DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        b=FIKCi6q7hzLe7lynxomE2X38yTrkD26NKOJlUQe7AkuHhJ7H5/s0wX23VU5fO+kixW
         2rKuXtmmra64RMBk2k805Zw8kNS8ZzQbUw5zI5VbpUWx9Xjp2az3ZW29MWfCTNNS2udK
         /cM7XPwnIkLCKQlhe+QR6ntGesc+Gasfgu2Tc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1775028CB7C146B496121BA36FB7093D@AGB>
References: <47C531A902A946C9BE2EEC5C6B7E2EF3@presario1>
	 <B4B0E46364344221863F9B6A7249A44E@JimPC>
	 <1775028CB7C146B496121BA36FB7093D@AGB>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:25:59 +0100
Message-ID: <1f0624b90909211125r2d9d0053o8a3965f22cc48e03@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gary - G4WGT <g4wgt@tiscali.co.uk>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
DomainKey-Status: good (testing) 
Subject: Re: LF: Re: US 500-kHz band plan
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e65c8bf00d378a04741a9dfb
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


--0016e65c8bf00d378a04741a9dfb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Graham, Jim LF,
I agree with Graham that if the 500 kHz band remains at this small 3 kHz
allocation and as the number of operators is likely to continue to increase
then it would be wise to restrict the bandwidth of the WSPR section to 100
Hz. The problem with the upper frequency suggestion is that here in the UK &
Ireland there is sometimes severe interference from the 252 kHz broadcast
station harmonic on 504 kHz. It also seems that there are other countries
suffering a similar interference problem around that frequency from other
sources, recall Laurence's (KL1X) comments recently regarding his problem
with a strong harmonic or signal on 504 kHz.

So, if a bandwidth reduction for WSPR and a frequency change is to be made
then I favour a 100 Hz section at the bottom of the band.

The 500 kHz band is not restricted to the use by CW (morse code) only and
there must be compatibility with other modes, like it or not, users must
have a choice of operating modes within the terms of their licence (NoV).
Don't forget that this is a temporary allocation so the more operators on
the band (no matter what mode) the more likely that it will become a
permanent allocation.

Whilst on my soap box, I would also like to hear/see less of the disparaging
and belittling e-mails that appear on the LF Forum. Not all operators have
large areas of land available to construct large and full size antennas, or
unlimited financial resources to purchase the required hardware, or limited
time due to family and other commitments to improve their level of skills
within the hobby, yes it is a hobby.

Regards,

Gary - G4WGT.





