Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: Re: US 500-kHz band plan

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: Re: US 500-kHz band plan
From: Warren Ziegler <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:25:32 -0400
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=oNYP5CDCP3fYcR20sEkyeefTdvcgMEIxZVgp9TYHBnc=; b=lDOS0CcUd9f+cnh6/uhmlTRcP6DsFhInAVt4ybEANouiqWgk4WdC8E+Ov2aNx+huYk ddsD8cISB1xWF3hwk9OJKswd/jlHhnlqdAmluXpsdJrpQKlLHHGyv1IViHY/Fs8PWG4d +6LXToZ3wIm/0XO6Nlp4kPUebMQGcApwN2RpA=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=NQY30mqw61eMh84WOsZIVcaQbYAy2yrsRLwcYbFSJdeYD5/5w8eniJVkmCzfCjcg02 m2HkwP1ZC9GxK/cNl80sJHrxYFEAh7yb9Y4LSw8s71dMk7FnaxO3PwI5iQXMYxMKmfiR b9l+rcwws4p07h5+VBxGqqMm/eBnSFBghpfZs=
Domainkey-status: good (testing)
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
I agree with Jay's points.

 I would like to remind all that WE2XGR stations are  authorized for
two-way QSOs with amateur stations
whilst WD2XSH are not authorized for two-way communications with
amateur stations.
73 Warren K2ORS

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
> Jim, LF group
> <2 cents>
> If T/A is of interest it seems like a three frequency slot system would be
> benificial.
> slot 1) EU beacons (not attempting a QSO)
> slot 2) USA beacons (not attempting a QSO)
> slot 3) EU/USA stations attempting a QSO on the same frequency (for
> convenience in digital modes)
> Slots 1 and 2 should not be combined as 'local' interference will preclude
> reception of T/A. A similar three slot system could be used for cw, although
> operating 'split' on cw is less of a problem than on the digital modes.
> The WD2XSH bandplan eats up large chunks of spectrum by unnecessarily
> handing out frequency allocations to all stations. Past performance within
> the XSH group has shown that some never got on the air and many others
> haven't been on the air in years. Only a very few stations are regularly
> active. We would be better served by an 'open' frequency slot system as
> outlined above. It doesn't appear the WE2XGR station will be following the
> XSH band plan as currently laid out.
> </2 cents>
> Jay W1VD  WD2XNS  WE2XGR/2
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Moritz"
> <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:40 PM
> 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,
>> just 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
>> to use 504.0 - 504.1kHz.
>> But the main thing is whether we over here should transmit around 504kHz
>> as we are now, or shift to near 501kHz to share a common WSPR segment with
>> the US. On one hand, keeping to near 504k would have the advantage of no
>> strong 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
>> stations would need two receivers/soundcards, etc.
>> Cheers, Jim Moritz
>> 73 de M0BMU

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