Q1. 470kHz and 5MHz bands

Discussion in 'Ofcom Licence Review - Consultation' started by RSGB Forums, Sep 10, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. RSGB Forums

    RSGB Forums Administrator Staff Member

    Do you agree with the proposal to include, as a matter of course, the 470 kHz and 5 MHz bands into the Licence for all Amateur Radio (Full) licensees?
  2. Gerald Davison

    Gerald Davison New Member

    Yes, simplifies things.
    I'd like to understand more about the part that says
    "The licensee shall only operate the station to the extent that the licensee can be contacted on a telephone which is located in close proximity to the station"I operate portable (Summits on the Air) and have a phone with me. But OFCOM don't have the number? What on earth is the point of that?
    I know this is in the current NOV conditions.
    Would it not be an idea to clear this up?
    It may mean SOTA users can't operate on 5MHz except on hills with mobile coverage. How on earth do you enforce that?
  3. Larry

    Larry New Member

    Yes all available bands should be included to promote use and prevent exclusivity.

    Larry. G4GZG
  4. Max M0VNG

    Max M0VNG New Member

    Disagree. The NoV process is swift and simple. It also means that anyone looking to get onto these bands - I speak from 60m background - has understood how they work. I have a fear that if the 'specialization' of 5MHz becomes open domain, people will 'wander onto' to the bands and have a play, and potentially end up splattering, much to annoyance of Prime User - and that does not help our cause for a worldwide continuous band at this frequency. Until we do get this, I believe the NoV should remain. I also cannot understand if GB callsigns will be allowed on 60m if this goes ahead - can well imagine some pileups which may well irate the MoD...
  5. M5AKA

    M5AKA New Member

    No, I oppose the incorporation of both 470 kHz and 5 MHz into the licence as currently proposed by the consultation. 470 kHz brings with it the dangerous phrase shall not cause interference to electronic equipment. We cannot allow those words to appear in the standard licence. Both 470 kHz and 5 MHz bring with them a mass of usage restrictions which would unnecessary clutter the main licence. Keep the licence simple, straightforward and easy to understand. Bands such as 470 kHz and 5 MHz which have a large number of restrictions are better handled by the NoV system.
  6. Stewart Wilkinson

    Stewart Wilkinson New Member

    I have no objection to the principle of adding additional bands to all Full Licences, but imposing additional restrictions that currently apply just for the use of 470 kHz and 5 MHz bands as overall changes to the licence conditions does seem to be a backward step.

    As I recall the latest issue of 5MHz NoV's required those applying to provide Ofcom with contact phone numbers so that is really no change anyway.
  7. Peter Chadwick

    Peter Chadwick New Member

    >470 kHz brings with it the dangerous phrase shall not cause interference to electronic equipment.<

    A VERY dangerous requirement, insofar as it ignores the fact that the term 'electronic equipment' includes that which may or may not be compliant with the requirements of the EMC or other (e.g. various medical) Directives - one example being where the victim equipment may be old enough to pre-date the requirements.

    G3RZP
  8. G4AVN

    G4AVN New Member

    Once again, OFCOM!!. The questions all start with, "do you agree..." immediately you can only answer Yes or No. However, there are many more qualified than myself, that are quite rightly alarmed by the phrase, "Shall not cause interference to electronic equipment". OFCOM and the BBC are the only two organisations that will help with interference problems, both of these sites will tell you that they will not entertain Amateur Radio problems.
  9. Andrew Marshall

    Andrew Marshall New Member

    I fully agree. To allow any such phrase would be setting a very dangerous precedent indeed.
  10. Ken G3SDW

    Ken G3SDW Moderator


    Andrew, could you show what Ofcom site says that they will not entertain Amateur Radio problems?

    73

    Ken
    G3SDW
  11. DrTeeth

    DrTeeth New Member

    It is so easy to get an NoV, having them included in the licence is neither here nor there. I do share the concern about the 'no interference to electronic equipment' clause.

