Interference with SSB on current "Phone" bands

[Rick, W4XA]

Howdy FreeDV'ers

I'm currently listening on 14236 and it appears that "special event station " K8T  has just taken over the frequency.

Over the weekend, there were several POTA stations also operating on 14235 ,  236 and 237 in much the same manner!  (one of them launched into a 4-letter word monolog to a FreeDV transmission thinking it was  interference.

I mentioned it to another station and she told me that she asked if the frequency was in use after I informed her that she was operating on the "World-Wide 20M Digital voice frequency"  (similar to the ATV frequencies that are well published and established for many years)

I think the above situations are not going to stop and will get much worse until POTA, ARRL, and other Contesting groups are notified that they should try to (voluntarily?)  avoid certain alternative (such as ATV, Digital ATV, FreeDV and other )mode frequencies!!

I was going to add this message to the "ARLB031 ARRL Hails FCC Action to Remove Symbol Rate Restrictions" thread only to reiterate that there either needs to be a another  "push"  to get the ARRL and other groups onboard with making the next band plan issues to maybe include a (narrow band) Digital Voice segment either in the current "Phone" bands (open to US Gen/ADV/EX classes of license) or establish a segment below the current Phone segments... specifically  narrow band Digital Voice and/or combination Digital Voice/Data modes.

Ultimately I decided to make this a thread separate so as to not hi-jack the above thread.

Ideally, I still think Digital voice modes should be in a segment all their own, understanding that on 20m and above, there is more potential for transmitting over someone on SSB even after "asking" if the frequency is in use. 

 It would seem less likely with FreeDV transmitting over other FreeDV stations since most would be observing the Reporter before transmitting. 

In the US, I think this might be an argument for an FCC STA to carve out a segment specifically NOT in current worldwide "phone" segments.

Although some disagree, It also might be an argument for designating FreeDV a "digital" mode which would then allow it to be transmitted in current world-wide digital segments.

I am still trying to think out of the current 1960's box we're currently still  "stuck" in.

73/Rick

[Mooneer Salem]

Hi Rick,

I found this on the ARRL's "Considerate Operator's Guide" (red circle mine):

Unfortunately you have to follow several links from the ARRL's band plan page (https://www.arrl.org/band-plan) before reaching this document (https://www.arrl.org/files/file/conop.pdf), so it's not immediately obvious to most that DV is on 14.236 MHz.

Anyway, considering that HF spectrum is a limited, finite resource, I'm not sure moving elsewhere (wherever that ends up being) will help all that much. Increasing awareness and FreeDV use is, IMO, the best way to ensure that wherever we're at is as clear as possible.

Thanks,

-Mooneer K6AQ

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "digitalvoice" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to digitalvoice...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/digitalvoice/5df62ec7-8485-4ecc-9e2f-ca21eb24687en%40googlegroups.com.

[MJ Inabnit]

I've run into this on several sub-bands. A ham lands on 14.230 SSB and
starts calling cq. RTTY station lands on nbems net frequency calling cq
test.

I think with more activity, the newbies will figure out there are spots
not to jump on.

Feature request. Ability to switch from DV to SSTV :)

73
Jaye

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "digitalvoice" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to digitalvoice...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:digitalvoice...@googlegroups.com>.

> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/digitalvoice/5df62ec7-8485-4ecc-9e2f-ca21eb24687en%40googlegroups.com

> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/digitalvoice/5df62ec7-8485-4ecc-9e2f-ca21eb24687en%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.


--

wishing you well
Jaye, ke6sls--via the toshiba w/thunderchicken

[G D]

I would like to see someone come up with a band plan and a legitimate reasoning behind why they put what they put where.  

I am not arguing that there are issues with people using frequencies and that may or may not interfere with what others want to do.  This happens in every band including vhg and up except where specific use in directed such as repeaters.  In HF this is difficult to do as signals travel different distances due to power, antenna radiation, hop distance etc etc.  Unless there is a specific portion dedicated by channeling the HF bands there will be constant issue and may create un or under used spectrum.  Although we consider 14.236 the digital voice dial frequency it is not dedicated to only that use just like 14.230 and 14.233 sstv frequencies that are also used by other USB voice QSOs frequently.

