone thrown from the occupant of a glass house.

A sharp writer would know the difference between the words, "your" and "you're."

 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KG4RUL on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"..... This thread has morphed into something hideous. It's time to shut it down!

Dennis Starks
KB0SFP
HFpack/Milpack Monitor(all USB):
3996, 5403.5, 7296, 14342.5, 18157.5"



An opinion from an unbiased observer!!!! Wait, he is part of Bonnie's little clique - now that is HIDEOUS! Let's shut HFpack down instead!
 
RE: USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests.  
by KQ6XA on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
.

Many are not familiar with the history of
how hams arrived on 60 meters.

The record is clear: FCC (and NTIA) was
not convinced hams needed more bands for
DXing; nor for contesting; nor for
longwinded ragchewing.

USA's Amateur Radio Service obtained use
of the 5MHz channels primarily by arguing:
"We need it for disaster communications."

Have hams engaged in a game of "Bait &
Switch" with 5MHz?

Hams promised the FCC that we are capable
of adult behavior: a new pinnacle of careful
non-interfering operating practice. Yet we
see high power, split pileups, QRM, and
longwinded transmissions on this band.

When the new FCC rules go into effect later
this year, 5MHz will take another step
in evolution. CW, RTTY, and Digital will
be added. Many have not followed the recent
changes; many will be new to this band; many
do not understand why the sloppiness common
on other bands isn't appropriate for this band.
We must tread more carefully upon it. The
number of hams advocating misuse of this band
demonstrates the need for this article to appear.

Spectrum is a scarce resource these days.
Use it wisely.

Regards,
Bonnie Crystal KQ6XA

.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz: Emcomm; Not Ragchew, DX, Contests.  
by KR2C on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie says:
"The record is clear: FCC (and NTIA) was
not convinced hams needed more bands for
DXing; nor for contesting; nor for
longwinded ragchewing."

Please site your sources of this information.

Bonnie says:
"USA's Amateur Radio Service obtained use
of the 5MHz channels primarily by arguing:
"We need it for disaster communications."

Please site your sources of this information.

Bonnie says:
"Hams promised the FCC that we are capable
of adult behavior: a new pinnacle of careful
non-interfering operating practice. Yet we
see high power, split pileups, QRM, and
longwinded transmissions on this band."

Obviously we behaved well. They gave us more privileges.
 
And the consensus is .......  
by AI2IA on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
The consensus is that the comments of KQ6XA are just like all the comments of the super hams over the years. They are not welcome.

We are amateur radio operators. We know where to look for authority and how to operate. We really don't care what your opinion of hams in general is, or what you want all hams to do with sixty meters or any other band.

From its earliest days amateur has gotten along very well without the advice of control freaks, and it will continue to rumble on just fine.

The majority just say no to this kind of nonsense, and the majority is correct.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W3WN on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
----------------------
Why do some American radio amateurs make using the hobby so so difficult with quotations from incomprehensible rules and regulations ?

Mel G0GQK
----------------------
How else would you know how smart and important they are, if they didn't tell you in this way?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K4YZ on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
QUOTE:
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests Reply
by W9PMZ on January 16, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
oh dear...

another frequency police article...

should be intersting...
UNQUOTE

Actually, Carl, had you been following the 60M issue at all, you'd know that EmComm applications and direct interoperability with federal users was one of the "selling points" for convincing NTIA to go with the program.

The LAST thing we need is another "You're 59, QSL via the bureau" allocation.

Steve, K4YZ
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB5ZSM on January 19, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I'm not an expert on the subject but it seems that without our support for emergency communications, to the government, to the FCC and to all of the people involved with getting us the frequencies we have to use, We're nothing. In other words, Why should they support us. They would be money ahead to just take our bands away and sell them off to other interested parties. I'm not involved in ARES or any of the other organizations but I do respect their cause and what they do for ham radio and the public in general. Learn to appeciate and respect what you do have as you could lose it all at anytime.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K4YZ on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!

QUOTE
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests Reply
by N8NOE on January 17, 2012

5403.5 RTTY, Better "PEE" and mark my Spot Fast...

SORRY ALL, I Don't Normally Post or Reply, but I Agree this is Bonnie GRABBING frequency spaces again, YES AGAIN! Please Look at A.L.E., HF-PACK, etc. Groups she is involved with or Started, YOU will see for Yourself. I have Left ANY and ALL Groups she has been involved with just for this reason alone. Her Followers are not bad Hams or People, just Mis-Informed and think there all doing the RIGHT-THING...
PLEASE, Read the RULES and Follow them, and have Fun! If we all listen to this Dribble, We'll loose the 5Mhz band due to LACK of USE by anyone NOT running ALE, or Not Calling CQ... HOW Ridiculous!..
UNQUOTE

Sorry, N8NOE, but your post ought to be titled "Knee-Jerk Reaction Without Adequate Research".

Nothing in Bonnie's post is inaccurate, demanding or authortarian. Her comments are both technically correct and operationally prudent.

The "60 meter band" is NOT a band as far as Amateur Radio is concerned. We are allowed five discreet channels at 60 meters that we have been permitted to operate on by the approving agency (in this case, NTIA). Part of the justification for our occupancy of this part of the spectrum is it's value for EmComm, especially for direct agency interoperability.

Like it or not, our valid need for EmComm related operability got us these channels, NOT ragchewing or award hunting.

One of the caveats of operating here is that we yield the frequency IMMEDIATELY if a federal user asks us us to so. That means operating more like a two meter repeater and less like a traditional Amateur HF frequency. And what do we NOT do on repeaters? Call "CQ DX" or carry on extentive, long-winded conversations, for a couple. Why? So other stations who need the frequency can get a word in edgewise.

These are NOT "Amateur" allocations. They are "land mobile" allocations that we've been granted access to.

The Amateur Radio SERVICE is just that, a service to the public. No where in Part 97 is the Amateur Radio SERVICE codified as a HOBBY! Why do I state this? Because when our operations cease to be in the public good, and that includes operating our stations responsibly and cooperatively with other users, we may quickly find ourselves banished from the airwaves.

The ever-expanding demand for spectrum for all those consumer devices we've all come to consider must-haves in our lives creeps up on "our" allocations everyday. One of the few arguments that fends off the wolves is our usefulness in emergencies. Like it or not, EmComm is the life ring for our other activities. If you can't get behind the dedicated use of five single frequencies for such uses, please be sure to check your whiny-rag at the door when the privilege gets pulled from us.

Yes, most of us ARE licensed in Amateur Radio as a hobby, but that license is a PRIVILEGE, NOT a RIGHT!

Steve, K4YZ


 
RE: And the consensus is .......  
by K4YZ on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!

QUOTE
And the consensus is ....... Reply
by AI2IA on January 19, 2012

The consensus is that the comments of KQ6XA are just like all the comments of the super hams over the years. They are not welcome.

We are amateur radio operators. We know where to look for authority and how to operate. We really don't care what your opinion of hams in general is, or what you want all hams to do with sixty meters or any other band.

From its earliest days amateur has gotten along very well without the advice of control freaks, and it will continue to rumble on just fine.

