Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: 500 - BAND PLAN

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: 500 - BAND PLAN
From: Alan Ibbetson <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:25:54 +0100
Delivered-to: [email protected]
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
User-agent: Turnpike/6.04-S (<LyrEZZUuE90FLa1szkUXKvGk1k>)
Yes, this works for me. Thanks for taking the initiative. 73, Alan.

In message <[email protected]>, CHRISTOPHER OSBORN <[email protected]> writes
CT
DISCUSSION POINTS

Obviously an ideal band plan would benefit as many stations as possible
to the inconvenience of as few as possible.

There seems to be a need to separate the QRSS modes and beacons
from the 'straight' cw segment of the band.

There may be a case for beacon and QRSS 'silence periods' during times
of likely high cw activity (weekends).

QRSS modes and PSK/RTTY need defined band plan locations.

As most of the stations are congregated in the SE corner of the UK, local
QSO's amongst themselves should ideally be separated from QSO's with
more distant stations.

It would be useful to have a QRP calling frequency to facilitate 'homing in'
on weaker stations.

Is there a  case for the call 'CQ CQ CQ X' to denote a crystal controlled
transmission ?

73 G3XIZ SK

Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for
your free account today.

[ A MIME application / vnd.ms-excel part was included here. ]


--

Cheers,

Alan G3XAQ
[email protected]



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>