Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-di05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 9D2A338000382; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 03:26:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1THUx0-0005JH-Am for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:25:30 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1THUwz-0005J8-IE for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:25:29 +0100 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.9]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1THUwx-0002YD-7E for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:25:28 +0100 Received: from [192.168.178.182] (p5B0B278C.dip.t-dialin.net [91.11.39.140]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu2) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Lm8VZ-1TqYiU48tl-00ZKAp; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 09:25:26 +0200 References: <20961.6c91afbf.3d962a97@aol.com> <16D488A381E4440287F46DFFAD8F3797@gnat> From: Holger 'Geri' DK8KW DI2BO W1KW X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9A405) In-Reply-To: <16D488A381E4440287F46DFFAD8F3797@gnat> Message-Id: <351A0FF9-918D-4AC2-92CF-E88E339D592B@dk8kw.de> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 09:26:23 +0200 To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:wmPHRJicMFO1ViUINg/BRAanuQaolkd7Cv33nfI/Xi0 rGqAtAGFEnCpE29Hfqaor47rUDq86LKSaNKJUpPBj64tmvhi9+ 863hr8uLPIsKCl4bMtYIMVq9HQaTrb+aj6Z8AjTNs+vch4ZdDg HgIrnA7beE+9QwdQkAzeS4IDssAEQSlBs0FSUMj2nSbN+k1oUj zgZVNR88qB6qIHSH6mrGOnbIrybj03kJl4RzLYqhmjwcnIcy4h h5Gec/7+CvisZeDfTcsLAOxCgi6zKQzxsu9mFVE8Lvhtbns1jO zqfZ0MUl+tVhemtHrP2NwOVJcy2lphM3Tf6z4ptuFytQK9Klks aBJgEkCiFrrvYooNrhxWqP//jgTAmxq8hc7XF/79u X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Alan, While I can understand your concerns I don't understand your comments regarding any limitations here in Germany. The only limitations we have for both, the 136 kHz and the 472 kHz allocation are: secondary allocation, 1 Watt ERP, maximum 800 Hz bandwidth without any restriction on which mode to use, or where in the band it should be used. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.17.9 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars X-Scan-Signature: ecf102e6d15c1e466f357d5e6d956ac3 Subject: Re: LF: Re: 630m Band Plan Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-FCD707F6-B069-4023-9E8C-BE95B0AC95DE 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=1.3 required=5.0 tests=HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE, HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNSAFE,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR, TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL 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: 3039ac1da60950655132604a X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none --Apple-Mail-FCD707F6-B069-4023-9E8C-BE95B0AC95DE Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Alan, While I can understand your concerns I don't understand your comments regard= ing any limitations here in Germany. The only limitations we have for both, t= he 136 kHz and the 472 kHz allocation are: secondary allocation, 1 Watt ERP,= maximum 800 Hz bandwidth without any restriction on which mode to use, or w= here in the band it should be used.=20 To me this seems a pretty liberal regulation and I can not see how this woul= d stop someone from using the band. Markus and I have even used "Slow SSB" l= imited to 800 Hz bandwidth. All other restrictions are purely voluntary and I= remember that dividing regular CW and QRSS/digital modes in the old days on= 136 kHz had helped to coexist peacefully for over a decade now. Best 73 Geri, DK8KW & DI2BO On 28.09.2012, at 01:18, "Alan Melia" wrote: > Can you advise why you are seeking to impose a "plan" on the rest of the w= orld when it patently is not required, nor is it desired by many. History su= ggests that flexibility is required, and the quantity of signals is unlikely= to require strict planning. Can I remind you how a strict regulatory "plan"= strangled German use of 136kHz originally, and probably drove many potentia= l users away. > =20 > You are suggesting to me that this plan will be imposed........I am not im= pressed, particularly as many countries have not decided on their allocation= s. Please discuss use profiles for the band but not "plans". > =20 > Alan Melia G3NYK > ----- Original Message ----- > From: KKorn42@aol.com > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 11:18 PM > Subject: LF: 630m Band Plan >=20 > Dear All > as a first proposal for discussion we present a "plan" that we coined the "= B31 Band Plan for 630m". The name derives from the DOK to which all who shar= ed ideas, belong. > Just to state it once more: it is a first basis and proposal and those who= have an interest in operation between 472kHz and 479kHz (up to now the slot= allocated by the BuNetzA to German hams) are invited to agree, discuss or p= rovide better ideas. > Several hams already provided specific proposals which were incorporated. > We deliberately did not detail too much, as we do not think, that all can b= e fixed prior to actual demand. > =20 > Please see attached gif-file. > =20 > 1. A CW slot from 472kHz to 475kHz (=3D3kHz). > 2. Within that, a region for beacons (472,000kHz to 472,150kHz) followed b= y a region for Slow CW (472,150kHz to 472,300kHz). > 3. For TA-CW DX traffic or other long-haul DX, a calling frequency shall b= e established at 472,600kHz. > 4. For other CW traffic, another calling frequency (if the necessity exist= s) shall be established in the upper region of the CW allocation at 474,7= 50kHz (474,500 occupied by "SA"). > 5. The frequency 472,500kHz will not be allocated for special use (at leas= t for the time being), as a continuous carrier is audible 24/7 throughout DL= . > 6. A slot for Digital Modes from 475,0kHz to 479,0 (=3D 4kHz). > 7. Today it is much too early to decide which digital modes will be used o= n 630m. We propose to leave this open for the future. WSPR (474,200kHz Dial U= SB), OPERA and ROS (477,000kHz DIAL USB) have established themselves on the s= hown frequencies. Some other modes that may be useful for MW but can not yet= be used (e.g. JT65HF) because they allow no suitable frequency selection. > 8. Digital Modes should not overlap each other (minor relocations may be n= ecessary). > 9. Whether or not the shown "protection zones" of e.g. +/- 50Hz around act= ive NDB frequencies are necessary or not, ist still being discussed. > 10. No further stipulations will be given. > =20 > Walter DJ2LF, Roland DL3NDR, Klaus DJ6LB > =20 > NB (DJ6LB): Upon request I provide (via separate mail) a picture with bett= er resolution . > =20 > =20 --Apple-Mail-FCD707F6-B069-4023-9E8C-BE95B0AC95DE Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Alan,