The majority just say no to this kind of nonsense, and the majority is correct.
UNQUOTE


Last time I checked, Bonnie has the right to express her thoughts, ideas, concerns and opinions, just the same as you or I, regardless of whether you or I like them. There's a couple of rather famous documents that form the framework for that which we call "America", and they promise ALL of us the right to say our peice.

So unless you're an avowed North Korean sympathizer or Iranian cleric, Ray, suck it up. She's allowed to have her say, "majority approval" be damned.

Steve, K4YZ
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K4YZ on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!

QUOTE
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests Reply
by KB2HSH on January 19, 2012
KB0SFP:

I KNEW it! It was only a matter of time until one of Bonnie's brainless dolts came to her "rescue". Climb off the soapbox, pal. I don't think ANYONE gives two shits about your critiques of others. Bonnie stated her inane position, the ham community at large responded. DEAL WITH IT.

And let Ms. Crystal fight her own battles (that she herself creates)
UNQUOTE

"...brainless dolts..."

"...two shits..."

Let's see how low you can push the denominator, John.

Apparently you can't maturely or reasonably argue any of her points, so you just drop right on in to name calling and profanity...Really responsible, adult behavior.

Steve, K4YZ
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K4YZ on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!

QUOTE
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests Reply
by KF4CQR on January 16, 2012

If the intent was not to use 5 MHZ for ragchews, the Government should prohibit such by regulation.

I see that they do not, so ragchews are fine.
UNQUOTE

Where did Bonnie say they weren't?

She suggested LONG-WINDED QSOs were inappropriate here, and she's absolutely correct.

Inasmuch as we have been directed to relinquish the frequency immediately to any federal user who may break in and demand the frequency's use, her caveat was a prudent one.

Judging by the majority of the posts in this thread, Mr. Wilson's included, it's glaringly apparent that a remedial English comprehension course is warranted for most of the correspondents herein.

Steve, K4YZ
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W9PMZ on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
K4YZ - you missed the whole point of my post. Personally I have never even tuned, to 60M let alone follow what is going on in regards to the go bag crowd. So you are correct in the assumption about my knowledge of the go bag crowd.

But you are incorrect, my comment was to the nature of the internet. When an article of this nature is posted usually fireworks ensue.

Regarding the go bag crowd, to each their own. This country has been reduced to paranoia... To paraphrase a past movie, "Dr. Bin Laden, or how I learned to love the terrorist"...

73,

Carl - W9PMZ
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB2HSH on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
K4YZ:
Untwist your panties and move on, fella.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9MHZ on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
>>>>N8CEP on January 19, 2012 As a retired asst. fire chief, I know the way Emcomm people are looked at by professionals. This article is just another example of the typical emcomm personality.<<<<

I admire the League (Life Member, blah, blah, who cares). But one thing I've never understood is why, with so much League emphasis on EMCOMM to retain our allocations, is so little effort put into guidelines for EMCOMMers' appearance and behaviors. It's like the wild west....anything goes for uniforms, logos and lights on vehicles, officious presumption of authority, you name it. Weird, weird, weird.

N8CEP....I can imagine that someone in your position would welcome a group of hams and other volunteers who show up to assist in comfort much like Red Cross volunteers, so long as they do it in a DIGNIFIED, and stay the h%$l out of the way manner.

In the military, people who provided such services to families, etc in our unit were a HUGE help, and they were dignified and provided their services behind the scenes. No uniforms, no badges, no weird vehicles....just noble service to the people who needed it.

Ah well.

 
Adding to the collection  
by AI2IA on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Over the years on eHam.net I've read posts by ham snobs, gloom and doomer hams, good old golden days hams, Morse Code fanatics, Morse Code bashers, self-hating hams, emcomm bashers, and now with Bonnie and her loyal followers I can add emcomm control freaks.

Fortunately, the vast majority of contributors to this thread exhibit the good sense of the regular ham community. In fact, it is uplifting to read all the sound, clear comments on here in contrast to the emcomm control freak inputs, and by saying this, I have all due respect for those who give their time and effort for the real emcomm activities of ham radio. - Ray Mullin, ai2ia
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W4HV on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie,
The comment dated the 16th states that you understand the commissions policy on declared frequencies. That is good! So why are you trying to pervert that to say its all about Emcomm. We don't Emcomm on a daily basis nor do we have a disaster daily! I suppose you need a digital drum to beat yet again. We obviously have been doing what we are supposed to based on the recent increase in power levels given to us! I am constantly amazed at the illogical banter you post on here!
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N0YXB on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
It's interesting that there are those defending Bonnie's freedom of speech rights by suggesting that this thread needs to be shut down. I guess to them freedom of speech is a one way street. I'm neutral about "Emcomm" and amateur radio, but this article illustrates that some in the "Emcomm" world certainly live up to the stereotype.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB6QXM on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I would like to suggest that it is not the article that Bonnie submitted. Considering how much responses that this article have received, it is an indication on how polarized people have become.

I could generate an article of code versus no-code hams or an article on the ARRL or an article on Contests or many other "touchy" subjects and the response from each of the pro/con camps will generate comments to support and justify their positions. I believe in my opinion that the method that Bonnie took to justify her position curled the hair(the one's that still have hair) of many hams. I think it was the delivery of the point that she was declaring that this the way it is and that she has no official authority.
I do not believe it is the subject of the post, it was the delivery.
There are many "touchy" subjects that will cause us to respond and respond with such passion. This thread caused me to generate a yahoo group called Ham Radio Open Conversation as this type of passion was demonstrated on the sixty meter yahoo group and the group owner had to shut down the thread. I will allow any touchy ham radio subject and will not step in short of verbal threats.

I do hope that this thread is not being read by any real decision makers in the FCC. They either have to document better so that there is no room for interpretation or they might just not grant us secondary status on any band in the future.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K4YZ on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
QUOTE
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests Reply
by KB2HSH on January 20, 2012

K4YZ:
Untwist your panties and move on, fella.
UNQUOTE

Very mature. No reasonable argument, ergo name calling and silly, sand-lot aspurgences.

Steve, K4YZ
 
RE: It's about time to close this thread!  
by N9JR on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
KB0SFP Wrote:
60 meters IS-NOT a HAM BAND. The entire 5mhz segment of the HF spectrum is channelized(not just the 5 channels we have access to) & shared with other services on an international scale. US Hams(as well as a few others) have been granted access to this band on a very understandably limited basis. As such, Bonnie made some common sense suggestions relating to ham related practices that might not be suitable for this very unique band. All where simply common sense, & should be common pactice anyway, but the plain fact is, they aren't. That is evidenced from many of the comments made here.

Dude, you should really stop drinking the Kool-Aid Bonnie is serving you. If 60 meters isn't a ham band why do we have a secondary allocation for it? Why do our radios cover it? And why do you operate it?

Sure hope you are getting paid to shill for her. You and Her Highness remind me of the Packet Nazis of years past. Annoying like a buzzing gnat.
 
RE: It's about time to close this thread!  
by AE6RO on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
On my message of 1-19-2012, I accidentally wrote "ARRL revisionbs". This was a typographical error, I assure one and all. It should have read "ARRL revision".

