Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: 630m Band Plan

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: 630m Band Plan
From: "Markus Vester" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 09:45:01 +0200
Cc: <[email protected]>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20110426; t=1348818307; bh=vZi8psSRusZE1g2Gn1gLBvdKh6ZRb4AYitD/7B9OmgU=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=xdc34kOJLQ3FQ8Yo4r2MAzeAy2UB3yx+n7S+8HlwikjGmFe5tCLZsE0jxSyTmbTXw M1C8vpDIyd648k/7LMDt8Q0XMX9LjsTHoGkWRzAJek3VPBjnwSWssE7qbad0/2ZATH cBTns+nBm3c0fL/I+gel+PlItGGbMqUWV+tPUQhM=
Importance: Normal
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Dear Walter, Roland, Klaus,
 
thanks very much for working out this detailed suggestion!
 
I do share the views of Alan and Rik that we should not now (and perhaps net ever) impose a "plan", in the sense that everyone is expected to adhere to it, or (even worse) that frequency usage may be enforced by authorities. I think that we do need "freedom to operate" on an experimental band - the aim is not to maximize amateur traffic throughput but to find inventive ways of dealing with existing difficulties. But still some form of "preliminary suggested usage" may be helpful.
 
It is certainly a good idea to have narrow guard bands around existing aeronautical beacons. But there will be different ones in other regions, like outside Europe.
 
Coming from LF, I am a strong promoter of the narrow QRSS/DFCW 60 slots for intercontinental work. They should be free of faster usage (eg QRSS-3), and reasonably spaced from subbands with local signals from within the assigned receive area. We may again adopt a scheme with different, nonadjajend  slots for different target areas ("TA / Eu").
 
One thought I keep pondering is whether we could somehow mitigate QSB by frequency diversity. Current ruling here has an 800 Hz bandwidth limitation. But it may be ok to transmit two "separate" but complementary narrowband signals, each say 100 Hz wide but 6 kHz apart. This could go from a simple FSK-CW scheme (eg. keydown on 472.6, key up on 478.6), all the way to digitally processed "multi-narrowband" modes.
 
One day we may want to perform "ionosonde"-type channel sounding, by sweeping or stepping a GPS-controlled carrier all over 7 kHz.  
 
Or how about analog narrowband voice transmissions, fitting in 0.8 kHz? It is neither CW nor digital, but certainly something worthwhile playing with.
 
Best 73,
Markus (DF6NM)
 
PS I'm posting this on Yahoo as well, to avoid missing half of our community.
 
 
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 12:18 AM
Subject: LF: 630m Band Plan

Dear All
as a first proposal for discussion we present a "plan" that we coined the "B31 Band Plan for 630m". The name derives from the DOK to which all who shared ideas, belong.
Just to state it once more: it is a first basis and proposal and those who have an interest in operation between 472kHz and 479kHz (up to now the slot allocated by the BuNetzA to German hams) are invited to agree, discuss or provide better ideas.
Several hams already provided specific proposals which were incorporated.
We deliberately did not detail too much, as we do not think, that all can be fixed prior to actual demand.
 
Please see attached gif-file.
 
1. A CW slot from 472kHz to 475kHz (=3kHz).
2. Within that, a region for beacons (472,000kHz to 472,150kHz) followed by a region for Slow CW (472,150kHz to 472,300kHz).
3. For TA-CW DX traffic or other long-haul DX, a calling frequency shall be established at 472,600kHz.
4. For other CW traffic, another calling frequency (if the necessity exists) shall be established in the upper region of the CW allocation at 474,750kHz (474,500 occupied by "SA").
5. The frequency 472,500kHz will not be allocated for special use (at least for the time being), as a continuous carrier is audible 24/7 throughout DL.
6. A slot for Digital Modes from 475,0kHz to 479,0 (= 4kHz).
7. Today it is much too early to decide which digital modes will be used on 630m. We propose to leave this open for the future. WSPR (474,200kHz Dial USB), OPERA and ROS (477,000kHz DIAL USB) have established themselves on the shown frequencies. Some other modes that may be useful for MW but can not yet be used (e.g. JT65HF) because they allow no suitable frequency selection.
8. Digital Modes should not overlap each other (minor relocations may be necessary).
9. Whether or not the shown "protection zones" of e.g. +/- 50Hz around active NDB frequencies are necessary or not, ist still being discussed.
10. No further stipulations will be given.
 
Walter DJ2LF, Roland DL3NDR, Klaus DJ6LB
 
NB (DJ6LB): Upon request I provide (via separate mail) a picture with better resolution .
 
 
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>