Proposed changes to IARU Region 3 HF Band Plan

[AB1WX]

@ZL4NVW

Really? It’s been wall-to-wall Chinese* broadcast stations whenever I’ve checked that end of the band. Admittedly I only try up there when the band is open to DX (and hence the lower frequencies are full).

Are you looking at the spectrum in the eyes of consumer-grade shortwave radios (with AM filter), or bandwidths appropriate for FT8 contacts, etc?

Most of the broadcast stations in 41 meter band in R3 are in China, though they may broadcast in different languages. Majority of them operate in that band only during certain hours.

I keep forgetting to point this out, but until 1990s when the 40m amateur band was still only 100 kHz wide, there were a few Chinese broadcast stations transmitting within the amateur band (i.e. between 7.000 and 7.100MHz). We had to deal with those super strong signals in the middle of the band, with the receiver performance much poorer than what we have today.

Technically, there are ways to multiplex different uses.

[AB1WX]

@G8ADD

The problem for me, Andy, is that I do not understand why the current 40m CW allocation does so not work in R3 to the extent that they are prepared to change it to the detriment of long established international practices. They have the same raw material to work with, 200kHz of it, how different are the pressures on it.

The 40m band plans in many countries in R3 still look like the band plan when 40m was only 100kHz (7.000 to 7.100MHz) back in the day. 40m was a mess even back then because there were Chinese broadcast stations operating within the amateur band. For various reasons, adoption of the additional 100kHz (7.100 to 7.200) happened slowly over time and so they kept the bottom half the same as before for compatibility. They allocate only 25 or 30kHz at the bottom of the band for exclusively CW use, and they don’t find it a problem because their CW subband is very sparsely used.

So, in short, a part of this problem is a dilemma between their historically preferred bandwidth allocation and lack of global harmonization.

[ZL4NVW]

@AB1WX

Are you looking at the spectrum in the eyes of consumer-grade shortwave radios (with AM filter), or bandwidths appropriate for FT8 contacts, etc?

(7.200-7.300MHz)

I’m speaking as a GURL amateur radio license holder, considering transmitting in a ‘secondary use’ amateur frequency allocation using a commercial grade amateur radio transceiver such as a TS440, FT818, etc. My license is pretty clear that the primary user has priority of use on those frequencies and that any transmissions of mine that could interfere with their signal whilst they are broadcasting would be a breach of my license conditions.

Or are you are saying that there are fixed guard bands between each broadcast allocation, and by identifying those, I could legally and practically transmit / receive in those without breaching my license conditions? So long as I could handle any interference from the neighbouring broadcast station - e.g. by using high-Q narrow-band filters if their signal is clean enough, or using a mode such as FT8 with tolerance of such interference.

[AB1WX]

In ZL and VK where you have secondary allocation 7.2 to 7.3, what you are talking about may be a realistic discussion, but as a R3 solution, it is not, because some countries are still 7.0 to 7.1 only, just like pre-WRC03. So, this topic must be discussed as future vision or a policy direction rather than regulation details.

IARU has long been looking for ways to build momentum to gain primary amateur service allocation 7.000 to 7.300 world-wide, just like how it was pre-WW2. WRC03 was only a first step. That is why I’m bringing this up at this juncture. The IARU R3 band plan committee proposal seems backward, at least for the 40m matter, from the existing direction that IARU has operated for decades. For the amount of trouble any change requires, I would certainly hope a substantial gain of amateur allocation rather than increasing fights among the fellow amateurs.

[VK2AOH]

Thanks for the guidance, facts and figures is somewhat buried. For the benefit of others here is just snippet which may be of interest.

Hope this works, my computer skills are not great.

EDIT: sorry for the small image

73’s Wal VK2WP

[M0LEP]

@AB1WX

some countries are still 7.0 to 7.1 only

It seems pretty pointless to try to globally harmonise a plan for a band until all (or at least most) countries have the same allocation. 40 metres seems to be particularly complicated in that respect.

(From Kenya, which is in R1, the amateur 40 metre allocation goes from 7.0 to 7.2 MHz. I’ve heard high power non-amateur AM broadcasts in the 7.1 to 7.2 MHz part of the amateur band from there. It’s possible they’re pirates, but large parts of Africa are a mite wild from the regulation enforcement point of view. Doesn’t really help when there are so few licensed amateurs in a country.)

[AB1WX]

You know I would agree with you.

Broadcast stations transmitting within the 40m amateur band go back to the post-WW2 or cold war era. Not all those transmission frequencies were officially listed or announced, but were clearly government propaganda programs. Then there are, in the 21st century, those Morse code version of “numbers stations” that send encrypted message in Morse code, operating within the 40m amateur band. Those are thought to be North Korean intelligence agents but I haven’t heard of any hard evidence. A lot of things happen on 40m.

