Message-ID: <006701ca3af6$6d9445c0$6c01a8c0@DELL4>
From: <jrusgrove@comcast.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <47C531A902A946C9BE2EEC5C6B7E2EF3@presario1> <B4B0E46364344221863F9B6A7249A44E@JimPC> <1775028CB7C146B496121BA36FB7093D@AGB> <7D5B0AF5BD6C467F8719EB684EB8D7D5@JimPC>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:02:19 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: LF: Re: US 500-kHz band plan
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Jim, LF group

<2 cents>

If T/A is of interest it seems like a three frequency slot system would be 
benificial.

slot 1) EU beacons (not attempting a QSO)

slot 2) USA beacons (not attempting a QSO)

slot 3) EU/USA stations attempting a QSO on the same frequency (for 
convenience in digital modes)

Slots 1 and 2 should not be combined as 'local' interference will preclude 
reception of T/A. A similar three slot system could be used for cw, although 
operating 'split' on cw is less of a problem than on the digital modes.

The WD2XSH bandplan eats up large chunks of spectrum by unnecessarily 
handing out frequency allocations to all stations. Past performance within 
the XSH group has shown that some never got on the air and many others 
haven't been on the air in years. Only a very few stations are regularly 
active. We would be better served by an 'open' frequency slot system as 
outlined above. It doesn't appear the WE2XGR station will be following the 
XSH band plan as currently laid out.

</2 cents>

Jay W1VD  WD2XNS  WE2XGR/2



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Moritz" <james.moritz@btopenworld.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Re: US 500-kHz band plan


> Sorry, pressed "send" too soon by accident!
>
> Dear Graham, LF Group,
>
>> As the  European allocation looks to  be  wider than the  Uk, are we 
>> expecting the  UK 3 Khz  allocation to  remain as is, if  and when the 
>> band is formalised ?, in which case loosing 200 hz may not be the  most 
>> sensible option ...
>
> As I understand it, there are not yet any formal Europe-wide proposals, 
> just what individual regulators have allocated on a case-by-case basis. I 
> think G, EI, and ON have all allocated 501 - 504. The DL beacons and 
> OK0EMW are licenced to use spot frequencies around 505kHz. Gus SM6BHZ 
> would be able to use 504.0 - 504.1kHz.
>
> But the main thing is whether we over here should transmit around 504kHz 
> as we are now, or shift to near 501kHz to share a common WSPR segment with 
> the US. On one hand, keeping to near 504k would have the advantage of no 
> strong signals in band for those trying to receive US stations. But on the 
> other hand, it might mean we get QRMed by "general comms" US stations for 
> those trying to receive us, and anyone wanting to receive both US and EU 
> stations would need two receivers/soundcards, etc.
>
> Cheers, Jim Moritz
> 73 de M0BMU
>
>