Emails have crossed in the system hi.
I note the reply , re USA operating frequency's
The large gap in frequency made itself apparent at the time of my first
post , but with the availability of digital receivers, with the ability
to capture quite large spectrums, as can be observed on for example
Gary's grabber page http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/wgtaylor/grabber2.html
perhaps the gap is not as problematic as might be of been in the past ?
A more conventional solution may be to channel scan with the rx , assuming
the rx may be controlled by the pc ... how much of the wspr signal do
you 'actually need' to decode, what happens if you chop it.. room for
From: "James Moritz" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 7:40 PM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: Re: US 500-kHz band plan
Sorry, pressed "send" too soon by accident!
Dear Graham, LF Group,
As the European allocation looks to be wider than the Uk, are we
expecting the UK 3 Khz allocation to remain as is, if and when the
band is formalised ?, in which case loosing 200 hz may not be the most
sensible option ...
As I understand it, there are not yet any formal Europe-wide proposals,
what individual regulators have allocated on a case-by-case basis. I think
G, EI, and ON have all allocated 501 - 504. The DL beacons and OK0EMW are
licenced to use spot frequencies around 505kHz. Gus SM6BHZ would be able
use 504.0 - 504.1kHz.
But the main thing is whether we over here should transmit around 504kHz
we are now, or shift to near 501kHz to share a common WSPR segment with
US. On one hand, keeping to near 504k would have the advantage of no
signals in band for those trying to receive US stations. But on the other
hand, it might mean we get QRMed by "general comms" US stations for those
trying to receive us, and anyone wanting to receive both US and EU
would need two receivers/soundcards, etc.
Cheers, Jim Moritz
73 de M0BMU
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.111/2386 - Release Date: