Re: LF: RadCom February 2013

["Graham" <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>]

http://www.rsgb.org/committees/spectrumforum/docs/rsgb_band_plan_2013.xls#'600M'!A1

 

This seems to  be  wishful thinking  , and the  reason for  500 Hz  is  ?  

As in a  few  months it will  no more than a  local  chat  band , so  why the  panic

over  modes  and b/w any way ?

 

G..

From: Chris Osborn

Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 6:18 PM

To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Subject: Re: LF: RadCom February 2013

I agree.

Also I found the RadCom band plan quite confusing.
I don't recall being confused with previously published plans so perhaps I'm getting old !

I have a regular sked on top band A.M. on 1985 kHz
According to the band plan we need to operate between 1840 and 1843 kHz ("All Modes" - AM is acceptable in the 'All Modes' segments . . .)
and have a bandwidth of 2.7 kHz - a good trick if you can do it with AM - fortunately I have a deep voice!

73
Chris G3XIZ

---

From: Chris <c.ashby435@btinternet.com>
To: RSGB LF Group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Thursday, 17 January 2013, 17:00
Subject: LF: RadCom February 2013

I was surprised to see on page 9 of the latest RSGB RadCom under '2013 Band Plans', a statement re the 472 - 479kHz band:- "Activity is limited to modes with 500Hz bandwidth or less". The implication here is that this is what Ofcom has specified, especially as in the sentence before it refers to the Notice of Variation. As such, the statement is quite misleading and untrue.

Who at the RSGB has decided on this new rule? Why does the RSGB feel the need to impose such a rule? It looks like they are dictating to the membership, rather than representing them. Frankly a bit of a cheek.

I note later in 'LF' by Dave, G3YXM, on page 55, the correct statement is made, referring to the only change in the licence conditions being the power limitation.

Come back Pete (FMT)! All is forgiven!!

Vy 73,

Chris, G4AYT.