Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-df04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id D7D343800008B; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 09:15:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SfWMF-0002HV-KB for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:14:35 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SfWME-0002HM-Uo for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:14:34 +0100 Received: from out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.243]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SfWMC-0006EI-Fm for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:14:33 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkkFAO80209cF/7E/2dsb2JhbABFgkWiMJBdgQiCEwUBAQQJAQEDICEHAQImBgEBCAIBAxEEAQEKOQEEGAIGDAgCDg8EAQkBAgIBAQECCQSHXAMGCQeYPpd3A4lYizaGEQOID4U0kQWGWYJg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,417,1336345200"; d="scan'208,217";a="38596051" Received: from host-92-23-254-196.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.23.254.196]) by out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 15 Jun 2012 14:14:30 +0100 Message-ID: <003d01cd4af8$cbb4a1d0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: "rsgb" Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 13:14:28 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Dave Activity has already started on the new 472 band and this could set the trend by the time we get there. I have observed some CW , QRSS and Beacon acty already. Any frequency that takes your fancy. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [62.24.128.243 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FSL_XM_419 Old OE version in X-Mailer only seen in 419 spam -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 FSL_UA FSL_UA 0.0 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 X-Scan-Signature: f8d160685865bb56f1be9345202faba0 Subject: LF: Fw: [rsgb_lf_group] Re: New Opera QRG for 472 Khz Band ? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003A_01CD4AF8.CB802450" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_60_70,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 1:2:481133696:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 8 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d40d84fdb356822b9 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003A_01CD4AF8.CB802450 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dave=20 Activity has already started on the new 472 band and this could set the = trend by the time we get there. I have observed some CW , QRSS and = Beacon acty already. Any frequency that takes your fancy. g3kev ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Dave Sergeant=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk=20 Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 12:23 PM Subject: Re: [rsgb_lf_group] Re: New Opera QRG for 472 Khz Band ? =20 It seems rather strange that when this allocation is still at least 6=20 months away for most of us (DL excepted) we are already talking about=20 where to fit in a specialised data mode... I expect there will be=20 significant interest in the band, when it arrives, and will attract far=20 greater interest in the general community than has 136. As such any=20 bandplanning should follow the practice on the higher bands - with CW=20 at the bottom, then a small data slot, then SSB (is there enough room=20 for that?...). It may even be sensible to split it 50/50, with cw in=20 the bottom 3.5kHz and all modes (including data) in the top half. Whatever, if Opera (the data mode) is going to be the default mode on=20 this band you are unlikely to see me anywhere near it. And Opera (the=20 browser) released a new version yesterday at exactly the same time as=20 the original message in this thread was posted... 73 Dave G3YMC On 15 Jun 2012 at 13:13, Mike Dennison wrote: > I agree there should be thought given to bandplanning. Where, for=20 > instance, should I set my QRSS receiver? >=20 > However, the band is 7kHz wide and the suggestion to "go 1k up may be = , > 473 dial to give room for cw etc" would in fact give just 2.2kHz of = the > band for what will presumably be the most popular mode. Currently the > two modes of the 500kHz version of Opera occupies from 1.2kHz to = 1.8kHz > above dial frequency. >=20 > I think we need first to look at how much each mode might occupy. A > useful division might be 3.8kHz for CW, 0.2Hz for QRSS (perhaps in two > wide-spaced sub-bands) and 3kHz for all "data" (machine-read modes > including Opera). There is an argument that any mode involving beacons > (including some uses of QRSS and Opera) should be widely separated = from > two-way QSOs. >=20 > Lower bandwidth modes should be nearer the band edge. Perhaps 'DX' = modes > should avoid the active NDB frequencies - say between 476 and 478kHz. >=20 > Currently, it seems that Opera had a dial frequency of 500kHz, and the > 1.2kHz below it has some QRSS activity (eg IQ2MI). That sort of > arrangement may work on 472kHz provided the Opera allocaton does not > eventually migrate as it did on 137kHz. >=20 > Perhaps in the short term there should be allocated (or at least=20 > agreed) frequencies with an understanding by all that there will need = to > be adjustments eventually. >=20 > All food for thought. > Mike, G3XDV > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 http://www.davesergeant.com __._,_.___ Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a new = topic=20 Messages in this topic (5)=20 Recent Activity: a.. New Members 4=20 Visit Your Group=20 Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest . Unsubscribe . Terms of Use. =20 __,_._,___ ------=_NextPart_000_003A_01CD4AF8.CB802450 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dave
Activity has already started on the new 472 band = and this=20 could set the trend by the time we get there. I have observed some CW , = QRSS and=20 Beacon acty already.
Any frequency that takes your = fancy.
 
