RE: LF: RTTY test...

Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23769 invoked from network); 18 Oct 1999 09:22:27 +0100 Received: from unknown (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by guiness.force9.net with SMTP; 18 Oct 1999 09:22:27 +0100 Received: (qmail 22773 invoked from network); 18 Oct 1999 08:29:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 18 Oct 1999 08:29:41 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 11d7u1-00003C-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 18 Oct 1999 09:12:21 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from hk.czcom.cz ([195.146.99.2] helo=serverhk.czcom.cz) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 11d7ty-000033-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 18 Oct 1999 09:12:19 +0100 Received: from lasvegas.GMCCZ ([195.146.99.31]) by serverhk.czcom.cz (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-57399U3000L300S0V35) with ESMTP id cz for ; Mon, 18 Oct 1999 10:12:11 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: by LASVEGAS with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1459.74) id ; Mon, 18 Oct 1999 10:08:47 +0200 Message-ID: From: "Petr Maly" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: RE: LF: RTTY test... Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 10:08:44 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1459.74) Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit RE: LF: RTTY test...

I agree, and I have additional argument. In Czech republic, there are only CW modes allowed. What about in other countries?

Petr, OK1FIG

-----Původní zpráva-----
Od:     Rik Strobbe [SMTP:rik.strobbe@fys.kuleuven.ac.be]
Odesláno:       18. října 1999 11:15
Komu:   rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Předmět:        Re: LF: RTTY test...

At 11:34 15/10/99 -0400, DK8KW wrote:
>this frequency is in perfect agreement with the gentlemen's agreement
>bandplan worked out at the LF Forum during the RSGB HF (and LF) Convention
>in Old Windsor last week, documented by John, G3WKL.
>
>Basically, the forum came up with the following:
>
>135.700 - 136.000       local tests and temporary beacon transmissions
>136.000 - 137.100       CW
>137.100 - 137.600       non-CW modes (such as PSK31, RTTY, etc.)
>137.600 - 137.800       Slow-CW

I wasn't aware that in agreement with the 'bandplan' there should be not CW
above 137100. And taking into account the many CW signals heard up to
137500 many others are in the same situation.

One practical remark : due to commercial QRM the band is useless for weaks
signal reception below 136500 (at least here in Belgium). This would mean
that in practice there is only 600Hz bandwidth for CW while we reserve
500Hz for almost non-existing modes. I agree that new modes must be
encouraged and that we sould have a segment for it, but 500Hz seems just
too much to me. Maybe a 200Hz segment would be enough (137400 - 137600).

73, Rik ON7YD