So.  What should be done?  A new band plan including spectrum dedicated for use for only DV that perhaps a couple thousand of us use?  That seems a little extreme.  Perhaps reduce CW bands down and have actual channeling and band width for digital modes?  Many would argue against that as well.  

Just playing devils advocate here.  Perhaps new band plans need created.  But even then what is fair for everyone and every type of operation.  We already don't use the 60M band as required by some digital modes.  Rules have always been a single signal centered at 1500 but that has never occurred as evident on CH 2 is 60M.  That channel has become unusable by federal stations because we hams operate improperly by those specific rules already.  So what do we do..  I feel like I got side tracked here.  Phone is phone, no frequency is protected.  We just need to learn to spin the dial and find open space like SSB Analog Voice, justbtry and keep it a whole number for easier tuning for the receiver 

Hope I didn't get side tracked too bad.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "digitalvoice" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to digitalvoice...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/digitalvoice/5df62ec7-8485-4ecc-9e2f-ca21eb24687en%40googlegroups.com.

[Rick, W4XA]

Yeah,

There has been an "explosion" of POTA and YOTA ( https://youthontheair.org/ ) station as of late getting on the air and I believe that if one were to ask about the ARRL's "Considerate Operator's Guide"they would likely say they have never seen it! 

It is a good start but many of the operators I have heard doing this are experienced operators (Advanced and Extra Class operators.....Yes I know many Xtras are "new" but Advanced class operators are not very "new" at all!!)

It's been my experience that many Contest operators are also not very considerate.  Seems like they're also in the "All-Knobs-to-the-Right" club too.

None of this is new of course, hence my suggestion that Digital modes should be separate from analog voice modes.

[Rick, W4XA]

On Monday, December 18, 2023 at 1:49:51 PM UTC-8 G D wrote:

So.  What should be done?  A new band plan including spectrum dedicated for use for only DV that perhaps a couple thousand of us use?  That seems a little extreme.  Perhaps reduce CW bands down and have actual channeling and band width for digital modes?  Many would argue against that as well.  

Hope I didn't get side tracked too bad.

No.  You're actually "SPOT-ON"

And I agree that having a specific exclusive segment only for FreeDV wouldn't be practical at this time.  But looking a little forward,  FreeDV (or a future derivative) has the potential of being used by FAR more than a few thousand people. 

I really believe it *could* be the voice mode of the future much like SSB supplanted AM 

Notice I didn't say SSB "replaced" AM.  It really didn't.  (SSB IS AM) .....AM is still authorized and I would strongly oppose eliminating AM as a usable mode (because many hams are still using vintage equipment that operate AM.....me included!) 

But it's really hard to operate FreeDV when someone just takes over the only frequency we are trying to use on 20m for example..... (right now someone is on 14238 which effectively prevents anyone from operating DV on 236  there. 

That's not to say I don't have a VFO to "spin" we're really not channelized either (and I don't want to be)

 

[Gary Kohtala]

 

You might also quote "The amateur's code", especially the first  paragraph. See 

https://www.arrl.org/amateur-code. I don't think anyone can reasonably argue 

with that, unless they are dead set on aggression.  Unfortunately, that’s all many know. 

From past and recent events,  which I've personally observed, the slot from 14.230 - 14.240 

mhz is constantly under siege (as well as many other well documented and publicized watering 

holes, AM windows, ACDS digital slots, etc). 

Analog SSTV, digital SSTV, digital voice, and other modes/activities are being intentionally 

and  maliciously interfered with on a regular basis. Amateur radio has become combative 

and competitive since activities such as contesting were introduced many decades ago. There is

no place in amateur radio for this ultimately destructive mindset. They've even butchered Field Day, 

which to me has always been an emergency communications exercise, NOT a contest. My guess is 

that contesting brings big bucks into the pockets of manufacturers and the ARRL. Anything not 

supporting their bottom line is not worthy of consideration, even if it ultimately destroys the amateur 

radio service as we know it.

Just because they may have asked "is the frequency in use?" and received no response 

does not necessarily mean that the frequency is unoccupied. If they actually listened for 

a response, it was most likely for a mere nano-second before opening up with a barrage.  

My experience is that this is intentional and malicious.  It's all about me, me, me. To hell 

with everyone else. The "almighty Q" (QSO), or point, is all that matters, no matter who gets hurt in

the process.  Sadly, many people attempt to destroy that which they do not  understand 

or which does not interest them. If you get in their way, you will be steam rolled or eaten alive by the 

likes of Walking Dead zombies. Such is life in this day and age. A very sad commentary on the human 

condition. 

Amateur radio is displaying the absolute worst of human behavior, none of which has any 

redeeming value. How long will it take for the authorities to recognize this and forcibly revoke 

amateur radio worldwide?  This type of ongoing behavior cannot justify continued use of our 

precious radio frequencies,  which will ultimately be sold to the highest bidder.  Perhaps this 

can be reversed if more experienced and knowledgeable amateurs took time to mentor, or 

"elmer" others, as it was when I joined the ranks of amateur radio in the 1960's. Something

to ponder....

Best regards,

Gary, K7EK

 

[Rick, W4XA]

Mooneer,

Thanks for this link.  I do think the vast majority of the POTA interference is completely unintentional.

To that end, I sent the POTA-Peeps a rather long email explaining what it happening on 14236 (and other freqs), a link to AND a copy of the below ARRL publication.  (BCC'd you and Walter)

I'll let you know what type of response I get!  I expect a  positive response.   I Also think POTA could be "our friend" since FreeDV lends itself well  to low power remote and/or portable operations!

73/Rick

[Michael Lizzio]

Rick & Mooneer,

Here's what I had sent to POTA support and their response earlier in the year.  I hope you have better luck than I had.

Mike WA2TOP

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello,

I'm not sure who to send this to but any help would be greatly appreciated. In the event you are not aware 14.236 is used by Digital Voice FreeDV. For more information 

please see May 2023 issue of QST Page 68.

Would it be possible to put the following link (https://www.arrl.org/files/file/conop.pdf) and reference to the attached "The ARRL Considerate Operator's Frequency Guide" in your Code of Conduct?

Thanks for your consideration.

Mike WA2TOP

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Charlie W7RTA (Parks on the Air)

May 2, 2023, 16:16 EDT

Hi Michael, this topic comes up often in social media and in help desk tickets. The POTA admin will not be including the considerate guide in the code of conduct. We link to http://www.arrl.org/files/file/DXCC/Eth-operating-EN-ARRL-CORR-JAN-2011.pdf  And that is adequate for most situations. Every month,, someone emails us and says, they have a net. They have a county frequency. and so on. 

73
W7RTA
Charlie

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael Lizzio

May 6, 2023, 16:17 EDT

Hi Charlie,

Thanks for your reply. I am however disappointed that you will not be including the link to the Considerate Operator's Guide in your code of conduct. Knowledge is power and if more folks had the guide at their fingertips it could possibly reduce the amount of support tickets that POTA receives each year. Hopefully as these issues pop up you will make reference to this guide.

I will contact the ARRL next to explore other options knowing that this issue is affecting others besides digital voice. 

73 Mike

WA2TOP

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Charlie W7RTA (Parks on the Air)

May 6, 2023, 21:30 EDT

When you go to the ARRL be sure and let them know this is the section that you want the considerate guide to be placed. You are basically now saying you want POTA to police the Considerate Operator guide. Any violation of that can get someone kicked out of POTA. 
 
https://docs.pota.app/docs/code_of_conduct.html#code-of-conduct
 
"Code of Conduct
To participate in the Parks on the Air program, one must register at the https://pota.app/ website. Parks on the Air, Inc. reserves the right to remove all access or data, permanently or temporarily, for violations of this Code of Conduct. The decision of the Administration Team/President will be final."
 
 

73
W7RTA
Charlie

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "digitalvoice" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to digitalvoice...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/digitalvoice/267d63d6-bc5a-44dd-9f08-74106cac3bf6n%40googlegroups.com.

[Rick, W4XA]

Mike,

Here's the email I sent (below) directly to Jason Johnston W3AAX (the POTA director in charge)  at his QRZ address and  and the POTA email address help(AT)parksontheair(dot)com

I have not received an answer as of yet and it sounds like they won't be responding....I really think the POTA/YOTA interference is just going to get worse

We REALLY need to investigate an STA for operation slightly below all the current analog "Phone" bands

///////////////////////////

Dear Jason Johnston,

My name is Rick Myr, W4XA and while I do not participate in POTA and/or other contest type operations I still fully support them!

