1Introduction - ITU: Committed to connecting the worldN14!MSW-E.docx · Web viewis the amateur transmitting antenna factor. From the antenna diagram above, the side-lobe gain is –18

Radiocommunication Study Groups

Source: Document 5A/TEMP/245 Annex 14 toDocument 5A/650-E21 November 2017English only

Annex 14 to Working Party 5A Chairman’s Report

WORKING DOCUMENT TOWARD PRELIMINARY DRAFT NEWREPORT ITU-R M.[AMATEUR_50_MHZ]

Spectrum needs for the amateur service in the frequency band 50-54 MHz

in Region 1 and sharing with mobile, fixed, radiolocation and broadcasting services

Table of contents

1 Introduction....................................................................................................... 5

2 Current usage of the 50-54 MHz frequency band in Region 1......................... 5

2.1 The amateur service.......................................................................................... 5

2.2 The radiolocation service.................................................................................. 7

2.3 The broadcasting service.................................................................................. 7

2.4 The fixed and mobile services.......................................................................... 7

[2.5 Inter-regional sharing between services........................................................... 7

3 Spectrum needs for the amateur service in Region 1....................................... 7

3.1 General Considerations..................................................................................... 7

3.2 Propagation Issues............................................................................................ 8

3.3 Future usage...................................................................................................... 9

3.4 Usage categorisation......................................................................................... 10

3.5 Approach to determining spectrum needs........................................................ 10

3.6 Spectrum Needs Summary............................................................................... 12

4 Characteristics of amateur stations for sharing studies..................................... 12

/TT/FILE_CONVERT/5B3CD58B7F8B9A986E8D44A3/DOCUMENT.DOCX 20/11/2017 20/11/2017

- 2 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

4.1 Global characteristics........................................................................................ 12

4.2 Specific Region 1 characteristics...................................................................... 12

4.3 Antenna type and polarisation.......................................................................... 14

4.4 Propagation Factors.......................................................................................... 14

5 Sharing with the mobile service....................................................................... 15

5.1 System parameters of the mobile service......................................................... 15

5.2 Minimum coupling loss calculations................................................................ 17

5.2.1 Propagation model............................................................................................ 17

5.2.2 Calculation Method.......................................................................................... 17

5.2.3 Propagation criterion and ambient noise figure................................................ 17

5.2.4 Radiated power for co- and channels................................................................ 18

5.2.5 Determination of minimum path attenuation.................................................... 18

5.2.6 Evaluation of the interference ranges............................................................... 19

5.2.7 Conclusion........................................................................................................ 20

6 Sharing with the fixed Service.......................................................................... 20

7 Sharing with the radiolocation Service............................................................. 20

7.1 Background....................................................................................................... 20

7.2 Study details Ed. note added 14/11/2017 from 5A/549................................... 21

7.3 Study Results Ed. note added 14/11/2017 from 5A/549.................................. 21

8 Sharing with the broadcasting service............................................................. 21

8.1 Background....................................................................................................... 21

8.1.1 The 2016 Situation............................................................................................ 22

8.1.2 Digital Terrestrial Television Broadcasting in Band 1 – 47-68 MHz.............. 22

8.1.3 Analogue Television Broadcasting in Band 1 – 47-68 MHz............................ 23

8.1.4 Inter-Regional Sharing Situation...................................................................... 23

8.1.5 Sharing between the broadcasting service in Region 1 and the amateur service in Region 3........................................................................................................ 24

8.1.6 Sharing between the broadcasting service in Region 1 and the amateur service in Region 2........................................................................................................ 24

8.1.7 Sharing arrangements between the amateur service and incumbent services in the 50-52 MHz frequency band implemented in some countries................. 24

8.2 Sharing study details......................................................................................... 26

8.3 Study results...................................................................................................... 26

9 Conclusion of the Report.................................................................................. 27

/TT/FILE_CONVERT/5B3CD58B7F8B9A986E8D44A3/DOCUMENT.DOCX 20/11/2017 04:10:00 PM 20/11/2017 11:43:00 AM

- 3 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Annex 1 – Spectrum needs and associated information............................................. 28

Annex 1.1: Application-based approach to calculation of spectrum needs............... 28

A1.1.1 General........................................................................................................... 28

A1.1.2 Input parameters............................................................................................. 28

A1.1.3 Calculation Process........................................................................................ 29

A1.1.4 An example of input parameters values and obtained results........................ 30

A1.1.5 Input parameters............................................................................................. 30

A1.1.6 Spectrum needs............................................................................................... 31

Annex 1.2: Amateur Stations & Density.................................................................... 32

Annex 1.3: Digital spectrum arrangement for the band 52–54 MHz......................... 33

A1.3.1 Digital amateur applications (channel spacing up to 500 kHz)...................... 33

Annex 2 – Sharing with the broadcasting service...................................................... 35

A2.1.1 Introduction.................................................................................................... 35

A2.1.2 Method............................................................................................................ 35

A2.1.3 Variables for the unwanted amateur station signal......................................... 37

A2.1.4 Variables for the wanted TV signal................................................................ 38

A2.1.5 The calculation............................................................................................... 38

A2.1.6 Sharing scenario............................................................................................. 39

A2.1.7 An alternative approach.................................................................................. 39

A2.1.8 Summary and Conclusions............................................................................. 40

Annex 2.2: A Monte-Carlo simulation study of compatibility between the analogue TV broadcast service and the amateur service.................................................. 41

A2.2.1 Introduction and summary.............................................................................. 41

A2.2.2 Study details................................................................................................... 41

A2.2.4 The rural centre study..................................................................................... 42

Annex 2.3: Amateur Service Stations Interference to Television receivers of the Broadcasting Service in the band 50-54 MHz.................................................. 49

A2.3.1 Introduction.................................................................................................... 49

A2.3.2 Working Assumptions.................................................................................... 49

A2.3.3 Calculation results.......................................................................................... 52

A2.3.4 Findings and Proposals................................................................................... 62

Annex 2.4: TBD......................................................................................................... 63

A2.4.1 To be determined............................................................................................ 63


- 4 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Annex 2.5: Information concerning current and past sharing arrangements between the amateur service and other services in the 50-52 MHz frequency band...... 64

A2.5.1 Introduction.................................................................................................... 64

A2.5.2 Sharing Scenarios........................................................................................... 64

A2.5.3 Country Information....................................................................................... 64

A2.5.3.1 Finland......................................................................................................... 64

A2.5.3.2 France.......................................................................................................... 65

A2.5.3.3 Germany...................................................................................................... 66

A2.5.3.4 Hungary....................................................................................................... 67

A2.5.3.5 Norway........................................................................................................ 67

A2.5.3.7 United Kingdom.......................................................................................... 68

A2.5.4 Summary......................................................................................................... 69

Annex 3 – Sharing between the amateur service and the land mobile service.......... 70

Annex 3.1: MCL interference analysis between amateur and mobile service in the band 50-54 MHz..................................................................................... 70

A3.1.1 Technical and operational Parameters of amateur service in the band 50-54 MHz........................................................................................................ 70

A3.1.2 Propagation scenarios..................................................................................... 70

A3.1.3 Radiated power for co- and adjacent channels............................................... 73

A3.1.4 Determination of minimum path attenuation................................................. 78

Annex 3.2: A Monte-Carlo Simulation of Sharing with the Mobile Service............. 80

A3.2.1 Introduction.................................................................................................... 80

A3.2.2 Background..................................................................................................... 80

A3.2.3 The study scenarios and basic system parameters.......................................... 80

A3.2.4 Operational considerations............................................................................. 81

A3.2.5 Estimating the service range of the tactical links........................................... 82

A3.2.6 Range of the amateur service links assumed in this study............................. 82

A3.2.7 Results of the simulations............................................................................... 83

A3.2.8 Conclusion...................................................................................................... 87

Annex 3.3: Sharing studies between Amateur Radio and Governmental Mobile under WRC-19 agenda item 1.1....................................................................... 88

A3.3.1 Global Approach............................................................................................ 88

A3.3.2 Modeling of radio amateur behavior.............................................................. 88

A3.3.3 Modeling of Governmental System Behavior................................................ 91

A3.3.4 Propagation model.......................................................................................... 92


- 5 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

A3.3.5 Minimum Coupling Loss (MCL) study.......................................................... 96

A3.3.5.1 Minimum Coupling Loss calculation.......................................................... 96

A3.3.5.2 Determination of required isolation............................................................. 96

A3.3.5.3 MCL analysis results................................................................................... 97

A3.3.6 Monte Carlo Study......................................................................................... 100

A3.3.6.1 Configuration of Seamcat scenarios............................................................ 101

A3.3.6.2 Way of presenting the results...................................................................... 106

A3.3.6.3 Impact of Radio Amateur in SSB mode...................................................... 107

A3.3.6.4 Impact of Radio Amateur in FM mode....................................................... 109

A3.3.6.5 Impact of Radio Amateur in wide band mode............................................. 110

A3.3.7 Conclusion...................................................................................................... 112

A3.3.8 References...................................................................................................... 112

Annex 4 – Sharing with the radiolocation service..................................................... 113

Annex 4.1: Wind Profile Radar Systems................................................................... 113

A4.1.1 Background..................................................................................................... 113

A4.1.2 WPR location and parameters........................................................................ 114

A4.1.3 In-band separation distances........................................................................... 115

A4.1.4 Separation distances....................................................................................... 116

A4.1.5 Conclusions.................................................................................................... 118

Editor’s note: Use update table of content commands to update above table as each entry is linked to the section titles

1 IntroductionResolution 658 (WRC-15) invites ITU-R to conduct the following studies to support the deliberations of WRC-19 on agenda item 1.1:

1 to study spectrum needs in Region 1 for the amateur service in the frequency band 50-54 MHz;2 taking into account the results of the above studies, to study sharing between the amateur service and the mobile, fixed, radiolocation and broadcasting services, in order to ensure protection of these services.

This Report responds to the invitations of Resolution 658.

2 Current usage of the 50-54 MHz frequency band in Region 1

2.1 The amateur service

The 50-54 MHz frequency band is allocated to the Amateur Service in Regions 2 and 3. While the Region 1 African countries listed in No. 5.169 of the Radio Regulations (RR) have an allocation to the amateur service in the 50-54 MHz frequency band on a primary basis, a number of other Region 1


- 6 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

countries have authorised the use of all or parts of the 50-52 MHz frequency band by the amateur service on a mainly secondary (but sometimes national primary) basis in accordance with RR No. 4.4.

CEPT’s European Table of Frequency Allocations allocates the 50-52 MHz frequency band to the amateur service on a secondary basis. As of October 2016, twenty-four of the forty-eight member administrations of CEPT have notified an allocation to the amateur service in the CEPT European Communications Office’s online Frequency Information System (EFIS). In addition a further twelve CEPT administrations have indicated that amateur usage is an application in this band. This demonstrates that 75% of CEPT’s membership authorise amateur usage within the 50-52 MHz frequency band. The permitted maximum power of such stations is mostly 100 W, in some countries there are territorial limitations with regard to power and frequencies.

Table 1 provides a list of Region 1 Administrations and the conditions for using the 50-54 MHz frequency band, as published in the website of Region 1 of the International Amateur Radio Union (IARU).

TABLE 1

Conditions for amateur service usage of the 50-52 MHz band in Region 1, as at May 2017

Country Band

Status 1 RR 2

Country Band

Status 1 RR 2

Country

Band

Status 1 RR 2

Country Band

Status 1 RR 2

AFS 50-54 P 5.169 DNK 50-52 S LBR No Info S 50-52 S

ALB 50-52 S E 50-52 S LBY No Info SDN No Info

ALG NO EGY NO LIE 50-52 S SEN 50-51 P 5.169

AND 50-52 S ERI No Info LSO 50-54 P 5.169 SEY No Info

AGL No Info EST 50-52 S LTU 50-52 S SMR 50-52 S

ARM NO ETH No Info LUX 50-52 S SOM 50-54

ARS NO F 50-52 S LVA 50-52 S SRB 50-51.9 S

AUT 50-52 S FIN 50-52 S MAU NO SRL No Info

AZE NO

G

50-51 P MCO 50-52 S SSD No Info

BEL 50-52 S 51-52 S MDA NO STP No Info

BEN No Info GAB No Info MDG No Info SUI 50-52 S

BFA No Info GEO NO MKD 50-52 S SVK 50-52 S

BHR

50-50.5 P GHA No Info MLI No Info SVN 50-52 S

50.5-52 S GMB No Info MLT 50-52 S SWZ 50-54 P 5.169

BIH 50-52 S GNE No Info MNE 50-52 S SYR No Info

BLR NO GNB No Info MNG No Info TZA No Info

BOT 50-54 P 5.169 GRC 50-52 S MOZ No Info TCD No Info

GUI No info

BUL 50.05-50.2 S HNG 50-52 S MRC No Info TGO No Info

BDI No Info HOL 50-52 S MTN No Info TJK NO

CAF No Info HRV 50-51.9 S MWI 50-54 P 5.169 TKM NO

CME No Info I 50-52 S NGR No Info TUN NO

COD 50-54 P 5.169 IRL 50-52 S NIG NO TUR NO

COG No Info IRQ No Info NMB 50-54 P 5.169 UAE No Info

COM No Info ISL 50-52 S NOR 50-52 S UGA No Info

CPV No Info ISR 50-52 S OMA 50-52 S UKR No Info

CTI No Info JOR 50-51.5 S POL 50-52 S UZB NO

CVA 50-52 S KAZ NO POR 50-52 S YEM No Info

CYP 50-51 S KEN NO QAT No Info ZMB 50-54 P 5.169


- 7 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

CZE 50-52 S KGZ NO ROU 50-52 S ZWE 50-54 P 5.169

D 50.08-51 S KWT No Info RUS NO

DJI No Info LBN NO RRW 50-54 P 5.169

5.169 Alternative allocation: in Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Namibia, the Dem. Rep. of the Congo, Rwanda, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe, the band 50-54 MHz is allocated to the amateur service on a primary basis. In Senegal, the band 50-51 MHz is allocated to the amateur service on a primary basis. (WRC-12)

1 Status: P = primary, S = Secondary, No info = no information available. 2 RR is the applicable Radio Regulation Article 5 footnote.

The frequency range 50.0-50.5 MHz is utilised for weak signal communications, which would derive great benefit from harmonisation with Regions 2 and 3. The essential need here is for 500 kHz of narrowband applications including propagation beacons.

The frequency range 50.5-52 MHz is currently utilised for voice communications using frequency or phase modulation, Data, Gateways and FM Repeaters. Concerning two frequency repeaters, sufficient separation must be available between input and output frequencies in order to be able to easily engineer the cavity diplexers required for such installations. Digital Voice and data is already being used for 50 MHz networks in the amateur service incorporating text and simple voice messaging. Such systems have shown to be of considerable value in emergency communications. See RR No. 25.3.

The amateur service, with more than three million operators worldwide, continues to grow. Radio amateurs utilise allocations to the amateur service to engage in scientific and technical investigation and experimentation, provide communication in the wake of natural disasters, provide non-commercial public service communications, conduct other activities to advance technical education, develop radio operating technique and enhance international goodwill.

2.2 The radiolocation service

RR No. 5.162A provides for an additional allocation to the radiolocation service on a secondary basis in a number of countries in Region 1, limited to the operation of wind profiler radars in accordance with Resolution 217 (WRC-97). Very few wind profiler radars operate in the 50-54 MHz frequency band.

2.3 The broadcasting service

The 47-68 MHz frequency band is allocated to the broadcasting service on a primary basis in Region 1. In recent years broadcasting has significantly declined in the 47-68 MHz frequency band and analogue television is expected to be phased out by 2020 as conversion to digital television broadcasting in a different part of the spectrum proceeds. However in Eastern Europe the band is still used for analogue television.

2.4 The fixed and mobile services

Footnotes RR No. 5.164 and RR No. 5.165 allocate part, or all, of the frequency band 47-68 MHz to the land mobile service on a primary basis in a number of countries in Region 1.

It has to be noted that RR No. 5.167 and RR No 5.167A provide allocations to the fixed service on a primary basis to a number of countries in Region 3. No further study on the fixed service is provided in this report as WRC-19 agenda item 1.1 only applies to Region 1.

[2.5 Inter-regional sharing between services

Due to the different service allocations as given in various footnotes in the Radio Regulations there is inter-regional sharing between services at the borders between Region 1 and Regions 2 and 3.]


- 8 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

3 Spectrum needs for the amateur service in Region 1

3.1 General Considerations

Article 1.56 of the Radio Regulations defines the amateur service as amateur service: a radiocommunication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs, that is, by duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest.

The 50 MHz band exemplifies all key aspects of the amateur service —communication, technical investigation and self-training. Underpinning this are harmonised allocations to the amateur service on a global basis for which the International Amateur Radio Union develops utilisation plans. The 50 MHz band is also the first band in the frequency spectrum above 30 MHz where the full wide range of amateur modes and infrastructure (such as repeaters and gateways) can be used. These range from conventional and emerging terrestrial techniques, all the way to specialist EME (moon-bounce) stations. This part of the spectrum is also where propagation characteristics are highly attractive for amateur investigations. In contrast, its relatively high noise levels and unwieldy antenna sizes continue to detract from major commercial use, especially for mobile communications.

Regulatory and technical decisions over many years have had a significant impact on the use of broadcasting in both the 50-54 MHz range and indeed over all of the frequency band 47–68 MHz (also known as Broadcasting Band-I). In this band, as analogue television broadcasting declined and finally ceased in most countries, many CEPT administrations found it possible to allocate all or parts of the band 50-52 MHz to the amateur service under the conditions of RR No. 4.4 on a national primary and/or secondary basis. This has complemented existing primary 50-54 MHz amateur service allocations in Africa under RR No. 5.169 and the 50-54 MHz primary allocation to the amateur service in Regions 2 and 3.

IARU Region-1 in consultation with IARU Regions 2 and 3 has consequently developed a plan to facilitate intercommunication and technical investigations in the 50 MHz range. The most common applications to date have been the use of relatively narrow bandwidth (less than 25 kHz) analogue and digital modes in the 50-52 MHz range, within which the long distance weak-signal and propagation beacon applications are globally coordinated within 50.0-50.5 MHz. For Region 1 countries with 52-54 MHz allocations, that range is designated for wideband modes, an area where significant innovation, growth and benefits are forecast, should it become more accessible.

IARU band plans are generally flexible and are regularly reviewed in order to reflect technical developments and user requirements. For example in 2011 the range 50.0-50.5 MHz was the subject of detailed re-planning and beacon upgrades in Region-1 to accommodate demand and technology advances. Such reviews can be expected to continue as technology (and amateur ingenuity) evolves.

The opportunity provided by WRC-19 AI 1.1 to achieve global harmonisation would provide the means to introduce new and innovative communications systems. The following paragraphs provide the reasons for the granting of an allocation to the amateur service in Region 1 in the range 50-54 MHz, in response to AI 1.1 of WRC-19.

The amateur service sees a need to bridge the very wide gap between the existing allocations to the amateur service at 28 MHz and 144 MHz in Region 1 thus avoiding the use of RR No. 4.4 by those administrations in Region 1, not party to RR No. 5.169, which have provided, at a national level, an allocation to the amateur service within the 50-54 MHz frequency range.


- 9 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

3.2 Propagation Issues

The frequency range 30-80 MHz marks the transition area between ionospheric and non-ionospheric propagation modes, which makes it particularly interesting for experimentation and study within the amateur service. A number of propagation modes are used by amateurs in the range 50-54 MHz:

– Free-space (line of sight)– Sporadic-E ‘clouds’ – E and F2 multi-hop and chordal-hop– Trans-equatorial spread-F– E-layer Field Aligned Irregularities (FAI)– Aurora backscatter– Meteor scatter– Earth-Moon-Earth (using the moon's surface as a passive reflector)– Tropospheric super-refraction and ducting– Tropospheric scatter– Scatter from aircraft and objects in near Earth orbits (e.g. International Space Station).

An allocation within this frequency range in Article 5 of the Radio Regulations has not been generally available to the amateur service in Region 1 for over half a century. Alignment with Regions 2 and 3 would therefore facilitate the general understanding and prediction of propagation events as data accumulates and more Region 1 administrations grant their amateur licensees access to spectrum in the 50-54 MHz frequency band. Therefore, longer-term propagation studies would continue and thrive.

3.3 Future usage

{Editor's note: Need reference to Annex 2 (Application-based approach).}

Additional spectrum above 52 MHz is required in order to give amateur radio room to develop new innovative applications, systems and modes in keeping with 21st century developments and to assist young people in developing new communications skills. Based on current experimentation, in general these will be digital, combining voice, video and data like services encompassing a wide range of appropriate bandwidths. These applications, systems and modes may be used in conjunction with HAMNET, a mainly IP based broadband point-to-point network in the amateur service utilising spectrum mainly in allocations to the amateur service at 2.3 GHz and 5.7 GHz.

In addition, access to the entire 50-54 MHz frequency band in Region 1 would mitigate problems experienced by the amateur service in several ways. The widespread rise in the overall noise floor in MF and HF spectrum increasingly renders lower frequencies allocated to the amateur service subject to disturbance and harmful interference, particularly in urban environments. Furthermore, additional VHF spectrum would help to compensate for possible loss of spectrum identified for IMT in the 2.3 GHz band and the 3.4 GHz bands at recent WRCs. This would apply especially for wideband modes such as data and multimedia which are increasingly being displaced from these bands.

Amateur innovation in the 52-54 MHz frequency band could also pioneer the way for commercial applications in other parts of the low VHF band where many administrations are investigating how such spectrum might be used in an efficient and effective manner. HoT (HAMNET of Things), Machine to Machine and Station to Remote Station are anticipated applications.


- 10 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Unlike Region 2 and in some cases Region 3, the amateur service in Region 1 does not have allocations elsewhere in the VHF range at 146-148 MHz and 220-225 MHz; harmonising with Regions 2 and 3 in the 50-54 MHz frequency band would therefore seem appropriate, especially if global networks with roaming capabilities are eventually realised.