[VK3SQ]

Thanks Ryuji for your historical knowledge to this discussion. Very enlightening to me.

cheers, Geoff vk3sq

[G4IPB]

/Off Topic
Many years ago I seem to remember a general discussion about the number of broadband station listers per MW.
Moving forward as digital services become more important how many listeners are there for SW AM stations? I would guess few in the developed world but how much is commercial Short Wave used ( by used I mean listened to no just transmitted)in the less developed world?
Longer term this may have an impact on 7.0 to 7.3 MHz…

[M0LEP]

@G4IPB

in the less developed world?

I know that in the more populous parts of Kenya the mobile coverage is at least reasonable, but it’s not that hard to get to places where the nearest cell tower is over 70kms away. At that point you’re into “find the right rock to stand on and hold the phone just so” territory. Terrestrial TV covers the big cities, and satellite TV covers the country. Most of the local radio is on VHF FM (including the local re-broadcast of the BBC World Service), but MW and SW still get used too, though rather less than 20 or 40 years ago.

[VK3AFW]

Hi Ryuji,

Yes I agree on supporting the IARU in having a 40 m plan that covers 7.0 MHz to 7.3 MHz. It needs to be supported by the representative AR bodies. Of course the local regulators may still impose restrictions in their countries.

In VK, the ACMA, our regulator, had the introduction of restricted operation on 60 m as per the IARU recommendations on their published agreed work list, only to cave in at the meeting intended to close the deal, to a grumble from a junior military officer about protecting Defence utilisation.

It reminded me of the British and American Navies claiming control of all frequencies for National Security after WW1. They were fairly promptly over-ruled by a coalition of commercial broadcasters such as wireless telegram operators, commercial shipping, and government administrators with radio amateurs making up the numbers.

It’s unlikely that the broadcasters on the top end of 40 m will be booted off although there are other under utilised allocations they could use.

But with a plan, even the unlikely is possible.

73
Ron
VK3AFW

[AB1WX]

Spectrum allocation is discussed and decided in a top-down mechanism. The highest-level meeting is WRC, an ITU conference on radio matters. IARU is the only entity representing radio amateurs’ interests at that level. We need to pay attention to what IARU does and increase engagement where appropriate.

Before WRC, there are different kinds of preparatory meetings by the regions. Those are participated by the national level. Each government solicits public inputs before those preparatory meetings, and amateurs should engage with their government at that time. By that time, IARU publishes their list of key agendas that are of interests to amateurs, and they may have their preliminary positions on some of those agendas. You can study those and feed to your country’s government at that time.

Once something is adopted at WRC, it is up to each government to implement it. If the matter is related to amateur radio, the government may consult that country’s amateur radio league, a member organization of the IARU.

Each country’s league may also contribute and engage with the IARU throughout the process or on an ongoing basis, but my observation has been that only a few countries’ leagues have well-informed and competent members to contribute meaningfully.

In case of 60m, WRC decided to allocate a globally harmonized spectrum at a limited EIRP, and governments are in the process of implementing it. In the US, ARRL is pushing to keep the current channelized 60m allocation in the US in addition to what was decided at the WRC, which may or may not happen. The secondary allocation comes with limitations. Instead of fighting for rights that we don’t necessarily have, it’s more important to make a balanced deal that makes sense. Emergency communication, youth programs, and technology education are the key domains where amateurs can provide value to the governments, and of course, ARRL’s argument on defending 60m is centered around its usefulness in emergency communication systems.

Amateur 30m band also has a few commercial stations (those RTTY stations near the bottom but within the band). They have been there way before 30m was allocated for amateur service and I think we coexist pretty well. Back to 40m, AM broadcasts were hard to coexist with SSB and CW with the 20th century receiver technology but digital modes very well may. Digital modes require modern equipment anyway, and human operators don’t have to keep listing the carrier beats constantly.

A lot of UHF and higher amateur allocations are on a secondary basis. Commercial interests, such as mobile communication companies, are trying to steal those bands, particularly 10GHz. In defending amateur allocations, we must get along with the current primary users of those spectra. Where amateur and the primary users (such as radar) are compatible and have good relationships, new commercial interests will still try to drive wedges between us, but they have a harder time taking the spectrum away from us.

[AB1WX]

I sent in my comments. Hope many others did as well.

In the confirmation email I received in return, WIA TAC Chairman said

Please be advised that the committee will now start the next phase of the work, which is to review and collate all of the responses, before preparing a revised paper for consideration at the IARU Region 3 Conference in November. We will release this new paper publicly prior to the conference.

We should keep an eye on their progress as well.

[VK3SQ]

H Ryuji, I too sent a reply and received the same message.

73 de Geoff vk3sq