Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4021 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2002 18:38:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO warrior.services.quay.plus.net) (212.159.14.227) by exhibition.plus.net with SMTP; 7 Jan 2002 18:38:37 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 1448 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2002 18:38:28 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by warrior.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 7 Jan 2002 18:38:28 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.33 #2) id 16NecM-0004fo-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2002 18:35:30 +0000 Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.106]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 16NecL-0004fg-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2002 18:35:29 +0000 Received: from DL4YHF@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id l.94.1f76f600 (4413) for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2002 13:34:31 -0500 (EST) From: DL4YHF@aol.com Message-ID: <94.1f76f600.296b4437@aol.com> Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 13:34:31 EST Subject: Re: LF: Re: New band plan To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows XP DE sub 50 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Hi Alberto and Group,

Only 800 Hz for CW, and that in the worst part of the band (QRM, Luxembourg Effect, DCF39, DLF splatter // intermod) ?

No thanks...

If we needed an 'official band plan' at all, we could move the "edge frequency" between slow modes and regular CW from 136.0 to 136.3 (or so), but keep the 136.5 as "center of activity" for CW.
There are a couple of dinosaurs like myself, enjouying steam radio as well as the "modern modes".
Especially on saturday and sunday mornings there is still a lot of ''TWO WAY traffic' going on in DL (and also low-power stations not looking for the big DX can enjoy it). Though most DL stations have worked each other dozens of times it is still nice to have a 'talking' QSO.

But please don't let us start a fruitless discussion about pro & contra CW on this reflector.
There should be enough room for a peaceful co-existence of all modes. No need to have a band plan nailed to the wall as long (or on someone's forehead).

Instead of saying "No xxx on this frequency", lets put it this way:
    "xxx encouraged at the lower edge of the band" ...
    "yyy preferably on 136.x kHz " ...
    "center of CW activity on 136.6 +- 400Hz " (thinking of those with 270 Hz IF filters)
    "prolonged beaconing should be avoided between ... and ..." (including time of day)
 etc.
Note: This list is incomplete and worth less than a Cent - we ran out of them anyway.


Now back to stirring the tea,
 Kind regards,
      Wolf DL4YHF.

 --... ...--