Current trials show that Reduced Bandwidth digital amateur Television (RB-DATV) could also be implemented above 52 MHz. With leading-edge amateur innovation, currently the lowest data rate achievable for RB-DATV (MPEG-4/DVB-S QPSK) is 333 kb/s requiring a necessary bandwidth of 500 kHz. See for example the Radio Society of Great Britain RadCom journal of November 2014 and the British Amateur Television Club CQ-TV journal of May 2015 for further details of this experimental work.

When the hardware to support such applications matures, it is expected that there will be greater demands for VHF amateur spectrum to provide some form of one-to-one amateur video communications as well as other data services.

3.4 Usage categorisation

Based on a sound background of existing usage and anticipated growth in digital systems, we can address the spectrum needs based on the following usage categories within the range 50-54 MHz:

TABLE 2

Usage Categories in 50-54 MHz

Usage categorisation Frequency, MHzNarrowband weak-signal communications, including a subsection for 24/7 propagation beacons

50.0–50.5

Relatively Narrowband (<=25 kHz) voice, data, repeaters, gateways

50.5–52.0

Wider bandwidth predominantly digital applications (See Annex 3)

52.0–54.0

50-52 MHz is aligned with and would be utilised to satisfy current and continuing analogue/digital usage and developments on a global basis, whereas 52-54 MHz is needed to satisfy the wider bandwidths and data rates of advanced digital scenarios. The latter includes both IP links/mesh utilisations as well as innovative compressed multimedia (currently based on DVB-S2/MPEG technologies adapted for terrestrial use).

The full 50-54 MHz frequency band is well supported by amateur developers, including those employing the latest SDR techniques partly as a consequence of the entire frequency band 50-54 MHz being allocated in RR Article 5 in ITU Regions 2 and 3 and part of Region 1. Thus growth in digital modes can be expected to continue in the existing 50-52 MHz range, assisted by 52-54 MHz developments —and vice versa.

3.5 Approach to determining spectrum needs

{Editor’s note: More explanation of method is required}

An application-based approach is a good choice for the amateur service to assess spectrum needs for the frequency band 50-54 MHz and would focus on the specific applications expected in this frequency band. An example of this approach can be found in Recommendation ITU-R M.1651 “A method for assessing the required spectrum for broadband nomadic wireless access systems including radio local area networks using the 5 GHz band” which provides the methodology for


- 11 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

assessing spectrum requirements for RLANs. This Recommendation was developed and utilized in the WRC-07 study cycle, then again as part of RLAN spectrum requirements under WRC-15 agenda item 1.1 and more recently is one of the methods being used for WRC-19 agenda item 1.13. For the amateur service at 50 MHz the input parameters of the applications could reflect different situations for various countries with less complexity than an approach based on traffic forecasts.

In order to calculate the total amount of spectrum needs R (Hz) in this approach, the following basic equation is used:

R = (Connection density, Application data rate, Usage patterns) / (Service area, Spectral efficiency)

In practice the determination of the above has to be undertaken with appropriate parameters for each of the differing service categorisations in Table 3, as described in Annex 1 to this document.

Table 3 shows an example of an estimate of spectrum needs for the different frequency ranges between 50 MHz and 54 MHz using the application-based approach. Further details of this approach can be found at Annex 2.

TABLE 3

Estimated spectrum needs based on the application based approach

Frequency ranges

50.0–50.5 MHz 50.5–52.0 MHz 52.0–54.0 MHz Total

Spectrum needs R1 R2 R3 Rtotal

The spectrum need can be calculated for different countries but the overall requirement should be based on at least average use (see Table 4), knowing that in the high population density areas additional spectrum would be required (see Table 5) when emergencies, public service, special events, contests and favourable anomalous propagation conditions occur.

{Editor's note: Explain special events, contests and propagation conditions}

TABLE 4

Spectrum requirement – Average case

Nominal Frequency Range, MHz 50.5 - 52.0 52.0 - 54.0

DX Users, contests etc

Beacon Modes

General use, repeaters etc

High datarate links, DATV etc

Parameter UnitConnection Density, C users/km2 0.07 0.001 0.07 0.07Application Datarate, A bits/s 1000 1000 25000 512000Usage Pattern, U % 2.1 75 10 10Service areas/km2 from ISD, I areas/km2 0.000016 0.000025 0.0004 0.0025Spectral Efficency, S bits/Hz 0.25 0.25 0.5 0.5

Requirements, kHz 365 120 875 2,867

Rtotal, MHz 4.23

50.0 - 50.5


Dale Hughes, 05/25/17,

Finished here 1500 13/5/2017

- 12 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE 5

Spectrum Requirement – Higher Population Density Area CaseNominal Frequency

Range, MHz 50.5 - 52.0 52.0 - 54.0DX Users,

contests etcBeacon Modes




Requirements, kHz 1,042 120 2,500 4,096

Rtotal, MHz 7.76

50.0 - 50.5

As mentioned in section 3.1, IARU band plans are generally flexible and are regularly reviewed in order to reflect technical developments and user requirements. Thus if it is the case that the balance is driven by newer digital applications, some adjustments would be made in the middle to upper parts of the available frequency range.

{Editor's note: Check for use of services vs. usage}

3.6 Spectrum Needs Summary

An Application-based approach has been developed and has found to be suitable for estimating the spectrum needs for current and envisaged amateur applications in the 50-54 MHz frequency band. A nominal set of frequency sub-ranges have been used to align with the existing and expected categories of applications.

Results show that the average amateur density in the CEPT area requires just over 4 MHz, with some countries having a high population of radio amateurs potentially needing well in excess of that (or necessitating greater re-use or narrower channels with consequential problems).

For sparser areas, the lower densities offer the possibility of greater range, non-line-of sight communications for both standard amateur traffic and for more innovative applications which are expected to have a wider societal benefit.

4 Characteristics of amateur stations for sharing studies

4.1 Global characteristics

There is an existing allocation to the amateur service between 50-54 MHz in ITU Regions 2 and 3; therefore the most recent version of Recommendation ITU-R M.1732, “Characteristics of systems operating in the amateur and amateur-satellite services for use in sharing studies”, contains the range of current characteristics that might be used by the amateur service across the world.

4.2 Specific Region 1 characteristics

Considering contemporary and future likely use of the 50-54 MHz frequency band by the amateur service in Region 1 a subset of the range of likely characteristics is suggested for use in the sharing analyses that are contained in this report.

Typical transmission modes that may be used in this band are Morse telegraphy, analogue and digital voice, narrow band data modes and reduced bandwidth digital television. Based on the various Usage


- 13 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Categories given in section 3.4 of this Report and considering the range of parameters given in Recommendation ITU-R M.1732 the usage in the sub-bands are highly likely to be:– 50.0-50.5 MHz: Individual stations employing directional antennas, with intermittent

usage, but emitting relatively high effective radiated power as this segment may be utilized for relatively long distance communications. This existing usage has been ongoing for many years.

– 50.5-52 MHz: Stations use low to medium power levels, operate mobile and may use repeaters. Likely transmissions modes are FM/Digital voice and low to moderate rate data links. This existing usage has been ongoing for many years.

– 52-54 MHz: Stations using wider bandwidth transmission modes would have effectively low power spectral density e.g. lower power and wider bandwidth. These modes are under active development and will be implemented in the future.

Table 6 provides suggested and typical parameters of amateur stations that are currently used, and likely to be used in the future. These parameters are based on the following considerations:– The suggested modes specified in the 52-54 MHz frequency range are subject to future

development; however the maximum bandwidth and power given in the table are likely to be maximum values irrespective of future transmission modes.

– The height of amateur station antennas are generally limited by local housing planning considerations and economic factors, moreover, amateur stations may be used ‘in the field’ for special events, contests etc. so a probability distribution is appropriate to cover these situations.

– The percentage of time a station transmits cannot be precisely known, however even a very active amateur operator is unlikely to transmit for more than approximately one hour per day (on average), so a 5% duty cycle is assumed.

{Editor's note: Check figures and check terminology vs. usage section}

TABLE 6

Suggested parameters of the amateur service for use in the sharing studies of this report

Parameter ValueFrequency Range 50.0-54.0 MHzEmission Mode SSB (J3E) FM (F3E) Wideband Digital

OFDM, QPSK, QAMPower and duty cycle 20 dBW @ 2.5%

10 dBW @ 5%13 dBW @ 5% 17 dBW @ 5%

Emission masks:Out of band domainSpurious domain

ITU-R SM.1541-6 Annex 9ITU-R SM.329-12

Necessary Emission Bandwidth

3 kHz 16 kHz 300 kHz

Amateur receiver sensitivity dBm @ 50 Ohms in necessary bandwidth

T.B.D T.B.D T.B.D

Forward Antenna Gain 9.4 dBi (Directional)

2.5 dBi(Omni-Directional)

2.5 dBi(Omni-Directional)

4 dBi(Directional)


- 14 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Parameter ValuePolarisation Horizontal Vertical Vertical

Antenna type Yagi see Fig [ ] Monopole Monopole or low gain directional antenna

Antenna heights for use in simulations and probability of use

10 m @ 95%20 m @ 2.5%100 m @ 1.8%1000 m @ 0.7%

10 m @ 95%20 m @ 5%

10 m @ 95%20 m @ 5%

Area average of amateur stations

0.07 amateurs/km2 0.07 amateurs/km2 0.07 amateurs/km2

Activity factor 2.1% 10% 10%Density of stations transmitting in the simulation bandwidth

0.0015 transmitter/km2

0.007 transmitter/km2 0.007 transmitter/km2

Simulation bandwidth 0.5 MHz 1.5 MHz 2 MHz

{Editor's note: Need to better define activity factor: what does it include? transmission time, receiving vs. transmitting times, etc.}

4.3 Antenna type and polarisation

The suggested antenna types are representative of typical contemporary amateur practice. The polarisation of the antennas used by the amateur station is not generally considered in the studies contained in this report. Usual practice of the amateur service is to use horizontally polarised antennas in the 50-50.5 MHz frequency range and vertically polarised antennas above 50.5 MHz for FM and other relatively short range transmission modes. However individual amateur operators are free to use whatever polarisation is appropriate for the best link performance, consequently the only mention is to note that cross-polarisation may potentially reduce the probability of interference by some amount in some cases.

4.4 Propagation Factors

This report only considers radio propagation characteristics that are found in the various propagation models: Extended-Hata, Rec. ITU-R P.1546, Rec. ITU-R P.2001, Rec. ITU-R P.526, etc. Anomalous propagations modes such as sporadic E, trans-equatorial, meteor scatter etc. are not considered as they are usually very transient and geographically localised. Because of these factors, such propagation events and their potential interference effects are impossible to predict and any interference that does occur is likely to very transient and restricted to a small geographical area. Suggested propagation models to be used for studies are given in Table 7.


- 15 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE 7

Propagation Models – ITU Radiocommunication Services sharing with Amateur Service

Land mobile Broadcasting Radiolocation

SEAMCAT – EHATA

X X

SEAMCAT-1546 X

E-HATA X XITU-R P.1546 X

ITU-R P.2001 X XITU-R P.526 X

----- Start new section 5 from 5A/595 -------

5 Sharing with the mobile serviceAccording to RR Article 5.164 and the European Table of Frequency Allocations (ECA TABLE), the frequency band 47-68 MHz is allocated to the land mobile service on a primary basis.

Following ITU texts are relevant to the sharing analysis:– Recommendation ITU-R M.1825 – Guidance on technical parameters and

methodologies for sharing studies related to systems in the land mobile service.– Recommendation ITU-R M.1634 – Interference protection of terrestrial mobile service

systems using Monte Carlo simulation with application to frequency sharing.– Report ITU-R SM.2028-1 – Monte Carlo simulation methodology for the use in sharing

and compatibility studies between different radio services or systems. – Recommendation ITU-R SM.1055 – The use of Spread Spectrum Techniques.

5.1 System parameters of the mobile service

One incumbent land mobile system is the Governmental Mobile Radio system.

The Governmental Mobile Radio systems enclose several kinds of devices. They are integrated into:– Land Vehicles.– Portable Handsets.– Base stations.

Many of these stations can be operated in Fixed Frequency mode only. Fixed Frequency is thus a nominal mode to be considered in the compatibility studies.

TABLE 8

System parameters

System Type Governmental MobileFrequency tuning range with 25 kHz steps 30-88 MHzReceiver bandwidth 16 kHz

Protection criteria I/N = –6 dB


http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-SM.1055/en


http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-M.1634/en


- 16 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Receiver sensitivity -112 dBm @ 10 dB SINAD

TABLE 9

Vehicular parameterstransmitter/receiver type

Vehicle

Antenna height (meters) 2 m

Antenna polarization Linear vertical Note: May be slightly tilted

Antenna gain (dBi) -3 dBiAntenna radiation pattern Omnidirectional

Tx power 0.4 W to 50 WOut of band emission ITU-R TBD

Adjacent channel protection 60 dB

TABLE 10

Handset parameters

Transmitter/receiver type HandsetAntenna height (meters) 1.5 m Antenna polarization Linear vertical

Note: May be slightly tiltedAntenna gain (dBi) -10 dBi

Antenna radiation pattern OmnidirectionalTx power 0.2 to 5 W

Out of band emission ITU-R TBDAdjacent channel protection 60 dB

TABLE 11

Base Station

Transmitter/receiver type Base stationAntenna height (meters) 8 m

Antenna polarization Linear vertical Antenna gain (dBi) 2.15 dBi

Antenna radiation pattern OmnidirectionalTx power 5 to 50 W

Out of band emission ITU-R TBDAdjacent channel protection 60 dB

Editor's note: It is essential that the models reflect reality and concern has been expressed by the WG 5A1 about this issue. If different


- 17 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

propagation models are used, then control scenarios must demonstrate that the results are similar when using the same input parameters.

5.2 Minimum coupling loss calculations

Different scenarios are considered in order to investigate an impact of various parameters such as antenna heights, topological conditions and emission masks of the amateur radio transmitter on the mobile radio receivers. Different mask options for the amateur service have been taken into account:– M1: as provided in Recommendation ITU-R SM.1541-6– M2: M1 with reduced levels of the unwanted emission into adjacent channels– ME: M2 for mobile SSB equipment (for spurious domain only).

5.2.1 Propagation model

Editor's note: Need to agree on probability percentage and other relevant input parameters.

Radio wave propagation is calculated for 3 different propagation scenarios representing flat as well as hilly terrain respectively mountainous environment. Detailed representation of the scenarios are shown in Annex 5.2. Propagation effects are calculated according to the model of Recommendation ITU-R P.2001-2. The results represent mean values which are subject to statistical fluctuations1. The calculated losses show values which are lower for a probability of 50% of time for all possible cases. For lower probabilities, the path loss is several dBs lower than calculated for 50% of all cases. Looking at scenario 2 and 3 as an example, the calculated loss values may be lower by 14.5 dB in 1% of the cases, 7.9 dB in 10% and 5.3 dB in 20% of the cases than the calculated values for 50% of all cases. The calculated values therefore indicate a somewhat optimistic interference scenario. Regarding the influence of clutter, it can be concluded that on the TX side with an antenna height of 10 m, respectively 20 m and in a suburban environment, the loss due to clutter does not increase. For an antenna height of 1.5 m at the receiver, clutter may increase loss by approximately 5 dB. Because the clutter is not taken into consideration for the calculations, the result is somewhat conservative. Furthermore sporadic E propagation effects which occur spontaneously and lead to very low radio propagation losses for long propagation paths, are neglected.

5.2.2 Calculation Method

In order to evaluate the interference ranges of amateur radio transmitters for different propagation scenarios, the following calculation method is executed in four consecutive steps:1 The required protection level is evaluated with a protection criterion of I/N = –6 dB

based on ambient noise figure according to Recommendation ITU-R P.372-13.2 The radiated power for co- and adjacent channels is calculated.3 The minimum required path attenuation is calculated to meet the required protection

level.4 The interference range is evaluated by means of the calculated minimum path

attenuation and evaluated path attenuation for six different propagation scenarios, respectively path profiles.

1 With spherical diffraction, attenuation effects occur which depend on the gradient of the local dielectric characteristics of the environment. These are considered in the model as statistical parameters.


- 18 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

5.2.3 Propagation criterion and ambient noise figure

For mobile radios, a protection criterion of I/N = –6 dB is specified. According to Recommendation ITU-R P.372-13, natural background noise (dominated by galactic noise) corresponds to a noise figure of F = 15 dB at a frequency of 50 MHz. The maximum acceptable interference power for the mobile Service Pprotect ,is calculated as follows:

Pprotect=N0+Fs+10 log ( BW )− IN

where N 0is the thermal noise power at a temperature of 20°C, BW is the receiver bandwidth and Fs = 16.2 dB is the noise figure of the added ambient noise and receiver noise.

Accordingly, the maximum acceptable interference power for mobile service application is calculated as follows:

−121.8 dBm=−174 dBmHz

+16.2 dB+10log (16 kHz)−6 dB

The maximum acceptable interference power for amateur service application is calculated as follows:

−129.5 dBm=−174 dBmHz

+16.2 dB+10 log (2.7 kHz)−6dB

The values for the ambient noise figure F defined in Recommendation ITU-R P.372-13 relate to measurements with a vertical dipole or monopole antenna. In the given case, the victim antennas (mobile service) also show isotropic directivity in the azimuth, though with a gain which differs from the Recommendation's notional ideal antennas. However, because the ambient interference is substantially higher than the level of the receiver's internal noise, the gain of the victim antenna needs not be considered.

It should also be noted that the assumed ambient noise figure of 15 dB for antennas with increased directivity in the horizontal direction has been set somewhat too high. If corresponding antennas (with increased directivity in the elevation) are used at the victim receiver, the computed interference ranges represent a minimum, as in this case galactic noise actually reduces receiver sensitivity by less than the determined 16.2 dB.

5.2.4 Radiated power for co- and channels

The calculated transmit interference power PE of amateur radio transmitters is determined on the basis of two different emission masks: option 1 mask and option 2 mask? In the SSB interference study consideration is given to the fact that the bandwidth of the receiver affected by the interference (16 kHz) is greater than that of the interference signal (2.7 kHz). The calculated interference powers at the transmitter output of the interference source, corrected for bandwidth, are shown Annex 5.3.

5.2.5 Determination of minimum path attenuation

The minimum path losses which are necessary to reduce the reception level of the interference signal below the value of the protection value are determined. Thus, from the computed path loss curves, the minimum distance between the interfering transmitters and the victim receiver can be determined.

The minimum path losses AS is calculated as:

AS=PE−Pprotect


- 19 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

where PE is the radiated power (e.i.r.p.) including polarization decoupling of –6 dB

The values calculated for all considered path profiles are provided in Annex 5.2.

5.2.6 Evaluation of the interference ranges

The evaluated interference ranges are shown in Table 12 and Table 13, taking into consideration the two different mask options as mentioned in Annex 5.3. Values for mask option 1 are marked (M1), for mask option 2 are marked (M2). In Table 12 the term f0 defines the frequency offset between the centre frequencies of interfering transmitter (amateur service) and victim receiver (mobile service).

TABLE 12

Interference ranges for the different interference scenarios of SSB operated amateur stations considering both emission mask options

Interference ranges [km], values for mask option 1 (M1) and mask option 2 (M2); vertical polarization for mobile service an horizontal polarization for amateur service

f0+0.0 kHz < f < f0+/-6.5 kHz

f0+/-6.5 kHz < f < f0+/-9.5 kHz

f0+/-9.5 kHz < f < f0+/-11.6 kHz

f > +/-11.6 kHz

Scenario 1H(RX) = 8 m

446(M1)446(M2)

322(M1)172(M2)

60(M1)60(M2)

33(M1)33(M2)

Scenario 1H(RX) = 1.5 m

445(M1)445(M2)

308(M1)168(M2)

25(M1)25(M2)

13(M1)13(M2)

Scenario 2H(RX)=1.5 mH(TX)=10 m

357(M1)357(M2)

230(M1)88(M2)

3.5(M1)3.5(M2)

1.6(M1)1.6(M2)

Scenario 2H(RX)=8 mH(TX)=20 m

365(M1)365(M2)

239(M1)97(M2)

10(M1)10(M2)

5(M1)5(M2)

Scenario 3 >27(M1)>27(M2)

>27(M1)>27(M2)

6(M1)6(M2)

6(M1)6(M2)

TABLE 13

Interference ranges for the different interference scenarios of wideband operated amateur stations considering both emission mask options


f0 + 0.0 kHz < f < f0 + 150 kHz

f0 + 150 kHz< f <f f0 + 300 kHz

f0 + 300 kHz < f < f0 + 375 kHz

f > 375 kHz

Scenario 1H(RX) = 8 m

228(M1)228(M2)

156(M1)106(M2)

37(M1)37(M2)

15(M1)15(M2)

Scenario 1H(RX) = 1.5 m

220(M1)220(M2)

131(M1)52(M2)

15(M1)15(M2)

6(M1)6(M2)

Scenario 2H(RX)=1.5 mH(TX)=10 m

155(M1)155(M2)

63(M1)16(M2)

2(M1)2(M2)

< 1(M1)< 1(M2)


- 20 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E


f0 + 0.0 kHz < f < f0 + 150 kHz

f0 + 150 kHz< f <f f0 + 300 kHz

f0 + 300 kHz < f < f0 + 375 kHz

f > 375 kHz


157(M1)157(M2)

66(M1)22(M2)

6(M1)6(M2)

2(M1)2(M2)


>27(M1)>27(M2)

>27(M1)>15(M2)

6(M1)6(M2)

6(M1)6(M2)

5.2.7 Conclusion

The interference analysis between the amateur and mobile services in the band 50-54 MHz has been performed. It was found that:– For co-channel interference, the interference range is up to 446 km for amateur station

SSB operation. For wide band amateur station operation, the interference range is up to 228 km.

