Hello!

Some interesting articles about using SW to do data transmissions.
Internet has a too high latency for these traders, so they wanna use
shortwave with 20 kW.

https://swling.com/blog/tag/shortwave-trading/

The question is what the outcome is and which bands can be used by
them. I hope that they will not be allowed to use the ham radio or
broadcast bands because that will be the end for many broadcast station
that cannot afford a high power transmitter.

Worldwide ham radio and broadcasting is in danger if that will be the
future of these bands.

On 8/22/2023 3:22 AM, Marco Moock wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Some interesting articles about using SW to do data transmissions.
> Internet has a too high latency for these traders, so they wanna use
> shortwave with 20 kW.
>
> https://swling.com/blog/tag/shortwave-trading/
>
> The question is what the outcome is and which bands can be used by
> them. I hope that they will not be allowed to use the ham radio or
> broadcast bands because that will be the end for many broadcast station
> that cannot afford a high power transmitter.
>
> Worldwide ham radio and broadcasting is in danger if that will be the
> future of these bands.
The petition is from the Shortwave Modernization Coalition (SMC), and
the whole docket can be found on the FCC web site ECFS as RM-11953.

They are asking for permission to use various existing Fixed Service
bands between 2 and 25 MHz. Right now, Fixed Services are allowed on the
HF bands for backup purposes, using SSB for voice, which uses 2.7 kHz
channels. There are also some data licensees. SMC is asking for
permission to use up to 50 kHz wide channels, up to 20 kW, and with a
relaxed out-of-channel emission standard that would put very loud junk
onto the amateur bands as well as interfere with other Fixed users,
like, say, competing traders. The Comment and Reply Comment periods have
officially closed, though. It has received a lot of opposition. For one
thing, SMC wanted to be allowed very loose out-of-band emissions because
a more properly filtered transmitter would have a tiny bit more latency,
and flash traders take money from the rest of the market by being just a
smidge faster to execute. There is no public benefit to this, just
private gain for public harm.

Am 23.08.2023 schrieb "Fred Goldstein" <anonymized@ionary.com>:

> SMC is asking for permission to use up to 50 kHz wide channels

Multiple of these channels mean no more space for ham radio - or is my
guess wrong?

On 8/24/2023 2:51 AM, Marco Moock wrote:
> Am 23.08.2023 schrieb "Fred Goldstein"<anonymized@ionary.com>:
>
>> SMC is asking for permission to use up to 50 kHz wide channels
> Multiple of these channels mean no more space for ham radio - or is my
> guess wrong?

They are not using proposing to use ham radio frequencies. They are
proposing a set of frequencies already authorized for use under Part 90
licenses. But those frequencies are normally only available for
commercial use on an emergency basis. There are several existing data
systems on those bands, however, operating under Part 5 experimental
licenses. Some of these bands are adjacent to ham bands, though, so the
out-of-band signals from transmitters operating under SMC's proposed
rules would be "S9+" on parts of the ham bands.

BTW, Digest readers should remember that you can contribute by submitting to
telecomdigestsubmissions@telecom-digest.org
A plain "reply" might go to the wrong address.

--
Fred Goldstein  k1io  fred "at" ionary.com