2009/9/21 Graham <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>

>
> Jim,
>
> I did post a email on this a short while ago, Gus , I thin was the only one
> to  respond and  subsequently lowered his operating  frequency to  fall
> inside the , set 502.4 usb dial  frequency in use in the  UK.
>
> As the  European allocation looks to  be  wider than the  Uk, are we
> expecting the  UK 3 Khz  allocation to  remain as is, if  and when the  band
> is formalised ?, in which case loosing 200 hz may not be the  most sensible
> option ...
>
> As by definition , if you  can transmit wspr  you  must be  able to  move
> transmit  frequency (noting Andy's new beacon) establishing an over lapping
> 100 hz section may be a reasonable  compromise ie move the  dial frequency
> to say  502.5  or  499.5 , leaving 100 hz in band for uk access
>
> Graham
>
> G0NBD.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "James Moritz" <james.moritz@btopenworld.com>
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:14 PM
> To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
> Subject: LF: Re: US 500-kHz band plan
>
>
>> Dear LF Group,
>>
>> I still haven't replied to Fritz Raab, W1FR, regarding the WD2XSH US band
>> plan which he is apparently coordinating - you may remember I posted the
>> US
>> proposals, which he sent me, a couple of weeks ago, but have not received
>> any comments from other UK/Eu stations. I think I should reply with
>> something, so now is your chance... The proposal relates to the US
>> allocation extending to 495 - 515kHz, and how that would fit in with
>> current
>> UK and Eu beacon operations. The content of the e-mail is below. The issue
>> is that they would like to make a 501.0 - 501.2kHz WSPR sub-band, to fit
>> in
>> with the various other proposals. Various other types of beacon modes are
>> allocated frequencies outside the UK/EI/ON 501 - 504kHz range, while 501.2
>> -
>> 504kHz is allocated to "general comms". Retaining frequencies just below
>> 504kHz would divide their "general comms" band in two
>>
>> I don't think there is anything preventing us from doing this, it is just
>> the inconvenience of turning the current band "upside-down". Let me know
>> what you think!
>>
>> Cheers, Jim Moritz
>> 73 de M0BMU
>>
>>  From W1FR:
>>>>>
>>>>
>> Greetings:
>>
>>    Thanks for the comments on the band plan, passed
>> along to me by W1XP.
>>
>>    About a month ago, a modification to the WD2XSH
>> license was approved that adds stations and gives us
>> access to 495 - 510 kHz.  Perhaps half of the 42 stations
>> will eventually get on the air.  Because of NDBs, some
>> stations are limited to parts of this band and we will
>> have two calling frequencies and two beacon bands.
>>
>>    A draft of our new band plan follows.  Of particular
>> interest is WSPR.  As I see it, our options are:
>>
>> (a)  501.0-501.2:  Conveniently on one side of our comms
>>    band.  Will not overload WSPR receivers near 504 kHz.
>>    Apparently in EU CW-beacon band.
>>
>> (b)  503.8-504.0:  Apparently same as what you guys are
>>    using.  Cuts our comms band in the middle.  Nearby
>>    stations may overload US receivers trying to hear EUs.
>>
>> (c)  503.9-504.1:  Same problems as above with cutting
>>    comms band in two and overloading.  Conveniently
>>    straddles both G/ON/EI and Canadian bands.
>>
>>    Any further thoughts you may have will be
>> appreciated.
>>
>>
>> 73, Fritz, W1FR
>>
>> Frederick H. (Fritz) Raab, Ph.D.
>> GREEN MOUNTAIN RADIO RESEARCH COMPANY
>> 77 Vermont Avenue, Fort Ethan Allen
>> Colchester, Vermont 05446  USA
>> Tel./Fax.:  +1 (802) 655-9670  Home:  +1 (802) 862-0997
>> E-mail:  f.raab@ieee.org
>>
>> BASIC BAND PLAN for WD2XSH
>>
>> f, kHz          USE
>>
>> 495.0 - 495.1   QRSS, 1-Hz spacing, 40 stations
>> 495.1 - 495.6   CW/PSK beacons midwest, 100-Hz spacing, 10 stations
>> 495.6 - 499.0   Comms
>> 497.5           Calling frequency
>> 499.0 - 501.0   Reserved for heritage stations and special events
>> 501.0 - 501.2   WSPR
>> 501.2 - 505.0   Comms
>> 505.0 - 505.2   DX window
>> 505.2 - 508.5   Comms
>> 507.5           Calling frequency
>> 508.5 - 510.0   CW/PSK beacons east, south, west, Pacific, 50-Hz spacing,
>> 30
>> stations
>> 510.0 - 511.0   WE2XGR beacons
>> 511.0 - 515.0   WE2XGR SSB and wideband modes
>>
>>
>> OTHER IN-BAND SIGNALS
>>
>> 503.976         NEED LSB
>> 505.0           NEED carrier
>> 506.024         NEED USB
>>
>> 508.976         OF/FA LSB
>> 510.0           OF/FA carrier
>> 511.024         OF/FA USB
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.109/2384 - Release Date:
>> 09/20/09 06:22:00
>>
>>
>
>
>