John
 
RE: It's about time to close this thread!  
by AE6RO on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I am surprised that Bonnie Crystal hasn't weighed in after feeling the heat of all these flames. It certainly is an active thread.

I'd like to try 60 meters but with a boat anchor. My not-so-trusty HW-18 was decertified presumably by the CAP in 1996 because it did not meet the NTIA stability standard. I found some flaky trimmer caps and removed them that might have accounted for it.

Probably will lose the channels anyway because of the oceangoing robots will take it over. Or was that oceanographic radar which the US has proposed for WRC-12 and 60 meters. Certainly would be harder to kick a 'bot off a channel than a long-winded ham. John
 
The proper way to cede a frequency to primary user  
by KC8RWR on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Here's a 'beginner' question. You are told to clear the frequency by a primary user. Obviously you do so immediately. But how immediate is immediately?

What I mean is do you say something back to the primary user to acknowledge their request. "Sure thing, it's all yours" for example. I'm pretty sure Q-codes would be inappropriate for this. Also, if your last transmission didn't end w/ your callsign do you transmit one last time just to identify? I'm assuming that telling the other ham a frequency to QSY to would be too much?

What if you hear the primary user but the other ham does not. He/She did hear you just a moment ago. What if he keeps transmitting, looking for you. Should you jump on real quick and tell him to stop?

Or does immediate really mean IMMEDIATE. Just put down the mic and hit the vfo or power button?
 
RE: The proper way to cede a frequency to primary user  
by EX_AA5JG on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"Here's a 'beginner' question. You are told to clear the frequency by a primary user. Obviously you do so immediately. But how immediate is immediately?"

That is a good question. Also, how do you know for sure it is a primary user? How do they have to identify? It may be a freebander playing jokes on hams. Or another ham playing a joke. What sort of identifier would a primary user use?

73s John AA5JG
 
You deserve an answer.  
by AI2IA on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
John, AA5JG asks:
""Here's a 'beginner' question. You are told to clear the frequency by a primary user. Obviously you do so immediately. But how immediate is immediately?"

That is a good question. Also, how do you know for sure it is a primary user? How do they have to identify? It may be a freebander playing jokes on hams. Or another ham playing a joke. What sort of identifier would a primary user use?"

Here is what I would do: Part 97.119 (a) says in part, "...must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting channel at the end of each communication, ...for the purpose of clearly making the source of the transmissions from the station known to theose receiving the transmissions."

So, if I am on the air, and am interrupted by an emergency call, or a primary use station seeking the use of the frequency, I would acknowledge that I heard the request by giving my call sign ai2ia and saying, "clear." If it is a true emergency, I would keep it very short by saying, "This is ai2ia, clear.

By doing this, you assure the primary or emergency station, and everyone that may be listening, that you heard the request and that you are complying and going off the air on that frequency. In addition, in your log, you can and should note the time, frequency, and if possible the requesting station, if you can, and note also that you responded by terminating your communication with your call sign. Later, if there comes about any questioning of your actions, or if someone says that you did not yield, you have a record that you did it according to the rules.

How do you know if it is a primary user? You don't know for sure, but you do the right thing and yield anyway. Emergency transimissions can be made by anyone, even non-license holders. How immediate is immediate? In my opinion, as soon as you clearly hear and understand the request. If you don't, you ask them to repeat their message.

I hope that this answers your question and may you enjoy amateur radio to its fullest. Ray Mullin, ai2ia

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by NZ4O on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I worked for Uncle Sam for quite awhile including in radio communications. There is no "real" primary user government radio activity in the 60 meter band. The primary-secondary user thing is a farce.

Uncle Sam had all but abandoned the HF spectrum prior to 911. It reclaimed much of the spectrum when the war on terror began but the vast majority is still unused.

Also there is a move to claim this spectrum for the oceanographic research radar system called CODAR. Do a Google on it. Also tune between approximately 4700-4900 kc and you will here them in action. Horrific 24/7 wideband QRM.

Having said that I personally don't operate on 60 meters as I don't like the channelisation scheme.

73,
Thomas F. Giella NZ4O


 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by EX_AA5JG on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
" worked for Uncle Sam for quite awhile including in radio communications. There is no 'real' primary user government radio activity in the 60 meter band. The primary-secondary user thing is a farce."

Thomas,

Please stop confusing this discussion with facts and empiricism.

73s John AA5JG
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by NO6L on January 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I get the notion, though I could be wrong, Bonnie doesn't like ragchewing or people that partake of it. It's like this, as long as Part 97 doesn't limit the content that radio amateurs may traffic on 60M, I will use what ever frequency there I wish, for whatever legal content I wish. If I want to chase DX, I'll do it. If I want to ragchew, I'll do that. If I'm there first and some automated ALE station clobbers my QSO I'll just have to take care of business via "Self Policing", within the constraints of the law.

I also find her attitude interesting, seeing as how almost every emergency traffic passed on Amateur Radio was started when two or more people participating in a ragchew type QSO were discovered by the station/vessel in distress. Fat lot of good some automated station would be in that case.

73
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by WX7G on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
This is a good article that neatly condenses what is contained in FCC and ARRL documents.


FCC Report and Order, November 18, 2011

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db1123/FCC-11-171A1.pdf

ARRL link

http://www.arrl.org/60-meter-faq

 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by LA9XSA on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
N9JR > "If 60 meters isn't a ham band why do we have a secondary allocation for it? Why do our radios cover it? And why do you operate it?"

In the US it's a small collection of exact frequencies, not a continuous *band* with free tuning. That was the point made.
In some other countries, it's a continuous band.

AE6RO> "I am surprised that Bonnie Crystal hasn't weighed in"

She's replied several times in this discussion, just search for her callsign.

NO6L > "I will use what ever frequency there I wish, for whatever legal content I wish. If I want to chase DX, I'll do it. If I want to ragchew, I'll do that."

You're making the assumption that it would be legal to do those things. Both the secondary status and the requirement to show good engineering and amateur practice mean that we should show more consideration than just "I think it's legal, got mine". Those bands where primary and other users are more active, need to be a bit more carefully used than our primary allocations.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K2JX on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!

So, "we" have another band to operate on, but you can't talk more than necessary, whose idea was that ? Give us hobbyists a band "we" can yak on without military precision. The noise and clatter on 60 meters here on East Coast makes it most annoying to listen too. I can imagine during an emergency it would be almost impossible to pass traffic through that QRM anyway.
73 de K2JX
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KC8VWM on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I seem to recall the purpose of the channelised 60m band was intended for radio operation similar in scope and operating style to what we use VHF simplex for.

 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K0OD on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
A proposal that would have trimmed long ragchews via a VOX requirement was dropped in the final version.

The FCC is quite capable of promulgating precise regs that ban long transmissions or international communication. They haven't done so. Therefore, ragchewing and DXing are legal on 60.

Jeff
K0OD





 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N9JR on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
N9JR > "If 60 meters isn't a ham band why do we have a secondary allocation for it? Why do our radios cover it? And why do you operate it?"

In the US it's a small collection of exact frequencies, not a continuous *band* with free tuning. That was the point made.
In some other countries, it's a continuous band.

