The 17th IARU Region 3 Regional Conference was held September 10-14, 2018 in Seoul, South Korea. Many papers were presented, but the one that caught my eye was “The evolution of spectrum management in the era of hyper-connectivity and its impact on the amateur service.” The introduction reads:
This document provides an overview of emerging global changes in the way the radio frequency spectrum may be managed in the future. While the paper uses Australian documents for source material it is highly likely that similar situations are developing in many countries. Much of the context is based upon observations at ITU-R and APG meetings over the last few years and the purpose of the document is to highlight the global challenges that may emerge in coming years with respect to current and future amateur service allocations.
The paper discusses preparations for the 2019 World Radiocommunication Conference, and what changes will be made to the Radio Regulations, specifically what will happen to our amateur radio allocations. The outlook isn’t rosy:
During the last two WRCs the proposed new amateur allocations were fiercely opposed by many administrations and the amateur service was lucky to get two small allocations following very lengthy and difficult discussions. The opposition is largely around “why do you need another band?”, “the bands you have aren’t being used”, etc. The old fall back of “emergency communications” is no longer seen as an adequate reason so we need more relevant reasons to get any new bands, and going into the future, to maintain access to our existing bands.
Basically, this boils down to “use it or lose it,” and with the use of some of the UHF and microwave bands being so low, it’s hard to see how we manage to hold on to all of our allocations. The paper does have some suggestions for how we might better make use of the bands:
- While the advantages of narrow bandwidth applications are very important when band conditions are poor or band occupancy is high, what about the rest of the time? What about the VHF bands and above where propagation conditions are relatively favourable and stable, why limit the application bandwidth?
- Why not consider developing modes that use more bandwidth, or at least are adaptive and can use more bandwidth when band conditions permit? Wider band modes offering better voice quality are certainly easier on the ear. Other information could also be transmitted which would enhance the communications experience. Reduced Bandwidth Digital TV is a possibility for UHF bands and above, possibly even on 6 m and 2 m. Acceptable video quality can be achieved using bandwidths of 300 kHz or less.
- How about moving away from our reliance on internet mediated modes, or at least supplement the internet with an amateur equivalent. HAMNET in Germany and Broadband-Hamnet in the US are examples of this. Why not use some of our spectrum assets to transmit amateur-specific and non-commercial information (DX clusters, WSPR reports, etc.) instead of commercial internet services? Considering that amateurs have exclusive use of the 44.xx.xx.xx IP address range (AMPRNet) we could build an independent, though internet-linked amateur-specific network. Given the low population density in many Region 3 countries an extensive broadband network using any of the microwave bands is unlikely to be feasible, but perhaps lower frequency bands could be used for (relatively) broadband links if the application data rate is kept low enough.
All of the papers presented at this conference are available online. Other papers that look interesting are Amateur Radio for Kids and Using New Digital Modes to Improve Participation.
Dave New, N8SBE says
Then there’s the notion that our amateur allocations are like National Parks, which are there for the enjoyment, recreation, and inspiration of its citizens. And just like a national park, there is a fee for entry which helps go toward the upkeep of the park and defending it against commercial interests.
Why is it that everyone just assumes that we must somehow justify our allocations based on concrete paybacks? I would be pleased if the amateur community would go on the offensive, and point out that most countries have a national park system, which is not set aside to turn a quick buck, but is there for the enjoyment of all who can be responsible stewards.