– For SSB operated amateur station, in the adjacent channel the interference ranges from 88 km to 230 km, depending on the emission mask.

– For wideband operated amateur station, in the adjacent channel the interference ranges from 15 km to 66 km, depending on the emission mask. In this case, the interference bandwidth is 600 kHz.

– It should be observed, that the interference ranges of the considered mobile service are lower than those of the amateur service: for the mobile service transmitter the adjacent channel interference as well as the “spurious emissions” are significantly lower than the corresponding emissions of the amateur service transmitters. Consequently, the operator of amateur service may not notice the channel occupancy by the mobile service, while interfering the later one. However, it must be noted that the intermodulation interference of the SSB transmitter reduces as the distance from the transmitter frequency increases and probably does not attain the value of the limit value over a large bandwidth, so its interference effect may be less than calculated here for frequency spacing beyond the adjacent channel.

---- End new section 5 ----

6 Sharing with the fixed serviceIn the European Common Allocation table there is no allocation to the fixed service in the 50-54 MHz frequency band.

7 Sharing with the radiolocation service

7.1 Background

In the frequency band 46-68 MHz, RR No. 5.162A provides an additional allocation to the radiolocation service on a secondary basis in a number of countries and limited to the use of wind profiler radars.


- 21 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

7.2 Study details Ed. note: Added 14/11/2017 from 5A/549

The propagation model used is E-Hata (rural) at 52 MHz (median case). The following figure provides the corresponding attenuations for the different cases of Amateur stations antenna heights (10, 20 and 100 m).

7.3 Study results Ed. note: Added 14/11/2017 from 5A/549

Ed. note: Problem with missing antenna pattern data, how will that affect the results?

The calculations show that typical separation distance between Amateur service systems and Wind profiler would range from 29 to distances above 300 km, confirming the need for specific protection measures.

Taking into the low number of WPR (and probably the expected low number of amateur systems), sharing could probably be considered on a case-by-case basis, between the Amateur and meteorological communities.

The relevant procedure would need additional consideration but WMO is of the view that it will only be possible and efficient if both services are at equal status within the 50-54 MHz band.

Among possible procedure could be a specific WRC Resolution calling for coordination between IARU and WMO.

8 Sharing with the broadcasting service

8.1 Background

The following ITU texts are relevant to the sharing analysis:– Report ITU-R BT.2387-0 (07/2015) contains information on responses from

administrations on use of various frequency bands, including 50-54 MHz for broadcasting.

– Recommendation ITU-R BT.1368 – Planning criteria, including protection ratios, for digital terrestrial television services in the VHF/UHF bands.

– Recommendation ITU-R BT.2033 – Planning criteria, including protection ratios, for second generation of digital terrestrial television broadcasting systems in the VHF/UHF bands.

– Recommendation ITU-R SM.851 – Sharing between the broadcasting service and the fixed and/or mobile services in the VHF and UHF bands.

– Final Acts of the European Broadcasting Conference (Stockholm, 1961 as revised in Geneva, 2006) (“ST61”) in the European Broadcasting Area.

– Final Acts of the African Broadcasting Conference (Geneva, 1989 as revised in Geneva, 2006) (“GE89”) in the African Broadcasting Area and neighbouring countries.

In addition to the RR Article 5 allocation to the broadcasting service in Region 1 mentioned in noting d), the band continues to be subject to both the Final Acts of the European Broadcasting Conference (Stockholm, 1961 as revised in Geneva, 2006) (“ST61”) in the European Broadcasting Area and the Final Acts of the African Broadcasting Conference (Geneva, 1989 as revised in Geneva, 2006) (“GE89”) in the African Broadcasting Area and neighbouring countries.

The ITU-R eQry database also shows that there are a total of 353 broadcasting assignments recorded in the ST61 and GE89 plans still using the frequency range 50-54 MHz in 41 administrations. The MIFR contains 555 broadcasting transmitters in that band in Region 1. This information is shown in Table 14 below:



http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BT.2033/en

http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BT.1368/en

http://www.itu.int/pub/R-REP-BT.2387

- 22 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE 14

Date IFIC no. ST61GE89 Region

1 MIFR Region 124/10/2016 2831 292 56 555

TV entries falling into or overlapping with frequency range 50 MHz-54 MHz. The information submitted to the BR for recording in the MIFR may not necessarily include all broadcasting stations in operation thus it may not reflect the actual use of the frequency band.

8.1.1 The 2016 Situation

In the European Regional Telecommunications Organisation (RTO), CEPT administrations have been urged to remove their unused assignments to the broadcasting service in the band 50-54 MHz in view of agenda item 1.1 of WRC-19. This action will be in line with an earlier decision to protect assignments according to the Stockholm Agreement 1961 Plan.

The CEPT over a number of decades has developed a European Common Allocation (ECA) table, which is reviewed annually. Footnote ECA3 states 'CEPT administrations are urged to take all practical steps to clear the band 47-68 MHz of assignments to the broadcasting service. The broadcasting assignments according to Stockholm Agreement 1961 shall be protected.' At a recent CEPT meeting administrations agreed that it could be useful if the totality of Broadcasting Band 1 could be addressed in accordance with ECA3 and unused assignments listed in the MIFR suppressed. ECA3 will therefore be reviewed at future meetings when the ECA is addressed.

The closure of analogue television in the 47–68 MHz frequency band relates directly to the introduction of digital television. In 2009, the European Commission promoted a coordinated approach to the freeing up and future use of the radio spectrum because it wanted to ensure that EU citizens could enjoy the benefits of digital television. For that to happen, Member States (and other CEPT countries) closed analogue transmissions and moved to digital broadcasting. The switch-off of analogue terrestrial TV transmission was completed by 2009 in Germany, Finland, Luxembourg, Sweden and the Netherlands. The 2012 EU target for switch-off was met by almost all Member States of the European Union.

The MIFR does not reflect this result. The current situation is that in Western Europe the 47-68 MHz frequency band is no longer used for terrestrial television broadcasting to the general public.

8.1.2 Digital Terrestrial Television Broadcasting in Band 1 – 47-68 MHz

The Chester July 1997 Multilateral Coordination Agreement (MCA) attended by 34 CEPT administrations representing Member countries of the ITU was convened under the terms of Article 6 of the ITU Radio Regulations and dealt with the technical criteria as well as coordination principles and procedures for the introduction of Digital Terrestrial Television Broadcasting (DTTB). Article 4 of the Multilateral Co-ordination Agreement states that coordination procedures only deal with the frequency bands in which DTTB is envisaged, i.e. 174 to 230 MHz and 470 to 862 MHz. In the other bands the procedures of the 1961 Stockholm Agreement (ST61) would apply, without additional procedures.

Furthermore, the joint CEPT ERC/EBU Report on Planning and Introduction of Terrestrial Digital Television (DVB-T) in Europe, Izmir, December 1997 states in Section D2-2 “Due to long distance propagation effects and the high man-made-noise level, Band I is not considered suitable for DVB-T”.

During consultations carried out by ITU Secretary General in 2000/2001 an overwhelming majority of the countries of the European Broadcasting Area indicated their support for the proposed revision


- 23 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

of ST61. In addition, Member States from the planning area of the Regional Agreement for VHF/UHF television broadcasting (GE89) in the African Broadcasting Area (ABA) and neighbouring countries also expressed the wish to convene a Regional Radiocommunication Conference (RRC) for the same purposes.

The ITU Council, at its sessions in 2001 and 2002, adopted Resolutions 1185 and 1180, by which it agreed to the convening of a RRC on the planning of terrestrial broadcasting in the VHF/UHF bands, for the combined planning area covering the European Broadcasting Area (EBA), the African Broadcasting Area, and the countries outside the African Broadcasting Area which are parties to the Regional Broadcasting Agreement, Geneva, 1989.

The Plenipotentiary Conference, Marrakesh, 2002, also considered this issue and decided to extend the planning area to the territories of the following countries that are not or only partially covered by the planning areas of both the ST61 and GE89 Agreements: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation (the part of the territory to the west from longitude 170° E), Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan (see Resolution 117 (Marrakesh, 2002)).

In summary, the planning area comprised those parts of Region 1 that are situated west of the meridian 170° East and north of the parallel 40° South, as well as the whole territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The expectation that the band 47–68 MHz will not be utilised for DTTB in Region 1 continues in the ITU-R documentation, especially Report ITU-R BT.2387-0 (07/2015) which contains information from administrations on the current and future use of various frequency bands, including 50-54 MHz for broadcasting. None of the responding administrations identified VHF1 spectrum for their current or future DTTB services. However it is likely that several countries in Region 2 may adopt or have adopted the ATSC DTTB standard in spectrum allocated to the Broadcasting Service above 54 MHz.

8.1.3 Analogue Television Broadcasting in Band 1 – 47-68 MHz

Report ITU-R BT.2387-0 (07/2015) clearly indicates that low VHF spectrum is not generally considered by administrations to be suitable for DTTB. As national Analogue Switch Off (ASO) programmes are completed, the number of analogue television stations diminishes in those countries where DTTB has been fully implemented. However there are a large number of analogue stations assigned frequencies in the VHF band below 100 MHz which are still in operation, for example 2 091 in Brazil above 54 MHz and 3 683 in the Russian Federation, some of which will be in the 47-54 MHz frequency band. It therefore appears that analogue television in VHF1 spectrum remains a cost effective means of reaching viewers in remote areas of large countries.

Another important consideration is that many of the remaining analogue broadcasting stations in Region 1 were planned using the criteria and Plan assignments detailed in ST61 and GE89. On the assumption that those countries which have completed their ASO have decommissioned their analogue transmitters that the interference environment for those stations which remain operational has as a result significantly improved and the combined interference potential of several hundred amateur stations spread across the countries of central and western Europe is likely to be significantly less than the situation when the band was utilised solely for television broadcasting.

Nevertheless, it may in some situations be necessary to develop mechanisms to limit the possibility of harmful interference being caused by the amateur service to broadcasting reception in the 50-54 MHz frequency band in Region 1, until such time that the broadcasting stations cease operations.


- 24 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

8.1.4 Inter-Regional Sharing Situation

The 50–54 MHz frequency band is currently allocated to the amateur service in Region 2 and Region 3 on a primary basis. However in Region 3 the countries specified in numbers 5.167, 5.167A, 5.168 and 5.170 of the Radio Regulations have alternative allocations to other radiocommunication services. ITU Region 1 has a border with Regions 2 and 3. Inter-regional sharing between the primary amateur service in Regions 2 and 3 and the primary analogue television broadcasting service in Region 1 seems to have been successful with minimal or no harmful interference occurring to the service areas of analogue television stations.

8.1.5 Sharing between the broadcasting service in Region 1 and the amateur service in Region 3

[The border between the Russian Federation and Japan is of particular interest since in Region 1 the band is used extensively for analogue television broadcasting by the Russian Federation. Japan in Region 3 has authorised the use of band 50–54 MHz by amateur service licensees. The distance between Japan and the Russian Federation at its closest point is 43 km and at its farthest point about 1 000 km, with a considerable amount of territory within 600 to 800 km across the Sea of Japan. In September 2016 there were 435 565 Japanese amateur licensees, about 0.34% of the Japanese population. With a land area of 378 000 km2, on average one should find more than one amateur station per square kilometre. The maximum permitted power at the antenna of an amateur station in Japan is 30 dBW.]

Another similar case is between Mongolia and the Russian Federation in Region 1 and China in Region 3. These three countries share long territorial borders. Currently there are 5 783 amateur licences in the provinces adjacent to that part of the border in China, together with significant numbers of TV broadcasting stations. No complaints on interference issues between stations of the amateur service and the broadcasting service in that part of China have been received by the administration of China.

Editor’s note: Need more information about sharing, when, how and where.

8.1.6 Sharing between the broadcasting service in Region 1 and the amateur service in Region 2

[A similar situation exists between the Russian Federation in Region 1 and the United States in Region 2 where the amateur service has operated for many years on a primary basis in the 50-54 MHz frequency band. Here the closest distance is 83 km across the Bering Strait. The main difference between Japan and the United States would be a smaller density of amateur service stations per square kilometre in the State of Alaska. As of November 2016 the US regulator has recorded about 3 800 amateur licences in the State of Alaska]

Editor’s note: Sections 8.1.6 and 8.1.7 need additional information for relevance, esp. if there are broadcasting stations in existence or planned near Japan or Alaska.

8.1.7 Sharing arrangements between the amateur service and incumbent services in the 50-52 MHz frequency band implemented in some countries

Editor's note: Administrations are requested to check the details of this section and add additional information if possible.

In ITU-R Region 1 the broadcasting service is the primary service in the 50-52 MHz band, however a number of CEPT countries have allowed the amateur service, generally on a secondary basis, to operate in the band under the provisions of RR Article 4.4 and the CEPT ECA (European Common


- 25 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Allocation Table). The overarching restriction was that the amateur service must not cause interference to the broadcasting service or other primary and secondary services to which the band is allocated by footnotes.

Sharing methods that were applied in each country that allowed operation of the amateur service in part or all of the 50-52 MHz frequency band depended on national needs and regional considerations. The sharing methods which were imposed on the amateur service in these countries were a combination of:– restrictions on radiated power– restrictions on frequency ranges – restricting transmission modes– specifying geographic exclusion zones or imposing protection distances– field strength limits– operation by permit only.

Various administrations adopted one or more of the above methods.

Tables 15 and 16 show a summary of information from some countries where sharing was implemented. Full details are given in Annex 2.5 of this Report. Note that while Australia is in ITU-R Region 3, broadcasting is the primary service under the provisions of RR footnote 5.168.

TABLE 15

Summary of operational restriction imposed on the amateur service in some countries when the broadcasting and amateur services shared all or part of the

50-52 MHz frequency band

CountryPower

restriction (maximum)

Field strength

limitsGeographicrestriction

Allowedfrequency

rangeOther

restrictions

Finland(Note: This is the only country where restriction are still being applied)

150 W PEP 6 dBµV/m and 10% of time on border in some locations for stations operating higher power stations

Operation not allowed in specified part areas near the FIN/RUS border.

50-52 MHz None

Germany 25 W ERP None Operation not allowed in some specified areas

50.08-51 MHz Limited to narrow band modes.

Hungary 10 W ERP

Norway 60 W ERP None 100-140 km zones around specified main TV stations. 15-25 km zones around specified relay stations.

50-52 MHz Limitations on antenna gain and height.


- 26 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

CountryPower


Field strength

limitsGeographicrestriction

Allowedfrequency

rangeOther

restrictions

Sweden 250 W ERP None 50-52 MHz Operation only allowed after the TV station ceased transmission at night time. A permit was required for each fixed location where 50 MHz amateur equipment was operated.

United Kingdom

100 W ERP None None 50-50.5 MHz No Repeater or mobile operation.Maximum antenna height of 20 m. Operation only allowed after the TV station ceased transmission at night time.

NB: Primary allocation at national level.

Australia Mode dependent but 100 W PEP

None 120 km zones around specified main TV stations. 60 km zones around specified relay (translator) stations.

50.0-50.3 MHz only in NSW, ACT, VIC and QLD, no restrictions elsewhere.No restriction in band 52 – 54 MHz

None

TABLE 16

Summary of restrictions imposed in two countries to protect the land mobile or other incumbent services in the 50-52 MHz frequency band

CountryPower


Geographic restriction

Frequency restrictions

Other restrictions

France 5 W ERP, 100 W allowed in a small number of regions

Operation not allowed in some “departments”

50.2-51.2 MHz only

No repeaters.Fixed or portable only i.e. no mobile operation.

Germany 25 W PEP 50.03-51.0 MHz


- 27 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

8.2 Sharing study details

{Editor's note: add introduction to studies and refer to study details supplied in annex}

8.3 Study results

Editor’s note: Summary text will change as studies progress

[An examination has been made of the switchover from analogue to digital terrestrial television broadcasting and concludes that it is highly unlikely that the band 50-54 MHz will be utilised for digital television broadcasting in the future in Region 1. Nevertheless there remain a large number of operational analogue television transmitters in a small number of countries.

Sharing between analogue television and the amateur service is not new in this frequency band and examples have been provided of how sharing currently exists on an inter-regional basis.]

9 Conclusion of the Report{Editor's note: To be added when we are done…}


- 28 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

ANNEX 1

Spectrum needs and associated information

Annex 1.1: Application-based approach to calculation of spectrum needs

A1.1.1 General

This approach can:– Take account of the expected capabilities and usage scenarios, and is– Able to be readily implemented using common software tools such as a spreadsheet.

The results from this calculation procedure need to be considered carefully given that the output might be sensitive to the input parameter values on the usage of advanced applications which can be drawn from a large range of possible values. This input parameter, on the other hand, could reflect the different situation in particular regions or countries.

A1.1.2 Input parameters

Input parameters to the assessment process can be grouped as:

User related– Connection density – Application data rate – Application usage pattern assumptionsThe number of amateur stations per square kilometre has been calculated for CEPT countries in Annex 1.2. This data may be further refined to develop user densities in particular countries or urban / rural areas should it be required.

Radio related– Service area (Inter-Site Distance – ISD) {Editor's note: ISD needs more explanation}– Spectral efficiency

Step by step approachThe following steps 1 to 3 and the final calculation are the essence of the ‘Application based determination’.

Step 1Service Categorisation (SC)

In principle a matrix of service categorisations can be identified across different connection density types. For simplicity the average density of radio amateurs has been used. In practise individual amateurs are most likely to be grouped in relation to urban areas, whilst some automatic systems such as repeaters, gateways, data-links or propagation beacons may be more remotely located on high ground/buildings etc.

Specific considerations have to be paid to those system with high duty cycles such as 24/7 beacon and linked-repeaters, compared to an individual amateurs who may have much more variable/lower usage – but which may peak during activity events such as, emergencies, contests or propagation openings.


- 29 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Application density definition

Each application density parameter can be characterised by assessing the number of users or devices in a given area and the communication activity factor.

Connection density (/km2) can be calculated by evaluating the active number of users or devices in a given area in the application density considered. Simply:

Connection density = (Number of users or devices in a given area) × (Activity factor)

Activity factor can reflect the proportion of users/devices that are simultaneously actively communicating. It will be dependent upon when any services or applications are consumed and could vary with time. It may be important to take this into account.

Service type data rates

Application data rates need to be assigned to each service type.

Step 2Usage Pattern

An application usage pattern is defined as a common user(s) behaviour denoting the percentage of active user/device using a given service type in a given application density. The values for the input can be defined differently by regions or countries in percentage (%).

Activity factor and usage pattern could be influenced according to different frequency ranges to reflect the different operational environments anticipated.

Step 3Deployment considerations

Assuming a regular pattern of service areas, inter-site distances (ISD) and spectral efficiency figures can be derived and relevant performance objectives assigned to each application density.

A1.1.3 Calculation Process

The total amount of spectrum needs R (Hz) can be calculated in the following way:

Rts = (C × A × U) / I / S

Rt = ∑ Rts

R = max(Rt)

where:C = Connection density (users/km2);A = Application data rate (bits/s);U = Usage patterns (%);I = Number of service areas/km2 based on the ISD (km);S = Spectral efficiency (bits/s/Hz);

Rts = A set of spectrum needs in given teledensities2 and service types (Hz);Rt = A set of spectrum needs in given teledensities (Hz).

2 Teledensity; terminal density: Number of end-user terminals per square kilometre.


- 30 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

R is therefore the spectrum need for the amateur service in 50-54 MHz as the maximum from the set of needs based on the set of teledensities Rt. It is not confined to any one service area, application and teledensity.

A1.1.4 An example of input parameters values and obtained results

An example of this application-based approach adjusted for WRC-19 agenda item 1.1 and Resolution 658 (WRC-15) can be described as follows.

A1.1.5 Input parameters

Connection density

For most service categories we can base this on the individual amateurs. Based on the statistical data in Annex 3 where an overall average density of amateurs was calculated:

TABLE A1.1.1

Connection densities, C

Case Connection Density / km2

Low 0.02

Average 0.0694Maximum >0.2

The one exception to this can be made for the extensive amateur propagation beacon network which is typically at >100 km separation distances (giving a lower density of ~0.001), but which has a high usage pattern due to its 24/7 operation (see below).

Application data rate

Considerations for data rates range from around less than 1 kb/s for Morse or weak-signal structured data modes, to around 25 kb/s for FM/digital voice and 100-512 kb/s for wideband data/media

TABLE A1.1.2

Application data rate types, A

Service type Application data rate, bits/s

Low BW/data rate application 1 000

Medium BW/data rate application 25 000High data rate application 512 000

Note: For estimating purposes, analogue mode bandwidths are considered to be directly equivalent to bits/s.

Application usage pattern

Usage pattern could be influenced according to different frequency ranges to reflect the different operational environments anticipated.


- 31 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A1.1.3

Application types and their usage patterns

Application type Usage pattern, %Individual amateurs (analogue traffic) 2

Conventional Voice/data repeaters, nodes and gateways and new digital developments

10

Beacons and linked/automatic systems 25-100 High data rate applications 5-25

Service Area and Spectral efficiency

Inter-site distances for Service Area relate to either coverage areas or typical contact distances depending of the application

Spectral efficiency, whilst nominally in bits/Hz, in practice this has to be tailored for the length of the overall contact, including any error correction and acknowledgements required to successfully pass a message.

For example propagation beacons have longer transmission sequences (which may include a significant amount of error-correction coding) so have been assumed to be no more than 0.25 bits/Hz equivalent.

A1.1.6 Spectrum needs

Table A1.1.4 shows an example of the estimated spectrum needs for the main service categories as they are likely to be used within the overall study range of 50-54 MHz.

TABLE A1.1.4

Spectrum requirements example based on average amateur density {Editor's note: check calcs}

Nominal Frequency Range, MHz 50.5 - 52.0 52.0 - 54.0

DX Users, contests etc

Beacon Modes




Requirements, kHz 365 120 875 2,867

Rtotal, MHz 4.23

50.0 - 50.5


- 32 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Annex 1.2: Amateur stations and densityUsing the 2016 data in document CEPT CPG-PTD(17)20, the number of amateur stations per square kilometre has been calculated for most CEPT countries in the table below. This data may be further refined to develop user densities in urban and rural areas.

