Barry Thompson wrote: >List, not sure if this applies to the noise on the >repeater or not but Newline has confirmed a >snap-crack-pop noise. > >ON THE AIR: THE NEW AMERICAN UHF WOODPECKER > > [WARNING: Before replying - if you're not on the Repeater-Builder list, please see if you're BCC'ed on this e-mail as a courtesy... you might embarass yourself by hitting "Reply to All". You may have been Blind Carbon-Copied to keep your identity out of the public spotlight.]
[Second warning: Take five minutes to read this completely, and to think and digest.] Now... for the follow-up to this list, because I promised I'd send it. I've seriously considered breaking that promise, but I won't. Here's the story. Let me start by saying two things: I'm not a professional journalist, nor am I a professional frequency coordinator or spectrum management person. I'm just a ham with a noise problem along with all the other hams using UHF repeaters in the Denver area. Here's the deal... - The news report on Newsline this/last week was simply to get information out to the general Ham population about a noise source we've been experiencing since before November 2002 in the Denver area. - The noise source was DF'ed by a great group of volunteers at the request of the Colorado Council of Amateur Radio Clubs, and was found to be at Buckley AFB. Further research indicated that the noise is coming from a U.S. Military system known as EPLRS, or the Enhanced Position Location Reporting System. As always -- hams helping hams. - There's lots of information about what EPLRS is and presumably what it does (it probably does more, we all realize this...) available on the Net. One example: http://www.raytheon.com/products/static/node4397.html - Further investigation and some local folks working and cooperating with the local FCC Field Office found that the system operates here from approximately 430 MHz through 450 MHz. - Apparently, research shows that somewhere between 25 and 50 of these systems are already deployed and there is a possibility that over 100 of them will eventually be deployed. ------- Now this leads off into the weeds pretty quick after those factual points, and leads to hard questions that are long and complex... please read and think carefully before gathering an opinon or taking ANY action. Panic is NOT warranted or appreciated, because I'm not the guy who wants to start THAT. Bill at Newsline contacted me privately and mentioned that he got a lot of feedback from people reminding him that hams are on UHF as a Secondary user to the military and that I (and therefore Newsline) should have put that information in the report. This is 100% accurate, and I left it out of the report for the following reason: There are NTIA rules regarding where even the military puts things in their band allocations. US217 states pretty clearly the following, and I'll bulletize them below. (If you want to see where I'm getting this from, I have a copy of the Federal Register dated December 2002 on my webserver at http://www.natetech.com/files/02-30898.pdf -- search for the second occurence of "US217" in the document in your favorite PDF reader.) (And please.. my DSL bandwidth isn't going to handle you all at once... so be kind... if it's slow, stop the download and find it via the web or come back later.) The way I read it is this: - The military is authorized to place spread-spectrum systems below 435 MHz in the UHF band. - Spread-spectrum systems deployed must treat other users of the spectrum as primary to their use. - The only type of system authorized for this type of use are "radiolocation" systems. As they say on the Net... IANAL. (I Am Not A Lawyer.) For those wondering what this "thing" sounds like, there's a recording of the noise over a quiet carrier on my website also: http://www.natetech.com/files/EPLRSNoise.wav ------- Okay, the political rub : I received (privately) a number of both happy and upset comments from people I *highly* respect, including Bill at Newsline. Some of the comments leaned heavily toward the political. Everything from "You could put troops in danger by talking about this." to "Good job, I've been saying UHF is going away someday for 20 years." Quite frankly, the number and strength of the opinions voiced to me in private e-mail has been overwhelming. And I am doing my best to understand and carefully evaluate all of them. I reiterate that I'm generally a dumb guy, and I'm certainly not attempting to do any of the following: - Place hams in conflict with one another including picking on our national leadership in any way. - Bother our government and Federal employees that work HARD to keep all this stuff running smoothly and gladly work with us on these types of things. - Hurt the military in any way or compromise National Security. - Get us kicked off of UHF permanently. (Always an option when you're secondary.) ***** My main and #1 most important intention is this: ****** - People who are struggling with figuring out what this "noise" is will now KNOW what it is. ***** That's it. NOTHING more. ****** ------ Opinions: Are we still secondary? Yes. Is there a question about where the military put the system. Maybe. If the military wants