Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[Ham-80211] OT??? High power 2.4 GHz rules change

w3sz w3sz at comcast.net
Wed May 17 16:33:58 UTC 2006


Hello, Marlon,

I would strongly recommend dropping the APC requirement for Spread
Spectrum.  It is difficult to implement and an impediment to further
experimentation.  Its initial implementation was unfortunate.

I believe the ARRL has appropriately come out in favor of dropping APC.
The exact wording of their petition to the FCC is:

ARRL, the National Association for Amateur Radio, also known as The
American Radio Relay League, Incorporated (ARRL), by counsel, hereby
respectfully requests that the Commission issue a Notice of Proposed Rule
Making at an early date, proposing the deletion of Section 97.311(d) of
the Commission?s rules, save for the first sentence thereof. The effect of
the rule change would be to eliminate an automatic power control provision
that has proven over time to be impractical of compliance; is unnecessary
in order to protect other Amateur Radio operations or the operation of any
licensed radio service sharing certain Amateur Radio allocations; and
which has unfortunately served as an unintended, but effective deterrent
to Spread Spectrum experimentation in the Amateur Service. In support of
its Petition, ARRL states as follows:

Thanks for asking for comment on this.  The ARRL has it precisely right  
this time.

I hope you do the right thing and recommend that APC be dropped.  Think  
broader public interest and not narrow special interest group and I think  
you will agree.

Thanks, and

73,

Roger Rehr W3SZ


On Wed, 17 May 2006 12:03:37 -0400, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
<ooe at odessaoffice.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> As I'm sure you guys are aware, HAMs are primary users in about half of  
> the 2.4 gig band.  When using APC you can run very high wattage.  I  
> can't remember if it's 100 or 1000.  This is for video as I recall.
>
> There's a proposal to drop the APC requirement.  As a board member of  
> the Wireless Internet Provider's Association (www.wispa.org) I've been  
> asked to ask for your input on the issue.
>
> WISPs, and other license exempt users, are limited (for all practical  
> purposes) to 4 watts for our broadcast sites.  And much of the gear is  
> contention based, so anything that's always on tends to cause great  
> headaches and gnashing of teeth.
>
> We will likely fight this new proposal but wanted input from the HAM  
> community first.
>
> Are there people using this ability today?
>
> What's it used for?
>
> Any plans for more high power 2.4 gig use?
>
> Are there any reasons that we shouldn't come out against the proposal to  
> drop the APC requirement?
>
> Am I missing anything?  Asking the wrong questions etc?
>
> Thanks all!
> Marlon
> (509) 982-2181                                   Equipment sales
> (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)                    Consulting services
> 42846865 (icq)                                    And I run my own wisp!
> 64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
> www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
> www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ham-80211 mailing list
> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211



-- 
Roger Rehr
W3SZ
http://www.nitehawk.com/w3sz/




More information about the ham-80211 mailing list