IARU Coordination - Frequency Misuse (satellite QUBE)

1

We must choose between 4 options to mark a transmitter for IARU Coordination.

  • IARU Coordinated
  • IARU Declined
  • IARU Uncoordinated
  • N/A

If you choose “Declined” or “Uncoordinated” the status is set to “Frequency Misuse” and you neither be able to export data from the database nor build dashboards.

Frequency Misuse

Lately, IARU has obviously changed its opinion on what is now necessary to get a frequency coordinated. The criteria are now stricter.

There are satellite operators who already got frequencies of previous missions’s transmitters coordinated and now facing a rejection of their equivalent frequency application.

This is a general problem, but I like to start this thread by a discussion on it from the perspective of the satellite QUBE from the Zentrum für Telematik in Würzburg, Germany.

Already in 2004, Klaus Schilling, at that time professor and chair of Chair of Computer Science VII of the University of Würzburg, got the first UWE satellite IARU coordinated. Three more followed, also successfully coordinated (2,3,4).
In 2019, the Zentrum für Telematik (founded 2007 by Schilling, now its president) applied successfully for IARU frequency coordination for their 4 NetSat satellites.

Only two years later, another equivalent coordination application was submitted - this time for QUBE -, but was quite unexpectedly rejected.

Compared to previous applications, they did nothing wrong. It’s the IARU who changed its requirements for a coordination by being stricter on coordination of mixing of scientific missions with the radio amateur ones.

We currently follow the decision of IARU frequency coordination and mark transmitters as “declined” if IARU did so.
Data won’t be shown on SatNOGS because decoders won’t be used in the database and without decoders, dashboards are impossible. On top data exports are not possible.

As for QUBE, its decoder (already on a merge request), cannot be used in the database.
The also planned dashboard cannot be implemented.

Besides what the team already did for their previous satellites transmitting on amateur radio frequencies:

  • planned digipeater functionality
  • got ham callsigns
  • got their frequency IARU coordinated
  • built a decoder

this time in addition they also

  • planned special classes to prepare students for the amateur radio exams and for hands-on experience in satellite communications
  • send out QSL cards as confirmation for telemetry reception
  • QUBE QSL Card

We now can leave the transmitter marked as “declined” (based on IARU’s decision) and show the team our “appreciation” or we can - and we are free to do so - change the transmitter to “N/A” which opens up possibilites for both sides, for the amateur radio community and for the QUBE team.

Fact is, the amateur radio and its satellite community need satellite providers like the QUBE team.

They support us, we should do the same for them.

I’m looking forward to your comments.

Daniel, dl7ndr

8 Likes
2

Good morning Daniel,

I struggle with this post.

In the past I have actively supported this team with all their UWE satellites and still actively follow UWE-4.

The team has always shared a lot of scientific information about their missions, but as far as I can remember never activated a single amateur payload or any other functions for interaction with Ham radio community.

Therefore I tend to agree with the IARU decision to decline the coordination and should be configured as IARU Declined

IARU explanation:

The team has been advised that the IARU Satellite Frequency Coordination Panel has discussed the QUBE coordination request and has problems to assign frequencies for a mainly scientific mission

Me personal; I like the science part and always try to support and follow these missions, but in the bigger picture of Ham frequency allocation these missions miss a very basic functionality and that is a payload or functionality that can be used by Ham radio operators.

Jan - PE0SAT

6 Likes
3

I +1 echo @PE0SAT comment and general sentiment. I would like to take the opportunity and emphasize that amateur-radio service != amateur mission . I (and LSF) would like to wholeheartltly support scientific, non-profit, educational missions but there is no need for them to use the “Amateur Radio Satellite Service”. There are perfectly valid Services and bands which we support in SatNOGS (Earth-Exploration Satellite Service, Space Operation Service and others) that missions like QUBE could use.

5 Likes
4

Hi Jan,

Thank you very much for your comment.

You are right, I’m also missing the promised digipeater function on UWE-4.
If there were a good reason for it to not activate it, they should at least state that on their website.

However, now it’s about QUBE and the question should be if it’s ok to let the QUBE team foot the bill for other team’s mistakes.

And, there are more ways to interact with the ham radio community apart from via the satellite itself.
In case of QUBE, I hereby like to allude to

planned special classes to prepare students for the amateur radio exams and for hands-on experience in satellite communications

If they move to frequencies outside the amateur band for future missions, we would surely lose them also for this interaction.

Daniel, dl7ndr

3 Likes
5

Maybe @pb2t as IARU Satellite Advisor can also share his view on this subject.