    73 de Guy G4DWV/4X1LT
  12. stewart_bakeruk

    stewart_bakeruk New Member

    I think that there is a very dangerous condition attached to the 470kHz spectrum release:-

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    2.26.3 The station must not cause interference to, and may not claim protection from, other wireless telegraphy or electronic equipment.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The inclusion of unspecified “electronic equipment” is contrary to the current Wireless Telegraphy Act which covers “Harmful Interference” including that from any electronic equipment.

    Ofcom are trying to break new ground and set a precedent. In doing this they may also be in breach of EU law.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    DIRECTIVE 2004/108/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 15 December 2004

    Acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty (2),

    Whereas:

    (2) Member States are responsible for ensuring that radiocommunications, including radio broadcast reception
    and the amateur radio service operating in accordance with International Telecommunication Union (ITU) radio
    regulations,
    electrical supply networks and telecommunications networks, as well as equipment connected
    thereto, are protected against electromagnetic disturbance
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Whilst it is (at present) only being proposed (illegally) for the 470kHz allocation these things have a habit of migrating.
    Today LF, tomorrow HF/VHF.

    This is the thin edge of the wedge. If this goes through then Ofcom (in their eyes) will have legitimate reasons to do nothing when it comes to products causing interference to Amateur Radio ….

    73
    Stewart G3RXQ

    UKEMC
  13. Peter Chadwick

    Peter Chadwick New Member

    It must be remembered that there are requirements related to EMC in other Directives/Decisions that are not referenced in the documents related to the EMC or R&TTE (RED?) Directives. These include various medical directives and decisions, and quite possibly others.

    It would thus make sense to reword to: operation "must not cause interference to devices demonstrably meeting the requirements of applicable ISO/CEN/CENELEC/ETSI immunity standards", bearing in mind that, for example, IF breakthrough is not considered an EMC problem.

    Or better still get rid of it altogether, although the proposed wording would make it hard for Ofcom - they would have to deal with non-compliant equipment - some of which could be old enough to pre-date the EMC Directive.

    I can't help feeling that all this is what happens when you let non-technical administrators with no knowledge loose....maybe I am biased after years of dealing professionally with Administrations/EU bureaucrats/CEPT/ITU..............

    73

    Peter E. Chadwick G3RZP
  14. Rob Styles

    Rob Styles New Member

    (N0) My thoughts are the same as M5AKA's "No, I oppose the incorporation of both 470 kHz and 5 MHz into the licence as currently proposed by the consultation. 470 kHz brings with it the dangerous phrase shall not cause interference to electronic equipment. We cannot allow those words to appear in the standard licence. Both 470 kHz and 5 MHz bring with them a mass of usage restrictions which would unnecessary clutter the main licence. Keep the licence simple, straightforward and easy to understand. Bands such as 470 kHz and 5 MHz which have a large number of restrictions are better handled by the NoV system."
    Rob M0TFO
  15. 2e1avx

    2e1avx New Member

    I agree lets keep this a a NOV extention, so that these bands can have seperate additional oprating clauses as needed. You also need to look at fixing the online application process as I was able to get the NOV using my 2e1 call sign.
  16. g6jyb

    g6jyb Moderator Staff Member

    For info the online 472k/5MHz NoVs in their title/text only vary a Full Licence , otherwise they are legally invalid - which is why the current online process is really quick and need not filter the applicants callsign

    Other more spectrum-specific NoVs are run thru the ETCC system which require validation checks on uploaded individual licences

    Murray G6JYB
  17. 2e1avx

    2e1avx New Member

    I do understand this. However holding several other NOV the paperwork for each also States a change in the full license and not an intermediate etc. This is more a heads up than anything else! It's interesting that the m6 call sign is blocked by the system though.
  18. Ronald Young

    Ronald Young New Member

    NO is simply the best response, NOVs do the job.
  19. C P HOWARD

    C P HOWARD New Member

  20. C P HOWARD

    C P HOWARD New Member

    No I do not,
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page