TABLE A1.2.1

CEPT Amateur statistics for 2016

Country Licencees Territorial area (km2) Licensees per km2

Albania 117 28 750 0.004Andorra 82 468 0.175Austria 6467 83,879 0.077Belarus 1400 207 600 0.007Belgium 5261 30 530 0.172Bosnia and Herzegovina 3500 51 200 0.068Bulgaria 6960 111 000 0.063Croatia 1657 56 590 0.029Cyprus 236 9 251 0.026Czech Republic 5396 78 870 0.068Denmark 8680 42 930 0.202Estonia 600 45 340 0.013Finland 7229 338 100 0.021France 13752 643 800 0.021Germany 74698 357 022 0.209Greece 6900 132 000 0.052Hungary 3120 93 030 0.034Ireland 1801 70 270 0.026Italy 25000 301 300 0.083Latvia 340 64 590 0.005Lithuania 730 65 300 0.011Luxembourg 559 2 586 0.216Malta 439 316 1.389Monaco 51 2.02 25.248Netherlands 12637 41 540 0.304Norway 6745 323 800 0.021Poland 13098 312 700 0.042Portugal 5677 92 210 0.062Romania 4048 238 400 0.017San Marino 100 61 1.634Slovakia 1500 49 040 0.031Slovenia 4400 20 270 0.217Spain 30756 505 400 0.061Sweden 13000 450 300 0.029Switzerland 4818 41 290 0.117United Kingdom 84694 243 600 0.348

Totals 356 448 5 133 335Average licenssees per km2 for listed countries 0.0694


- 33 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Annex 1.3: Digital spectrum arrangement for the band 52-54 MHzIn Region-1 this sub range is currently band planned by IARU as appropriate for ‘all-modes’ in those countries where it is already allocated (RR No. 5.169). Consistent with this current position is the Service Categorisation for amateur applications used in this document. Predominantly this band segment is assumed to be suitable for all for wideband modes which can include wideband digital communications, reduced bandwidth digital television, machine to machine applications, as well as adaptations of HAMNET3 terminal devices. These applications currently exist in microwave bands and a few Region 1 countries with experimental amateur VHF developments. Their further development and adaptation to the frequency band 50-54 MHz requires the certainty of a sufficiently wide frequency allocation in Region 1. Digital communications is a highly innovative area, so it is likely that additional applications may subsequently emerge.

The availability of the entire frequency band 50-54 MHz would additionally encourage development of new technologies to support disaster relief in accordance with the IARU-ITU and Red Cross/Red Crescent MoUs4 on disaster relief operations, consistent with Article 25.9A of the Radio Regulations. Examples would be mobile video used for searching for survivors in earthquakes and easier establishment of medium capacity digital links over difficult propagation paths.

50 MHz digital amateur systems will thus either evolve from existing developments in other VHF/UHF bands, or will incorporate the use of new technologies and applications that will benefit from the physical characteristics of the frequency band in question. Hence the work on spectrum needs under Resolution 658 (WRC-15) will have to take account of current and future amateur service applications in this spectrum.

A1.3.1 Digital amateur applications (channel spacing up to 500 kHz)

In Region-1 IARU is currently considering an update to its band plan guidance for the 52-54 MHz range for existing amateur users, based on this proposal:

In those Region-1 countries where 52-54 MHz (or parts thereof) is allocated, its use should be planned on the basis of up to 4 × 500 kHz blocks which may be sub-divided or merged to suit digital applications. Amateurs using digital transmission methods should also ensure that their transmissions do not spread beyond band edges.

The four blocks that are the basis of scheme are illustrated in Table A1.3.1.

TABLE A1.3.1

Guidance for 52-54 MHz amateur applications

F, MHz 52.0 52.5 53.0 53.5 54.0

Block 1 2 3 4

Fctr, MHz 52.25 52.75 53.25 53.75

3 See https://www.tapr.org/pdf/DCC2014-TheEuropeanHAMNET-DG8NGN.pdf.4 Copies of the MoUs are at: http://www.iaru.org/uploads/1/3/0/7/13073366/ituandiarumou.pdf and http://www.iaru.org/uploads/1/3/0/7/13073366/ifrcandiarumou.pdf.


http://www.iaru.org/uploads/1/3/0/7/13073366/ifrcandiarumou.pdf

http://www.iaru.org/uploads/1/3/0/7/13073366/ituandiarumou.pdf

https://www.tapr.org/pdf/DCC2014-TheEuropeanHAMNET-DG8NGN.pdf

- 34 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

If an allocation is agreed during WRC-19 then further IARU band planning may be initiated to accommodate specific applications. For example full size blocks may be needed for DATV or regional/trunk data-links, whereas other blocks may be subdivided for local 100 kb/s simplex user access5.

The scheme is also adaptable for countries where parts of the 52-54 MHz range may have existing assignments to other services.

5 A particular benefit of VHF for this is that amateurs can achieve non-line of site data communications, which is not possible in UHF/Microwave bands with conventional Wi-Fi, etc.


- 35 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

ANNEX 2

Sharing with the broadcasting service

Annex 2.1

A2.1.1 Introduction

WRC-19 agenda item 1.1 is to consider an allocation of the frequency band 50-54 MHz to the amateur service in Region 1, in accordance with Resolution 658 (WRC-15). The Resolution requests to take into account the results of sharing studies with incumbent services. This document from IARU deals with the compatibility between the amateur service and the broadcasting service prior to the switch-off of the analogue broadcasting service in this frequency band.

IARU-R1 has studied various mechanisms which have been used by administrations in the past in Regions 1 and 3 to regulate the amateur service in the 50-54 MHz frequency band where amateur stations have existed in relatively close geographical proximity to the service areas of analogue television broadcasting stations. In addition, ITU-R WP 6A has provided WP 5A with details of the current ITU-R Recommendations which detail the criteria necessary to assess sharing conditions and these have been used in formulating the sharing model detailed in section A2.1.2 below. To address part of the sharing scenario requested by WRC-19 agenda item 1.1, section A2.1.2 of this document shows a sharing model that can be used or adapted to show how sharing between the amateur service and the remaining analogue television broadcasting applications in Region 1 in the band 50-54 MHz is feasible.

In addition, section A2.1.3 provides details of perhaps the most challenging sharing scenario from the European Broadcasting Area (EBA); sharing between the amateur service and analogue television in the broadcasting service in the Russian Federation prior to analogue switch-off sometime after 2018. The sharing method calculates the difference in field strength between the wanted TV field and the field resulting from an amateur transmitter.

Recommendation ITU-R SM.851-1 entitled Sharing between the broadcasting service and the fixed and/or mobile services in the VHF and UHF bands has been used in many forums to address sharing between the amateur service and the broadcasting service. In general this appears acceptable in the case of avoiding harmful interference to analogue broadcasting; however care must be exercised when addressing the polarization of amateur stations’ antennas which may be vertically or horizontally polarized depending on the location and application being utilized.

The minimum median value of the field strength to be protected is specified as 46 dB µV/m in Table 1 of Recommendation ITU-R SM.851-1 (50% of time, 90% of locations). The required protection ratio is also given by Recommendation ITU-R SM.851-1, which is determined from Tables 3, 5 and Figure 2 of the Recommendation and depends on the frequency separation between wanted and interfering emissions.

The amateur signal strength is calculated using ITU-R recommendations and assumes the use of a four element Yagi antenna with the characteristics shown in the Figure A2.1.1 below. The signal strength is further adjusted based on factors to adjust for differences in signal polarisation, receiver antenna gain factors and losses due to obstructions between the amateur station and TV receiver.

A2.1.2 Method

The minimum field strength for which protection against interference is provided in planning should never be lower than 46 dBµV/m from Table 1 of Recommendation ITU-R SM.851-1.


- 36 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Remaining analogue television transmitters in Region 1 generally utilise the SECAM System D/K standard with a channel centre frequency of 52.50 MHz, vision carrier frequency 49.75 MHz and sound carrier 56.25 MHz. Carrier offsets may be used.

The method involves calculating the difference between the wanted TV signal's field and the field resulting from an amateur transmitter operating on a frequency within the TV channel some distance away from the edge of the TV service area. If the amateur signal is less than the minimum signal strength based on the minimum required TV signal field strength adjusted for the protection ratio, then no harmful interference will occur.

Due to propagation phenomena it is estimated that European amateur stations such as those described in the paragraph below, which establishes the field strength from a specific type of amateur station less than 500 kHz from the 49.75 MHz video carrier of a television station will be transmitting for only 8.5% of daylight hours on 90 days within a year. In other parts of Region 1 especially in geographical areas nearer to the equator activity times may be greater.

Other amateur applications including digital emissions with channel bandwidths of up to 500 kHz will employ a lower station e.r.p. generally not exceeding 20 dBW and will be separated from the 49.75 MHz vision carrier by between 1 and 4 MHz, thus requiring a lower protection ratio to protect the service area of the television broadcasting transmitter. Conversely the amateur emissions’ duty cycle is likely to be greater than the higher power amateur transmitters closer to the vision carrier.


- 37 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.1.1

Polar Diagram of assumed amateur transmitting antenna

A2.1.3 Variables for the unwanted amateur station signal

E is the field strength (dB µV/m) of a typical amateur station which is located at a distance of d km from the service area of an analogue television transmitter. It assumes the amateur station antenna is pointing in the direction of the TV station and uses a state-of-the-art four element Yagi antenna design as shown in the figure above. The maximum gain is approximately 9 dBi which equates to 7 dBd. The value of E is determined using Recommendation ITU-R P.1546 curves for land paths for the case of 10% time and 50% locations, and h2 = 10 m and e.r.p. of 30 dBW. Pr is the radio frequency protection ratio. This value is determined from Recommendation ITU-R SM.851-1. For the situation given above with a carrier separation of around 400 kHz a Pr of 50 dB is required.

At is the amateur transmitting antenna factor. From the antenna diagram above, the side-lobe gain is –18 dBi which equates to –20 dBd. It is extremely likely that amateur operators will point their antennas away from the broadcasting transmitters which are geographically close to them because:– TV video signal levels in their receivers will be excessive and would interfere with the

reception of weak signals and most importantly,


- 38 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

– Administrations which have a large number of analogue television transmitters remaining in their territory have generally not authorized amateur emissions from their territory in the 50-54 MHz frequency band. Since amateur operators outside such jurisdictions do not have the possibility of making amateur communications with such geographical areas it is unlikely that they will beam their emissions towards such territories.

Ol is the Obstruction loss. Amateur radio stations are generally situated in domestic locations. They are not normally located on prime VHF sites and are often in heavily obstructed areas. Obtaining any degree of foreground Fresnel zone clearance is in many cases impossible. For the purposes of this study a 10 dB obstruction loss for amateur stations has been assumed at these frequencies.

Cp is a receiving antenna polarisation factor. Recommendation ITU-R P.1406 indicates that polarization changes due to scattering from various obstacles may be significant and that such scattering increases as the frequency is lowered reaching a maximum or about 18 dB at 35 MHz. As the standard deviation of the scattering is significant, a value of 10 dB is assumed for the cross polarization loss at 50 MHz for the purposes of this study.

Ad is a television antenna receiving discrimination factor determined from Recommendation ITU-R BT.419 entitled Directivity and polarization discrimination of antennas in the reception of television broadcasting. Television receiving antennas nearest to amateur stations are likely to be pointed away from amateur stations whereas there will be additional geographical separation between television receiving antennas pointing towards the broadcasting transmitter and amateur stations in the model. 7 dB is permitted for this situation.

Afs, the aggregate field strength of the amateur stations at a given distance from the edge of the TV station service area, is calculated from:

Afs = E + At + Ol + Cp + Ad

A2.1.4 Variables for the wanted TV signal

Tfs is the minimum TV Field strength of 46 dBµV/m.

Pr is the required protection ratio, specified by the relevant ITU-R Recommendations depending on the type of TV service and the frequency separation between the wanted and unwanted signal.

TVifs is the maximum field strength of the interfering signal calculated from the minimum wanted TV signal field strength adjusted by the specified protection ratio:

TVifs = Tfs – Pr

A2.1.5 The calculation

The difference in field strength is calculated between the wanted TV field with its protection factor (TVifs) and the field resulting from an amateur transmitter (Afs).

If the amateur station(s) field strength (Afs) is equal to or less than the TV interference field strength (TVifs), then there should be no interference. If the Afs is greater than TVifs, interference is possible.

E.g. for no interference:

TVifs ≥ Afs

which is calculated from:

Tfs – Pr ≥ E + At + Ol+ Cp + Ad

where all the variables are in dB.


- 39 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

A2.1.6 Sharing scenario

This section addresses the results of calculations concerning sharing between the amateur service in neighbouring Region 1 countries adjacent to the Russian Federation and legacy analogue television transmitters utilising SECAM System D/K with a channel centre frequency of 52.50 MHz, vision carrier frequency 49.75 MHz and sound carrier 56.25 MHz. Carrier offsets may be used.

TABLE A2.1.1

System D 625 lines

Channel

Video-carrier (MHz)

Centre (MHz)

Colour-subcarrier (MHz)

Audio-carrier (MHz)

2 49.75 52.50 54.18 56.25

3 59.25 62.00 63.68 65.75

It should be noted that the video carrier is outside the band being considered for an allocation to the amateur service in Region 1, the separation between the amateur transmitter and the vision carrier being greater than 400 kHz.

Pr = 50 dB. This value was determined from Tables 3 and 5, and Figure 2 of Recommendation ITU-R SM.851-1 based on video carrier protection.

For a 50 km distance and 1 transmitting amateur station, the calculated figures for this sharing scenario are given below:

TABLE A2.1.2

Component ValuesE: Amateur signal level dB(µV/m) from stations 50 km from TV service area boundary

27

At: TX side-lobe gain (dBd) -20Ol: obstruction loss (dB) -10

Cp: Antenna polarisation factor (dB) -10Ad: TV RX antenna discrimination factor (dB) -7

Amateur field strength at edge of TV service area dB(µV/m) Afs = E + At + Ol + Cp + Ad

-20

Tfs: Wanted TV signal strength at service area boundary dB(µV/m) 46

Pr: Interference protection ratio (dB) 50Permissible interference field strength at TV service area boundary: TVifs = Et – Pr

-4

TVifs > or = Afs? Yes

Interference from amateur stations? No

A2.1.7 An alternative approach

Although the sharing study described in previous paragraphs suggests that sharing would be feasible between SECAM analogue television broadcasting and the amateur service in the


- 40 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

frequency band 50-54 MHz a SEAMCAT study has been conducted to determine the probability of harmful interference occurring for several sharing situations for different configurations of the broadcasting and amateur services. Using Monte-Carlo simulators such as the CEPT/ETSI SEAMCAT software package allow various scenarios to be examined relatively quickly. The simulations conducted are thought to represent typical worst-case situations that might be encountered if the broadcasting service (analogue television) coexists with the amateur service in the 50-54 MHz frequency band. Report ITU-R SM.2028-1 entitled Monte Carlo simulation methodology for the use in sharing and compatibility studies between different radio services or systems is particularly relevant in this regard.

Further details of the SEAMCAT analyses are contained in Annex 2.2 to this document.

A2.1.8 Summary and conclusions

This document shows that sharing is possible using the method described without any harmful interference occurring from an amateur transmitter with a power level (e.r.p. of 30 dBW) at a distance of 50 km from a television transmitters’ service area in the frequency band 50-54 MHz.

This study details a method of ascertaining whether a rather basic sharing scenario will likely protect remaining analogue television broadcasting applications in Region 1 in the band 50-54 MHz, until this band is no longer used for broadcasting.

The method calculates the difference in field strength between the wanted TV field with its protection factor (TVifs) and the field resulting from an amateur transmitter (Afs).

If the amateur station(s) field strength (Afs) is equal to or less than the TV interference field strength (TVifs), then there should be no interference. If the Afs is greater than TVifs, interference is possible.

In addition to the method described in sections A2.1.1 to A2.1.3 above a Monte-Carlo SEAMCAT simulation was conducted as discussed in section 4 and the Annex 2.2 to this document. The predicted probability of interference between the amateur service and the TV broadcasting service is relatively low if typical operating conditions of both the TV service and amateur service are taken into account. In both rural and suburban environments the calculated mean signal strength (dRSS) of the TV signal is greater than the minimum receiver sensitivity of -48 dBm implying that the TV receivers display relatively interference free images when the amateur stations are not transmitting.

Notwithstanding that the interference probability is low; any harmful interference which does occur could likely be handled through bilateral or multilateral agreements in place with neighbouring countries.

It is believed that the foregoing has described scenarios to demonstrate that successful sharing is possible between the amateur service and broadcasting service in Region 1, in European countries which border those countries which have NOT so far implemented a full changeover to terrestrial digital television broadcasting in bands above 174 MHz.


- 41 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Annex 2.2: A Monte-Carlo simulation study of compatibility between the analogue TV broadcast service and the amateur service

A2.2.1 Introduction and summary

This report presents the results of Monte-Carlo simulations using the SEAMCAT software tool to predict the probability of interference to residential analogue TV reception in suburban and rural environments by stations of the amateur service.

The probability of interference is found to be low in the cases considered by this study.

A2.2.2 Study details

This study considers two typical scenarios: – A major metropolitan area with a high powered TV broadcast transmitter. – A small rural township serviced by a relatively lower power transmitter.

Two propagation models were used in the simulations, with the most appropriate model selected for each service:– For the TV broadcasting service ‘ITU-R P.1546-4 Land’ with the analogue broadcasting

option selected and signal strength calculations are for between 10% and 50% of the time. ITU-R P.1546 calculations are only valid for field strengths exceeded for percentage times in the range from 1% to 50%.

– For the amateur service the ‘Extended-Hata’ model was used.

For the TV receiver, the required protection ratio of wanted to unwanted signal strengths (C/I) is 54 dB. The sensitivity of the TV receiver is –48 dBm (~1 mV into 50 Ohms) and the bandwidth of the TV signal is assumed to be 5 MHz.

The TV receiving antenna used in the study is a low gain design which is ‘built in’ to SEAMCAT and it would be suitable for short to medium range reception of TV signals; however it is likely, and experience suggests, that receivers on the outskirts of the TV coverage area will use antennas with higher gains and more directional characteristics which will reduce the potential for interference from any directions other than the main lobe that will be pointing towards the TV broadcast transmitter antenna.

The study assumes two amateur stations operating anywhere within a 50 km radius of the TV broadcast transmitter. The two amateur stations have a 100 W transmitter and use four-element Yagi antennas at 10 m elevation and are operating on a 5% duty cycle. The amateur transmitters may be communicating to receivers either inside or outside of the TV service area. All the parameters used by SEAMCAT are given in Table A2.2.3.

A2.2.3 The major metropolitan area study

This study is modelled on the TV transmitter in Moscow found in the ITU BR database record 061000305, an extract of which is shown in Figure A2.2.3.

The TV broadcast transmitter is assumed to have an effective radiated power of 316 kW (85 dBm) into an omni-directional antenna with a numerical gain of 1 at an effective height of 385 metres and the radius of the TV service area is assumed to be 50 km. The predictions for the probability of interference made by SEAMCAT for the metropolitan area are shown in Table A2.2.1 and the simulation outline is shown in Figure A2.2.1.


- 42 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A2.2.1

Probability of interference for the major city calculated by SEAMCAT using the parameters given in Table A2.2.3. The C/I column is the calculated percentage of interference for the C/I protection criteria of 54 dB; Mean dRSS is

the calculated mean signal strength of the desired TV signal and its standard deviation also shown.

C/I %(54 dB)

Mean dRSS (dBm)

dRSS StdDev(dBm) Environment

0.14 -29.69 11.34 Suburban0.81 -29.09 11.27 Rural

FIGURE A2.2.1

Simulation outline of the major metropolitan area (Moscow) study. This figure shows 601 positions of the 100 000 random positions that SEAMCAT simulates to predict

the probability of interference.

A2.2.4 The rural centre study

This study is modelled on the TV transmitter in Zapadnaya Dvina Tver found in the ITU BR database record 096002674, an extract of which is shown in Figure A2.2.4. The other parameters used in the simulation, e.g. receiver antenna, sensitivity, amateur characteristics, etc., are the same as previously described in section A2.2.2 above.


- 43 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

The TV broadcast transmitter is assumed to have an effective radiated power of 165 W (52.2 dBm) into an omni-directional antenna with a numerical gain of 1 at an effective height of 92 metres and the radius of the TV service area is assumed to be 5 km.

Given the low transmitter power of 165 Watts (22.2 dBW) and relatively low antenna height (92 m), it is assumed that the broadcast station serves a small rural community or some other type of isolated compact settlement. The image from Google Earth (Figure A2.2.8) shows the town at the center of a largely forested area with a diameter of approximately 5 km.

Table A2.2.2 shows the calculated probability of interference to residential TV reception by amateur operators and Figure A2.2.2 shows the simulation outline.

TABLE A2.2.2

Probability of interference for the rural township calculated by SEAMCAT using the parameters given in Table A8.3. The C/I column is the calculated probability of

interference; Mean dRSS is the calculated mean signal strength of the desired TV signal and its standard deviation also shown.

C/I %(54 dB)

Mean dRSS (dBm)

dRSS StdDev(dBm) Environment

1.57 -41.06 9.99 Rural

FIGURE A2.2.2

Simulation outline of the rural township (Zapadnaya Dvina Tver) study. This figure shows 601 positions of the 100 000 random positions that SEAMCAT simulates to

predict the probability of interference


- 44 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.2.3

Extract from ITU database giving details of the Moscow television transmitter used in the simulation in section A2.2.3 of this Report

FIGURE A2.2.4

Extract from ITU database giving details of the Zapadnaya Dvina Tver television transmitter used in the simulation in section A2.2.4 of this Report


- 45 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A2.2.3

The main parameters used for the SEAMCAT studies given in this document. Any other parameters not specified were left as the program default values. SEAMCAT

version 4.1.0 revision 2337 was used for this study.