--0016e65c8bf00d378a04741a9dfb
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Graham, Jim LF,<div><br></div><div>I agree with Graham that if the 500 kHz=
 band remains at this small 3 kHz allocation and as the number of operator=
s is likely to continue to increase then it would be wise to restrict the=
 bandwidth of the WSPR section to 100 Hz. The problem with the upper frequ=
ency suggestion is that here in the UK &amp; Ireland there is sometimes se=
vere interference from the 252 kHz broadcast station harmonic on 504 kHz.=
 It also seems that there are other countries suffering a similar interfer=
ence problem around that frequency from other sources, recall Laurence&#39=
;s (KL1X) comments recently regarding his problem with a strong harmonic=
 or signal on 504 kHz.</div>
<div><br></div><div>So, if a bandwidth reduction for WSPR and a frequency=
 change is to be made then I favour a 100 Hz section at the bottom of the=
 band.</div><div><br></div><div>The 500 kHz band is not restricted to the=
 use by CW (morse code) only and there must be compatibility with other mo=
des, like it or not, users must have a choice of operating modes within th=
e terms of their licence (NoV). Don&#39;t forget that this is a temporary=
 allocation so the more operators on the band (no matter what mode) the mo=
re likely that it will become a permanent allocation.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Whilst on my soap box, I would also like to hear/see=
 less of the disparaging and belittling e-mails that appear on the LF Foru=
m. Not all operators have large areas of land available to construct large=
 and full size antennas, or unlimited financial resources to purchase the=
 required hardware, or limited time due to family and other commitments to=
 improve their level of skills within the hobby, yes it is a hobby.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Gary - G4WGT.</div><=
div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><br><div class=3D"gma=
il_quote">2009/9/21 Graham <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:g8fzk@g=
8fzk.fsnet.co.uk">g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk</a>&gt;</span><br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1=
px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><br>
Jim,<br>
<br>
I did post a email on this a short while ago, Gus , I thin was the only on=
e to =A0respond and =A0subsequently lowered his operating =A0frequency to=
 =A0fall inside the , set 502.4 usb dial =A0frequency in use in the =A0UK.=
<br>
<br>
As the =A0European allocation looks to =A0be =A0wider than the =A0Uk, are=
 we expecting the =A0UK 3 Khz =A0allocation to =A0remain as is, if =A0and=
 when the =A0band is formalised ?, in which case loosing 200 hz may not be=
 the =A0most sensible option ...<br>

<br>
As by definition , if you =A0can transmit wspr =A0you =A0must be =A0able=
 to =A0move transmit =A0frequency (noting Andy&#39;s new beacon) establish=
ing an over lapping 100 hz section may be a reasonable =A0compromise ie mo=
ve the =A0dial frequency to say =A0502.5 =A0or =A0499.5 , leaving 100 hz=
 in band for uk access<br>

<br>
Graham<br>
<br>
G0NBD.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--------------------------------------------------<br>
From: &quot;James Moritz&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:james.moritz@btopenwo=
rld.com" target=3D"_blank">james.moritz@btopenworld.com</a>&gt;<br>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:14 PM<br>
To: &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" target=3D"_blank">=
rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org</a>&gt;<br>
Subject: LF: Re: US 500-kHz band plan<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1=
px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Dear LF Group,<br>
<br>
I still haven&#39;t replied to Fritz Raab, W1FR, regarding the WD2XSH US=
 band<br>
plan which he is apparently coordinating - you may remember I posted the=
 US<br>
proposals, which he sent me, a couple of weeks ago, but have not received<=
br>
any comments from other UK/Eu stations. I think I should reply with<br>
something, so now is your chance... The proposal relates to the US<br>
allocation extending to 495 - 515kHz, and how that would fit in with curre=
nt<br>
UK and Eu beacon operations. The content of the e-mail is below. The issue=
<br>
is that they would like to make a 501.0 - 501.2kHz WSPR sub-band, to fit=
 in<br>
with the various other proposals. Various other types of beacon modes are<=
br>
allocated frequencies outside the UK/EI/ON 501 - 504kHz range, while 501.2=
 -<br>
504kHz is allocated to &quot;general comms&quot;. Retaining frequencies ju=
st below<br>
504kHz would divide their &quot;general comms&quot; band in two<br>
<br>
I don&#39;t think there is anything preventing us from doing this, it is=
 just<br>
the inconvenience of turning the current band &quot;upside-down&quot;. Let=
 me know<br>
what you think!<br>
<br>
Cheers, Jim Moritz<br>
73 de M0BMU<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1=
px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D=
"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquot=
e class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc so=
lid;padding-left:1ex">