That was not the point argued at all, unfortunatly your interpretation is presented with the intention of supporting the origional authors untenable supposition that 60 meters is not a ham band. I contend that it is or we would not have an allocation. The inference that it is channelized makes it different is a red herring. A grant of rights to use frequecies channelized or not is a ham band.

And 60 is a damn fine DX band too. My last 60m qso was with 9L0W - awesome 60m DX. Who knows it might be a good ragchew band too.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by LA9XSA on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I direct the reader's attention to 97.101, 93.303 and 2.105 of the FCC rules.

101 requires US amateurs to use "good engineering and good amateur practice" in "all respects not specifically covered by FCC Rules", as well as saying that they "must cooperate in selecting transmitting channels and in making the most effective use of the amateur service frequencies".

303 and 105 says that US amateurs must not cause interference to, and must accept interference from, the other users of frequencies where we have a secondary allocation.

If you refuse to follow that, you're actually breaking the FCC rules, so it's not true that only content that have their own specific in the rules paragraph (paid messages, encrypted messages, etc.) are against the rules.

That doesn't give this eHam article the force of law, but it's a guideline for how to follow these FCC rules and keep the NTIA happy in respect to the 60 meter frequencies. Discussion and improvement of this suggested guideline is a good thing - offering sexual insults to the author and causing harmful interference due to ignoring the guideline, is not so good.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by NZ4O on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I was involved in real EMCOM situations with a myriad of federal agencies including the U.S. Coast Guard. I also worked as a federal, state and county law enforcement officer. All the while I was also an amateur radio operator.

My personal observations of the performance of amateur radio EMCOM types in action led me to have a very poor opinion of them. I saw many instances of very poorly trained personnel in very poor physical shape. I saw one guy show one time show up with an oxygen tank as he had COPD.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Andrew I saw another guy show up with a yellow hard hat on with battery powered revolving red and blue emergency lights mounted on top. He ended up getting hit by a car. Another guy was bitten by a rattlesnake.

It was the whole get in the way and become another onscene victim wacker thing.

73,
Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by LA9XSA on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
N9JR > "That was not the point argued at all"

Yes it was: In the US it's channelized and it's secondary with other active users, so you can't treat it the same as you do primary amateur bands. Go back and read the post if you want. He even points out that it's OK to ragchew and have regular QSOs on the 60 meter band - he just supports the article writer's notions that it's not to have longwinded overs, pileups, split operation etc. because of the potential QRM to other users, and that you should listen carefully before and while using it.

If his post had consisted only of saying "Hey guys 60 meters is not a ham band", I would have agreed with you that he would have been imprecise, but he clarified what he meant by that: US amateurs only has a few frequencies of the band, on a secondary basis.
 
60m channels do indeed constitute an amateur band.  
by N4QA on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!

Granted, 60m will look, sound and feel more like a conventional amateur band, once CW and PSK31 are allowed.

Impaired though it currently is, with only USB phone, 60m is most definitely a bona fide amateur band.

Listening around the 60m band today, I heard one ham say that he's hearing many first-timers on the band of late. He offered an explanation for this phenomenon by declaring that the upcoming effective date of the new 60m rules has spawned great interest in the new, improved 60m band.

I agree wholeheartedly with his assessment.

72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: 60m channels do indeed constitute an amateur band.  
by K5MO on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
It's a ham frequency...dx, ragchew, do whatever you want.

John K5MO
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by EX_AA5JG on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"N9JR > "That was not the point argued at all"

Yes it was: In the US it's channelized and it's secondary with other active users, so you can't treat it the same as you do primary amateur bands."

We are secondary users on 70cm, but it is treated the same as 2m, which is a primary amateur band.

73s John AA5JG
 
If you hesitate, they succeed.  
by AI2IA on January 21, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
With all due respect to real emcomm hams, don't let these emcomm control freaks prevent you from using sixty meters to the fullest extent provided to amateur radio operators by the FCC rules and regulations.

Bonnie and her crowd are not the FCC. They cannot tell you how to operate. Read and understand the rules. Listen, and operate. Isn't this what we do on all our allocations?

It may very well be that the main reason for this very long thread and large number of comments is that many hams are either uncertain about the sixty meters rules, or are intimidated by the emcomm control freaks, or simply lack self-confidence. Don't let that happen to you.

As a cranky and nasty old school teacher once used to say, "Know what you know, and know that you know it." After that, go ahead. JUST DO IT!
 
What many don't know about DXing on 60  
by K0OD on January 22, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie (and her bicycle mobile station) ignores that over 100 countries operate 60 meters. Recently Paul, G0HNW became the first station to work "DXCC" on the band. He uses a dipole and 100 watts.

THE U.S. DOESN'T OWN SIXTY. Canadian hams will soon get permanent authorization. Channel 5 needs to be kept fairly clear because that's the way OTHER nations want it. There are many different allocations around the world, but 5403.5 kHz is uniquely common to most of them.

Yes, many Americans love DXing. But other nations want to work us and other DX too. Quite a few foreign ops collect states. They are often the ones complaining loudest about long-winded American operation on Ch 5.

Now you understand why Channel 5 is "The DX Channel" and has always required special respect during wintertime evening hours.
 
Great! CW DX on 5405 KHz. Be right there!  
by N4QA on January 22, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Seeing how 60m channel 5 has been set aside by so many as the 'DX Channel', I'll be right there on 5405 KHz, once CW is allowed on 60m in the USA. After all, you sideband boys have had the band all to yourselves since 03 July 2003 !

I'll probably buy a big amplifier, since my GADS! antenna is so inefficient on sixty, so that I may raise my ERP on the band to 100 watts p.e.p. once the new rules become effective.

Otherwise, I may operate QRP...

72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: Great! CW DX on 5405 KHz. Be right there!  
by KB6QXM on January 22, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
What is the effective date of the new rules?
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KM6CQ on January 22, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
What is clear is that group thinking or decision by committee is not effective. It kills self reliance and the pioneering spirit. No wonder a growing amount hams fear the FCC very little.

 
RE: What many don't know about DXing on 60  
by K0OD on January 22, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Funniest quote:

"The other night I was listening to a guy
who claimed he was running 100 watts into
a 3-element SteppIR beam, and didn't seem
to care that the current rules state 50
watts PEP into a dipole."

--
A 3 element SteppIR has no gain on 60. Probably a awful antenna on the band. Running 100 watts might well be legal into such a lossy antenna.

The rules don't require dipoles. Jeesh, read the rules folks. Actually there's nothing wrong with using a 60 meter yegi on 60 meters if you turn down your power to offset the antenna gain. You'd also have to do some record keeping required by the FCC.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by NG3J on January 23, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
>Funniest quote:

>"The other night I was listening to a guy
>who claimed he was running 100 watts into
>a 3-element SteppIR beam, and didn't seem
>to care that the current rules state 50
>watts PEP into a dipole."

--
>A 3 element SteppIR has no gain on 60. Probably a
> awful antenna on the band. Running 100 watts might >well be legal into such a lossy antenna.

>The rules don't require dipoles. Jeesh, read the >rules folks. Actually there's nothing wrong with >using a 60 meter yegi on 60 meters if you turn down >your power to offset the antenna gain. You'd also >have to do some record keeping required by the FCC.