Parameter Value CommentsFrequency 52.5 MHz Same frequency is used for both the TV

transmitter and amateur stationAmateur transmitter power SSB: 50 dBm (100 W) PEP Typical of amateur equipment used around

52 MHz. See Figure A2.2.7 for emission mask.

Duty cycle of amateur transmitter SSB: 2.5% at 40 dBm and 2.5% at 50 dBm

5% operation is 1.2 hours per day; most amateurs would transmit less than this on average. Considering SSB; for smoothly read text, the mean power of the speech signal is 10 dB lower than the power of a reference sinusoidal signal (see Recommendation ITU-R SM.326, Note 2 to Table 1).

Amateur links antennas,RX & TX

SSB: 4 element Yagi, 9.4 dBi gain Typical amateur antennas. See Figure A2.2.5 for radiation pattern.

Amateur antenna height, RX & TX

10 m (above ground) A probable maximum amateur height due to planning requirements.

Number of active amateur transmitters in service area

2

Television broadcast transmitter power

85 dBm (316 kW)52.2 dBm (165)

The difference between ERP and e.i.r.p. is small and is ignored here. Since ERP is given antenna gain is assumed to be 0 dBi

Television broadcast transmitter antenna

Omni-directional vertical, 0 dBi gain

Television transmitter height 385 m & 92 m

TV receiver antenna height 5 m (above ground)TV receiver sensitivity -48 dBm (1 mV into 50 ohms)

TV receiver antenna gain 0 dBi See Figure A2.2.6 for radiation pattern. Pattern based on ITU-R BT.419 which is a built-in SEAMCAT option.

TV signal bandwidth 5 MHz

Interference criteria C/I = 53.97 dB, C/(N+1) = 47 dB (N+I)/N = 0.97 dB, I/N = -6 dB

Noise floor –103 dBm Based on the fundamental calculation of noise power per Hertz (kTB), corrected for bandwidth (5 MHz) and receiver noise figure (4 dB):-103 dBm = -174 dBm/Hz + 10 log(BW) + NF

Coverage radius 50 km TV transmitter to receiver5 km TV transmitter to receiver

Major cityRural town

General environment Rural and suburban


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson%E2%80%93Nyquist_noise



- 46 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Parameter Value CommentsPropagation model For amateur service: Extended-Hata

TV service: ITU-R P.1546-4 Land

Suitable for elevated transmitters in a cluttered, non-line-of-site environment between 30 MHz and 3 GHz up to a maximum range of 100 km

Broadcasting & other terrestrial services, typically considered in cases with high mounted transmitter antennas e.g. above 50-60 m

FIGURE A2.2.5

Radiation pattern of the 4 element Yagi used in this study. Side lobes have not been included as the random assignment of directions in the simulation covered all

possibilities of direction by the main lobe


- 47 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.2.6

Radiation pattern of the TV receiver antenna

FIGURE A2.2.7

Emission mask of SSB transmission from the amateur station used in this study


- 48 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.2.8

A Google Earth image of Zapadnaya Dvina showing the extent of the settlement and rural nature of the surrounding environment. The township appears to have a diameter of roughly 5 km as shown by the lines drawn on the image. This is in

accord with the assumed TV coverage area of 5 km radius


- 49 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Annex 2.3: Amateur Service Stations Interference to Television receivers of the Broadcasting Service in the band 50-54 MHz

A2.3.1 Introduction

As part of studies under WRC-19 agenda item 1.1., regarding electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) between amateur service stations in the 50 MHz band and broadcasting service stations, the telecom administration of the Russian Federation has performed EMC calculations for simulated sharing of the band 50-54 MHz by broadcasting service and amateur service stations.

A2.3.2 Working Assumptions

The calculation of electromagnetic compatibility is based on the application of Recommendation ITU-R SM.851-1 “Sharing between the broadcasting service and the fixed and/or mobile services in the VHF and UHF bands” and Recommendation ITU-R P.1546 “Method for point-to-area predictions for terrestrial services in the frequency range 30 MHz to 3 000 MHz”.

The calculation assumptions used:– In the frequency band 50-54 MHz, the characteristics of amateur service stations are

taken from Recommendation ITU-R M.1732-2 “Characteristics of systems operating in the amateur and amateur satellite services for use in sharing studies mobile service stations”;

– At is the factor that determines amateur service stations’ antenna selectivity. In calculations in accordance with Recommendation ITU-R P.1546, the amateur service station antenna's directivity is taken into account for each direction of transmission as the e.i.r.p. is re-calculated based on the antenna pattern radiation reductions. For non-directional antennas At is assumed to be 0 dB;

– Ol is the propagation loss resulting from the limited size of the Fresnel zone. The calculation assumes 0 dB, since losses due to irregular terrain have already been addressed in the calculation, and the boundary of the TV broadcasting area is not in built-up areas;

– Cp is a factor that accounts for polarization discrimination of the broadcasting service station and amateur service station antennas;

– Here and hereinafter, TV stations’ reception area boundary locations affected by interference from amateur service stations are determined through calculations of the area with an interference level of 6 dBμV/m at a height of 10 meters with tropospheric interference (10% of the time) and –4 dBμV/m for continuous interference (50% of the time).

The maximum interference is calculated by using the formula:

Еint_max = Tfs-N-At-Ol-Cp-Ad-PR

where Tfs is the minimum wanted field strength of the broadcasting service station in the frequency band 48.5-56.5 MHz, determined in accordance with Recommendation ITU-R SM.851-1 “Sharing between the broadcasting service and the fixed and/or mobile services in the VHF and UHF bands”.

Editor's note: Consider 10% and 50% percentage of time for protection of broadcasting service


- 50 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A2.3.1

Calculation of the wanted field strength of an analogue television broadcasting station

Wanted field strength, dBμV/m, on the boundary of the coverage area (in 50% of the locations, 90% of the time)

46

Wanted field strength, dBμV/m, on the boundary of the coverage area (50% of the time, 50% of the locations), in accordance with Recommendation ITU-R BT.417

48

N is the number of amateur service stations operating simultaneously at a certain distance from the boundary of the TV station’s coverage area. This calculation addresses only one amateur service station operating.

Ad is the factor that accounts for the selectivity of TV receiving antennas. A signal strength loss of 7 dB is assumed, as per Recommendation ITU-R BT.419.

PR is the protection ratio for the signal of the analogue TV broadcasting station, calculated in accordance with Recommendation ITU-R SM.851; it equals 49 dB (for the amateur service station frequency of 50 MHz). For other amateur service station frequencies, the PR shall be adjusted by the difference between the protection ratio for the frequency of 50 MHz and the protection ratio of the frequency used by the amateur service station.

If the field strength produced by the amateur service station on the boundary of the TV signal reception area exceeds the value of Eint_max, then the level of interference caused by the amateur service station is considered unacceptable.

So, in order to detect amateur service stations’ interference into TV reception, one should identify overlaps between the broadcasting station’s reception area and the amateur service stations’ area of interference (for 10% of the time) exceeding the Eint_max level.

Protection ratios for standard 625-line systems are shown in Figure A2.3.1 and Table A2.3.2.

FIGURE A2.3.1

Protection ratios for analogue TV broadcasting systems.


625-line systems

- 51 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A2.3.2

Protection ratios for analogue television broadcasting systems

Frequency difference between wanted and interfering carriers (MHz)

Luminance range PAL SECAMMHz -1.25(1) -1.25(2) -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 2.0 3.0 3.6-4.8 5.7-6.0(3) (4) 3.6-4.3(5) 5.7-6.3(3) (4)

dB 32 23 44 47 50 50 44 36 45 25 40 25(1) H, I, K1, L television systems.(2) B, D, G, K television systems.(3) B, G television systems: the range is 5.3-6.0 MHz.(4) This value is valid until the end of the channel.(5) D/SECAM and K/SECAM: add 5 dB.

The calculation includes a scenario with the amateur service station located outside the ATV station’s reception area.

The amateur service station parameters are shown in Table A2.3.3.

TABLE A2.3.3

Amateur service station parameters

StationAntenna

height above groundlevel

Antennadirectivity

Polarization e.i.r.p.

Amateur_service_1 15 m Directional (-6 to 12 dB)

H 28 dBW

Amateur_service_2 2 m Non-directional V 17 dBW

Antenna attenuation diagram of an amateur station in the azimuth plane is shown in Figure A2.3.2.


- 52 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.3.2

Antenna attenuation diagram of an amateur station in the azimuth plane (for a directional antenna)

Broadcasting service station parameters are shown in Table A2.3.4.

TABLE A2.3.4

Broadcasting service station parameters

StationAntenna height

aboveground level

Antenna directivity Polarization e.i.r.p.

Sankt Petersburg

253 m Non-directional Horizontal 50 dBW

Ruskeala 45 m Non-directional Horizontal 10 dBW

A2.3.3 Calculation results

Based on the input data described, we plot the coverage areas of the broadcasting service stations and the amateur service stations using the CHIRplusBC software, in accordance with Recommendation ITU-R P.1546.


- 53 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

A simulation of interference between amateur service stations located on the border of Russian Federation and actually operating TV stations in the Russian Federation is shown in Figures A2.3.3-A2.3.12. Each figure is based on a calculation of an amateur service station’s interfering field strength.

The calculation includes the TV receiving antenna’s polarization isolation.

FIGURE A2.3.3

The area of interference from Amateur_service_1 to St. Petersburg ATV station

St. Petersburg station’s reliable reception area when the amateur service station operating;

The area of the amateur service station’s interference into TV signal reception from St. Petersburg ATV station;


- 54 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.3.4

The area of interference from Amateur_service_2 to St. Petersburg ATV station

St. Petersburg station’s reliable reception area when the amateur service station operating;

The area of the amateur service station’s interference into TV signal reception from St. Petersburg ATV station

We plot the interference areas of the amateur service stations with an interference level of 6 dBμV/m during 10% of the time.


- 55 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.3.5

Amateur_Service_Station_1’s interference area

For Amateur_Service_Station_1, the interference distance in the direction of the territory of the Russian Federation is 129 km.


St. Petersburg

Veliky Novgorod

Pskov

- 56 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.3.6

Amateur_Service_Station 2’s interference area

For Amateur_Service_Station 2, the interference distance in the direction of the territory of the Russian Federation is 148 km.


St. Petersburg

Veliky Novgorod

Pskov

- 57 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.3.7

Amateur_Service_station_1’s area of interference to Ruskeala ATV station

Ruskeala station’s reliable reception area with the amateur service station operating;

The area of the amateur service station’s interference into TV signal reception from Ruskeala ATV station


- 58 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.3.8

Amateur_service_station_2’s area of interference to Ruskeala ATV station

Ruskeala station’s reliable reception area with the Amateur service_2 station operating;

The area of the Amateur service_2 station’s interference into TV signal reception from Ruskeala ATV station


- 59 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.3.9

The area of interference from both amateur service stations to Ruskeala ATV station

Ruskeala station’s reliable reception area when Amateur service stations operating;

The area of the amateur service stations’ interference into TV signal reception from Ruskeala ATV station

The aggregate interference field strength has been calculated using the power summation method.

For evaluation of interference caused by amateur service stations to television receivers of the broadcasting service in the band 50-54 MHz interference field strengths at test points were also calculated. The results are shown in Table A2.3.5.


- 60 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A2.3.5

Test point

Distance from Test

Point to TV Station

Ruskeala, km

Distance from Test Point to AS_1, km

Distance from Test Point to AS_2, km

Field strength values

from TV station

Field strength values

from AS_1 at the test

points, dBμV/m

(1% of the time)

Field strength values from AS_2 at the test points,

dBμV/m(1% of the

time)

TP1 10.07 3.02 10.82 48 54.3 36.6TP2 9.52 9.77 5.10 48 41.9 49.1

TP3 0.36 12.76 14.29 88.2 43.2 32.6TP4 0.28 13.37 14.85 90.7 42.4 32.0

TP5 11.51 24.42 22.52 47.8 33.0 26.4TP6 10.25 22.63 24.54 48 31.0 25.3

Location of test points inside the TV station reception area boundary is shown in Figure A2.3.10.

FIGURE A2.3.10

We calculate the minimum territorial isolation required to support compatibility of amateur service and broadcasting service stations.


- 61 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.3.11


For amateur_Service_Station_1, the interference distance in the direction of the territory of the Russian Federation is 175 km.


- 62 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A2.3.12


For Amateur_Service_Station_2, the interference distance in the direction of the territory of the Russian Federation is 70 km.

A2.3.4 Findings and Proposals

The study results show that the amateur service stations’ field strength values at the test points exceed the previously determined threshold that supports interference-free operation of the broadcasting service stations, which equals 6 dBμV / m.

Values by which the field strength threshold is exceeded and the frequency and territorial separations required depend on the characteristics and relative location of the amateur service stations and TV broadcasting station.

So, to compensate for the level of interference on the boundary of the TV broadcasting station’s reception area, additional restrictions should be imposed on amateur service stations’ e.r.p. in the direction of the boundary of the TV broadcasting station’s reception area, with the e.r.p. reduced to values below 0 dBW.

The necessary protection distances vary from 70 km to 175 km.


- 63 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Annex 2.4: TBD

A2.4.1 To be determined

(…)


- 64 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Annex 2.5: Information concerning current and past sharing arrangements between the amateur service and other services in the 50-52 MHz frequency band

A2.5.1 Introduction

This information document compiled by IARU details sharing arrangements which have been implemented by administrations when sharing currently takes place, or has been implemented in the past between the amateur service and other allocated services in-country, or in a neighbouring jurisdiction.

The information provided in this document originates from administrations, IARU Member Societies or individual persons who were involved in introducing the sharing criteria.

A2.5.2 Sharing scenarios

In the mid-1980s some countries in Region 1 were assessing whether VHF television should cease and spectrum should be transferred to the mobile service. It was at this time that a number of IARU Member Societies raised with their administrations the possibility of an allocation to the amateur service in the frequency band 50-54 MHz to align with the allocation in Regions 2 and 3. However because broadcasting in the frequency band 47-68 MHz (Broadcasting Band 1) ceased at different times two sharing scenarios arose:1 When all broadcasting ceased within a territory but neighbouring countries were

continuing with their Band 1 broadcasting.2 Where administrations felt that they were able to introduce the amateur service within

their own country in locations which were not impacted by their Band 1 transmitters or another service such as the mobile service or radiolocation service.

This document describes the sharing formulation used in a number of countries and in part was initiated by sending a questionnaire to IARU Member Societies in CEPT countries. Information received for a number of countries is reproduced in the following paragraphs.

A2.5.3 Country information

A2.5.3.1 Finland

The frequency band 50-52 MHz is allocated to the amateur service on a national secondary basis in Finland. There are regional restrictions in border areas. Amateur radio transmitters must not be used in part of the Tohmajärvi Municipality in an area between Niirala, Pykälävaara, Tervavaara, Lusikkavaara and Ahvenvaara and the border between Finland and the Russian Federation.


- 65 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

The maximum transmitter power in the elementary class is 30 W peak envelope power (PEP) or 120 when the carrier of the transmission is attenuated by at least 6 dB. The maximum transmitter power in the general class is 150 W PEP or 200 W when the carrier of the transmission is attenuated by at least 6 dB. For extended power amateur licences there are limits for the field intensity caused by the amateur station in the Russian area. The calculation model detailed in Recommendation ITU-R P.1546 is used for the calculation of the field intensity. The limit value of the field intensity is 6 dBuV/m and 10% of time. The same principles are applied to repeaters which are near Russia's border. In addition the permitted radiation direction for extended power licensees is 0-20 degrees and 150-360 degrees. However the radiation direction of the antenna can be 0-360 degrees when the elevation angle of the aerial is 15-90 degrees

A2.5.3.2 France

Broadcasting Band 1 (47-68 MHz) was not used for television broadcasting in France. However in December 1997 when the amateur service in France was first authorised to use the band 50.20-51.20 MHz, sharing with mobile video links was implemented. In addition to frequency band limitations the following restrictions were applied to amateur stations:– Fixed or portable only (no mobile).– No repeaters.– No restriction on antenna type, but restrictions on the radiated power level.– Access and power levels defined by regions (French “departements”) as per the map

below.


- 66 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Authorized region with radiated power limited to 5 Watts

Authorized region with radiated power limited to 100 Watts

In the regions where use of the band was permitted further restrictions could apply. These restrictions ended in March 2013.

A2.5.3.3 Germany

In 1993 the frequency band 50.08–51.00 MHz was released on a national secondary basis in accordance with Article 4.4 of the Radio Regulations and could be used anywhere in Germany with the exception of proscribed protection zones, see Figure A2.5.1 below. Amateur licensees within the defined protection zone were permitted to use the band whenever the TV station was not transmitting.

FIGURE A2.5.1

Pre 2014 German protection zones marked in red

Only Morse code telegraphy (A1A) and SSB telephony (J3E) were permitted. Power limit: 25 Watt ERP.


- 67 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Antenna polarization: horizontal. It should be noted that the limitation in power, emission modes and antenna polarisation were based on governmental mobile requirements, NOT for the protection of analogue television broadcasting. In case of any reported interference to radiocommunication services and/or cable distribution networks (Cable TV) an amateur had to cease transmissions immediately. Interference from other radiocommunication services had to be accepted by amateurs. Amateur operators also had to be available by telephone in order that the administration could inform an amateur licensee to cease transmissions in case of interference. No mobile operation and no automatic stations were permitted.

The broadcasting protection zones were removed after the closure of broadcasting stations using the lower Broadcasting Band 1 channel.

In 2014 further changes were made. The frequency allocation was extended to 50.03–51.00 MHz. Additional emission classes were introduced and the power limit was changed to transmitter output power instead of ERP. The requirement to be available by telephone has also been dropped since no interference had been reported.

A2.5.3.4 Hungary

There are no longer any Band 1 television broadcasting stations in Hungary and no restrictions have been placed on the amateur service subsequent to the authorising of the amateur service in 50-52 MHz other than secondary status e.g. no protection zones or other special provisions. The power limitation was and remains at 10 W ERP.

A2.5.3.5 Norway

In the past and today in accordance with RR Article 4.4 an amateur licensee is responsible for non-interference with other services, especially broadcasting in the band 50-52 MHz. In addition prior to the closure of Band 1 television transmitters the Administration of Norway recommended compliance with the 50–52 MHz IARU Band-Plan and required that amateur licensees operating in the band 50–52 MHz comply with the following:– All emission classes as permitted in the band 144–146 MHz could be used. – The maximum transmitter power should not exceed 25 W and maximum ERP 60 W.– Maximum antenna gain 6 dB and maximum antenna height 20 m.– Obtain a special licence for beacons.

In areas where Band 1, channel 2 used for TV, amateur use of 50–52 MHz was not allowed within a given radius of TV-transmitters in the periods when the transmitter was active. The proscribed protection distances are indicated in the table below:

Transmitter TV transmitter power (kW)

Sector (degrees)

Distance (km)

Main StationsGreipstad 5 000 – 360 100

Gulen 5 000 – 110110 – 200200 – 360

120120

Melhus 10 000 – 090090 – 360

130110

Steigen 10 000 – 110110 – 360

110140


- 68 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Transmitter TV transmitter power (kW)

Sector (degrees)

Distance (km)

Varanger 10 No transmission East of 27 deg or South of 31 deg

Relay StationsBødalen 1 000 – 360 20

Øyer 5 000 – 360 15Skarmodalen 2.5 000 – 360 25

Åbogan 20 000 – 360 25

Since all use of TV channel 2 in Norway ceased many years ago, the restrictions mentioned in the above table do not apply for today’s amateur use of the 50-52 MHz frequency allocation granted in accordance with RR Article 4.4.

A2.5.3.6 Sweden

Currently there are no geographical restrictions on the use of the band 50.0–52.0 MHz by the amateur service.

However in 1989 (the start of 50 MHz activities in Sweden), no amateur transmissions were permitted during television broadcasting hours. A permit was required for each fixed location where 50 MHz amateur equipment was operated. Subsequently ERP restrictions were introduced in an area around the television transmitters reflecting the actual protection requirements.

Today the transmitter power limit in Sweden is 200 W PEP. Previously the maximum ERP was 250 W ERP at a specified distance from the TV transmitter and 50 W ERP at a greater distance from the television transmitter.

There have been no polarisation or antenna pointing restrictions on amateur licensees at any time.

A2.5.3.7 United Kingdom

Subsequent to WARC-1979 the first 50 MHz experimental permits provided to UK amateurs allowed operation outside television hours from February 1983. From February 1986 Class A amateur licensees were permitted to use 50.0-50.5 MHz and the “out of hours” time limits were withdrawn as Band 1 analogue television services had ceased in the UK. However sharing criteria was developed to protect the nearest operational Broadcasting Band 1 service area resulting from the Antwerp TV transmitter in Belgium:– Maximum power at all times shall be carrier 14 dBW ERP, PEP 20 dBW erp. – Maximum transmitting antenna height to be 20 metres above ground level. – Antennas shall be horizontally polarised.– No mobile or 'temporary premises' operation allowed.– No Repeaters permitted.

In June 1987 the 50 MHz band was also released to Class B licensees and the band was extended to 50-52 MHz. Restrictions were relaxed as Broadcasting Band 1 in Western Europe declined. Vertical polarization and mobile operation were permitted from April 1991. In July 1994, the ERP limit and aerial height restriction were removed and a power of 400 Watts (26 dBW) watts permitted in 50-51 MHz with primary status for the Amateur Service on the basis of non-interference to other services outside the United Kingdom as per RR Article 4.4. The frequency band 51.0-52.0 MHz is allocated on a Secondary basis with a power limit of 100 W (20 dBW) for Full Licensees, available


- 69 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

on the basis of non-interference to other services inside and outside of the UK, again in accordance with RR Article 4.4.

