Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 15:26:17 +0200
From: Steinar Aanesland <saanes@broadpark.no>
In-reply-to: <1368096290.60555.YahooMailNeo@web133205.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Cc: M0FMT <m0fmt@yahoo.co.uk>
Message-id: <518BA3F9.6030006@broadpark.no>
MIME-version: 1.0
References:
 <7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A0FBCBDA1@ICTS-S-MBX5.luna.kuleuven.be>
 <518B7455.8000609@broadpark.no>
 <1368096290.60555.YahooMailNeo@web133205.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328
 Thunderbird/17.0.5
Subject: Re: LF: Re: [rsgb_lf_group] Proposed usage for the MF band
Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org



Yes i am 110% agree , and some people are extremely keen on regulatin=
g
other people's behavior. LF/MF people are perfectly capable to take c=
are
of the band. The gentleman's agreement is working absolutely fine.


LA5VNA Steinar
loc:JO59jq



Den 09.05.2013 12:44, skrev M0FMT:
> Hi all
> =20
> It has been said before that to salami slice such a small allocatio=
n as the MF/LF bands is nonsenses.
> =20
> In any case how many of the "Slicers" use these frequencies? As usu=
al it is those who feel they have the right, will thus be giving the =
band "Policemen" a mission.
> =20
> Why is it not possible to have these bands organised by the actual =
users on a consensual basis rather than have it cast in "stone"?
> =20
> Alterations in QRG usage would then be organic and by popular deman=
d and meet the needs of developing modes and operating practise. It w=
ill be messy but I think it's called Democracy which seems to be slip=
ping through the fingers of the regular MF/LF users. After all we do =
have a forum to air these issues..
>  73 es GL Pete M0FMT IO91UX
>=20
>=20
>> ________________________________
>> From: Steinar Aanesland <saanes@broadpark.no>
>> To: rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk; "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>=20
>> Sent: Thursday, 9 May 2013, 11:03
>> Subject: LF: Re: [rsgb_lf_group] Proposed usage for the MF band
>> =20
>>
>> This has not been discussed in the Norwegian ham community, and be=
cause
>> of LA4LN's solo act, I am not a member of NRRL any more.
>>
>> LA5VNA Steinar
>> loc:JO59jq
>>
>>
>> Den 09.05.2013 10:36, skrev Rik Strobbe:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> those active on 630m might be interested in the outcome of the di=
scussion of paper C4_06 (Bandplan for the 630 m band proposed by NRRL=
) at the Committee C4 (HF Matters) Interim Meeting (20-21 April 2013,=
 Vienna):
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 4.5 Paper C4_06 was presented by LA4LN
>>> RSGB stated that they support the principle of a band plan, but t=
hat it is too early to have a formal plan until the usage is better k=
nown.
>>> DARC stated that the usage of the band at the moment doesn=92t re=
ally require a band plan.
>>> DARC introduced a plan "proposed usage" (see Annex 1).
>>> ZRS asked if the CW DX frequency could be moved a little higher u=
p the band.
>>> DARC noted that there are still 4 NDBs in the band. They also ask=
ed if the QRSS CW segment could be moved out of the CW part of the ba=
nd as it is decoded as a digimode. DARC also said there is currently =
no need for a coordinated beacon segment as we can use the existing N=
DBs.
>>> OeVSV said we should observe the band usage for a while before de=
ciding on a fixed band plan and suggested that centres of activity co=
uld be used also.
>>> UBA stated it is too early to propose a band plan.
>>> It was agreed to show current plan as proposed usage and to revie=
w at the next general conference.
>>> CRC stated that we should not show a plan as the current users wo=
uld not appreciate being told how to use the band.
>>> The meeting agreed to change the wording to a =91proposed usage=
=92 plan and that frequencies should be referred to as centre of acti=
vities.
>>> DARC introduced a plan "proposed usage".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [cid:2bd9b952-2278-4148-b306-9c41271fd880]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 73, Rik  ON7YD - OR7T
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>   =20