>From W1FR:<br>
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
Greetings:<br>
<br>
 =A0 =A0Thanks for the comments on the band plan, passed<br>
along to me by W1XP.<br>
<br>
 =A0 =A0About a month ago, a modification to the WD2XSH<br>
license was approved that adds stations and gives us<br>
access to 495 - 510 kHz. =A0Perhaps half of the 42 stations<br>
will eventually get on the air. =A0Because of NDBs, some<br>
stations are limited to parts of this band and we will<br>
have two calling frequencies and two beacon bands.<br>
<br>
 =A0 =A0A draft of our new band plan follows. =A0Of particular<br>
interest is WSPR. =A0As I see it, our options are:<br>
<br>
(a) =A0501.0-501.2: =A0Conveniently on one side of our comms<br>
 =A0 =A0band. =A0Will not overload WSPR receivers near 504 kHz.<br>
 =A0 =A0Apparently in EU CW-beacon band.<br>
<br>
(b) =A0503.8-504.0: =A0Apparently same as what you guys are<br>
 =A0 =A0using. =A0Cuts our comms band in the middle. =A0Nearby<br>
 =A0 =A0stations may overload US receivers trying to hear EUs.<br>
<br>
(c) =A0503.9-504.1: =A0Same problems as above with cutting<br>
 =A0 =A0comms band in two and overloading. =A0Conveniently<br>
 =A0 =A0straddles both G/ON/EI and Canadian bands.<br>
<br>
 =A0 =A0Any further thoughts you may have will be<br>
appreciated.<br>
<br>
<br>
73, Fritz, W1FR<br>
<br>
Frederick H. (Fritz) Raab, Ph.D.<br>
GREEN MOUNTAIN RADIO RESEARCH COMPANY<br>
77 Vermont Avenue, Fort Ethan Allen<br>
Colchester, Vermont 05446 =A0USA<br>
Tel./Fax.: =A0+1 (802) 655-9670 =A0Home: =A0+1 (802) 862-0997<br>
E-mail: =A0<a href=3D"mailto:f.raab@ieee.org" target=3D"_blank">f.raab@iee=
e.org</a><br>
<br>
BASIC BAND PLAN for WD2XSH<br>
<br>
f, kHz =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0USE<br>
<br>
495.0 - 495.1 =A0 QRSS, 1-Hz spacing, 40 stations<br>
495.1 - 495.6 =A0 CW/PSK beacons midwest, 100-Hz spacing, 10 stations<br>
495.6 - 499.0 =A0 Comms<br>
497.5 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Calling frequency<br>
499.0 - 501.0 =A0 Reserved for heritage stations and special events<br>
501.0 - 501.2 =A0 WSPR<br>
501.2 - 505.0 =A0 Comms<br>
505.0 - 505.2 =A0 DX window<br>
505.2 - 508.5 =A0 Comms<br>
507.5 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Calling frequency<br>
508.5 - 510.0 =A0 CW/PSK beacons east, south, west, Pacific, 50-Hz spacing=
, 30<br>
stations<br>
510.0 - 511.0 =A0 WE2XGR beacons<br>
511.0 - 515.0 =A0 WE2XGR SSB and wideband modes<br>
<br>
<br>
OTHER IN-BAND SIGNALS<br>
<br>
503.976 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 NEED LSB<br>
505.0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 NEED carrier<br>
506.024 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 NEED USB<br>
<br>
508.976 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 OF/FA LSB<br>
510.0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 OF/FA carrier<br>
511.024 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 OF/FA USB<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1=
px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
No virus found in this incoming message.<br>
Checked by AVG - <a href=3D"http://www.avg.com" target=3D"_blank">www.avg.=
com</a><br>
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.109/2384 - Release Date: 09/20/0=
9 06:22:00<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>

--0016e65c8bf00d378a04741a9dfb--