A2.5.4 Summary

This document provides information on various sharing mechanisms that have been introduced by CEPT administrations in Region 1 over the last 34 years to facilitate the allocation of the frequency band 50-52 MHz to the amateur service under the conditions of RR Article 4.4. It is believed that similar mechanisms would also be appropriate for the band 52-54 MHz to facilitate a globally harmonised frequency band allocated to the amateur service between 50 and 54 MHz throughout Region 1.


- 70 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

ANNEX 3

Sharing between the amateur service and the land mobile service

Annex 3.1: MCL interference analysis between amateur and mobile service in the band 50-54 MHz

A3.1.1 Technical and operational Parameters of amateur service in the band 50-54 MHz

The current spectrum and modes of operation used by radio amateurs is considered according to Recommendation ITU-R M.1732-2.

The projected spectrum and modes of operation used by radio amateurs is considered according to Document 5A/469, Annex 14.

The characteristics of amateur radio equipment are prescribed in Recommendations ITU-R SM.1541-6 and ITU-R M.1732-2. The strongest interference emissions from amateur radio transmitters are to be expected in SSB operation and digital wideband operation using QAM with high peak to average power ratio, because of intermodulation distortion in the power amplifier. Accordingly, the analysis shown in this contribution are based on operational case 2K70J3E.

Details of the relevant technical and operational parameters for the amateur service are given in Rec. ITU-R M.1732 and future projected wideband data according Doc. 5A/469, Annex14.

A3.1.2 Propagation scenarios

The path loss of the following scenarios are calculated for the MCL interference studies:

Scenario 1– Antenna height of source of interference = 1 000 m– Antenna height of receiver affected by interference = 1.5 m, 8 m– Spherical diffraction.

Scenario 2– Antenna height of source of interference = 20 m, 10 m– Antenna height of receiver affected by interference = 8 m, 1.5 m– Spherical diffraction.

Scenario 3– Antenna height of source of interference = 10 m– Antenna height of receiver affected by interference = 8 m– Free space propagation (line of sight connection) or according to model ITU-R P.2001-2

with diffraction at edges (Bullington diffraction method).


https://www.itu.int/md/R15-WP5A-C-0469/en

- 71 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Propagation effects are calculated according to the model of Recommendation ITU-R P.2001-2 [4]. The results are mean values are subject to statistical fluctuations6. The calculated losses show values which are lower for a probability of 50% of all possible cases. For lower probabilities the path loss is several dBs lower than calculated for 50% of all cases. Looking at scenario 2 and 3 as an example, the calculated loss values may be lower by 14.5 dB in 1% of the cases, 7.9 dB in 10% and 5.3 dB in 20% of the cases than the calculated values for 50% of all cases. The calculated values therefore indicate a somewhat optimistic interference scenario. Regarding the influence of clutter it can be concluded, that, on the TX side with an antenna height of 20 m and in a suburban environment, the loss due to clutter does not increase. For an antenna height of 1.5 m at the receiver, clutter may increase loss by approximately 5 dB. Because 8 m victim receiver antenna height is assumed, the clutter is not taken into consideration for the calculations. Therefore the calculation is somewhat conservative. Furthermore sporadic E propagation effects which occur spontaneously and lead to very low radio propagation losses for long propagation paths, are neglected.

The figures below show the dependence of path loss on path length, taking into consideration the various propagation and system parameters.

FIGURE A3.1.1

Path loss with spherical diffraction @ hTX = 20 m and hRX = 8 m (red lines), hTX = 10 m and hRX = 1.5 m

(blue lines), horrizonal polarization (dotted lines) and vertical polarization (dashed lines)

Figure A3.1.1 shows the loss process for scenario 1 whereby the amateur transmitter is located on a hilltop 1000 m above flat terrain and the mobile radio is located on flat terrain. The victim antenna height is assumed to be 8 m and 1.5 m.

6 With spherical diffraction, attenuation effects occur which depend on the gradient of the local dielectric characteristics of the environment. These are considered in the model as statistical parameters.


- 72 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Figure A3.1.2 shows the loss process for scenario 2 whereby the amateur transmitter and victim mobile receiver are located on a flat terrain. The amateur station antenna height is assumed to be 20m and 10m where the victim antenna height is assumed to be 8 m and 1.5 m.

Figure A3.1.3 shows the calculated path loss taking into consideration the terrain profile for scenario 3. The height of the amateur radio antenna is assumed to be 10 m and that of the mobile radio 8 m. Figure A3.1.4 shows the terrain profile.

FIGURE A3.1.2

Path loss with spherical diffraction @ hTX = 1000 m, hRX = 8 m (red lines), hRX = 1.5 m (blue lines), horizontal polarization (dotted lines) and vertical polarization

(dashed lines)


- 73 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.1.3

Path loss with spherical diffraction @ hTX = 20 m and hRX = 8 m, horizontal polarization (dotted lines) and vertical polarization (dashed lines)

FIGURE A3.1.4

Typical path profile for Jura mountainous terrain


- 74 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

A3.1.3 Radiated power for co- and adjacent channels

According to Recommendation ITU-R SM.1541-6 Annex [3] spectrums masks as shown in Figures A3.1.5 and A3.1.6 for narrowband and wideband applications are applied, spectrum mask, represented graphically in Figure A3.1.5 and Figure A3.1.6 are a somewhat conservative definition. Often, amateur radio transmitters exhibit smaller adjacent channel emissions than represented in this recommendation. In order to take this fact into account, an additional spectrum mask (Option 2) is defined for the compatibility studies to be carried out. This is plotted graphically in Figures A3.1.7 and A3.1.8. [*Editor’s note: References to be added.]

FIGURE A3.1.5

OoB emissions of amateur stations in operation above 30 MHz in the normal or narrowband applications of recommendation ITU-R SM.1539

For “spurious emissions”, the values specified in the Recommendation ITU-R SM.329-12, as shown in Table A3.1.1, are used.

The appropriate measurement bandwidths are specified in the respective standards as 100 kHz.


- 75 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.1.6

OoB emissions of amateur stations in operation above 30 MHz in the normal or narrowband applications of recommendation ITU-R SM.1539

TABLE A3.1.1

Limit values for spurious emissions according to Recommendation ITU-R SM.329-12


- 76 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

It must be assumed that in SSB operation the “spurious emissions” decrease as the frequency spacing in relation to the carrier frequency increases. This is the nature of intermodulation interference. Accordingly, one could assume that interference with very large frequency spacing in relation to the carrier frequency is well below the limit value.

FIGURE A3.1.7

Emission masks (e.i.r.p.) for 2.7 kHz bandwidth (5 kHz channel spacing, 5 dBi antenna gain

and 100 W transmitter power for amateur radio transmitters)

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000

-45

-35

-25

-15

-5

5

15

25

35

45

55

Option 1Option 2

frequency [kHz]

pow

ewr d

ensi

ty [d

Bm

/kH

z]


- 77 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.1.8

Emission masks (e.i.r.p.) Emission masks (e.i.r.p.) with reduced adjacent channel power for wideband operation)

0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30 Emission mask [e.i.r.p] at 300 kHz bandwidth and 4 dBi antenna gain

Option 1Option 2

frequency [kHz]

Pow

er d

ensi

ty [d

Bm

/kH

z]

The calculated transmit interference power PE of amateur radio transmitters is determined on the basis of emission masks option 1 mask option 2 and mask for mobile SSB and wideband transmission mode. Consideration is given to the fact that the bandwidth of the receiver affected by the interference is not equal to that of the interference signal. The calculated interference powers at the transmitter output of the interference source, corrected for bandwidth, are shown the tables below

SSB amateur radio transmitter to a mobile receiver with 16 kHz bandwidth

TABLE A3.1.2

Bandwidth-corrected co – channel, adjacent channel and out-of-band interference from a SSB amateur radio transmitter to a mobile receiver with 16 kHz bandwidth

Interference emissionsPower PE

e.i.r.p. for mask option 1

[dBm]

Power PE e.i.r.p. for

mask option 2 [dBm]

Same channel 50 dBm + 9.4 dBi = 59.4 dBm

50 dBm + 9.4 dBi = 59.4 dBm

1st adjacent channelf0 + 1.50 kHz < fadj < f0 + 3.60 kHzΔf = 3.60 kHz – 1.50 kHz = 2.10 kHzBWRX = 16 kHz

45.1 dBm/kHz + 10 log(2.1) = 48.3 dBm

30.1 dBm/kHz + 10 log(2.1) = 33.3 dBm

2nd adjacent channelf0 + 3.60 kHz < fadj < f0 + 6.75 kHz

-5.3 dBm/kHz+ 10 log(3.15)

-5.3 dBm/kHz+ 10 log(3.15)


- 78 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Interference emissionsPower PE

e.i.r.p. for mask option 1

[dBm]


mask option 2 [dBm]

Δf = 6.75 kHz – 3.60 kHz = 3.15 kHzBWRX = 16 kHz

= -0.3 dBm = -0.3 dBm

Spurious -(43 dBc + 17 dBW) = -60 dBMeasurement BW= 100 kHzBWRX=16 kHz

55.09 dBm/kHz+ 10 log(16) – 10 log(100) – 60 dB = –12.9 dBm

55.09 dBm/kHz+ 10 log(16)– 10 log(100)– 60dB= -12.9 dBm

TABLE A3.1.3

Bandwidth-corrected co-channel, adjacent channel and out-of-band interference from a wideband amateur radio transmitter to a mobile receiver with 16 kHz

bandwidth

Interference emissions Power PE e.i.r.p. for

mask option 1 [dBm]


mask option 2 [dBm]

Same channel 22.2 dBm + 4 dBi + 10 log(16)= 38.3 dBm

22.2 dBm + 4 dBi + 10 log(16)= 38.3 dBm

1st adjacent channelf0 + 150 kHz < fadj < f0 + 300 kHz

BWRX=16 kHz

16.2 dBm/kHz + 10 log(16)= 28.2 dBm

1.2 dBm/kHz + 10 log(16)= 13.2 dBm

2nd adjacent channelf0 + 300 kHz < fadj < f0 + 375 kHz

BWRX=16 kHz

-21.8 dBm/kHz+10 log(16)= -9.8 dBm

-21.8 dBm/kHz+10 log(16)= -9.8 dBm

Spurious -(43 dBc + 17dBW)= -60dBMeasurement = 100kHzBWRX=16 kHz

30.2 dBm/kHz+10 log(16)-10 log(100)- 60 dB= -37.8 dBm

30.2 dBm/kHz+10 log(16)-10l og(100)- 60 dB= -37.8 dBm

TABLE A3.1.4

Bandwidth-corrected adjacent channel and out-of-band emission of a vehicle mounted mobile radio transmitter with an assumed antenna gain of -3 dBi and a

transmitter power of 50 W

Interference emissions Power PE e.i.r.p. [dBm]

Same channel 47 dBm – 3 dBi = 44 dBm

Adjacent channel 44 dBm – 60 dB – 9.7 dB = -25.7 dBm


- 79 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Interference emissions Power PE e.i.r.p. [dBm]

(Adjacent channel suppression –60 dBc)f0 + 12.5 kHz < fadj < f0 + 37.5 kHzΔf = 37.5 kHz – 12.5 kHz = 25 kHzBWRX=2.7 kHz

Spurious 1f0 + 25 kHz < fadj < f0 + 50 kHzΔf = 50 kHz – 25 kHz = 25 kHzBWRX=2.7 kHz

44 dBm – 75 dB – 5.7 dB = -36.7 dBm

Spurious 2f0 + 50 kHz < fadj < f0 + 100 kHzΔf = 100 kHz – 50 kHz = 50 kHzBWRX=2.7 kHz

44 dBm – 80 dB – 5.7 dB = –41.7 dBm

Spurious> f0 +/– 100 kHzMeasurement = 100 kHzBWRX=16 kHz

44 dBm – 90 dB+10 log(2.7/100) = –61.7 dBm

A3.1.4 Determination of minimum path attenuation

The minimum path losses AS which are necessary to reduce the reception level of the interference signal below the protection value is calculated as:

AS=PE−Pprotect

The values calculated for all considered path profiles are provided in the table below

TABLE A3.1.5

Minimum path loss necessary to protect the mobile radio receiver from amateur service wideband transmitter interference

Interference scenarioNecessary path loss AS1 for mask option

1 [dB]

Necessary path loss AS2 for mask option

2 [dB]

Same channel 38.3 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB= 154.1 dB

38.3 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB = 154.1 dB

1st adjacent channel

f0 + 150 kHz < fadj < f0 + 300 kHz

28.2 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB= 144 dB

13.2 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB = 129 dB

2nd adjacent channel

f0 + 300 kHz < fadj < f0 + 375 kHz

–9.8 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB= 106 dB

–9.8 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB= 106 dB

Spurious –37.8 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB= 90 dB

–37.8 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB= 90 dB


- 80 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A3.1.6

Minimum path loss necessary to protect the mobile radio receiver from amateur service SSB transmitter interference

Interference scenarioNecessary path loss AS1 for mask option

1 [dB]

Necessary path loss AS2 for mask option

2 [dB]

Same channel 59.4 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB = 175.2 dB

59.4 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB = 175.2 dB

1st adjacent channelf0 + 6.5 kHz < fadj < f0 + 9.5 kHz

48.3 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB= 164.1 dB

33.3 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB= 149.1 dB

2nd adjacent channelf0 + 9.5 kHz < fadj < f0 + 11.6 kHz

–0.3 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB= 115.5 dB

–0.3 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB = 115.5 dB

Spurious –12.9 dBm + 121.8 dB –6 dB= 102.9 dB

–12.9 dBm + 121.8 dB – 6 dB = 102.9 dB

TABLE A3.1.7

Necessary path loss to protect the amateur radio receiver

Interference scenarioNecessary path loss AS1 for mask

option 1 [dB]

Same channel 44 dBm + 131 dB = 175 dB

1st adjacent channelf0 + 12.5 kHz < fadj < f0 + 37.5 kHz

–25.7 dBm + 131 dB = 105 dB

Spurious 1f0 + 25 kHz < fadj < f0 + 50 kHz

–36.7 dBm + 131 dB = 94.3 dB

Spurious 2f0 + 50 kHz < fadj < f0 + 100 kHz

–41.7 dBm + 131 dB = 89.3 dB

Spurious –61.7 dBm + 131 dB = 69.3 dB


- 81 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Annex 3.2: A Monte-Carlo simulation of sharing with the mobile serviceThis report contains the results of Monte-Carlo simulations performed using the SEAMCAT software tool to assess the possibility of co-channel sharing in the frequency band around 52 MHz between a proposed governmental tactical communications system and the amateur service.

The results indicate that under the most likely circumstances the probability of co-channel interference is low and contained within a very limited area. A protection distance of 40 km, to separate the tactical and amateur stations, could be applied if required though under most circumstances the interference would be transitory due to the very different operational characteristics of the tactical system and amateur service.

A3.2.1 Introduction

There is a need to undertake appropriate sharing studies between various services and the amateur service for WRC-19 agenda item 1.1 which is considering the possibility of a new amateur service allocation in the 50-54 MHz frequency band. This contribution presents a sharing study between a proposed government tactical communications system and the amateur service for a number of scenarios in the 50-54 MHz frequency band.

A3.2.2 Background

Recommendation ITU-R M.1634 notes under considering:“c) that deterministic interference calculations may not give a complete picture of the severity of the interference, for example, in terms of percentage of time;d) that deterministic calculations are simple but may result in important decisions being made which overlook potentially useful sharing opportunities;e) that probabilistic interference calculations can provide significantly improved insights that enable more informed decisions regarding use of radio spectrum;”

Recommendation ITU-R M.1634 further states that the software tool known as SEAMCAT is an appropriate method for undertaking the recommended probabilistic sharing studies. SEAMCAT was developed by the group of European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT), European Telecommunications Standardization Institute (ETSI) members and international scientific bodies. SEAMCAT is publicly available along with relevant reference and user documentation at: http://www.cept.org.

This document presents the results of SEAMCAT simulations covering a number of scenarios that are thought to represent a worst case situation when considering contemporary technology of the amateur service and a proposed government tactical communication system that may be used in the 50-54 MHz frequency band.

A3.2.3 The study scenarios and basic system parameters

This SEAMCAT simulation study covers six situations in a rural environment with both the ‘victim’ (tactical system) and the ‘interfering’ (amateur station) links operating on the same frequency of 52 MHz:– Base station transmitting to vehicle receiver.– Base station transmitting to handset receiver.– Vehicle transmitting to base station receiver.– Vehicle transmitting to handset receiver.– Handset transmitting to base station receiver.


http://www.cept.org/eco/eco-tools-and-services/seamcat-spectrum-engineering-advanced-monte-carlo-analysis-tool/product-download


- 82 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

– Handset transmitting to vehicle receiver.

Each simulation was run for 20 000 individual random positions with the amateur transmitter free to operate anywhere within a 40 km radius of a tactical transmitter. All the relevant SEAMCAT parameters are given in Table A3.2.4.

The transmission mode of the amateur station is single sideband suppressed carrier (SSB) using a 100 W Peak-Envelope-Power (PEP) transmitter operating with a duty cycle of 5% which represents 1.2 hours of transmission per day. The amateur transmit and receive antennas have a gain of 9.4 dBi and are located 10 m above ground. The emission mask of the amateur signal is shown in Figure A3.2.4.

The ‘victim’ (tactical) system specifications used for the SEAMCAT studies are shown in Table A3.2.1 through A3.2.4:

Using the parameters specified for the Protection Criteria of I/N = –6 dB and 10 dB SINAD the equivalent SEAMCAT Noise Floor and Interference Criteria were calculated and a given in Table A3.2.5

TABLE A3.2.5

SEAMCAT noise floor and interference criteria used for this study

Noise floor -126.9 dBm= –169 + 10 log10(16000)

C/I 16.97 dBC/(N+I) 10 dB

(N+I)/N 0.97 dBI/N –6 dB

A3.2.4 Operational considerations

Tactical systems are likely to be deployed rapidly in response to various situations, operate for a relatively short period of time (hours to days) and then be stood down or moved to another area. The vehicular and handset assets are likely to be highly mobile and move continuously or intermittently throughout the service area, not remaining in any given position for an extended period of time. The handset devices carried by the user have a limited range and the user is highly likely to remain in close proximity to the host vehicle at all times otherwise communication may be lost.

{Editor's note: Consider or mention cases when not operational and use is restricted to relatively fixed areas.}

Stations of the amateur service are relatively sparse, static and located in homes or temporary field sites. In general they are highly visible and their location or proximity is known because of national licensing requirements and all transmissions are clearly identified by the call-sign of the transmitting station. Amateur stations operate intermittently and much more time is spent listening than transmitting. A typical amateur operator is only likely to be operational for an hour or two each day, or a few hours a week.

A final factor to consider is that most amateur antennas likely to be used around 52 MHz are horizontally polarized versus the vertical polarization of the tactical system. This cross-polarization is not taken into account in this study but its presence in the actual usage of the band under


- 83 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

consideration would reduce the interfering signal strength in the range 6 to 187 dB which would further decrease the probability of interference.

A3.2.5 Estimating the service range of the tactical links

The first step undertaken in this study was to estimate the likely service range of the tactical system from the parameters provided. In particular, the specified receiver sensitivity of –112 dBm for a 10 dB SINAD sets the lower limit for the required signal strength and defines the maximum likely operational range.

SEAMCAT simulations were run for the six scenarios over a variety of coverage radii and the predicted mean desired signal strength (dRSS) and standard deviations were recorded and compared to the minimum required signal strength. The radius of the service area was taken to be that given by the mean desired signal strength minus two standard deviations. This implies that approximately 97% of all possible paths in the service area will be above the minimum signal strength of –112 dBm. dRSS is the predicted mean desired signal strength i.e. of the tactical service, in a service area with the radius shown. If the value dRSS – 2.StdDev falls below approximately –112 dBm the link does not meet its required performance criteria. The results of these calculations are shown in Table A3.2.2.

TABLE A3.2.2

Predicted ranges of tactical devices in various configurations based on the minimum acceptable signal strength of 112 dBm for a 10 dB SINAD.

Link Radius(km)

dRSS(dBm)

StdDev

(dBm)dRSS – 2.StdDev

(dBM)

Base to vehicle 40 -88.56 12.21 -112.98Base to handset 15 -87.42 11.87 -111.16

Vehicle to base 40 -88.57 12.1 -112.77Vehicle to handset 3 -86.93 12.73 -112.39

Handset to base 7.5 -87.02 11.96 -110.94Handset to vehicle 1 -91.19 10.64 -112.47

The service ranges show significant variation due to the differences in transmitter power, antenna gain and antenna elevation and these ranges will dictate the use and positioning of the individual tactical system assets. This SEAMCAT study uses the above predicted transmission ranges as the basis for assessing the compatibility of the tactical and amateur service communication links.

A3.2.6 Range of the amateur service links assumed in this study

The second part of this study assumes there is one active amateur transmitter (‘interfering’ transmitter) in a radius of 40 km around a tactical system transmitter and both systems are operating on the same frequency. As the amateur service doesn’t have a defined service area, transmissions from the amateur stations are to other amateur station receivers which may be either inside or outside of the tactical service area. In this case it is assumed that the amateur receiver can be within a radius of 40 km of any position that the amateur transmitter may occupy. This implies that in some cases the tactical system assets may be very close to an amateur station, or relatively far away

7 The adjustment factor resulting from the antenna polarization discrimination for horizontally polarised broadcasting emissions with respect to vertically polarised mobile emissions is –18 dB, from section 4.1 of Recommendation ITU-R SM.851-1.


- 84 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

in other cases and this is to be expected as the tactical system is not a fixed installation and may be deployed in any position relative to an amateur station. Figure A3.2.1 shows this study scenario.

In this study the test areas for each service completely overlap and in normal practice an amateur station would not transmit on an occupied frequency, so the situations presented in this simulation would not usually occur in practice as the amateur station would be aware that a tactical station was already using the frequency.

FIGURE A3.2.1

The SEAMCAT simulation for the Base-to-Handset scenario which has a 15 km service range, with the relative positions of the tactical and amateur stations free to move within the entire 40 km radius amateur transmitter area. The figure shows just

401 positions of the 20 000 random positions actually used to calculate the interference statistics

A3.2.7 Results of the simulations

This study assumes that the amateur transmitter is within a 40 km radius of a tactical system transmitter, operating on the same frequency and with the tactical receiver operating anywhere


- 85 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

within its defined service area. Table A3.2.3 shows the predicted average probability of interference for the scenarios and it can be seen that the probability of interference is generally small and the tactical links generally function without interference for more than 95% of the time for the given10 dB C/I protection criteria. Those scenarios that do have a higher probability of interference (vehicle-to-base and handset-to-base) are all mobile situations that are highly likely to be transient as the relative distance between the tactical assets and amateur station changes. The table also shows that the I/N criteria is not a good indicator of compatibility for this type of application as the position of the victim and interfering systems are likely to be constantly moving and that while the I/N criteria may be exceeded the ultimate Signal to Noise Ratio is acceptable.

TABLE A3.2.3

Predicted co-channel average interference probability for each study scenario assuming the tactical assets are operating within their operating ranges and with

the amateur station transmitting anywhere within a 40 km radius of a tactical transmitter

Link Radius(km)

C/I% (17 dB)

C/(N+I)%(10 dB)

I/N%(-6 dB)

Base-to-vehicle 40 2.73 1.78 14.16

Base-to-handset 15 1.11 0.66 6.43Vehicle-to-base 40 8.73 5.47 38.11

Vehicle-to-handset 3 1.19 0.66 6.45Handset-to-base 7.5 10.1 6.25 44.65

Handset-to-vehicle 1 3.82 2.44 17.53

TABLE A3.2.4

The main parameters used for the SEAMCAT studies given in this document. Any other parameters not specified were left as the program default values. SEAMCAT

version 4.1.0 revision 2337 was used for this study

Parameter Value CommentsAmateur transmitter power SSB:50 dBm (100 W) PEP Typical of amateur equipment used

around 52 MHz. The emission mask is shown in Figure A3.2.4.

Duty cycle of amateur transmitter SSB: 2.5% at 40 dBm and 2.5% at 50 dBm

5% operation is 1.2 hours per day; most amateurs would transmit less than this on average. Considering SSB; for smoothly read text, the mean power of the speech signal is 10 dB lower than the power of a reference sinusoidal signal (see Recommendation ITU-R SM.326, Note 2 to Table 1).

Amateur links antennas, RX & TX 4 element Yagi, 9.4 dBi gain Typical amateur antennas. See Figure A3.2.2 for radiation pattern.

Amateur antenna height, RX & TX 10 m (above ground) A probable maximum amateur height due to planning requirements.

Number of active amateur transmitters in service area

1



- 86 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Parameter Value CommentsBase station transmitter power 47 dBm (50 W)

Vehicle transmitter power 47 dBm (50 W)Handset transmitter power 37 dBm (5 W)

Tactical base station antenna Omni-directional vertical, 2.15 dBi gain, 8 m high

See Figure A3.2.3 for radiation pattern.

Vehicle antenna Omni-directional vertical, –3 dBi gain, 2 m high


Handset station antenna Omni-directional vertical, –10 dBi gain, 1.5 m high


Tactical service receiver sensitivity -112 dBm (0.56 uV into 50 ohms)Mobile link bandwidth and modes 16 kHz

Mobile service interference criteria C/I = 16.97 dB C/(N+I) = 10 dB(N+I)/N = 0.97 dBI/N = –6 dB

10 dB SINAD and –6 dB I/N specified

Mobile service noise floor –126.9 dBm Based on the fundamental calculation of noise power per Hertz (kTB), corrected for bandwidth (16 kHz) and receiver noise Figure (4 dB):-129 dBm = -174 dBm/Hz + 10log(BW) + NF

Coverage radius 40 km for amateur1 to 40 km for tactical system

General environment Rurals, over landPropagation model Extended-Hata Suitable for elevated transmitters in a

cluttered, non-line-of-site environment between 30 MHz and 3 GHz up to a maximum range of 100 km


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson%E2%80%93Nyquist_noise

- 87 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.2.2

Radiation pattern of the 4 element Yagi used in this study. Side lobes have not been included as the random assignment of directions in the simulation covered all

possibilities of direction by the main lobe.

FIGURE A3.2.3

Radiation pattern of the 2.15 dBi antenna used in this study. The other omni-directional antennas have the same pattern but use different gains in place of 2.15

dBi as shown here.


- 88 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.2.4

Emission mask for the SSB transmissions made by the amateur station transmitter used in this study.

A3.2.8 Conclusion

Using Monte-Carlo simulators such as SEAMCAT allow various scenarios to be examined relatively quickly. The simulations discussed above are thought to represent typical worst case situations that might be encountered if a tactical service and amateur service coexist in the 50-54 MHz band. Notwithstanding that the co-channel interference probability is low in some cases and moderate in others it would appear that any interference which is likely to occur would be transient, probably be in the same jurisdiction as the tactical system and could be handled by national provisions in place for the use of the radio spectrum, which might include bilateral or multilateral agreements in place with neighbouring countries.


- 89 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Annex 3.3: Sharing studies between Amateur Radio and Governmental Mobile under WRC-19 agenda item 1.1

Editor's note: Headings, figures etc. in this section needs to be renumbered

A3.3.1 Global Approach

The study presented hereafter aims to evaluate potential degradation of Governmental Systems due to interference caused by Radio Amateur to Governmental Mobile if the whole 50-54 MHz band is used by amateur stations. These two kinds of systems are labelled as follows within this document:– Radio Amateur service is labelled Interferer Link;– Governmental System is labelled victim system.

The compatibility study is split in two parts:– A Minimum Coupling Loss (MCL) study; – A Monte Carlo study: This study makes use of a statistic/probabilistic tool: the CEPT

Seamcat tool.

The modelling of the victim system is reduced to the 3 agreed cases: – Base Station (BS): It corresponds to a vehicle equipped with a mast mounted antenna.

This vehicle is static most of the time;– Vehicle;– Handset.

It is chosen to drive the compatibility study in rural environment.

A3.3.2 Modeling of radio amateur behavior

The Radio Amateur parameters are extracted from Annex 14 to WP 5A Chairman's Report [Ref. 1].

TABLE A3.3.1

Radio amateur characteristics

Frequency range 50-54 MHz 50-54 MHz 50-54 MHzEmission Mode SSB (J3E) FM (F3E) Wideband Digital OFDM,

QPSK, QASMExisting usage Yes Yes Future

Signal bandwidth 3 kHz 16 kHz 300 kHzTransmit power and duty cycle 100 W (50 dBm) @

2.5%)10 W (40 dBm) @ 2.5%

20 W (43 dBm) @ 5%

50 W (47 dBm) @ 5%

Emission mask See Figure 2 See Figure 2 See Figure 3Antenna type Yagi

Radiation pattern is shown in Figure 4

Monopole Monopole (omnidirectional)Low gain directional antenna

Average antenna gain (dBi) 9.4 dBi (Directional) 2.5 dBi(Omni-Directional)

2.5 dBi(Omni-Directional)4 dBi(Directional)


- 90 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Frequency range 50-54 MHz 50-54 MHz 50-54 MHzPolarisation Horizontal Vertical Vertical

Antenna height (meters) 10 m 10 m 10 mAntenna heights for use in simulations and probability of use

10 m @ 95%20 m @ 2.5%100 m @ 1.8%1000 m @ 0.7%

10 m @ 95%20 m @ 5%

10 m @ 95%20 m @ 5%

Area average of amateur stations

0.07 amateurs/km2 0.07 amateurs/km2

0.07 amateurs/km2

Density of stations transmitting in the simulation bandwidth

0.0015 transmitter/km2 0.007 transmitter/km2

0.007 transmitter/km2

[Ref. 1] specifies several emission masks:– One mask is used for Monte Carlo analysis with mobile service and compatibility with

broadcast service. It is specified for SSB mode only. It is also the one provided by Radio Amateur contribution at WP 5A [Ref. 2].

– Another mask is used for MCL analysis with mobile service, derived from ITU-R SM.1541, Annex 9 [Ref. 3], together with emission masks for FM and Wide Band modes.

Noting that the emission mask for FM and Wide band modes is not yet available, the present study takes into account the following emission masks:– For SSB mode: the mask specified by Radio Amateur (see Figure A3.3.1);– For FM mode: the mask specified by ITU-R SM.1541 for the narrow band case (see

Figure A3.3.2);– For Wide band mode: the mask specified by ITU-R SM.1541 for the wide band case

(see Figure A3.3.3).

FIGURE A3.3.1

Radio Amateur emission mask – SSB mode


- 91 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.3.2

Radio Amateur emission mask – Narrow band case (FM mode)

FIGURE A3.3.3

Radio Amateur emission mask –Wide band case


- 92 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.3.4

Radio Amateur Yagi radiation pattern

A3.3.3 Modeling of Governmental System Behavior

The tables below list the parameters of the Governmental system that is deployed in the VHF band. They are aligned with characteristics as discussed at CEPT/PTD (see Error: Reference source not found) and forwarded to ITU-R WP 5 (see Error: Reference source not found).

The system encloses several kinds of devices. They are integrated into:– base stations,– land vehicles,– handsets.

TABLE A3.3.2

System characteristics

System type Tactical mobile

Frequency range 30-88 MHzSignal bandwidth 16 kHz

Protection criteria I/N = –6 dBReceiver Protection Ratio (SINAD) 10 dB

Typical sensitivity –112 dBmDeployment environment Rural, over land


- 93 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A3.3.3

Base Station characteristics

Receiver type Base station

Antenna height (meters) 8 mAntenna polarization Linear Vertical

Antenna gain (dBi) 2.15Antenna radiation pattern Omnidirectional

TABLE A3.3.4

Vehicular characteristics

Receiver type VehicleAntenna height (meters) 2 mAntenna polarization Linear Vertical


TABLE A3.3.5

Handset characteristics

Receiver type HandsetAntenna height (meters) 1.5 mAntenna polarization Linear Vertical


A3.3.4 Propagation model

The adopted propagation model in the simulation is the Longley Rice model [Ref. 4-5]. This propagation model is appropriate for path loss calculation of VHF radio links in rural environment where both transmitter and receiver antenna heights are low, especially that Longley Rice takes into account antenna polarization.

Longley Rice model is applicable for distances above 1 km.

In this contribution, as a first step of our studies, the Longley Rice propagation model is configured for Continental temperate climate, with plain relief (average 30 m). The list of Longley Rice parameters is shown in Table 6. This set of parameters represents an example of deployment in the country side in Centre of France (other regions of France require other set of parameters, they will be provided when the list of interference scenarios will be more mature).


- 94 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A3.3.6

Longley Rice set of parameters for Centre of France, rural area

Parameter ValueClimate Continental temperate

Ground conductivity δ = 10-3 S/mRelative permittivity εr = 15

Mean surface refractivity, Ns = 301Terrain irregular parameter

30 m

Antenna polarisation Mobile: VerticalRA SSB: HorizontalRA FM and Wideband: Vertical

Sitting criteria RandomVariability Individual

Time percentage 85%Location percentage 85%

Confidential percentage 85%

The attenuation as a function of distance for Tx antenna height = 10 m (RA) and Rx antenna height = 8 m (land mobile) is illustrated in the figure below:

FIGURE A3.3.5

Longley Rice model – Attenuation as a function of distance


- 95 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

For distances below 1 km, Longley Rice is completed with a two slopes model as shown in Figure A3.3.6: an interpolation is done between Longley Rice distance limit (1 km) and the breaking point Rb which is the point of probability of transition between radio LOS and no LOS (Rb is linked to wave length)

Rb is calculated with the following formula: Rb=

4⋅hTx⋅hRx

λ

At 52 MHz, for Htx = 10 m (radio amateur):– Rb ~ 55.5 m for Hrx=8 m (base station)–- Rb ~ 13.8 m for Hrx=2 m (vehicle)–- Rb ~ 10.4 m for Hrx=1.5 m (handset)

At Rb and below Rb, free space attenuation is applied.

The interpolation is done in the following way:– At Rb, path loss is calculated with free space formula:

PLRb (dB )=32. 4+20∗log10( f MHz)+20∗log10( dkm )

– At 1 km, path loss is calculated with the Longley Rice model: PL1km (dB )

– For any distance between Rb and 1 km:• Calculation of the coefficient path loss is calculated as:

α 2dB /km=(PL1 km(dB )−PLRb (dB ) )

1km−Rb• Calculation of the path loss at distance d:

PL(d )dB=( PLRb (dB )+α 2dB /km . (d−Rb )km)


- 96 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.3.6

Three slopes propagation model

α

α2

Unfortunately when trying to use the Extended hata model on seamcat, it appeared that this model would be applicable if one of the radio link antenna heights would be at least 30 m. It is thus not applicable to scenarios with Radio Amateur antenna height of 10 or 20 m. this model is also not applicable to distances more than 40 km. Seamcat generates warning message as shown in the figure below.


- 97 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.3.7

Seamcat warning message with Extended Hata and low antennas

A3.3.5 Minimum Coupling Loss (MCL) study

A3.3.5.1 Minimum Coupling Loss calculation

For mobile radios, a protection criterion of I/N = –6 dB is specified. According to Recommendation ITU-R P.372-13, natural background noise (dominated by galactic noise) corresponds to a noise figure of F = 15 dB at a frequency of 50 MHz.

The maximum interference power that is acceptable at the Governmental System receiver is calculated as:

PRecMax∫ ¿=N 0+F+10 log ( BW )− I

N¿

where N 0is the thermal noise power at a temperature of 20°C and BW is the receiver bandwidth.

Accordingly, the maximum acceptable interference power for mobile service application is calculated as follows:

PRecMax∫ ¿=−174 dBm

Hz+15 dB+10 log (16 kHz )−6 dB=−123dBm ¿


- 98 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

A3.3.5.2 Determination of required isolation

The required isolation is calculated as:Isolation=PMaxINT−EmissionMask∫¿ (∆ f , Att )+ BwCorrection+Gvict +G∫ ¿−PRecMax ∫¿ ¿¿

¿

where:PMaxINT is the interferer maximum transmit power;

EmissionMask∫¿(∆ f , Att)¿ is the interferer transmit power attenuation due to the interferer emission mask, as a function of the frequency separation between interferer and victim;

BwCorrection is a correction for calculation of power density, due to the fact interferer and victim operate with a different signal bandwidth:

BwCorrection=10∗log( BW IF

BW vict)

Gvict : victim antenna gain;G∫¿ ¿ : Interferer antenna gain;

PRecMax∫ ¿¿: maximum interference power that is acceptable at the victim receiver.

It corresponds to the minimum path loss between Radio Amateur Interferer and Governmental System victim receiver.

A3.3.5.3 MCL analysis results

The MCL has been calculated for the three Radio Amateur modes of operation as interferer, and for the three types of System Governmental receivers that has been adopted at CEPT PTD and ITU WP 5A, i.e. Base Station, vehicle and handset. The results are detailed hereafter.

For all the results presented hereafter: the protection distance does not decrease above a given frequency separation. This is due to spurious emission that is constant whatever frequency separation.

A frequency separation of 0 kHz means frequency reuse i.e. frequency sharing.

A3.3.5.3.1 Radio Amateur SSB mode as interferer

The required protection distance as a function of frequency separation for a Radio Amateur in SSB mode is synthetized in the table below and illustrated in the figures below. MCL calculation is done for victim receivers located in the direction of the centre of the antenna beam (i.e. the zone of highest interferer antenna beam).

TABLE A3.3.7

Protection distance as a function of frequency separation – RA in SSB mode – Antenna height = 10 m

Frequency separation

Base station

Vehicle

Handset

0 kHz 96.3 km 72.7 km 53.1 km2.7 kHz 68.6 km 47.6 km 31.5 km

5.4 kHz 46.5 km 29.1 km 17.5 km10.8 kHz 17.2 km 10.5 km 6.5 km


- 99 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

21.6 kHz 9.1 km 5.1 km 3.1 km

32.4 kHz 9 km 5.1 km 3.05 km200 kHz 7.5 km 4.1 km 2.5 km

400 kHz 6 km 3.2 km 1.95 km600 kHz 4.8 km 2.5 km 1.5 km

800 kHz 3.8 km 1.9 km 1.2 km1 000 kHz 2.8 km 1.35 km 0.95 km

TABLE A3.3.8



Base station

Vehicle

Handset

0 kHz 110 km 86.2 km 65.5 km


10.8 kHz 22.7 km 14.2 km 9.1 km21.6 kHz 12 km 7 km 4.35 km

32.4 kHz 11.9 km 7 km 4.3 km200 kHz 10 km 5.7 km 3.5 km



TABLE A3.3.9



Base station

Vehicle

Handset

0 kHz 140.2 km 118.6 km 97.1 km

2.7 kHz 110.2 km 89.7 km 69.9 km5.4 kHz 84.8 km 65.8 km 48 km


32.4 kHz 23.9 km 15.1 km 9.6 km200 kHz 20.4 km 12.5 km 7.9 km

400 kHz 16.8 km 9.9 km 6.2 km600 kHz 13.7 km 7.7 km 4.85 km

800 kHz 11 km 6 km 3.75 km1 000 kHz 8.2 km 4.25 km 2.7 km


- 100 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A3.3.10

Protection distance as a function of frequency separation – RA in SSB mode – Antenna height = 1 000 m


Base station

Vehicle

Handset

0 kHz 205.4 km 195.6 km 187.5 km

2.7 kHz 195.8 km 186 km 177.9 km5.4 kHz 187.2 km 177.4 km 169.4 km


32.4 kHz 157.4 km 147.6 km 139.7 km200 kHz 154.3 km 144.6 km 136.7 km

400 kHz 150.7 km 141 km 109.9 km600 kHz 147.1 km 137.4 km 70.8 km

800 kHz 143.5 km 102.2 km 45.6 km1 000 kHz 104 km 57.5 km 25.6 km

A3.3.5.3.2 Radio Amateur FM mode as interferer

The required protection distance as a function of frequency separation for a Radio Amateur in FM mode is synthetized in the table below and illustrated in the figures below.

TABLE A3.3.11

Protection distance as a function of frequency separation – RA in FM mode – Antenna height = 10 m


Base station

Vehicle

Handset


15 kHz 54.6 km 35.7 km 22 km20 kHz 34.3 km 19.8 km 13.3 km


35 kHz 6.2 km 3.3 km 2 km40 kHz 3.9 km 1.95 km 1.2 km


1 000 kHz 1.9 km 0.95 km 0.85 km


- 101 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A3.3.12

Protection distance as a function of frequency separation – RA in FM mode – Antenna height = 20 m


Base station

Vehicle

Handset

0 kHz 91.9 km 69.4 km 50.3 km






A3.3.5.3.3 Radio Amateur Wide Band mode as interferer

The required protection distance as a function of frequency separation for a Radio Amateur in Wide Band mode is synthetized in the table below and illustrated in the figures below.

TABLE A3.3.13

Protection distance as a function of frequency separation – RA in Wide Band mode – Antenna height = 10 m


Base station

Vehicle

Handset

0 kHz 140.4 km 107 km 84.5 km100 kHz 122.4 km 97.1 km 75.3 km



600 kHz 11.4 km 6.6 km 4 km700 kHz 8.8 km 4.95 km 3 km


1 000 kHz 5.8 km 3.1 km 1.85 km


- 102 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A3.3.14

Protection distance as a function of frequency separation – RA in Wide Band mode – Antenna height = 20 m


Base station

Vehicle

Handset

0 kHz 184.6 km 121.8 km 98.7 km

100 kHz 150 km 111.5 km 89 km200 kHz 126.3 km 101.5 km 79.7 km


500 kHz 33.5 km 21.2 km 14.1 km600 kHz 15.1 km 9 km 5.6 km



A3.3.6 Monte Carlo Study

Interference is inevitable if two transmitters operating within the same service area transmit on the same frequency at the same time; in this case sharing a frequency is unlikely to be possible, unless acceptable mitigation techniques are defined.

A3.3.6.1 Configuration of Seamcat scenarios

A3.3.6.1.1 Victim Link (Governmental system)

The following example is for Base Station as a victim system.


- 103 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.3.8

Seamcat scenario: configuration of victim receiver

In order to reduce the number of scenarios regarding the “Transmitter to Receiver Path” of Governmental system, it is configured with the “User Defined dRSS” option. In that way the victim receiver is at its sensitivity level regardless the position of the transmitter (VLT: Victim Link Transmitter). With the User Defined dRSS option, the “Coverage Radius” and the “Transmitter” panels are not taken into account by Seamcat.


- 104 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.3.9

Seamcat scenario: configuration of User Defined dRSS

A3.3.6.1.2 Interfering Link (Radio Amateur)

The figures below illustrate FM mode. The transmit duty cycle of Radio Amateur transmitter is taken into account as a cumulative probability (stair distribution). The antenna height probability is also modelled as a cumulative probability.


- 105 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.3.10

Seamcat scenario: configuration of interfering transmitter

The density of stations transmitting in the simulation bandwidth is modelled in the “Transmitter to Receiver Path” panel, in the “Transmitter and Density Traffic” block.

FIGURE A3.3.11

Seamcat scenario: configuration of interfering Transmitter Density


- 106 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

A3.3.6.1.3 Scenario

The scenario is launched in Uniform mode with one active interfering transmitter. In the example below, there is a protection distance of 10 km and frequency separation of 16 kHz.

The scenario is launched in Uniform mode with one active interfering transmitter. In the example below, there is a protection distance of 10 km and frequency separation of 16 kHz.

FIGURE A3.3.12

Seamcat scenario: configuration of protection distance and frequency separation

The figure below illustrates an outline of a simulation. As can be seen, the victim link receiver is operating at its sensitivity level.


- 107 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE 13

Seamcat scenario: outline of a simulation with protection distance and frequency separation

The figure below illustrates another run with no protection distance and no frequency separation. As can be seen, the average iRSS level is above the required isolation calculated as –123 dBm for MCL study (see § A3.3.5.1).


- 108 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

FIGURE A3.3.14

Seamcat scenario: outline of a simulation with no protection distance and no frequency separation

A3.3.6.2 Way of presenting the results

Two groups of simulation have been run:– Simulations at busy hours, that is to say during periods of activity. Radio Amateur Duty

transmit cycle equals 100%. This is like a focus of simultaneity of Radio Amateur emissions together with Governmental System operation.

– Simulations averaged over 1 day (24 hours), that is to say the activity factor is taken into account. Radio Amateur community has communicated forecast activity of 1.2 hour per day, which corresponds to a Duty Transmit cycle that equals 5%. Of course the probability of degradation is reduced in the same proportion.

These two groups of simulation are presented in distinct tables.

Ones that would compare both types of tables would find that the probability of degradation averaged over 1 day roughly corresponds to 5% of the probability during busy hours: this is quite logical, it is the effect of Duty Cycle.

Simulations have been run in several steps, by varying protection distance and frequency separation (Δf). Thus the tables that synthesize the results contain:– A column for Δf = 0, which means frequency sharing.– 2 columns with Δf adapted to the Radio Amateur mode and victim bandwidths

(the value depends on the Radio Amateur mode of operation).– A column with protection distance, i.e. physical separation. The term “None” means

that there is no protection distance imposed to the amateur stations scattering; i.e., the amateur stations can be located at close proximity to the victim.


- 109 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

– The Interference Probability (IP) based on the I/N victim receiver criteria. IP_(I/N) is the probability that the protection ratio is exceeded i.e. it represents the probability that the victim receiver experiences service degradation related to the typical sensitivity that has been taken as a reference, see section A3.3.3. This is what needs to be analysed before conclusion.

A3.3.6.3 Impact of Radio Amateur in SSB mode

The probability of Governmental System service degradation is synthesized in the tables below.

The Radio Amateur transmit antenna directivity is taken into account. Thus, because Seamcat applies a uniform distribution of interferers around the victim receiver, the victim receivers located outside the mean beam benefit more isolation thanks to this interferer antenna directivity.

The reception of the interfering signal is also lowered by polarisation mismatch between interfering transmitter and victim receiver (SSB mode is configured with a Yagi antenna which has horizontal polarisation while victim Governmental System receiver antenna is vertical polarisation).

As what was expected, the Governmental System Base Station is more sensitive to interference than Vehicle and Handset. This is due to both antenna height and antenna gain.

TABLE A3.3.15

Interference probability with Radio Amateur in SSB mode – Busy hours

Victim terminal type

Protection distance

Δf =0

Δf = 16 kHz

Δf = 100 kHz

IPI/N

IPI/N IPI/N

Base Station

None 100% 19% 16%10 km 100% 6.6% 4.2%

20 km 74% 0.8% Null35 km 44.3% 0.3% Null

50 km 35% 0.2% Null60 km 29.3% 0.1% Null

70 km 21% 0.1% Null80 km 12.8% 0.1% Null

100 km 1.2% Null NullNone 75.5% 4% 3.3%

IPI/N IPI/N IPI/N

Vehicle

10 km 53.5% 0.5% 0.4%

20 km 66% 0.2% Null35 km 24.4% Null Null

50 km 11.3% Null Null60 km 3.7% Null Null


100 km 0.3% Null NullNone 53% 1.7% Null


- 110 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E


Protection distance

Δf =0

Δf = 16 kHz

Δf = 100 kHz

IPI/N IPI/N IPI/N

Handset

10 km 34.9% 0.2% Null

20 km 22.7% 0.1% Null35 km 10% Null Null

50 km 1% Null Null60 km 0.7% Null Null


100 km 0.2% Null Null

When averaged over 24 hours, the interference probability is limited to 5% if there is no protection distance and no frequency separation. This is the effect of transmit duty cycle which is 1.2 hour per day which equals 5%.

TABLE A3.3.16

Interference probability with Radio Amateur in SSB mode averaged over 1 day (24 hours)


Protection distance

Δf =0

Δf = 16 kHz

Δf = 100 kHz

IPI/N

IPI/N IPI/N

Base Station None 5% 0.9% 0.8%

10 km 4.8% 0.3% 0.2%20 km 3.7% Null Null



80 km 0.7% Null Null100 km Null Null Null

IPI/N

IPI/N IPI/N

Vehicle None 3.8% 0.2% 0.1%10 km 2.6% Null Null



70 km Null Null Null80 km Null Null Null

100 km Null Null Null


- 111 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E


Protection distance

Δf =0

Δf = 16 kHz

Δf = 100 kHz

IPI/N

IPI/N IPI/N

Handset None 2.7% 0.1% ~Null10 km 1.8% Null Null




100 km Null Null Null

A3.3.6.4 Impact of Radio Amateur in FM mode

The probability of Governmental System service degradation is synthesized in the tables below. The Radio Amateur transmit antenna is omnidirectional. This, together with the FM mode bandwidth, makes FM mode more interfering than SSB mode (even if transmit power is lower for FM mode). There are some threshold effects that make probability to swing brutally from 100% to a null probability.

TABLE A3.3.17

Interference probability with Radio Amateur in FM mode - Busy hours


Protection distance

Δf =0

Δf = 16 kHz

Δf = 100 kHz

IPI/N

IPI/N IPI/N

Base Station

None 100% 100% 27%25 km 100% 100% Null

30 km 100% 100% Null35 km 100% 100% Null

50 km 100% 5% Null70 km 100% Null Null

80 km 100% Null Null

85 km 5% Null Null100 km 0% Null Null

IPI/N

IPI/N IPI/N

Vehicle None 100% 100% 6.5%10 km 100% 100% Null

20 km 100% 100% Null25 km 100% 29.9% Null


- 112 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E



100 km Null Null NullIPI/N

IPI/N IPI/N

Handset

None 100% 100% 2.5%

10 km 100% 100% Null20 km 100% 5% Null

40 km 100% Null Null60 km Null Null Null

The table below shows explicitly the impact of a 5% transmit duty cycle.

TABLE A3.3.18

Interference probability with Radio Amateur in FM mode averaged over 1 day (24 hours)


Protection distance

Δf =0

Δf = 16 kHz

Δf = 100 kHz

IPI/N

IPI/N IPI/N

Base Station

None 5% 5% 1.4%10 km 5% 5% Null

20 km 5% 4.9% Null50 km 5% 0.2% Null


IPI/N IPI/N IPI/N

Vehicle

None 5% 5% 0.3%


100 km Null Null NullIPI/N IPI/N IPI/N

Handset

None 5% 5% 0.1%10 km 5% 5% Null

20 km 5% 0.25% Null50 km 5% Null Null



- 113 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

A3.3.6.5 Impact of Radio Amateur in wide band mode

The probability of Governmental System service degradation is synthesized in the tables below.

The Radio Amateur transmit antenna directivity is taken into account. Thus, because Seamcat applies a uniform distribution of interferers around the victim receiver, the victim receivers located outside the main beam benefit more isolation thanks to this interferer antenna directivity.

TABLE A3.3.19

Interference probability with Radio Amateur in Wide Band mode – Busy hours


Protection distance

Δf =0

Δf = 300 kHz

Δf = 1 MHz

IPI/N

IPI/N IPI/N

Base station

None 100% 12.7% 2.8%10 km 100% Null Null

20 km 63% Null Null35 km 38.8

%Null Null

50 km 30% Null Null


100 km Null Null NullIPI/N IPI/N IPI/N

Vehicle

None 100% 3.5% 1%10 km 96% Null Null

20 km 38.9%

Null Null

35 km 27.7%

Null Null


IPI/N IPI/N IPI/N

Handset

None 100% 1.8% 0.8%

10 km 44.8%

Null Null

20 km 30% Null Null25 km 25.6

%Null Null

30 km 21.4%

Null Null

35 km 17.6%

Null Null


- 114 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

TABLE A3.3.20

Interference probability with Radio Amateur in Wide Band mode averaged over 1 day (24 hours)


Protection distance

Δf =0 Δf = 300 kHz

Δf = 1 MHz

IPI/N IPI/N IPI/N

Base Station

None 5% 0.6% 0.1%10 km 5% Null Null



IPI/N IPI/N IPI/N

Vehicle

None 5% 0.1% Null



IPI/N IPI/N IPI/N

Handset

None 5% 0.1% Null



A3.3.7 Conclusion

In this contribution, we presented a sharing study between the Amateur radio service and the Governmental Mobile. The studies were divided into two approaches: MCL and Monte-Carlo. Studies show that the protection distances depicted in sections 4 and 5 need to be respected in order to ensure the protection of Governmental Mobile.

A3.3.8 References

[Ref. 1] Annex 14 to Working Party 5A Chairman’s Report – Working document toward preliminary draft new Report ITU-R M.[AMATEUR_50_MHZ] – Spectrum needs for the amateur service in the frequency band 50-54 MHz in Region 1 and sharing with mobile, fixed, radiolocation, and broadcasting services

[Ref. 2] ITU-R WP 5A, Document 5A/412, International Amateur Radio Union, Co-channel sharing between the proposed governmental tactical Land Mobile system and the Amateur service in the frequency band 50-54 MHz

[Ref. 3] ITU-R SM.1541, Unwanted emissions in the out-of-band domain.

[Ref. 4] Irregular Terrain Model (ITM) (Longley-Rice) (20 MHz – 20 GHz), Available at https://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/media/50676/itm_alg.pdf, accessed August 2017.


https://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/media/50676/itm_alg.pdf

- 115 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

[Ref. 5] Irregular Terrain Model (ITM) (Longley-Rice) Software toolbox (20 MHz – 20 GHz), Available at https://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/resources/radio-propagation-software/itm/itm.aspx, accessed August 2017.


https://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/resources/radio-propagation-software/itm/itm.aspx

https://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/resources/radio-propagation-software/itm/itm.aspx

- 116 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

ANNEX 4

Sharing with the radiolocation service

Annex 4.1: Wind Profile Radar Systems

A4.1.1 Background

In the frequency band 46-68 MHz, RR No. 5.162A provides an additional allocation to the radiolocation service on a secondary basis in a number of countries and limited to the use of wind profiler radars.

5.162AAdditional allocation: in Germany, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, China, Vatican, Denmark, Spain, Estonia, the Russian Federation, Finland, France, Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, the Czech Rep., the United Kingdom, Serbia, Slovenia, Sweden and Switzerland the band 46-68 MHz is also allocated to the radiolocation service on a secondary basis. This use is limited to the operation of wind profiler radars in accordance with Resolution 217 (WRC-97). (WRC-12)

The relevant Wind profiler radars parameters for sharing studies with amateur service are described in Table A4.1.1 below (to be confirmed):

TABLE A4.1.1

System parameter Range of valuesPulse peak power (kW) 5 – 60

Average transmitted power (kW) 0.5 – 5

Main beam antenna gain (dBi) 30 – 34

Antenna beamwidth (°) 4 – 6

Main pointing elevation angle (°) 90 (zenith)

Tilt angle from main pointing (°) 11 – 16

Antenna side-lobe suppression between 0 and 5° compared to horizon (dB)

33 (minimum) – 40 (Median)

Antenna height (m) 1

Additional shielding at horizon (dB) TBD

Pulse width (µs) 1 – 10

Necessary bandwidth (MHz) 0.2 – 2.2

Occupied bandwidth (MHz) 0.5 - 5

Protection criteria (I/N)(dB) –6

Noise figure (dB) 3

Maximum interference level in necessary bandwidth (dBW) –154 (for 0.2 MHz bandwidth)

–144 (for 2 MHz bandwidth)

The reference ITU-R documents related to wind profilers are:


- 117 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

– Resolution 217 (WRC-97) – Implementation of wind profiler radars.– Recommendation ITU-R M.1226 – Technical and operational characteristics of Wind

Profiler Radars in the bands in the vicinity of 50 MHz.– Report ITU-R M.2013 – Wind profiler radars.

A4.1.2 WPR location and parameters

FIGURE A4.1.2

Identified VHF WPR systems in Europe (red = in 50-54 MHz, green = out of band)

TABLE A4.1.2

WPR locations parameters

Sitename WMO Site No

Lattitude,

N

Longitude,

E

Freq,

MHz

Power mean,

kWPower Pk,

kWAnten

na gain

Beam width

Avg min

sKühlungsborn (OSWIN) (Germany)

54.1183 11.7690 53.50 4.5 90.0 30.0 6.0

South Uist (UK) 03019, 03020, 03021, 03022

57.3536 -7.3752 64.00 4 .0 40.0 29.0 4.5 15/30

Abersywyth (NERC-MST) (UK)

3501 52.4245 -4.0055 46.50 2.5 100 (typ.) 160.0 (max.)

35 .0 3.0 30

Clermont-Ferrand (France)

7453 45.7125 3.0903 45.00 0.8 5.0 30.0 5.5

Lannemezan (France) 7626 43.1290 0.3660 45.00 0.8 5.0 30.0 5.5 15Kiruna (Esrange) (Sweden)

2043 67.8865 21.1065 52.00 72.0 29.0 6.7 30

Andenes MAARSY-MST (Norway)

1012 69.2980 16.0420 53.50 40.0 800.0 33.5 3.6

SOUSY Svalbard Radar (Norway)

78.1530 16.0300 53.50 0.2 2.0 30.0 5


- 118 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Rome (Ciampino) (Italy)

16239 41.8080 12.5850 65.50 ? ? ?

TABLE A4.1.3

WPR parameters used for study

System parameter Range of valuesPulse peak power (kW) 2 – 800

Average transmitted power (kW) 0.2 – 72Main beam antenna gain (dBi) 29 – 35

Antenna beamwidth (degrees) 3 – 7Main pointing elevation angle (degrees) 90 (zenith)

Tilt angle from main pointing (degrees) 11 – 16Antenna side-lobe suppression between 0 and 5° compared to horizon (dB)

33 (minimum) – 40 (Median)

Additional shielding at horizon (dB) TBD

Pulse width (µs) 1 – 10Necessary bandwidth (MHz) 0.2 – 2.2

Occupied bandwidth (MHz) 0.5 – 5Protection criteria (I/N)(dB) –6

Noise figure (dB) 3Maximum interference level in necessary bandwidth (dBW) –154 (for 0.2 MHz bandwidth)

A4.1.3 In-band separation distances

At a preliminary stage, it is proposed to assess separation distance between amateur service stations and WPR taking into account the following elements: – Amateur service stations typical e.i.r.p. ranging 2 to 26 dBW (see ITU-R M.1732 for

both analogue and digital systems).– Amateur service stations typical bandwidth ranging 2.7 to 16 kHz (see ITU-R M.1732

for both analogue and digital systems).– WPR victim scenario.– Hata (rural) propagation model (at 52 MHz) (median case):



- 119 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Ed.: Needs axis titles

It should be noted that the case of the Amateur systems antenna height of 1 000 m is not considered since it is not within the validity range of the E-Hata model. It should also be noted that considering the WPR antenna height of 1 m, such 1 000 m height would lead to a visibility distance of around 115 km (hence free space).

A4.1.4 Separation distances

FM (F3E) case (only extreme distances are provided)

Amateur Power (dBW)

Amateur gain (dBi)

Amateur Bandwidth

(kHz)

Amateur antenna height

(m)

WPR bandwidth

(MHz)

BW factor (dB)

WPR antenna

gain (dBi)

WPR antenna side

lobe suppression

(dB)

Maximum interference level (dBW)

Required Isolation

(dB)

Separation distance

(km)

13 2.5 16 10 2 0 30 40 -143.96572 149.466 6013 2.5 16 10 0.2 0 34 33 -153.96572 170.466 15813 2.5 16 20 2 0 30 40 -143.96572 149.466 7913 2.5 16 20 0.2 0 34 33 -153.96572 170.466 196

For the FM (F3E) case, the separation distances would be ranging:– 60 to 158 km (Amateur antenna height of 10 m).– 79 to 196 km (Amateur antenna height of 20 m).

Wideband (omni) case (only extreme distances are provided)

Amateur Power (dBW)

Amateur gain (dBi)

Amateur Bandwidth

(kHz)


(m)

WPR bandwidth

(MHz)

BW factor (dB)

WPR antenna

gain (dBi)

WPR antenna side

lobe suppression

(dB)


Required Isolation

(dB)

Separation distance

(km)

17 2.5 300 10 2 0 30 40 -143.96572 153.466 7317 2.5 300 10 0.2 1.7609 34 33 -153.96572 172.705 17317 2.5 300 20 2 0 30 40 -143.96572 153.466 9517 2.5 300 20 0.2 1.7609 34 33 -153.96572 172.705 214


- 120 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

For the Wideband (omni) case, the separation distances would be ranging:– 73 to 173 km (Amateur antenna height of 10 m).– 95 to 214 km (Amateur antenna height of 20 m).

Wideband (directional) case

Amateur Power (dBW)

Amateur gain (dBi)

Amateur Bandwidth

(kHz)


(m)

WPR bandwidth

(MHz)

BW factor (dB)

WPR antenna

gain (dBi)

WPR antenna side

lobe suppression

(dB)


Required Isolation

(dB)

Separation distance

(km)

17 4 300 10 2 0 30 40 -143.96572 154.966 7917 4 300 10 0.2 1.7609 34 33 -153.96572 174.205 18417 4 300 20 2 0 30 40 -143.96572 154.966 10217 4 300 20 0.2 1.7609 34 33 -153.96572 174.205 227

For the Wideband (directional) case, the separation distances would be ranging, when considering the Amateur station main beam:– 79 (case 1) to 184 km (case 2) (Amateur antenna height of 10 m).– 102 (case 3) to 227 km (case 4) (Amateur antenna height of 20 m).

The following figure provides, for the cases 1 to 4 above, the variation in separation distances vs azimuth taking into account the Amateur system relative gain according to the antenna pattern:


- 121 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

SSB (J3E) (directional) case

Amateur Power (dBW)

Amateur gain (dBi)

Amateur Bandwidth

(kHz)


(m)

WPR bandwidth

(MHz)

BW factor (dB)

WPR antenna

gain (dBi)

WPR antenna side

lobe suppression

(dB)


Required Isolation

(dB)

Separation distance

(km)

10 9.4 3 10 2 0 30 40 -143.96572 153.366 7310 9.4 3 10 0.2 0 34 33 -153.96572 174.366 18620 9.4 3 10 2 0 30 40 -143.96572 163.366 11620 9.4 3 10 0.2 0 34 33 -153.96572 184.366 27610 9.4 3 100 2 0 30 40 -143.96572 153.366 17310 9.4 3 100 0.2 0 34 33 -153.96572 174.366 30020 9.4 3 100 2 0 30 40 -143.96572 163.366 24620 9.4 3 100 0.2 0 34 33 -153.96572 184.366 300

For the SSB (J3E) (directional) case, the separation distances would be ranging, when considering the Amateur station main beam:– 73 (case 5) to 186 km (Amateur antenna height of 10m and 10 dBW Power).– 116 to 276 (case 6) km (Amateur antenna height of 10m and 20 dBW Power).– 173 (case 7) to above 300 km (Amateur antenna height of 100m and 10 dBW Power).– 246 to above 300 km (case 8) (Amateur antenna height of 100m and 20 dBW Power).

The following figure provides, for the cases 5 to 8 above, the variation in separation distances vs azimuth taking into account the Amateur system relative gain according to the antenna pattern:

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

Sepa

ratio

n id

stan

ce (k

m)

Azimuth (°)

Case 5 Case 6 Case 7 Case _8

A4.1.5 Conclusions

The above calculations show that typical separation distance between Amateur service systems and Wind profiler would range from 29 to distances above 300 km, confirming the need for specific protection measures.

Taking into account the limited numbers of systems in or immediately adjacent to the frequency band 50-54 MHz range (and probably the expected low number of amateur systems in the vicinity


- 122 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

of WPR installations), sharing could probably be considered on a case-by-case basis e.g. coordination zones established in affected geographical areas.

It has to be noted that this approach, currently, could only be possible and efficient if amateur and radiolocation services are of equal status within the 50-54 MHz band.


- 123 -5A/650 (Annex 14)-E

Note: This section is for WG 5A1 use only and will be deleted when the document is complete.Suggested numbering scheme for annexes of 50 MHz sharing study. Adjust as required but be logical! Formatting suggestions also given belowV1 30 May 2017, revised November 2017

Identify general topic then reports by sub-topic

A1: Spectrum needs and existing/proposed usage of the 50-54 MHz frequency band

A1.1: Spectrum needs (IARU)A1.2: Licensees information (IARU)A1.3: Band plans (IARU)A1.4: Spectrum needs (Russia)

A2: Sharing with the broadcast serviceA2.1: Static study (IARU)A2.2: SEAMCAT study (IARU)A2.3: Static (Russia/CEPT)A2.4: SEAMCAT study (Russia)??A2.5: Information on sharing conditions

A3: Sharing with the mobile serviceA3.1: MCL study (Swiss)A3.2: SEAMCAT study on governmental mobile system (IARU)A3.3: MCL & SEAMCAT (France)

A4: Sharing with the radiolocation serviceA4.1: WMOA4.2

A5: Sharing with fixed service and anything elseA5.1

Format and style notes– Maintain agreed format and adapt section numbering to suit section number.– Please use tables and not embedded pictures of tables!– Please try to maintain consistent styles of naming figures and tables.– Please try to maintain consistent styles tables, avoid unnecessary use of colours in

tables.


Documents

1Introduction - ITU: Committed to connecting the worldN14!MSW-E.docx · Web viewis the amateur transmitting antenna factor. From the antenna diagram above, the side-lobe gain is –18