g3kev
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Dave = Sergeant
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: [rsgb_lf_group] Re: New Opera QRG for 472 Khz = Band=20 ?

  =

It seems rather strange that when this allocation is still at least 6 =
months away for most of us (DL excepted) we are already talking = about=20
where to fit in a specialised data mode... I expect there will be=20
significant interest in the band, when it arrives, and will attract = far=20
greater interest in the general community than has 136. As such any=20
bandplanning should follow the practice on the higher bands - with = CW
at=20 the bottom, then a small data slot, then SSB (is there enough room =
for=20 that?...). It may even be sensible to split it 50/50, with cw in
the = bottom=20 3.5kHz and all modes (including data) in the top half.

Whatever, = if Opera=20 (the data mode) is going to be the default mode on
this band you are = unlikely to see me anywhere near it. And Opera (the
browser) = released a new=20 version yesterday at exactly the same time as
the original message = in this=20 thread was posted...

73 Dave G3YMC

On 15 Jun 2012 at = 13:13, Mike=20 Dennison wrote:

> I agree there should be thought given to=20 bandplanning. Where, for
> instance, should I set my QRSS=20 receiver?
>
> However, the band is 7kHz wide and the = suggestion to=20 "go 1k up may be ,
> 473 dial to give room for cw etc" would in = fact give=20 just 2.2kHz of the
> band for what will presumably be the most = popular=20 mode. Currently the
> two modes of the 500kHz version of Opera = occupies=20 from 1.2kHz to 1.8kHz
> above dial frequency.
>
> I = think we=20 need first to look at how much each mode might occupy. A
> useful = division=20 might be 3.8kHz for CW, 0.2Hz for QRSS (perhaps in two
> = wide-spaced=20 sub-bands) and 3kHz for all "data" (machine-read modes
> including = Opera).=20 There is an argument that any mode involving beacons
> (including = some=20 uses of QRSS and Opera) should be widely separated from
> two-way=20 QSOs.
>
> Lower bandwidth modes should be nearer the band = edge.=20 Perhaps 'DX' modes
> should avoid the active NDB frequencies - say = between=20 476 and 478kHz.
>
> Currently, it seems that Opera had a = dial=20 frequency of 500kHz, and the
> 1.2kHz below it has some QRSS = activity (eg=20 IQ2MI). That sort of
> arrangement may work on 472kHz provided the = Opera=20 allocaton does not
> eventually migrate as it did on = 137kHz.
>=20
> Perhaps in the short term there should be allocated (or at = least=20
> agreed) frequencies with an understanding by all that there = will need=20 to
> be adjustments eventually.
>
> All food for=20 thought.
> Mike, G3XDV
> = =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>

http://www.davesergeant.com
<= BR>

__._,_.___
Reply=20 to sender | group | Reply=20 via web post | Start=20 a new topic
Messages=20 in this topic (5) =
Recent=20 Activity:=20 New=20 Members 4 =
Visit=20 Your Group
=20
Switch to: Text-Only,=20 Daily=20 Digest =95 Unsubscribe=20 =95 Terms of = Use
.

__,_._,___
------=_NextPart_000_003A_01CD4AF8.CB802450--