** That's what happens when you dumb down the license requirements. You get comments like "What is ERP??" or "I'm getting 100 watts out to my antenna with my 100 watt rig and my SWR is 2.0 and my feedline is 500 ft to the shack...but I'm sure that my antenna is radiating 100 watts because my power meter on my desk says so"... ;-)

 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9MHZ on January 23, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Or maybe he could just turn up his power mic to get out....roger.

 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W1LVL on January 24, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Problem Solved:

Make 60 meters D-Star and P-25 only. LOL

73
George W1LVL
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1DA on January 24, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Isn't KB0FSP quite the superior being, though. In the legal business, which I have been in for about 35 years, we find that clarification of government regulations often requires the issuance of some sort of notice of violation and attendant "discussion", pro and con, before a hearing officer. We don't KNOW what the FCC actually intends as proper usage for this assignment until someone is actually cited for IMproper usage. Until then, consider the suggestion that "all things are permitted unless specifically prohibited". Usually, the FCC issues a warning prior to an actual citation. Often, interpertation of that regulation ends up in the courts. We all know how that works out --- see the K1MAN debacle.
I don't wish to see anyone warned or cited over their use of 60 meters, but the author of this article is far from judge and jury in the matter.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1XT on January 25, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Here's what is posted on one of the URLs that was given:

"A request for an ECD will only be accepted after a communications disaster has occurred."

In the meantime, you can ragchew to your heart's content. The only way to learn propagtion of the band and the equipment in use is to use it.

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W3NUS on January 25, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
These self inflicted restrictions that are being constructed for this band seem to me to be one reason NOT to use the band. Amateur radio is becoming more and more a restricted communications endeavor. It used to be a haven for experimenters and creative individuals who wished to "advance the art." Rag chewing and dx activities, if done in the proper spirit, use the frequencies in a constructive manner and teach good operating practices. Remember one of the fathers of Amateur radio and communications, Edwin Armstrong, was an avid experimenter. He developed the first superheterodyne receiver, FM radio, and practical applications for vacuum tubes that DeForest had no clue about. This was experimenting and advancement of the radio art. When mode restriction and operatiog restrictions are imposed, we lose all of this sort of creativity and development.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N2MG on January 26, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Long before many of those posting here even became hams, contesters (almost) universally agreed to NOT have any contesting on any of the so-called WARC bands.

As far as I know, this self-imposed rule has not been broken.

I would love to hear a recording of a so-called "contest" or "contester" on 60m.

Mike N2MG
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KC8OYE on January 27, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"Hey guys - we don't need to worry about the Emcomm people as I view the situation they are like the CB craze of the 70s. They go to Ham school, get all hyped up that their radio will save the world, then get a Tech license and buy a handheld, build a "go bag", buy a bunch of batteries, and expect to be able to talk simplex from sea to shinning sea, and after they make two contacts the handheld is lost in the sock drawer. So this too will pass ! I have personally seen this happen to a half dozen of them. "

Really?
That's why my local A.R.E.S organization has been running strong since 1979? Through a lot of hard work, careful planning, and lots of listening, our organization has an awesome working association with our local Fire, Police, and E.O.M. In fact, we just got a nasty-gram from the Fire dept chief because they weren't getting our ATV feed from the fire scene (our ATV repeater was kaput at the time)
But to be fair, we have our share of rescue rangers. I know of one local ham that was arrested because he felt his ARES I.D gave him the right to put red lights on his truck and ignore traffic lights......

I think it's more fair to say that most of us recognize our roles. Our organization has focused on public service, not following the police and fire around and it's built us a mostly un-matched reputation. To the point that the Emergency services have come to us asking for help. *shrug*

like anything else, the loud and proud give the rest of us a bad rep. I've had plenty of civil conversations on 11m.. .and a few unbelievable ones...

my only HF capability right now is 10m FM... (FT-8900) but with the stuff I read on Eham on a regular basis like this thread.. it
a) makes me want to stay as far away from H.F as I can...
b) Having operated HF occasionally at other stations I realize you can't believe everything you read on the internet, which in turn makes me wonder why I continue to bother with reading anything on Eham anymore..
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KC8OYE on January 27, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"Really the rules do not specify anything for Emcomm specifically! The funny part of all this is that the wonderfully complex world of digital communications is mostly worthless in an actual emergency because it is what it is! In an emergency, the more complex a system the less likely it is to function. Sorry Bonnie, but even you know it is true!"

This part I have to agree with you on.. there are a few hams in the area here jumping up and down and screaming and waving that they want the local repeater to go to Dstar, or Motorola Turbo, or some other digital mode..

how well is that going to hold up in a disaster when A) nobody around here could hope of affording a Dstar radio..
and b, to my knowledge, the are *THREE* people in the county who own Motorola Turbo radios?

add to that, we're lucky we can even keep our 2m repeaters on the air.. for voice. let alone digital modes... our 220.48 is off the air due to antenna damage from winds.. our 440 repeater has been off the air for so long I can't even remember it's freq. We had to take it's dual band antenna down to keep the primary repeater on the air after it's antenna was wasted by a lightning strike. our ATV repeater is off the air because it relies on a PC to generate it's I.D image.. and that PC blew a p/s up. and someone thinks adding more digital stuff is a good idea?!?!?

our repeaters are located in a very awesome location, we're on the 13th floor of the local hospital, we are on the hospital's back up generators at no cost to us. (we're not on the battery back up for the life support systems tho.. shucks) so our antennas are on top of a 14 story building... when a tornado comes through and levels the town like it did back in 1953 (research the 1953 Beecher tornado in Michigan) do we really want delicate fiddly electronics up there.. or we do want reliable, robust commercial grade electronics that can take a minor lightning hit and keep going?
(we're surrounded by lightning rods, but they don't always help)
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KC8OYE on January 27, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"I would like to suggest that it is not the article that Bonnie submitted. Considering how much responses that this article have received, it is an indication on how polarized people have become. "

I would agree.. I've had the "NTS doesn't belong on VHF" debate with a ham friend of mine several times. I've been down the code/no code road a few times - I've only had my general class license for a few months... but I *AM* learning code because I _Want_ to...

The single biggest problem is the air of anonymity generated by being behind a keyboard... I could guarantee you with almost 100% certainty, that none of these anti-emcomm people would have the intestinal fortitude to stand up in front of our 33 year old A.R.E.S organization and repeat what they've said here...
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N9KWW on January 27, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
The 5MHZ band is channelized for a reason, it is NOT a ham band. These discrete frequencies were assigned to us on a secondary/non-interference basis. They can be revoked at any time. This is a privilege to use there channels. As a MARS member we have used channels for ages and fully understand the concept, as hams we have had the very unique privilege of bands where we can go up or down a few kHz at will. Every other HF user in the world has assigned frequencies they must use, and they can’t go where they want to.
If we want to continue to have access to these frequencies we need to be mindful of the restrictions that come with it. We have access to these frequencies on the premise it was ecom use. We have a choice, use them carefully or lose them.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K5MO on January 27, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"We have access to these frequencies on the premise it was ecom use."

Not true.
 
60m ham band = RC, DX & a single contest per year  
by N4QA on January 28, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
While I generally agree with no contests on the sixty meter amateur band...

