FCC Denies In Part ARRL Petition on ReconRobot Waiver

[W3WN]

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...A-11-675A1.pdf

It's only a matter of time, now, before we lose 70 cm. I had selected some pertiment quotes, but they're too long to fit in here. Suffice to say, everyone needs to read this!

Essentially all of the ARRL's concerns save one were brushed aside. The one that was granted was the request that the wording of the manual and labeling should be updated to reflect that officially & legally, the ReconScout is a secondary user of 70 cm, after the Government and Amateur services, and must accept interference from these services.

Oh, and the issue of the "uncertified devices" that ReconRobot has been selling? Refererred to the Enforcement Bureau. Uh-huh.

Now, anyone want to take wagers on how long it will be before the "secondary basis" is ignored by law enforcement, and/or the allegations are addressed by the Enforcement Bureau?

[n2ize]

What I don;t understand is this. If this ReconRobot is such an important device and is an important tool for potential life and death situations in law enforcement than why would they want to put it on a frequency where it is a secondary user and must accept interference to begin with ? Wouldn't it make sense to put it on some other frequency ? What if the device malfunctions due to interference from primary users ? Or, is it just that the company that makes it is playing on peoples ignorance ?

For that matter they could put it on the RC portion of 2.4 Ghz. With the spread spectrum technology being used up there it is doubtful that users will interfere with each other.

Of course the American government never met a corporation that it didn't like so, no surprise that are using 70 cm with the blessing of the Feces.

All in all I think it will be a non-issue. Issues of interference from/to the Recon device will probably be few and far between, if any at all. And, if the device does malfunction due to interference well, so be it. Such is the result of an inferior product that is using frequencies prone to interference from other services. Might even be a great opportunity for a competitor to market a "reliable, interference free" unit.

[PA5COR]

We in Europe see an atttack as well, our 430 - 440 MHz 70 cm band here was slashed first with LPD ( Low Power Devices) from 433.075 to 444.750 max 10 mW output, handhelds, car security systems, broadband wireless earphones, annd everything you can think off started to wash into our primary band.

Last year our version of the FCC decided to take the upper 2 MHz and downgrade us to secondary user and gave licenses to DGPS ( landbased GPS) for agricultural use out, completely laying waste there because they can use more power and vertical antenna's outdoor for a arge range.
Our repeaters there were banned ( 7.6 MHz shift) even when the neighbouring countries didn't agree with it, and kept the 2 MHz for the hams.
Lots of interference now there, the hams now upped the power and directional antenna's to the Netherlands to combat the interferece.

We can try to fight, we did, and the answer was simply "get lost" .

Looks with the attacks on 23 cm we will loose the higher frequencies to the commercial users, add the interference of the modems working on the mains wiring and we are in for lots of trouble.

Here we keep fighting every way we can, but commercial pressure is big....

[n2ize]

Too much money involved. Radio spectrum is a very valuable commodity these days and government works strictly for business

[KG4CGC]

People still using radio? As smart (and dumb) as we are as humans, I find it hard to believe that after 100+ years that we haven't figured out, beyond radio.

[N8YX]

Could be that the ARRL needs better (or more visible) legal representation in Washington.

[WØTKX]

I don't think we will lose all of 70cm, but crowded metro areas with a lot of repeaters may get squeezed. The weak signal stuff will probably co-exist just fine. 900 MHz is a good place for repeaters, and 2 meter repeaters with little activity might get scrutinized a little more.

But I'm surprised that these new services are not being placed in the vacated television spectrum. I wonder if it has more to do with the availability of cheap 70cm RF devices than spectrum. It's always about the money, and businesses are more valuable than people.

Maybe if these new ventures would hire some of us hamsters?

[KC2UGV]

Could be that the ARRL needs better (or more visible) legal representation in Washington.

There would be no way for the ARRL to compete with the better funded corporate lobbyist who share offices with the same representatives they are lobbying.

[W3WN]

I don't think we will lose all of 70cm, but crowded metro areas with a lot of repeaters may get squeezed. The weak signal stuff will probably co-exist just fine. 900 MHz is a good place for repeaters, and 2 meter repeaters with little activity might get scrutinized a little more.

But I'm surprised that these new services are not being placed in the vacated television spectrum. I wonder if it has more to do with the availability of cheap 70cm RF devices than spectrum. It's always about the money, and businesses are more valuable than people.

Maybe if these new ventures would hire some of us hamsters?

Keep in mind we've already lost 420 - 430 MHz in the "Line A" area, the zone going 90 miles from the Canadian border. Originally withdrawn to "protect" Canadian Land-Mobile users, then give to US Land-Mobile users in that area for their use.

Keep in mind that we have a federal bill to reallocate -- that is to say, sell -- 20 MHz of 70 cm spectrum (Amateur & GMRS/FRS areas) in Congress.

No, I fear the worse for 70 cm. And it's not a question of our lobbyist... it all comes down to money. And we don't have it.

[N8YX]

There would be no way for the ARRL to compete with the better funded corporate lobbyist who share offices with the same representatives they are lobbying.

Therein lies the fix to THAT.