POTA seems to be a great way to foster more participation in amateur radio.

POTA operations also seems to really be catching on but the participants also seem to be ignoring other operations on the band, and interference is resulting from it.

I have been experimenting with Digital Voice (FreeDV https://freedv.org/ ) nearly since it's inception and use it on US amateur MF/HF bands.  I  have noticed that more and more POTA stations are continually transmitting on the internationally recognized DV (Digital Voice) frequency on 20m (14236kHz) and the 20 SSTV frequencies.

Last week, I heard one POTA operator (Extra Class) actually spew forth 4-letter expletives after calling "CQ-POTA" and hearing a strong DV signal when he listened.

Now understand, I do not think any POTA operator is intentionally interfering,  but I regularly hear POTA stations calling CQ on the longtime digital and analog SSTV and DV frequencies.  

See ARRL publication  https://www.arrl.org/files/file/conop.pdf  (also attached)

It is easy to determine if 14236 is in use  by referring to https://freedv-reporter.k6aq.net/

Regardless of the time of day (in the CONUS) , there are other stations on the other side of the world that are either monitoring or transmitting on a continuous basis!) 

Since 20m can be a world-wide band at any time, someone using SSB on the frequency causes considerable interference. There needs to be at least the same separation (3kHz) one would use for any SSB (roughly 3 kHz wide) SSB "channel"!

Is it possible that you could include the ARRL's "The Considerate Operator’s Frequency Guide" or a link to it and information to try to avoid internationally known NET and mode  frequencies  on your POTA website?

Again, I fully support POTA and it's contribution to Amateur Radio.  The weekend interference from POTA and other contest users is becoming nearly unbearable.

Thanks for your consideration!

Richard Myr

W4XA

[jdow]

Mike, when you type something like this: "It is easy to determine if 14236 is in use  by referring to https://freedv-reporter.k6aq.net/" I snort in your general direction for your arrogant tone. What if I do not HAVE a browser to check. And why should I have to check arcane activity pages to see if a frequency is in use. The tradition is listen before use for a minute or two to make sure you didn't pop onto the new frequency between transmissions.

{o.o}  Joanne "just sayin'" W6MKU

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "digitalvoice" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to digitalvoice...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/digitalvoice/94e5d928-3a46-4504-93e1-f3ffeb5c67fan%40googlegroups.com.

[Mooneer Salem]

Hi all,

I'm still of the belief that with increased use, people will know to avoid the typical FreeDV frequencies (much like what mostly happens for SSTV).

However, I don't think it'd hurt to try for the STA. The worst the FCC can do is say no, right? Who knows, we might be able to move away from 14.236 onto the supposed IARU DV frequency (14.130 MHz) one day (though I suppose there's the chance we'll get stepped on by a data mode user instead).

Thanks,

-Mooneer K6AQ

[Rick, W4XA]

Joanne,

I'm Rick btw.  Not sure why you would accuse me of being "arrogant" 

 

I cannot think of anyone that doesn't have a cell phone with a browser in it.  Although I suppose there's still a few people out there with "flip-phones"

Now having said that, my point was,   anyone *can* check to see if the the world-wide 24-7 DV frequency is in use any time of the day or night and then find that it's nearly "always" in use.  AND the browser thing was more for POTA management to get them to agree to suggest "regular" POTA operators should at least try to avoid 14236.  They do seem to avoid the Pacific Maritime and other net frequencies on 20m.

This would also offer the *suggestion* that POTA enthusiasts will likely not be able to just  land on a DV frequency with a 10W (or even 100W)  radio and then reasonably expect someone to even hear them "ask" if the frequency is in use.   It also appears that many amateurs don't consider the "frequency in use" when they hear digital "noise"

When I am sitting on 14236,  I have the volume turned down, in the USB-D (digital)  mode and the receive bandwidth set at 1.1kHz.

 Even if someone asks, I won't hear them so how could I come back and say "yes it's in use" ?    AND, if they're up or down 1-2 kHz from 14236, I won't hear them at all. But I will hear the interference of the pileup of 1KW stations trying to call them

All this means is that there's more argument for getting a segment for  DV outside the "phone" band. 