There should be a single annual contest on 60 meters...all modes simultaneously...to show the feds just how interested USA hams are in the band. This contest would include required 'silent periods'... as were once used on the 600-meter maritime band...except that today, these would have to be observed more frequently on 60m in order to allow primary users access to these frequencies.
We'll call this contest the 'Bedlam Contest'.
The exchange will be 59 or 599 plus SPC and the contest will have a period of 24 hours.

At all other times, the 60-meter amateur band will be used for:
1) Primary user purposes, as required.
2) Secondary user actual emergency communications.
3) Ragchewing, DXing, experimenting etc by hams.

Sound familiar?

72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: 60m ham band = RC, DX & a single contest per year  
by K4RAF on January 28, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
The ARRL WHINED for these channels for EMCOMM
The ARRL ABANDONED these channels for EMCOMM

The band is now USED by non-EMCOMM

Case CLOSED...
 
USA: 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew, DX, Contests  
by KQ6XA on January 31, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Nice to see so many operators interested in 60 meters.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W5PUG on January 31, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I left amateur radio for quite a while, and I'm looking to return soon, once I get of the deed restricted neighborhood home I'm in.

What I don't miss is all the folks who tune up on top of others, play music, belch, shout obscenities, QRM nets, etc.

I think it's fine to RESPECTFULLY disagree with Bonnie. But many of the comments on here are at best rude and at the worst, absolutely uncalled for.

It seems that amateur radio these days is more and more populated by bitter, angry and obnoxious men, especially in the U.S. Reading the comments and the personal attacks here has convinced me that nothing has changed. Keep your rude behavior up, and maybe all our spectrum will be gone.
 
RE: USA: 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew, DX, Contests  
by KB2HSH on January 31, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Quote: "Nice to see so many operators interested in 60 meters."

No, Bonnie...it's the SAME shit-storm you created a few years ago when American operators were in the beginning stages of experimenting with ROS. Jose just "HAPPENED" to list 14.109 as a preliminary frequency, and you hit all of the forums CLAIMING that 14.109 "belonged" to ALE. You beat the "drum of emcomm", divided the masses, and when others started to resent YOUR input and interference, your groupies SWARMED to your defense.

Enjoy the vitriol, because I doubt it'll be the last time you write something slanted and with a motive. But, no one appreciates your writing...remember?

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N9KWW on January 31, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Being a new guy into this foray, unaware of others “histories”, but very familiar with the 60 meter band and its inception. To be quite frank, I was NOT in favor of having hams in this band. As a federal user of frequencies in this band and the channelization system we use, I was very Leary of hams just simply sliding up or down a few KHZ to make a contact. The other issue is the use of channelization rules, center frequency, power restrictions etc.
I will say that I am impressed, no incidents while I was using the band and I have not heard any hams off of the designated channels. Ecom and hams is not a well-received combination in many federal circles. There are a select few who do the hams as a whole proud and can effect Ecom in a professional manner. The issue I have had as a ham and on the job is that many are want to bee’s and can’t do the job. The few do a great job but some are more of a problem than a solution. This band is in use by many feral agencies on a routine basis and as such we need to be mindful. This is a great topic to bring up and keep active. A little awareness is worth a pound of cure.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W5XJ on January 31, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I wonder which governmental agencies actually use 60M anyway? The only non-ham I've ever heard on is a strange beacon of some kind. If anybody knows I'd be curious.

73 de W5XJ
Dallas, Texas
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K5TED on January 31, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
"This band is in use by many feral agencies on a routine basis"

What sort of a "federal user" are you, and why are my tax dollars being wasted on a semi-literate person?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB6QXM on January 31, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
You know feral users.....ferals are cats aren't they?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N9KWW on January 31, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Well excuse me for a slip of the fingers. I guess all you guys from 5 land are that way, find fault with everyone else.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K8YZK on February 1, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
This has been a interesting article with a lot of different inputs. Now here is my input.
First I am not a follower of Bonnie, and don't care for her at all to start with, but not going to get into the name calling etc.

60 meters was setup to be a freq that HAM's could use between 75 meters and 40 meters during emergencys if NEEDED. It is NOT just for use during emergency's only. Now since it is the newest how are we to know the in's and out's of 60 meters. How do we do that, but by operating while there is NO emergency and see if station A in NY can talk to station B in CA or maybe a relay is needed. So it takes someone to get on and have QSO's and see if plan A will work, if not go to plan B.

Now as far as frequencies that are used for emergencies, the FCC can come in and say they want all of 75 meters, or 40 meters no wait all the ham bands if necessary. Will it happen, probably not but could.

Should 60 meters be just sitting there waiting for the earthquake so all of CA can slide into the sea, nope. My opinion use it and enjoy it, when the emergency comes and the FCC says 60 meters, for emcomm traffic only then that is it.

Time for everybody ego's to chill.

Everyone enjoy the HOBBY, and God Bless.
Kurt
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KR2C on February 1, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
K4RAF said..
"The ARRL WHINED for these channels for EMCOMM
The ARRL ABANDONED these channels for EMCOMM

The band is now USED by non-EMCOMM

Case CLOSED... "

OK. Why don't you site some sources for this information so that the rest of can believe you.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W5DQ on February 1, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Well at least her and I have something in common. We both like ALE. My favorite ALE is Guiness but a stout Black and Tan is good too ;)

Gene W5DQ
 
Contact your US Senator re: FCC 11-171  
by N4QA on February 1, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I sent the following note to Senator Mark R. Warner (D) VA this afternoon.
Senator Warner is on several subcommittees of the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, including the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet.
FCC 11-171, of course, is the FCC Report and Order regarding the new 60m rules.

Dear Senator Warner,
Would you explain to me why FCC 11-171, which was received in the office of the President of the Senate on December, 5, 2011 and forwarded to the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, has yet to be published in the Federal Register.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
William K. Mabry
 
Time to ragchew on 60  
by W2MC on February 3, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Wow!

Bonnie and all of this discussion about 60 meters has inspired me!

I'm going to make a dipole for 60, and start ragchewing and chasing that rare dx on 60!

Jon
W2MC
 
RE: Time to ragchew on 60  
by KB6QXM on February 3, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
What I want to know is this. Why would someone consider HF frequencies for Emcomm anyways. Disasters are usually localized, therefore line of sight communications is more effective.I am suprised that the Emcomm people did not scream when the lower part of 220 was taken away. The lower portion of 220 was to be given away for use by UPS, which never happened.
If the Emcomm people want an exclusive right to frequencies, then they should take up the cause to get the lower portion of 220 back for their exclusive right.


There you go Emcomm fans....a new cause to go fight over.
 
RE: Contact your US Senator re: FCC 11-171  
by K0OD on February 3, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
New regs go into effect on March 5 (probably at local midnight... certainly NOT GMT)

http://www.arrl.org/news/new-rules-for-5-mhz-60-meters-to-go-into-effect-march-5

Jeff
K0OD
 
So Much For 60 According to Bonnie  
by K0OD on February 3, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
So Much For the Band According to Bonnie

Want to stress that after long deliberation, the amended regs were adopted with no restriction on DXing aside from our restrictions as secondary users. Obviously the government has no objection to responsible DXing on 60.

