Ofcom Will Remove Mandatory Ham Callsign ID Interval, Allow Encryption For Some

product_bucket writes: The UK's radio regulator, Ofcom, today published changes in the licensing conditions that remove the mandatory 15-minute callsign ID interval on all allocated frequencies apart from 5MHz, where special conditions remain. In its place, a requirement for the station to be "clearly identifiable at all times" has been made, along with a requirement to transmit the station callsign "as frequently as is practicable" in a form consistent with the operating mode. The decision also permits the use of encryption (PDF) when the station is being used for, or on behalf of a user service such as St. John Ambulance. Unusually, no response to the consultation (PDF) has been made available, so there is at present no way to assess the extent to which the changes were based on actual responses.

Comments

bad idea

[qwp]

bad idea. But hey it's just public airwaves, what is the worst that could happen?

Re:bad idea

[ColdWetDog]

I really don't get this - repeating your callsign every 15 minutes isn't particularly onerous. If it really bothers you, just set up your transmitter to kick it out in CW every so often. The encryption does makes sense for St. John's Ambulance (an emergency medical charity if I'm reading it right). US hams have asked for encryption for use in ARES (Amateur Radio Emergency Services) so personal information can be transmitted appropriately. Perhaps the UK's experience with this will move the FCC to act on it. Or perhaps not, what the FCC needs right now is a giant enema - that's the only way I see it moving along.

Re:bad idea

[amorsen]

Yes, it is a horrible idea to give those HAM guys more freedom. Every time we relax the rules for them, we get disasters of biblical proportions, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!

Re:bad idea

[TWX]

I think they really don't know what to do with ham radio. Some have tried to take it in a packet radio direction, but realistically that requires encryption. Some have tried to use it for more general-purpose voice communication, but again, privacy concerns come up. Cell phones have made it a lot more difficult to justify the time and expense, and other kinds of unlicensed radio or looser-licensed radio (GMRS/FRS type stuff) makes it harder to justify using ham radio for short-distance communications, and Internet-based voice over IP communications makes it a lot harder to justify using ham radio for long distance communication.

I have a 2m HT and a 10m mobile that needs repair. I last turned on the 2m radio on a road trip so I could listen to a simplex frequency in case anyone else asked for help. I barely received some other parties' rag-chewing, but that was the only time 146.520MHz lit-up. I haven't spoken with anyone in close to a decade; I only renewed my license because it was of negligible cost and effort to do so. I don't know what to do with ham radio even as a licensed operator, and I don't think that most other people do either.

If these changes allow ham radio in the UK to increase in usage, then maybe similar regulation changes in the US could help increase usage and make what was supposed to be something of an educational hobby actually provide something useful and educational again.

Re:bad idea

[jerel]

As a new-ish ham, I hear a lot of "ham radio is dead" stuff, and it's just not true. There are more registered hams now then ever before, and the rate of new licensees is also going up. (i.e. the number of new hams every year keeps going up) But the new young hams are not getting into it for the same reasons the older hams did. Most of the older hams were at least amateur radio electronics guys. Now, nobody (or very very few) builds a radio from bare components, and the first level of license requires only a basic understanding of radio electronics principles. In my book it's still very cool to put up my antenna (I live in an antenna-restricted community) and know that when I contact someone in another country, I'm doing it without relying on somebody else's infrastructure. It's just me, my battery, my radio, and my antenna, and I'm talking to some guy half-way around the world! How cool is that? And emergency communications will always be a valid use. In fact, in a real emergency, cell phones are useless for a variety of reasons, some of which can be failed infrastructure, or even just simple congestion. If an earthquake hits or a hurricane, cell towers go down or everybody jumps on their phone and then nobody can get in on the overcrowded towers. Or EMS blocks all calls except for emergency services to use. I don't know how it's going to evolve, but it always does, and it's most definitely not dead. 73, WT6G

Re:bad idea

[gnu-sucks]

Why does emergency communication need to be encrypted? If you place yourself in a situation where ham radio would really save the day, the last thing you would want is *less* compatibility with other stations and agencies.

All this will do is allow commercial users to encroach onto the ham bands unnoticed because illegal encrypted traffic is indistinguishable from legal encrypted traffic.

I think it's already questionable why local police departments would use encrypted P25. If the last few months of newsworthy police activity are any hint, we need more opportunities to observe law enforcement, not fewer.