I believe "we" will be wasting our time trying to operate on  "suggested" DV frequencies in any world-wide (analog)phone band. Especially when the POTA/YOTA and other contest "All-Knobs-to-the-Right" Locusts come out to play. (You can probably call this arrogant!)

Best Regards though!

Rick

[Rick, W4XA]

Actually,

I think most digital (like CW ) operators are a little more considerate of other stations on the band and would probably respect a published activity "channel" etc.

[Mooneer Salem]

Hi Rick,

I did a POTA activation recently at a location with no cell service. FreeDV Reporter wouldn't have helped me in that instance (but the normal "listen before transmitting" thing definitely did). This is before taking into account propagation causing some people to only hear certain other people, etc.

Re: the other net frequencies, those are easier to avoid since they're typically done with the same mode that the typical POTA activator would be using (analog SSB). Someone who's not familiar with FreeDV may very well conclude that the signal is some sort of nearby QRM/RFI or something instead of an actual QSO in progress, at least when using a radio without a waterfall display anyway.

Regardless, it's better to be constructive and friendly with other groups, lest one make enemies in the ham community.

(BTW, the official FreeDV Reporter URL is https://qso.freedv.org/. While https://freedv-reporter.k6aq.net/ does still work, I can see it eventually just turning into a redirect to the former some day--or possibly even going away altogether.)

Thanks,

-Mooneer K6AQ

[jdow]

OK, what part of presuming a ham MUST know the URL for your nice easy check, which is apparently not always correct based on comments here do you not understand as arrogant? I am a bloody ham. I use radios. I should not need to consult arcane web sites for permission to use a frequency. A simple occupancy check is sufficient. If you super-glued your tuning knob at 14.236 MHz might I suggest you made a poor decision? Besides, that is one of the SSTV frequencies from back when I dabbled with that. We learned to tune around a little.

Of course, if we DO tune around a little and then the same POTA operator pops up interfering again THEN you got him for malicious interference, perhaps. (The FCC sure doesn't give a Fig Newton over it.)

It is nice to ask. BUT, you must LISTEN to see if the frequency is in use or not. A couple minutes of no signal says it is unused - whereupon two people jump on it at once and immediately start screaming at each other. You cannot win. If you have a life you tune again - or break into a lumbago net and let your brain rot out. {^_-} (Not my bag even though I have an interesting age related illness that's not their business.) People being inconsiderate have led me to not repair my Pro-II when it died. It isn't worth the aggravation from POTA/Contest types, jammers, and whiners who insist other hams be abreast of all the web sites that may be trying to coordinate frequencies and such. Get A Freaking Life!

{^_^}    Joanne "Anti-whiners-R-US" W6MKU

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "digitalvoice" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to digitalvoice...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/digitalvoice/f335c461-0505-4bab-b91c-f8540a21cb49n%40googlegroups.com.

[Rick, W4XA]

On Thursday, December 28, 2023 at 11:35:14 PM UTC-8 Mooneer Salem wrote:

Regardless, it's better to be constructive and friendly with other groups, lest one make enemies in the ham community.

Thanks,

-Mooneer K6AQ

Mooneer, 

I completely agree.  Hence my friendly suggestion to the POTA policy-maker that it would be nice to include 14236 as one of many frequencies that simply "listening for a few min"  or asking, might not reveal that it's "in use"

It appears however,  that no one from POTA will even have the courtesy even respond.

It's also quite clear that attempting to get the general amateur population to do anything other than sit at the radio and twiddle the dial would get severe push-back.  After all, I have to keep reminding myself ....it is a "hobby"

This further indicates that digital modes of any kind really should be separated from the (legacy) analog voice modes.

I don't know who,  if anyone is going to apply for an STA.  I am not experienced in the process but I will attempt to find out!  

I'm sure it ain't Rocket Surgery!

Cheers Y'all!

[Facility 406]

> I completely agree.  Hence my friendly suggestion to the POTA
> policy-maker that it would be nice to include 14236 as one of many
> frequencies that simply "listening for a few min"  or asking, might not
> reveal that it's "in use"
>
> It appears however,  that no one from POTA will even have the courtesy
> even respond.

What about it being an SSTV calling frequency for a good six decades?

Don't forget to contact the more than half-century of SSTV operators
there.

There's been so much back and forth, were the POTA ops using DV, or SSTV
on 14236?