Thanks to all involved for these enhancements...the NTIA, FCC, The League and 60-m band users.

Jeff
K0OD
 
RE: Contact your US Senator re: FCC 11-171  
by N4QA on February 3, 2012 Mail this to a friend!

See what a short note to your US Senator can do !
Haw Haw Haw !

Now to dust off my homebrew 60m rig...the DSW-60 and practice sending CQ DX into my underground dummy load!

Who ever heard of a ham band without CW anyhow!
See y'all 0n 60m CW commencing on our daughter's birthday!

YEE HAW!

72,
Bill, N4QA




 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by WA3YAY on February 3, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Seems the author just wrote a "Wouldn't it be nice if we all did things this way..." kind of article.
 
New Rules Start: 05 MARCH 2012 at 0001 Local Time  
by KQ6XA on February 4, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
The new 5MHz rules take effect at:

0001 hours Local Time in each USA time zone on 05 MARCH 2012.

Time 00:01 is just past midnight, your local time.

Note: This is late at night on the evening of Sunday 04 March 2012, early morning Monday 05 March 2012.

Bonnie Crystal KQ6XA
 
Say what?  
by N4QA on February 4, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie,
Please cite the source of your claim about the effective time(s) of the implementation of the new 60m FCC rules under FCC 11-171.

Thank you & 72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: 5MHz argument  
by M0AFJ on February 4, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Well I'm pleased we don't have EMCOMM in the UK, and that we were considered responsible enough to have no restrictions on the use of our channels apart from interference to other licenced services. CW and data modes have proved very useful in weak signal propagation experiments and NVIS SSTV signals are outstanding
Look forward to working you guys on the key!
 
Release the 60m Skimmers!  
by N4QA on February 4, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Have yet to see a single RBN spot on 60 meters from amateur stations in those countries having had 60m CW authorization for some time.
Hopefully, to aid in propagation studies etc, the RBN folks will soon encourage theirs Skimmers to commence spotting 60m CW activity worldwide.

What say ye RBN folks...

72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: Release the 60m Skimmers!  
by M0AFJ on February 5, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bill, I think you will find that there are not that many stations on CW in the evenings when you may get propagation to the USA as, of course you guys cant use it yet. I've had a few cross mode QSO's with the States over the years. There's quite a bit of inter EU CW during the day though, again I don't know of any skimmer activity, mind you do we really need it on a channelised band?, I think not.
 
RE: Release the 60m Skimmers!  
by N4QA on February 5, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Worked Budd, J38FF on Grenada on 60m USB last evening, as did many other stateside hams. My ERP was 50 watts p.e.p. and my antenna was the GADS! (Gutter And Down Spout!) on the southwest corner of the house. Looking forward to working much more DX soon on 60m CW as well, especially while running QRP power levels.

Skimmers will be no less important on the 60m band than they are on any other amateur band. One aspect at which USA 60m RBN Skimmers will need to excel is that of frequency measurement. Most RBN Skimmers which have spotted my CW signals within the 160m, HF, and 6m ham bands have given very accurate indications of my operating frequencies. A few, however, are in need of more accurate frequency calibration. This fact may cause USA Skimmers to be hesitant to skim the 60m band for CW signals once CW is authorized here.

In any event, much fun will soon be had on the new, improved USA 60m amateur band. See y'all there!

72,
Bill, N4QA
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by WC1C on February 7, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I agree with Bonnie's assesment on the use of the 60M freqs. This is what the FCC says:

4. The Commission added the secondary amateur service allocation after determining that such
frequencies could be useful to the amateur radio community for completing disaster communications links
at times when existing frequencies in the 3500-4000 kHz (80 and 75 meter) and 7000-7300 kHz (40 meter)
bands are not available due to ionospheric conditions. It concluded that such an allocation represented the
best compromise available to give the amateur service access to new spectrum while assuring the Federal
Government agencies that their use is protected.

73 WC1C/Wayne
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K7NNG on February 8, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I agree that Bonnies assessment of 60 mtrs is for emergency secondary frequencies.
but,,,,,,,,,,,,,BIG BUT,,,,,LOTS OF HAMS cannot read and comprehend.
Also, it pointed out Techs cannot use the 60 mtr band....
True?
 
60 meters = just another ham band.  
by N4QA on February 8, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Paragraph 4., referenced a couple of posts above, should make it abundantly clear to even the poorest of readers that the 60-meter amateur band is to be used for emergency communications no more and no less than, for example, the 80-meter and 40-meter amateur bands.

72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: 60 meters = just another ham band.  
by K1DA on February 8, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
So when was the last ham cited or warned for "Non-Encom" communications in the YEARS since 60 has been open for us? Surley Bonnie has all the answers for that.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KZ1A on February 10, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Why are we trying to re-invent the wheel, here? 60mtrs is not exclusive to emcom use. Just follow the rules. It's not rocket science.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N4VNV on February 11, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Bonnie Crystal KQ6XA??????? Just who are you to be putting out this info??? I've been active on 60M eight years come March 3d 2012. NEVER heard of you! What agency is using you to communicate info to us? Are you just an instigator? I really don't care what you think, I read the regs and keep current on my own. I've been trusting my own judgement since 1967 and been doing just fine.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N1TA on February 13, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Here is the list of things the author has decided "unsuitable" for 5MHz:

1. Calling CQ DX.
Why? I want to work DX, so I'm going to call CQ DX. It doesn't use any more bandwidth than a normal CQ.

2. Long CQs.
These should be avoided on every band. Now that very few are still rock-locked, anyway. So I agree with this one, but it certainly isn't unique to 5MHz.

3. Longwinded ragchews.
Why not? If you desperately need to use the frequency during a long ragchew, there are procedures for that.

4. Calling in pile-ups.
There will always be pile-ups. There is no way to stop this. When someone is calling CQ and more than 1 person wants to work them, there will be a pile. It's the nature of radio. Welcome.

5. High power transmissions.
There's a power limit anyway, so this is a law not a suggestion.

6. Contesting.
There are no contests currently that allow Q's on 60, and I don't expect there to be (see the WARC bands).

7. Sending a long 'brag file' on PSK31.
See #2
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N1TA on February 13, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Here is the list of things the author has decided "unsuitable" for 5MHz:

1. Calling CQ DX.
Why? I want to work DX, so I'm going to call CQ DX. It doesn't use any more bandwidth than a normal CQ.

2. Long CQs.
These should be avoided on every band. Now that very few are still rock-locked, anyway. So I agree with this one, but it certainly isn't unique to 5MHz.

3. Longwinded ragchews.
Why not? If you desperately need to use the frequency during a long ragchew, there are procedures for that.

4. Calling in pile-ups.
There will always be pile-ups. There is no way to stop this. When someone is calling CQ and more than 1 person wants to work them, there will be a pile. It's the nature of radio. Welcome.

5. High power transmissions.
There's a power limit anyway, so this is a law not a suggestion.

6. Contesting.
There are no contests currently that allow Q's on 60, and I don't expect there to be (see the WARC bands).

