Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: 472kHz Bandplan or whatever

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: LF: Re: 472kHz Bandplan or whatever
From: "mal hamilton" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 12:11:12 -0000
References: <FAE50C6CEA8D4C7892AD2386B1F4D041@IBM7FFA209F07C>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Chris
Those that just listen as you put it are but Short Wave Listeners and do not really have an input. It is the Transmitting Radio Amateur looking for vacant slots on the band to propagate their RF  that need to be consulted if there is to be a Band Plan.
Like I said CW operators have nothing to fear since they just slot into any vacant frequency  and commence a QSO, no prior arrangements are necessary like DIAL frequency and exact TIME SYNC to decode the 24/7 Beacon Grinders.
Another advantage of the CW mode is speed. A QSO normally lasts minutes in which time all relevant information is passed, then the frequency is vacated for others. ie maximum frequency economy.
On LF es MF with bands of only a few Khz wide, if  CW was the Norm there would be no need for a Band Plan.
QRP transmissions do not have much impact, it is usually the RX operators system doing all the work. 
g3kev
  
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 10:15 AM
Subject: LF: 472kHz Bandplan or whatever

Hi Mal,
Re your comment:-
Those shouting most and _expression_ opinions about LF and MF are never heard on the bands.
Surely equal weight should be given to the opinions of those who just listen or run QRP? I have been running 1W RF on the band since January, probably well below your RX threshold, and working a couple of 'locals' regularly. So my opinion doesn't count in your book?
Rik has come up with the most logical suggestion so far. We really do need some sort of organisation on the band, all be it of the 'light touch' variety.
My feeling (which apparently probably doesn't count) is, modes with long carriers should be near the band edges, ideally QRSS near the bottom and others near the top. Filters easily resolve the issue of QRSS being close to faster CW, as you, Mal, pointed out to me some years ago.
Criticising suggestions is all very well, but it would be better if such criticism was supported by reasoned argument or a better proposal.
On another point, someone commented about the 'Subject' in e-mails to this site. I entirely agree with what was said. Not only the mode under discussion, but it has been confusing sometimes in the past when the band is not specified either in the 'Subject', or even the content!
Vy 73,
Chris, G4AYT.
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>