it there, it's not leaving. That's cold hard fact. My personal HOPE is that by the RIGHT people talking to the RIGHT people at the RIGHT time and asking VERY nicely, someone might be able to move this thing down 30 MHz or so and get it out of our hair -- but I'm NOT demanding this and I think it would be exceedingly unwise for anyone else to demand ANYTHING. It's not our band. This system's used for things far more important than Ham Radio. On the other hand, while we're on the band, it has been entrusted to us -- we self-police and we ask questions when things pop up there we weren't expecting. This is normal and EXPECTED of us. I created a separate mailing list for discussion which, frankly, hasn't had much traffic - whether it does or not is not important to me, it was just a tool for communication if people want to use it. You can find it at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or http://groups-beta.google.com/group/uhfnoise ------ The final analysis from me right now -- I'm sitting back and watching the show for a while. There's a lot smarter and more well-connected people than myself who are now talking very civily and coolly about this issue at a high level. They're bound to do a better job than an idiot with a microphone (me) could do. My desire was to "get the news out". I also desired to give the "scoop" to Newsline, and that's just a personal preference... I like Bill and the gang and the work they do. They're a positive, upbeat, good news organization that does GREAT work. Many people I have had over to the house who are not hams have gotten a chance to hear Newsline -- and they're impressed that such a professional newscast could come from Amateurs and the topics are always great. It's always a special treat to hear their reports every week. If I miss the club's transmission of the QST, I bring the recording up during lunchtime during the week and listen then. It's always fun and educational as well as entertaining, and their talented crew works hard while regularly begging for support -- we should all support them better. Bill and the Newsline editorial staff were even kind enough to call me "Newsline's Technical Expert" in the intro to the report, and trust me -- I was as surprised to hear that by-line as you guys were! I'm no expert... just a ham with some information to share. There are people on this list I'd put MUCH higher on the Technical Expert food-chain, no doubt. And, I do know some true spectrum management experts and they're now reading along, listening, and paying close attention. I find that GOOD. I have received ***very indirectly*** some comments that ARRL and other national-level folks are talking or will soon be talking to the RIGHT people. I have not seen anything official. I'm glad to have at least this small bit of information, and I encourage people to talk FIRST to local representatives of ANY organization you wish to contact. The League, the FCC, and anyone else someone MIGHT think is important to talk to all have local-level staff. Talk to them FIRST if you're having local problems with this sort of thing. We did two years ago, and we continue the discussions here locally and abroad. Figuring out the appropriate questions to ask, of the RIGHT people and the RIGHT time to ask them is WAY above my "pay grade", folks. And I think the right people are aware and working on it, if it can be worked on. Should some tough questions be asked somewhere by someone in the right job? Absolutely. Is it likely that person's a ham or reading this list...? Very hard to say. Should anyone go run to the phone and start freaking out and calling everyone and their brother about this one? No. ------- --> Thank you to everyone for your patience in waiting for this promised follow-up on the list. --> Thank you VERY much to Newsline for carrying the story, I truly hope I didn't cause Bill too much grief from anyone or from our follow-up private debate! --> Additionally thank you to those who are in real jobs where this affects you and you've either taken the time to send me comments or worked on this issue in private, on the phone, in person, whatever -- getting it done. You all know who you are, and I appreciate knowing that I'm just the guy telling the story and you smart people are working the issue. ***** #1 thing folks -- BE PROFESSIONAL about this if you're struggling with it in your local area, please. Please please please please. ***** Nate Duehr, WY0X Dumb guy with a story to tell... (Hey! Maybe if I ever send Bill another news article he can use that as my by-line instead -- it's much more accurate!!! "Here's Nate Duehr, a Dumb Guy with a Story to Tell... Nate?") Carbon-Copy: Bill Pasternak, Newsline Blind Carbon-Copy: Various other folks who have been actively debating the topics above in my private e-mail box. (SMILE... RELAX... BREATHE... READ... LEARN... THINK... ACT CAREFULLY AND PROFESSIONALLY... IN THAT ORDER!) (AND THE VERY HAPPIEST OF HOLIDAYS FROM DENVER! - 73 DE WY0X... and my wife Karen KC0KTI who's listened to me fuss and stew over how best to proceed over the last few weeks. She mostly just laughs at me. You should too!) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
