|
FSK CW with a shift of 6 Khz, and a
sounder sweeping the entire band, These are TWO VERY ANTI SOCIAL
MODES.
I intend to work primarily CW or QRSS 3 -
20 QSO MODE and not much slower and will pick a CLEAR frequency on
the band for such
communications.
I do not intend to use UNATTENDED
BROADCAST/BEACON MODES that cause needless and endless QRM to
others wishing to communicate in real time.
If there was a QSO version of OPERA that
wouild be useful.
The band is only 7 Khz wide and due
consideration should be afforded to all users and not swamped by endless
UNATTENDED BEACONS churning out repeative data for hours.
After years of experience especially on 160
metres the other MF band, I am able to determine quickly what band
conditions and propagation are like and proceed to engage in a QSO both near and
far. I do not need any assistance from Beacons to work out band
conditions.
This is how I intend to proceed as I do on
all the other radio amateur bands also taking into account any sensible
agreements to avoid QRM to other radio amateurs. Others
will have their own opinions
At present the 600 m band seems to be a
playground for BEACONS in various DATA MODES and reception reports via
INTERNET
with NO real time communications taking
place except the odd CW QSO.
De G3KEV
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 7:45
AM
Subject: Re: LF: 630m Band Plan
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 .
|
