Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14578 invoked from network); 16 May 2002 10:33:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO marstons.services.quay.plus.net) (212.159.14.223) by excalibur-qfe1-smtp-plusnet.harl.plus.net with SMTP; 16 May 2002 10:33:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 15015 invoked by uid 10001); 16 May 2002 10:37:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (193.82.116.70) by marstons.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 16 May 2002 10:37:12 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.33 #2) id 178IWg-0007eE-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 16 May 2002 11:30:26 +0100 Received: from gadolinium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.111]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 178IWf-0007e9-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 16 May 2002 11:30:25 +0100 Received: from host62-7-30-61.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([62.7.30.61] helo=dave) by gadolinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #8) id 178IW8-0001Uu-00; Thu, 16 May 2002 11:29:53 +0100 Message-ID: <001301c1fcc4$b6c8ff60$3d1e073e@dave> From: "Dave Sergeant" To: "rsgb_lf_group" Subject: LF: USA 136kHz proposals Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 11:28:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: I see from yesterday's ARRL Letter that the proposal for the USA 136 band is for 1W ERP and bandwidth less than 100Hz. I am puzzled why they are putting this stipulation on bandwidth, which I do not believe anybody else has done. It could be a disincentive for normal CW operation (although hopefully most CW will be in this bandwidth), and presumably will be difficult to enforce. 73s Dave G3YMC dsergeant@iee.org dsergeant@btinternet.com http://www.dsergeant.btinternet.co.uk