Return-Path: Received: from mtain-mh09.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-mh09.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.96.221]) by air-dd05.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINDD053-865b4c1f13a8342; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 03:24:24 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mtain-mh09.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 994F83800010F; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 03:24:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1OQbLN-0006rA-C8 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 08:22:57 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1OQbLM-0006r1-VL for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 08:22:56 +0100 Received: from out1.ip09ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.245]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1OQbLJ-0004HT-MC for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Jun 2010 08:22:56 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ak4KAPevHkxcEYUq/2dsb2JhbACHY4sDjCNxwA6FGwQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,451,1272841200"; d="scan'208";a="439132002" Received: from unknown (HELO your91hoehfy9g) ([92.17.133.42]) by out1.ip09ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 21 Jun 2010 08:22:46 +0100 Message-ID: <000701cb1112$8bc220b0$0301a8c0@your91hoehfy9g> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <006c01cb109f$08f7e7a0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>, <001f01cb10d7$fdb80620$0301a8c0@your91hoehfy9g> <4C1EFDB1.30801.142AB8@dave.davesergeant.com> Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 08:22:45 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: LF: Re: Re: 137 band Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d60dd4c1f13a6167e X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 Dave I do remember proposals and comments but no one wanted a bandplan and I thought that was the end, just a free for all and at the time everyone was on CW or the QRSCW. I do not remember any mention of a data mode slot.; mal/g3kev ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Sergeant" To: Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 6:50 AM Subject: LF: Re: 137 band > On 21 Jun 2010 at 1:23, mal hamilton wrote: > > > I am only quoting how the band has been used since the beginning ie this > > is how it evolved. The band has been 100% CW and QRSCW until recently. > > This band was not intended for spread spectrum modes to suit appliance > > operators. I do not recall any discussion about a RSGB band plan and the > > RSGB is but a small player in the world wide context. I would like to > > know who discussed and implemented this plan since I was never consulted > > and being a consistant user since the band was first licensed to radio > > amateurs. My last count was over 30 countries worked on normal CW world > > wide. I shall be using the band in the traditional way and work DX on > > any frequency where it appears in the CW mode. g3kev . > > > > Firstly the band plan is the IARU Region 1 bandplan, reissued by the > RSGB to include local differences on frequencies above 430MHz. The > 136kHz bandplan was agreed by the IARU and is the same in all Region 1 > countries. At one time it was published as a 'suggested operating > allocation' rather than a rigid bandplan but that seems to have been > changed. > > I know you have been on this reflector for many years. The bandplan has > been discussed here extensively (and fiercely) in the early days of > 136kHz around the turn of the millenium and I could certainly dig out > some reference emails from my archive. There was a strong feeling to > keep the lower part of the band exclusive to CW apart from the small > area just above 135.8 to be used for transatlantic QRSS tests. I > believe PSK was used on the band at one time. Whether there is a need > to increase the current data area is open to debate, but the current > bandplan is exactly what was agreed by this reflector. > > If you don't remember those discussions Mal I am afraid your memory is > beginning to fade. > > 73 Dave G3YMC > > http://www.davesergeant.com > >