If I recall correctly, in the early days of negotiation with the
Radiocommunications Agency in the UK, it was originally suggested that the RSGB
should apply for an allocation round about 173 kHz with 5W ERP (to line up with
the ZL allocation?). Time went by and we were asked for our views on an
allocation around 88 kHz. That idea was then withdrawn as that frequency was
already in use by another service (it was and still is used with induction
systems for cave communications on 87 kHz USB).
Eventually we got 73 kHz.
Mal says "several khz up or down the band from 137 it is clear". Not here it
isn't. And if he, in Yorkshire, is unaffected by Loran he is very lucky.
John F5VLF
JN17vg
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 21/01/2009 at 19:25 James Moritz wrote:
>Dear Mal, LF Group,
>
>I don't know... but it was probably the same as the reason for which the
>73kHz band was withdrawn at about the same time that all the utilities
>which
>had been operating inside or near that part of the spectrum were
>decomissioned ;-)
>
>Cheers, Jim Moritz
>73 de M0BMU
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "mal hamilton" <[email protected]>
>To: "rsgb" <[email protected]>
>Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 6:00 PM
>Subject: LF: 137
>
>
>Does anyone know why 137 khz was chosen as an amateur allocation, in that
>freq area it is the most polluted part, clobbered at both ends by
>commercial
>high power transmitters...
|