Any minute now, someone is going to remember nobody has any exclusive
rights to a frequency, and one group whining more than another, is
equally irrelevant.

Kurt

[roadfacts]

I may not fully understand FreeDV, but is it not possible to send some CW after each tx that an analog POTA would recognize as some other than noise is being heard? I recall other digital programs doing this.

Dave W7PDQ

[Rick, W4XA]

On Friday, December 29, 2023 at 5:45:39 PM UTC-8 Facility 406 wrote:

What about it being an SSTV calling frequency for a good six decades?

Don't forget to contact the more than half-century of SSTV operators
there.

There's been so much back and forth, were the POTA ops using DV, or SSTV
on 14236?

Any minute now, someone is going to remember nobody has any exclusive
rights to a frequency, and one group whining more than another, is
equally irrelevant.

Kurt

Hi Kurt,

1.  Interesting you say that. And it's a pretty good point.    I have *never* heard anyone on 14236 talking about SSTV coordination or anything else related to SSTV.   I do hear stations on 14230 talking about SSTV and shortly after,  transmitting SSTV.  And then after an SSTV transmission, talking about it again (on 14230) .

2. The only POTA (or other contest ) operators I have heard on 14235, 6,  7 & 8 were operators calling CQ POTA(or test)  right in the middle of DV transmissions. And in one case, one of them actually came back with 4-letter expletives directed at the interfering "noise" he heard.

3.  Someone already beat you to it!  But you're absolutely right.  No one has any exclusive right to any frequencies (except certain VHF/UHF and other repeaters coordinated by a recognized coordinating group, which is also not relevant here)

The "Whining" if you want to call it that, is more a statement that it appears organized contest and "club" groups should be voluntarily agreeing to inform their participants to "try" to avoid established frequencies (like SSTV, DV, or Nets etc) "if possible"   sort of like that outlined in the ARRL "Considerate Operator’s Frequency Guide" (below)

https://www.arrl.org/files/file/conop.pdf

It's not a new publication  and it's of course not mandatory by any means.

But it appears by the reaction another amateur got from a POTA rep and the NON-response I got from their founder and director etc, POTA doesn't "Give a FF" about other regular users on the band.  

If there is no immediate response to someone asking if the frequency is "in use" then they go for it.  They start calling CQ POTA and the pilup of KW stations replying ensues.

Now having said all the above, I really do not think the vast majority of POTA or other contest operators are intentionally transmitting over what they think is valid communications.  Since they cannot easily detect and/or decode FreeDV (or even SSTV for that matter) they may not think they're hurting a thing.

No Whining here.  It's just the reality of it.

And "Whining" isn't needed anyway......  I now educating myself on procedures to apply for a Special Temporary Authority (STA , that others could "sign" on to)  to operate ODFM/DQPSK  digital transmissions that carry multiple data (incl voice audio) on frequencies below the US "Phone" segments where  RTTY and other digital modes are already authorized at up 2.8kHz Bandwidth

FreeDV can operate at 1.0 to 2.1kHz bandwidth depending on the mode.  And in any case, it appears that FreeDV will not in the foreseeable future (if ever) even come close to  2.8kHz BW.

My main contention will be that ODFM/DPQSK (FreeDV) is  NOT compatible with legacy analog AM Phone (double and/or single sideband  using full, reduced or suppressed carrier) and Narrow Band FM, so it should allowed in the NON-Phone segments of each HF band (it's already allowed on 160m  --1.800-2.000MHz)

 More to come!

On Friday, December 29, 2023 at 10:02:25 PM UTC-8 roadfacts wrote:

I may not fully understand FreeDV, but is it not possible to send some CW after each tx that an analog POTA would recognize as some other than noise is being heard? I recall other digital programs doing this.

Dave W7PDQ

Dave, 

Anything's possible. Since the software already identifies the transmitter, it's not legally required and that requirement was dropped for RTTY and certain other digital modes long ago.  

I get what you're saying though, CW received would indicate that a licensed amateur is "transmitting something"  even though nowadays it seems the vast majority of amateurs cannot copy CW at even the slowest rate.

Although the developers could probably add a CW ID to the software, I wouldn't "vote" for it. (and although I am way out of practice,  I can still copy about 15wpm)

Regards,

Rick

W4XA