Why the heck does an ambulance need to use ham radio frequencies? Why would they need it encrypted? This argument is simply nonsense. If its an emergency, sorry, loose some privacy in place of saving your life. Hams have enough trouble setting up a PL on a radio, can you imagine them trying to coordinate encryption over the air? In emergency situations, communications networks like ham radio work because they are SIMPLE. They can spring up spontaneously out of nowhere and don't require anything more than a radio, antenna, and battery. This is why ham radio has been helpful in times of emergencies when complex cellular and digital trunking systems fail. There is an elegance to the simplicity of analog.

And if the DOD needs to transmit encrypted information using a ham radio, then can't they just do it anyway?

Furthermore, digital communication does not "need" to be encrypted as some posters here have stated. The protocol needs to be documented and standardized. Encryption doesn't help. Error correction does though, and these are totally different things. WiFi, for example, does not *need* to be encrypted.

Re:bad idea

[Ol Olsoc]

I think they really don't know what to do with ham radio. Some have tried to take it in a packet radio direction, but realistically that requires encryption.

Nothing in Ham radio requires encryption. What on earth is your rationale? Packet Radio has mostly turned into APRS anyhow. The only people I know who are espousing Packet are those who don't want to use NBEMS, because they think it's too difficult, with the added reason that thtey don't want to upgrade their license class.

Some have tried to use it for more general-purpose voice communication, but again, privacy concerns come up.

Are you one of those Hams that is trying to get the encryption ball rolling on Ham Radio? Fuggedaboudit. There is a lot more to Ham radio than whacker's dreams of green vest glory. And the rest of us don't want it destroyed on that account. If encryption is needed, then professional radio operator are demanded. You don't think that once you get encryption that thd need for security clearances does not follow? If teh data has to be kept secret, it will hav eto be handled bu secured personnel .

Cell phones have made it a lot more difficult to justify the time and expense, and other kinds of unlicensed radio or looser-licensed radio (GMRS/FRS type stuff) makes it harder to justify using ham radio for short-distance communications, and Internet-based voice over IP communications makes it a lot harder to justify using ham radio for long distance communication.

And during an emergency, when everyone is using their cell phones to call relatives to say "I'm okay", those cell phone towers go down in a hurry. To have sufficient emergency power to last say, a week, you won't want to pay that bill.

The present day quasi-paradigm of the Ham radio Emcomm Op is a bad one. Too many think they will show up at HQ with their Handi-talkie, and start barking on it, saving people's ;ives, and then going home to a hero's welcome.

The reality is that Ham radio prepares you to communicate, but more along the lines that you are the only one prepared inside the disaster area. So you are the one getting messages out of an area that has no power, no phone, no Internet, no smartphones. There are some areas where there is more organization, where there is more of a need (The Erie PA area comes to mind) but for most of us, nah.

I have a 2m HT and a 10m mobile that needs repair. I last turned on the 2m radio on a road trip so I could listen to a simplex frequency in case anyone else asked for help. I barely received some other parties' rag-chewing, but that was the only time 146.520MHz lit-up.

Not terribly surprising. Most 2 meter activity is on repeaters, not simplex. And most repeater activity is on weekends, except for retired Hams.

I haven't spoken with anyone in close to a decade; I only renewed my license because it was of negligible cost and effort to do so. If all you have is an HT and a 10 meter radio, it's not surprising. HF radio is a blast, you can talk around the world on less power than that light in your frig. I think you have formed your opinion based on personal experiences not rooted in actuality. It's like the people who tune into the 80 meter bsnd in the middle of the day and don't hear anything (it's a much better night time band) and decide no one is using it. There is actually a lot of activity, it's determined by time of day, solar conditions and frequency.

I don't know what to do with ham radio even as a licensed operator, and I don't think that most other people do either.

What to do? Here is just a samplig of what I have done so far this year:

Taught digital mode classes to Emergency and experimenters

Built a low power Software Defined Radio using Surface Mount Technology.

Designed and built several Soundcard interfaces for the classes and myself

Condicted a di

Re:bad idea

[Ol Olsoc]

I really don't get this - repeating your callsign every 15 minutes isn't particularly onerous. If it really bothers you, just set up your transmitter to kick it out in CW every so often. The encryption does makes sense for St. John's Ambulance (an emergency medical charity if I'm reading it right). US hams have asked for encryption for use in ARES (Amateur Radio Emergency Services) so personal information can be transmitted appropriately. Perhaps the UK's experience with this will move the FCC to act on it. Or perhaps not, what the FCC needs right now is a giant enema - that's the only way I see it moving along.