Jan - PE0SAT

3 Likes
6

Jan, thank you for inviting me to comment. I will do so in general terms.
I can confirm that IARU is more strict than it used to be in the past. The most important reason is a growing number of satellites that (want to) use frequency bands allocated to the amateur satellite service.
In the past amateur bands were an easy choice for commercial and science missions. Now that WRC-19 has identified bands for short duration missions there is (should be) no longer be a need to use our spectrum by commercial, science and other non-amateur entities .
Another reason is that ITU has issued documents related to small satellites and short duration missions.

More background on the use of amateur spectrum by educational satellites can be found here Satellite Coordination News Release | International Amateur Radio Union (IARU)

There seems to be a misunderstanding that science missions can use amateur bands. This is not the case. Science and educational (in terms of spectrum use) are not the same.

Misunderstanding often occurs in case of combined missions. Here I mean that a mission is partly amateur and partly something else.
In such a case the IARU Satellite Frequency Coordination Panel carefully determines if the use of amateur bands is acceptable.

Finally a word on past and present: It appears that universities grow up from a simple mission with a beacon and telemetry reception to a real science mission with huge bandwidths and encrypted downlink signals. At a certain point the use of amateur spectrum can no longer be justified.

73, Hans PB2T
IARU Satellite Advisor

9 Likes
7

Hi Pierros,

Thanks also for your comment.

I do understand your opinion that scientific, non-profit and educational missions have no need to use the “Amateur Radio Satellite Service”.

However, in reverse, am I right that IARU should at least have coordinated their amateur mission part?

Or to ask differently, how else should we amateur radio operators use a digipeater on non-amateur bands?

Daniel, dl7ndr

4 Likes
8

Then in that case the application should be for the digipeater only and not for TLM and TC, which is not the case as far as I can see.

1 Like
9

Can you link to an application which is for a digipeater or amateur radio payload only without any TLM and TC?

10

When there is TLM and TC it is only for the purposes of Amateur Radio Satellite Service.

11

I’m not sure if I understood you correctly.

Do you mean that IARU only coordinates frequencies where TLM and TC on amateur bands are for the purposes of amateur radio satellite service?

12

I believe, that IARU coordinates TLM and TC frequencies on amateur bands only if they are for the purposes of amateur radio satellite service. If you have digipeater on satellite, then IARU may coordinate one frequency (for downlink plus one for uplink) for digipeater only as it will be used only for amateur radio satellite service and not other services (like space operation or space research).

2 Likes
13

The reality however shows many satellites transmitting TLM and TC on amateur bands not for the purposes of amateur radio satellite service while being IARU coordinated.

14

As it was already mentioned in this topic IARU is more strict than it used to be in the past. Previous applications to IARU are not relevant when considering new ones. Some of those missions that you may thinking about might be the reason why IARU getting stricter

2 Likes
15

Yes, probably that’s the reason.

However, these are decisions of IARU. They don’t have to be ours. And that’s what I’m talking about.

We can make our own decisions.

16

And my decision is, follow the regulations.

Regulations are there for a reason and you cannot decide not to follow them if it is inconvenient.

If something needs to change contact your IARU representative and propose a change.

3 Likes
17

Does SatNOGS have regulations that state that we must put a transmitter to “IARU Uncoordinated” if IARU declined the coordination?

18

@pierros , you’ve created a diagram to determine if a satellite should be marked for frequency misuse.

Looking at this diagram, could you tell us what regulations exactly you mean by “Is the satellite following all service regulations?”?

1 Like
19

Hi Hans ( @pb2t ),

Thank you for your comment on the general terms.

I like to come back to QUBE since Jan asked you to share your view on this subject.
The frequency coordination for QUBE was declined two weeks after the application date.

The reason stated on the IARU Amateur Satellite Frequency Coordination Status page was:

" … the IARU Satellite Frequency Coordination Panel has discussed the QUBE coordination request and has problems to assign frequencies for a mainly scientific mission.
The panel suggests that you use frequency bands not allocated to the amateur satellite service."

Since there are 11 form pages to fill out for the coordination request, I expected more than just “has problems to assign frequencies for a mainly scientific mission” as an explanation for the rejection.

I and certainly also the community really like to understand this decision and have therefore further questions.

  1. What exactly made the coordination panel think it should “mainly” be a scientific mission?
  2. What does “mainly” refer to?
  3. What are the “problems”?

We are curious about your answers.

Daniel, dl7ndr

4 Likes
20