From: "John W Gould" <g3wkl@btinternet.com>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 19:54:41 -0000
Message-ID: <LOBBIDNOENMNHIBGDCKBAEKIDGAA.g3wkl@btinternet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <007401c2c7a8$c7a4e1a0$02000a0a@user>
Subject: LF: RE: Re: IARU Region 1 position on 500kHz
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Arnie, nice to hear from you again and your comments on 500kHz are welcome.
I think that we all recognise that it's not yet quite the time to expect to
get an allocation at this part of the spectrum, however, that shouldn't
cause us not to prepare and see if there are some small areas where we might
gain some sort of agreement to undertake some experiments. I think we all
agree that it would prove an interesting frequency between 1.8MHz and
136kHz.

Re. you interest in trying to secure a 136kHz allocation prior to WRC03.  I
should be in the position to help you with information of which Region 1
countries have implemented CEPT/ERC Recommendation 62-01 E (Mainz 1997),
however, I don't have a complete list. I have posted this reply to the
reflector in the hope that someone on the reflector can help us by providing
a list or pointing to a URL.  The other point that I would stress is that
the IARU Region 1 discussion on 500kHz made it quite clear that they would
not want to press for anything at 500kHz prior or at WRC03; the IARU will
only consider the 500kHz Working Group's recommendations after WRC03.

I have note your interest in receiving status/updates of the Working Group's
activity, which I am sure will not be a problem.

73 John, G3WKL


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
> [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org]On Behalf Of Prof. Arnaldo
> Coro Antich
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 13:27
> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
> Cc: John W Gould
> Subject: LF: Re: IARU Region 1 position on 500kHz
>
>
> Dear John:
> We have heard about similar interests related to an allocation around 500
> kHz. But I must advise that many Third World nations are still using that
> segment of the spectrum for maritime communications.
> Recent efforts to try to obtain a 600 meters band assignment by
> amateurs in
> neighboring countries came to a standstill when their telecommunications
> administrations replied that this was not possible because the segment was
> still in use for maritime communications.
> It would be very interesting and useful to have access to any
> documentation
> that Region I and Region III IARU coordinators may have, in order to
> approach our telecommunications administration regarding the preparations
> for the upcoming WARC 2003 to take place in Geneva later this year.
> I believe that one solid argument backing the request would be
> the succesful
> use of the 136 kiloHertz band by amateurs in many different countries, and
> along that line, I would like to request information regarding
> the number of
> countries in Region I already authorized to operate on 136
> kiloHertz at this
> moment.
> We Cuban amateurs are trying to obtain our 136 kiloHertz band before WARC
> 2003 takes place, and would like to have the 600 meters assignment too !!!
> My personal experience participating at ITU conferences is that
> this efforts
> require great coordination and to be worked well in advance of the actual
> WARC 2003....
> 73 and DX
> YOur friend in Havana
> CO2KK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John W Gould" <g3wkl@btinternet.com>
> To: "Rsgb_Lf_Group@Blacksheep.Org" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
> Cc: "HF. Chairman List Member" <Colin.Thomas@rsgb.org.uk>; "Vk4du@Gmdss.
> Com. Au" <vk4du@gmdss.com.au>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 3:24 AM
> Subject: LF: IARU Region 1 position on 500kHz
>
>
> > My apologies for not bringing to this group's attention before
> the outcome
> > of a discussion of the RSGB paper on 500kHz, at the San Marino Region 1
> > Conference.  AMRAD have usefully summarised the position with the
> following
> > in their Jan-Feb 2003 Newsletter, which I quote with their agreement:
> >
> > "G3PSM chaired a working group of ON7ZV, PA0SHY, PA0AWN, ZL2AMJ
> and G4OUT.
> > The result was the adoption of Recommendation REC/02/SMC4.11,
> as follows:
> >
> > A Working Group would be formed to investigate the possibility of a
> > frequency allocation of approximately 10kHz between 470-490kHz to
> > investigate propagation and the use of new communication
> technologies.  A
> > progress report should be circulated to the secretaries of Region 2 and
> > Region 3 for information."
> >
> > I would add to that statement a comment to me from Colin, G3PSM on his
> > return that we should be looking in a post-WRC2003 timeframe to
> come back
> > with proposals in relation to this part of the spectrum, thus this is a
> > long-term issue.
> >
> > As IARU Region 1 LF Coordinator I have assumed some responsibility for
> > forming a "500kHz Working Group" and have approached a few
> people to lead
> > such a group.  This has been without success, so I put the
> question to the
> > LF Group - Can I have volunteers please to work in a group, using e-mail
> and
> > a dedicated website, to carry out the task detailed by the above IARU
> Region
> > 1 recommendation. Once a group has been formed it can choose its
> > chairperson. I would like to see an international membership of
> the Group,
> > hence the need to conduct business over the Internet.  Meeting together
> > would be expensive and probably difficult to arrange. Volunteers should
> > e-mail me directly rather than post to the reflector.
> >
> > This e-mail has been copied to Colin, G3PSM and also Glenn, VK4DU (for
> > Region 3).
> >
> > 73 John, G3WKL
> > g3wkl@btinternet.com
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>