Let's hope not. The ARRL has come out against a recent petition to allow encryption

The rejection article at arrl.org sums it up nicely:

In denying the petition, the FCC concluded, “Thus, while the proposal could advance one purpose of the Amateur Radio Service — value to the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications — it would undermine other characteristics and purposes of the service. Therefore, we agree with the comments that say, in various ways, that amending the rules to allow encryption to obscure the meaning of messages transmitted during emergency services operations and related training exercises would not improve or enhance the operation of Amateur Service stations or otherwise be in the public interest.”

And that's really it. Fact is, ARS has handled info without encryption for a long itme now without issue, and the inclusion of encryption would change the nature of Ham radio forever, which might be nice for the emcomm people, but a disaster for the rest of us. We have remarkable access to radio, but it's because what we do is in the open, if we're doing encrypted work, a whole lot of that access, and who they allow to do that access will change. If you have to have encryption, go commercial.

Re:bad idea

[grumling]

I agree that whackers are a problem with modern ham radio, but they do help protect the bands (especially UHF and above) just because the ARRL can wave the disaster flag at the FCC every so often. I got into the hobby to play with radios and experiment, not be a "hero."

But I also think there's been a massive overreaction by the health care industry because of HIPAA, and DHS' attempt to co-opt the bands under the guise of disaster relief after the FCC screwed up the police bands with narrow banding. I've participated in traffic nets. I'm a big boy and know what counts as health and welfare traffic. And I also understand that most of the time hams should be sending "I'm OK" radiograms to family members outside the disaster zone and helping keep the shelters stocked, not sending doctor's email over our bands.

Re:bad idea

[thegarbz]

I think it's already questionable why local police departments would use encrypted P25.

I don't. Many departments use the radio for back to base fact checking amongst other things reading out the person's criminal history. I can't get this from my local police but the next jurisdiction over still use analogue narrowband AM to transmit stuff. It's not all that encouraging to hear a person's name, license plate, registration, insurance details, and the number of times he's been nabbed for being blasted over public airwaves.

Now there's some discussion to be had about whether a 2-way is really the proper technology to get this information out to police, but I'm sure there's no budget to change that. There never is.

Re:bad idea

[Ol Olsoc]

except a lot of people use encryption every day right now and FCC doesnt do anything about it. AMBE is basically encryption, and only way to decrypt it is to pay DVSI or ICOM

That's not encryption. That would be like saying that any of the Ham radio codecs are encryption ,only difference is that most are free. It's a codec. designed that people can read or hear it.

Re:bad idea

[Ol Olsoc]

As a new-ish ham, I hear a lot of "ham radio is dead" stuff, and it's just not true.

There are a number of older Hams who we call "Old Farts", for whom personally, Ham Radio is dying. Their buds are dying off, their high technology is no longer high technology. I don't mind people going into reminiscent mode, but all too many of the old farts are openly antagonistic toward anyone new, and any new technology.

I suspect that there were old farts during the transition from spark to alternator radio, From that to tube radio. I know old farts decried the mass switch from AM to Single Sideband. Then as the Morse code testing went away, they went into full dudgeon. Now, just like the old Single sideband haters, the old farts sit in the corner of club meetings, telling us all about how everything is bad, and Ham Radio is dying.

Yeah, for them it is. But not for the 96 year old Ham I had a digital computer mode QSO recently. H'e jus picked up a new laptop, and was trying it out on PSK31 mode.

In the meantime, the rest of us are having a blast, bouncing signals off the moon, talking to astronauts in the space station, building satellites, setting up networks for weather and position reporting, doing propagation research, talking around the world on milliwatts, writing software for radio use, building radios and support peripherals, and helping out in emergencies. And sometimes putting together an old school one tube radio and pounding on a Morse key.

Ofcom

[leathered]

If Ofcom really want to help ham radio operators they could do more to ban or restrict power network adapters and the multitude of other gadgets that leak QRM all over the airwaves.

Bring back the Radiocommunications Agency. Ofcom is a behemoth that has its fingers in too many pies to be an effective regulator.