7. Sending a long 'brag file' on PSK31.
See #2
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KE4ZHN on February 14, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Who died and left Ms Crystal in charge of 60 meters? The last time I checked 60 is legal for any amateur general and above to use. Why is it now reserved for EMCOMM geeks? Why is there always a microcosm of amateurs who feel it is their duty to dictate policy and procedure to the rest without benefit of any legal authority? Dont we have enough frequency "owners" and "kilocycle cops" spread throughout the bands already?
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB2HSH on February 14, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
KE4ZHN:

Well said!
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by KB6QXM on February 14, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
What I think is so nice is that will not be a bunch of high powered broad signal stations. Everyone will be on a level playing field. I also that there will not be any contesters on 60 meters. In my personal opinion contesters dilute the hobby just as much as the Emcomm people. I am modifying a alpha delta DX-lb to be used on 60 meters. I personally believe that the multiple m odes will cause a lot of QRM. I am curious to see if the author of this article will be on 60 meters dictating her beliefs on March 5th. My QTH is less than 40 miles from the author's QTH. I will be curious to listen on March 5th. I do not expect my antenna to be completed and in the air before spring.

See you all on 60 meters.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K1XT on February 17, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I agree with KB6QXM that close in communications on VHF/UHF is more important. I propose an Emcomm contest. There would be the regular points system for the number of 'official' Emcomm station QSOs and such. Let's see how they handle fast traffic.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N4VNV on February 20, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Since my first posting I have researched the KQ6XA lady. I must say I am impressed with your accomplishments and somewhat envious. I spent twelve years in foreign countries myself and will always love to travel. CRAZY about the mysteries of life on our planet. However, I have a saying that you may think about; "Advice that is asked for, is appreciated best". There is no end to the volunteers of same.
 
USA 5 MHz Emcom, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W2RS on February 22, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
What is Amateur Radio, and what is the place of EMCOMM within it?

The ITU Radio Regulations, an international treaty obligation agreed to by the governments of all ITU member nations, define Amateur Radio as:

1.56 Amateur service: A radiocommunication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs, that is, by duly authorised persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest.

What types of communication may Amateur stations transmit?

25.2 Transmissions between amateur stations of different countries shall be limited to communications incidental to the purposes of the amateur service, as defined in No. 1.56 and to remarks of a personal character.

So what about EMCOMM? It isn't even mentioned in these key provisions. It is simply one more permissible activity, right alongside ragchewing and DXing. No better, no worse.

The only place where EMCOMM is mentioned is in connection with third party traffic:

25.3 Amateur stations may be used for transmitting international communications on behalf of third parties only in the case of an emergency or disaster relief. An administration may determine the applicability of this provision to amateur stations under its jurisdiction.

Note, however, that this provision applies only to actual emergencies and disasters, not to training, drills and so on.

Hope this helps to clarify things.

73, Ray


 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcom, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9MHZ on February 23, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Ray,

I hear (read) you and am on your side wrt the point you're making, but nothing stops ITU signatories from further regulating on their own...probably to the delight of people like this thread's author.

What's causing so much angst is that the allocation is clearly defined in frequencies, modes, and power levels, but all of the fluff about "is intended for...", is non-specific, and drives people nuts when sanctimonious types like Bonnie emerge and preach about something that's not regulatory.

I think the League is so happy when a new allocation comes along, that they're playing nice with the FCC and not demanding clarification. A government agency has no motivation to ever loosen anything, so the League is trying to not ask questions in an area where the best they can do is to break even.

Cheers,
Brad



 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcom, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9MHZ on February 23, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
I guess the other thing I don't quite understand is why so many hams are so intimidated with the secondary users concept, and therefore become very officious in their thinking.....as if they're part of something really big. Maybe it's mostly HF people who ordinarily aren't used to the concept, but it's really no big deal at all. The rules are simple, and in reality, interference matters like those with PAVE PAWS are extremely rare, and are generally well handled when they occur, because everyone knows the pecking order in those allocations.

Oh, but make it an HF allocation, and some seem to lose their minds....."oh, this is HF, it could be a real problem if we're not careful...". Yeah, let's take a hard line and regulate ourselves....you know, this is big, really big.

Whatever.
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcom, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by K9MHZ on February 23, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
One final thing.......

Bonnie needs to read the ITU's recognition of the amateur service wrt the 60 meter allocation. It states the need for a "robust" network; one that exists below 7 MHz, when the MUF falls below that band. It's a little hard to be "robust" when people feel intimidated in using the band because their PSK burst might be a few seconds too long, or their SSB QSO might be long-winded.

The ITU is hardly suggesting that amateurs stand by silently on 60 meters, waiting for that disaster to occur, so they can spring into action with a robust and competent network to aid in relief.

I have yet to hear of any government land mobile radio users, whomever and wherever they may be, squawking about interference on 60 meters.

Folks, Bonnie's personal data page is loaded with a lot of narcissistic fluff.....don't be fooled, it's not credibility at all. I sincerely doubt that she wants to compare resumes with many, many other amateurs within our ranks....they just happen to be much more dignified than she is.

 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by W2RS on February 23, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Brad,

You're right: nothing in ITU or FCC regulations gives EMCOMM priority over other Amateur operations, unless there is an actual FCC-declared emergency, in which case FCC will specify the frequencies affected.

73, Ray
 
RE: USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by N5PVL on February 28, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Another spectrum grab by somebody waving the EMCOMM flag.

- Just about as stupid and characterless as it gets in the world of amateur radio.

73 DE Charles, N5PVL
 
USA 5 MHz Emcomm, Not Ragchew DX Contests  
by WA1SEO on February 28, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
The things that were useful about this article were the figures.
 
YO ! RBN Skimmers !  
by N4QA on February 28, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Let's have some Skimming of 60m, y'all !
60m will be abuzz with CW signals beginning 5 midnights from now.
I'll be there...how 'bout you !
72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: YO ! RBN Skimmers !  
by K9MHZ on February 29, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Uh oh.....don't make those dahs too long, Bill. Because you know, Bonnie, and all. Dits shouldn't be a problem, though.

 
Yawn...  
by N4QA on March 2, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
Man!
I'd be so sleepy at work on Monday after some wee-hours 60m CW...maybe I'd better take the day off !
72,
Bill, N4QA
 
NTIA speaks again  
by N4QA on March 2, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment/view?id=6016996545

No biggy.

NTIA reiterates its stance against multiple, simulaneous narrowband communications on other than center frequencies within the 60m channels.

72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: NTIA speaks again  
by N4QA on March 2, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
That last post should have read multiple simultaneous...

72,
Bill, N4QA
 
RE: NTIA speaks again  
by N9JR on March 3, 2012 Mail this to a friend!
For those who chase DX A92IO will be on this historic event transmitting (CW) on 5403 and listening up 2 Tuesday UTC. Should be a zoo. But for the more casual operator V47JA has been on and has been putting a big signal into the upper midwest.
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Related News & Articles
The Fun of CW


Other Recent Articles
Durham Hamfest Brings Amateur Radio Lovers, Emergency Responders Together:
The Spooky World of the 'Numbers Stations':
New England Communities to Host WRTC2014
Armed Forces Day Crossband Test:
Home is Wanted for Radio Ham's Cards: