VK Logger Ham Radio Forum Archive

The ACMA has released a consultation paper seeking comments on possible future licensing arrangements in the frequency range 3400-3600 GHz (‘the 3.5 GHz band’).
Stakeholder submissions will form a key element in the ACMA’s consideration of future arrangements in the band. The ACMA therefore encourages all interested stakeholders to make a written submission by 30 July 2014. Submissions can be sent to spectrum.outlook@acma.gov.au


The info paper : http://www.acma.gov.au/theACMA/making-t ... -in-future

The closing date for submissions is close of business on 30 July 2014.

Thanks to Rick VK4RF for his timely email.

Anyone that has built a 3.4GHz system or is planning to do so should take the time to read the document and make a submission.

READ the consultation paper, don't just think it's a foregone conclusion. There is scope to maintain our portion of the band.

And see here: http://www.wia.org.au/newsevents/news/2 ... /index.php

In addition, I draw your attention to:

The WIA is compiling a submission to respond to the ACMA’s consultation paper and, to that end, is seeking input from all interested Australian amateurs, which can be mailed or faxed to the National Office, or emailed to: nationaloffice@wia.org.au, to reach us by or before close of business Monday, 21 July.

The WIA also encourages all interested Australian amateurs to send your own submissions to the ACMA, which need to reach it by Wednesday, 30 July.

Recall the combined impact that submissions from individual amateurs and the WIA had on the ACMA's public consultation concerning the proposed loss of 2300-2302 MHz, here: http://www.wia.org.au/newsevents/news/2 ... /index.php

Get cracking!

Posted in the interests of maximising impact.

Interesting white paper around what the 3500Mhz will be used commercially with (and what we have been testing at work)

http://www.whitepapers.lightreading.com ... ltetdd.pdf

The most important drivers for TD-LTE deployments using spectrum in the 3.5/3.6GHz bands, highlighted by China Mobile and SoftBank, are:
 Limited coverage, low mobility and isolation makes higher frequency Band 42 attractive for outdoor rooftop and street level small cells in urban hot zones.
 3.5/3.6GHz spectrum offers high throughput for both outdoor and indoor hot zones.
 200 MHz of available spectrum is ideal as a dedicated large-bandwidth small-cell band to boost hot zone capacity on top of the macro cell cov- erage layer.
 3.5/3.6GHz spectrum using TD-LTE solutions is well suited for handling the severe unbalance and fluctuation of downlink/uplink traffic in each hot zone area.
 3.5/3.6GHz spectrum offers greater isolation to avoid interference, ensure quality of service (QoS) and enable frequency reuse in the high frequency band.

to put it into perspective! ever been to the MCG with 100,000 other people trying to upload selfies to Facebook? sure you don't care, but the other 23million in Australia seem to

After all the time, effort, and expense in getting on 3.4 GHz, I've had 5 contacts in the last 24 months.

Count them.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

With a crystal ball, I would not have wasted time with this band.

The apathy encountered over the last 3 years in trying to get activity days up and running was an eye opener.
OMs that have this gear, couldn't even be bothered responding to emails about these proposed activity days, or had some bullshit excuse why one day in the year wasn't do-able.

The Telcos can have this band, for all I care.
No great loss, given the actual logged activity.
It's pretty hard to justify this part of the spectrum.

At the end of the day, complacent hams get what they deserve. Not much.



10 GHz next?

I worked out my 10GHz activity in the time I had it effectively cost me slightly more than $150 per QSO by the time I sold it.

It's a fine line in Australia with its lack of numbers between IARU band allocations and actually finding people using the bands. Even 2m is a huge 4MHz chunk of prime spectrum that again is vastly under-utilised And it must be the band for which most amateurs own the equipment?

It'd be a difficult case to prove requirement of a lot of our amateur spectrum should the spectrum doomsday occur.

73 - Rob VK2GOM / GW0MOH

Speaking of 2m, it gets blasted by the new government pager system in VK3 making most of the 2m band useless either from de-sensing or intermod. I feel if I put a complaint in nothing will get done about it as they say that most amateur gear has a too wider front end.

Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk

VK4GHZ wrote:After all the time, effort, and expense in getting on 3.4 GHz, I've had 5 contacts in the last 24 months.

Count them.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

With a crystal ball, I would not have wasted time with this band.

The apathy encountered over the last 3 years in trying to get activity days up and running was an eye opener.
OMs that have this gear, couldn't even be bothered responding to emails about these proposed activity days, or had some bullshit excuse why one day in the year wasn't do-able.

The Telcos can have this band, for all I care.
No great loss, given the actual logged activity.
It's pretty hard to justify this part of the spectrum.

At the end of the day, complacent hams get what they deserve. Not much.



10 GHz next?

Plenty more activity on the moon Adam

VK3MIX wrote:Speaking of 2m, it gets blasted by the new government pager system in VK3 making most of the 2m band useless either from de-sensing or intermod. I feel if I put a complaint in nothing will get done about it as they say that most amateur gear has a too wider front end.

Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk

What rig are you running and what antenna?
I was working single yagi EME and doing pretty well in the 2m WSPR world rankings from my old QTH just 2km from the centre of the City. I'd first take a look at the specs of the equipment you're running. Not all receivers are born equal AND a decent preamp with good passband characteristics is essential, whether you're playing FM or weak signal.

I must admit my mobile setup isn't fantastic (ic208 w/ diamond sg7800) however I have IC92 DSTAR Handheld which cops the same issue in our CBD when DSTAR repeater is only 1km away. Other amateurs in the area are having the same problem with other brands such as Kenwood & Yeasu.

Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk

Perhaps it could be put down as one of the biggest failings of the WIA - not to have obtained Primary status to these bands - but in reality do we need or can we justify them ?

We do not have PRIMARY service until you get to 24Ghz.... maybe as has always been the case we need to establish a beach head at 24Ghz and defend from there.

Many bands in the long ago past were given to the amateur service because there was no interest from commercial users - Amateurs are a very small minority when it comes to the votes.

It's not about voting yet.

Doug and Roger have urged us to read the consultation paper. When I first saw this I thought "another one bites the dust" but the paper doesn't read that way. Yes there are proposals that consume the whole band but there are some that leave scope for other services to remain on the band. The amateur service is referred to and comments are made that there are only a handful of apparatus licenses registered.

Here then is the point where an interested amateur can simply say "I'm here, don't forget me. I'm interested in the 3.4GHz band". There seems to have been a small explosion in the growth of 3.4GHz systems over the last few years no doubt due to the availability of high power amps on the surplus market. Make mention of that in your submission. Make mention that it's a good area for experimentation away from all the WiFi crap that you get on 2.4 and 5.7GHz.

The ACMA are looking for input. If you have an interest in the 3.4GHz band take up Roger's suggestion and put in a submission.

I'm not so blind that I don't see that the odds are stacked against us but if we do nothing then there's no point crying about it if we lose our status on the band.

VK4TS wrote:Perhaps it could be put down as one of the biggest failings of the WIA - not to have obtained Primary status to these bands - but in reality do we need or can we justify them ?

Probably not to the extend that we currently have but if we get to the negotiation table there might be scope for the WIA to argue for the maintenance of a small portion of the band.

I would tend to agree with Adam on this, and feel under current circumstances that there should be less bands as its spreading operation to thin and spreading peoples equipment, resources and time out to a compromise level because there are so many bands to cover. (including the allocations below 1.8 MHz)

I've mentioned before, that I feel its not going to cut it to just use these bands (and others) a couple of times a year during a field day weekend. People should be encouraged to be more active as home stations where possible.

Annual Grid Square comp comes to mind to cover all bands. And WSPR is already doing well on 2m keeping people active and interested and on the lookout for openings.

VK3DXE wrote:I was working single yagi EME and doing pretty well in the 2m WSPR world rankings from my old QTH just 2km from the centre of the City.

And yes VK3DXE was in the top 5 world wide on 2m WSPR from pretty much the middle of Docklands.

Really Leigh?

We still have secondary status on this band and the purpose of this thread was to alert those interested in the band(s). Suggesting we give up bands because people don't utilise them or make enough contacts on them just doesn't make sense.

While you do a great job running the wspr program it's clear that not everyone is interested in participating. Should those that aren't interested propose that Digi modes be abolished so more people will operate voice? An outrageous suggestion for sure.

It seems to me that you have a very strong interest in propagation and exploring the limits of (predominantly) the 2m band. More power to you and no one should see your interest as less worthy than theirs. We all belong to the same fraternity (although if you see some of the comments here on the logger you'd have to wonder) and we should stand strong together and never suggest giving up an entitlement just because we have no interest or use for it.

VK4TS wrote:
We do not have PRIMARY service until you get to 24Ghz....

Really? A cursory glance at the bandplans shows most of the HF bands are primary, as is 2m.

73 - Rob VK2GOM / GW0MOH

Similar things happened in ZL a number of years ago.
The outcome was that their 3300 - 3500 MHz band was reduced to 3300 - 3410 MHz, the 3410 - 3500 MHz band was reallocated to licenced digital links etc, not ad-hoc WiFi type links.
The ZL system of licencing is different to Australia's, where (in ZL) a telco or company buys the management rights to use x.xx MHz of spectrum at xxx MHz, nationwide.

I believe that the band 3400 - 3410 MHz is allocated internationally to the Amateur service, and there is provision for Amateur Satellite services to operate in this segment which is why the band below 3410 MHz remains.

Australia's current Amateur 9cm allocation of 3300 - 3600 MHz is significantly larger than the 9cm allocation in most other countries.

There is still significant scope for us to develop the band we have, those interested in experimenting with wideband data or digital TV (DVB-S) have plenty of available spectrum in 9cm, and those among us who use it for other purposes, we may face new restrictions in the future above 3410 MHz, but that shouldn't stop us from putting in our submissions to the ACMA.
I think the ACMA realised that we cared about 2300 - 2302 MHz, as the numbers of our submissions, including that from the WIA, has forced the ACMA to listen.

The availability of equipment for this band is better now than it ever has been, so let's all use the band, not sit around and whinge because of other, non-Amateur uses for spectrum come along.

The usual way that any regulator determines spectrum usage is to look at the database of licences. If there's nothing there, it's obviously not being used, so lets use it and not forget that we are very fortunate to have this resource available to us

After all the time, effort, and expense in getting on 3.4 GHz, I've had 5 contacts in the last 24 months. Count them.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Well Adam, 5 contacts on 9 cm is better that none at all. Having five contacts, or like me having around 5 stations worked on the band entitles you to be a stakeholder in the band by virtue of being active and currently allowed. Use the word "stakeholder" with your submissions to the WIA or the ACMA.
Now 3.4 GHz or 9 cm is a great band. 2.4 GHz and 5.76 GHz over hear in ZL is a real mess with Wi-Fi noise.
We all have our favourite bands, mine is 1296, 3400 and 10368. 3400 sits in the middle of those three and I say is the best of the three.
Cheers, Steve

Only a matter of time.

The ACMA run computerised automated spectrum occupancy systems in capital cities....

As another poster said, perhaps we need to concentrate our activity?

Concentrate activity ?

What do we need on Microwave ? Answer that and work backward perhaps ? High speed data or Television say worse case scenario 10 MHz Band width - the old argument about propagation research has about as much relevance as jelly on a cow eating donuts...

Other than because I have built the gear what are the reasons to retain the Microwave bands or any bands for that matter ? Because until that can be put forward in a manner that the man in the street can understand we have a very hard time of winning the argument.