Message-ID: <56EFE31E.7040603@posteo.de>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 13:03:42 +0100
From: DK7FC <selberdenken@posteo.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A444E1924@ICTS-S-MBX1.luna.kuleuven.be> <7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A444E5E57@ICTS-S-MBX1.luna.kuleuven.be>
In-Reply-To: <7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A444E5E57@ICTS-S-MBX1.luna.kuleuven.be>
Subject: Re: LF: bandplan proposal at the next IARU Regon I Interim Meeting
 (Vienna,16-17 April 2016)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------080309090205020103090001"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------080309090205020103090001
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

...instead of putting efforts in the definition of a band plan i suggest 
they focus on working to push the power limit by 10 dB upwards! That 
would be helpful.
I bet, no one of those who want to decide where which mode can be used 
has ever been QRV, nor will ever!

73, Stefan

Am 21.03.2016 10:48, schrieb Rik Strobbe:
>
> Dear all,
>
> at the next IARU Regon I Interim Meeting (Vienna, 16-17 April 
> 2016) there is a proposal that concerns the 630 m band:
>
> */*/It/* is recommended that beacons will be accepted in the plan 
> of usage of the 472 - 479 kHz band (630 m) in addition to 
> the Recommendation VA14_C4_REC_02:  476 - 477 kHz beacons – 
> maximum bandwidth 200 Hz.  Maximum power output 1 W 
> EIRP.  Beacon proposals should adhere to beacon recommendations in 
> the IARU Region 1 HF Managers' Handbook, and should be approved by 
> the IARU Region 1 Beacon Coordinator/* (introduced by NRRL)
>
> Besides the fact that I am not a fan of the urge to 
> put everything into strict rules and I have doubts about the 
> usefulness of beacons (there are dozens of NDB's in and near the 630 m 
> band), I do fear that an "official" beacon 
> band might attract people or clubs to put up a nice "tech project" 
> and leave us with the QRM.
>
> The targeted range (476-477 kHz) is de facto used for QRSS, a some 
> "wideband" CW beacons can cause a lot of harm.
>
> I wonder if NRRL consulted the few Norwegian hams that are active on 
> 630 m and if other in societies the band users were asked for advice?
>
> 73, Rik  ON7YD - OR7T
>

--------------080309090205020103090001
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
 http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
...instead of putting efforts in the definition of a band plan i
suggest they focus on working to push the power limit by 10 dB upwards!
That would be helpful.<br>
I bet, no one of those who want to decide where which mode can be used
has ever been QRV, nor will ever! <br>
<br>
73, Stefan<br>
<br>
Am 21.03.2016 10:48, schrieb Rik Strobbe:
<blockquote
 cite="mid:7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A444E5E57@ICTS-S-MBX1.luna.kuleuven.be"
 type="cite">
  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
 content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
  <style>P {
	MARGIN-TOP: 0px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px
}
  </style>
  <style id="owaParaStyle">P {
	MARGIN-TOP: 0px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px
}
  </style>
  <div
 style="font-family: Tahoma; direction: ltr; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 10pt;">
  <p>Dear all,</p>
  <p> </p>
  <p>at the next IARU Regon I Interim Meeting (Vienna, 16-17 April
2016) there is a proposal that concerns the 630 m band:</p>
  <p> </p>
  <p><font color="#0000ff"><strong><em><font color="#0000ff"><strong><em>It</em></strong></font> is recommended that beacons will be accepted
in the plan of usage of the 472 - 479 kHz band (630 m) in addition to
the Recommendation VA14_C4_REC_02:  476 - 477 kHz beacons –
maximum bandwidth 200 Hz.  Maximum power output 1 W EIRP.  Beacon proposals should adhere
to beacon recommendations in the IARU Region 1 HF Managers' Handbook,
and should be approved by the IARU Region 1 Beacon Coordinator</em></strong></font>
(introduced by NRRL)</p>
  <p> </p>
  <p>Besides the fact that I am not a fan of the urge to put everything into strict rules
and I have doubts about the <span>usefulness of</span> <span><span>beacons</span>
(there are dozens of NDB's in and near the 630 m band), </span>I
do fear that an "official" beacon band might attract people or clubs to
put up a nice "tech project" and leave us with the QRM.</p>
  <p>The targeted range (476-477 kHz) is de facto used for QRSS, a some
"wideband" CW beacons can cause a lot of harm.</p>
  <p> </p>
  <p>I wonder if NRRL consulted the few Norwegian hams that are active on
630 m and if other in societies the band users were asked for advice?</p>
  <p> </p>
  <p>73, Rik  ON7YD - OR7T</p>
  <p> </p>
  </div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>

--------------080309090205020103090001--