=
While I can understand your concerns I don't understand your comments r= egarding any limitations here in Germany. The only limitations we have for b= oth, the 136 kHz and the 472 kHz allocation are: secondary allocation, 1 Wat= t ERP, maximum 800 Hz bandwidth without any restriction on which mode to use= , or where in the band it should be used. 

To m= e this seems a pretty liberal regulation and I can not see how this would st= op someone from using the band. Markus and I have even used "Slow SSB" limit= ed to 800 Hz bandwidth. All other restrictions are purely voluntary and I re= member that dividing regular CW and QRSS/digital modes in the old days on 13= 6 kHz had helped to coexist peacefully for over a decade now.

=
Best 73

Geri, DK8KW & DI2BO


On 28.09.2012, at 01:18, "= Alan Melia" <alan.melia@btin= ternet.com> wrote:

=
Can you advise why yo= u are seeking to=20 impose a "plan" on the rest of the world when it patently is not required, n= or=20 is it desired by many. History suggests that flexibility is required, and th= e=20 quantity of signals is unlikely to require strict planning. Can I remind you= how=20 a strict regulatory "plan" strangled German use of 136kHz originally, and=20= probably drove many potential users away.
 
You are suggesting to= me that this=20 plan will be imposed........I am not impressed, particularly as many countri= es=20 have not decided on their allocations. Please discuss use profiles for the b= and=20 but not "plans".
 
Alan Melia G3NYK
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 KKorn42@aol.c= om=20
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 1= 1:18=20 PM
Subject: LF: 630m Band Plan

Dear All
as a first proposal for discussion we present a "plan" th= at=20 we coined the "B31 Band Plan for 630m". The name derives from the DOK to w= hich=20 all who shared ideas, belong.
Just to state it once more: it is a first= =20 basis and proposal and those who have an interest in operation between 472= kHz=20 and 479kHz (up to now the slot allocated by the BuNetzA to German hams) ar= e=20 invited to agree, discuss or provide better ideas.
Several hams already= =20 provided specific proposals which were incorporated.
We deliberately di= d=20 not detail too much, as we do not think, that all can be fixed prior to ac= tual=20 demand.
 
Please see attached gif-file.
 
1. A CW slot from 472kHz to 475kHz (=3D3kHz).
2. Within that, a re= gion=20 for beacons (472,000kHz to 472,150kHz) followed by a region for Slow CW=20= (472,150kHz to 472,300kHz).
3. For TA-CW DX traffic or other long-haul D= X,=20 a calling frequency shall be established at 472,600kHz.
4. For other CW= =20 traffic, another calling frequency (if the necessity exists) shall be=20 established in the upper region of the CW allocation at 474,750kHz (474,50= 0=20 occupied by "SA").
5. The frequency 472,500kHz will not be allocated fo= r=20 special use (at least for the time being), as a continuous carrier is audi= ble=20 24/7 throughout DL.
6. A slot for Digital Modes from 475,0kHz to 479,0 (= =3D=20 4kHz).
7. Today it is much too early to decide which digital modes will= be=20 used on 630m. We propose to leave this open for the future. WSPR (474,200k= Hz=20 Dial USB), OPERA and ROS (477,000kHz DIAL USB) have established themselves= on=20 the shown frequencies. Some other modes that may be useful for MW but can n= ot=20 yet be used (e.g. JT65HF) because they allow no suitable frequency=20 selection.
8. Digital Modes should not overlap each other (minor=20 relocations may be necessary).
9. Whether or not the shown "protection=20= zones" of e.g. +/- 50Hz around active NDB frequencies are necessary or not= ,=20 ist still being discussed.
10. No further stipulations will be given.
 
Walter DJ2LF, Roland DL3NDR, Klaus DJ6LB
 
NB (DJ6LB): Upon request I provide (via separate mail) a picture with= =20 better resolution .
 
 
= --Apple-Mail-FCD707F6-B069-4023-9E8C-BE95B0AC95DE--