LF: RE: NRRL proposal for a 630m Band Plan

[Rik Strobbe <Rik.Strobbe@fys.kuleuven.be>]

Hello Chris,

 

the "where to monitor" problem can be solved by agreeing on some centre of activity frequencies for CW, QRSS etc.

This is far less rigid than a band plan.

 

73, Rik  ON7YD - OR7T

 

---

Van: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] namens Chris [c.ashby435@btinternet.com]
Verzonden: vrijdag 8 februari 2013 20:57
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Onderwerp: LF: NRRL proposal for a 630m Band Plan

Personally I don't think it's all bad in a limited sort of way. I would welcome an agreement on (1) a section for individual beacons, and (2) a defined section for QRSS. At the moment I haven't a clue where exactly to monitor. The idea of moving QRSS away from the centre of the band (but even nearer the bottom) is preferable. I am sure other mode enthusiasts would find it more desirable/helpful to know where to listen. Not so sure about the CW calling frequency so high though.

I am surprised CW activity hasn't taken off to a larger extent though, I regularly hear strong stations calling CQ over and over, getting no replies. Not very encouraging.

Chris, G4AYT.

From: "traumwandler@sensemail.ch" <traumwandler@sensemail.ch>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 8:24
Subject: LF: NRRL proposal for a 630m Band Plan

Are you aware of this proposal?
What do you think about it?
73 de Toni, HB9ASB


Recommendation
>From the viewpoints of NRRL we would (at the time being) like to present the
following proposal for a 630 m IARU Region 1 bandplan:
472 - 479 kHz (630 m)
472 - 475 kHz  CW only – maximum bandwidth 200 Hz
    472.000 - 472.150  CW Beacons only (IARU coordinated)
    472.150 - 472.300  CW QRSS
    472.600                    CW DX Calling
    474.750                    CW Calling
475 - 479 kHz  CW + digimodes – maximum bandwidth 500 Hz
Contests should be discouraged in this very narrow 630 m band where radio
amateurs are secondary users.
Comment:
NRRL feels that it will be premature to further subdivide different digimodes. This
may be better to do at the next conference, if necessary, after considering
experiences.