Stefan
You are just what they call a user so your opinion doesn't count!!!!! I wrote
to one of these "Planning" Individuals of the Amateur Radio Union who copied
me on mail elsewhere and he referred to me a "Just a user". Planning on such a
tiny band with only dedicated ops is a power trip for some one. I would hope we
are all intelligent enough and reasonable enough to rub along allowing the most
effective and creative use to the common good of this tiny band without the
dead hand of bureaucracy stifling any new and good ideas how to maximise its
potential.
Band planning only seems to give self appointed individuals the right in the
name of what ever national society to rain on your parade. UK VHF bands being a
case in point!!!!
73 es GL Pete M0FMT GQRP#15097.in IO91UX
Sent via my own personal Too-Way (two way) Earth Station to and from the
Eutelsat Ka-band satellite http://www.tooway.co.uk/ at approximately 172
degrees Azimuth in the Clarke belt owing to BTs 19th century cable technology
inability to provide a good enough 21st century broadband service. I agree for
this message to be passed on to BT Plc at 81 Newgate Street, London EC1A 7AJ
via the snoops at GCHQ Cheltenham, thanks for your cooperation it is
appreciated.
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 21/3/16, DK7FC <[email protected]> wrote:
Subject: Re: LF: bandplan proposal at the next IARU Regon I Interim Meeting
(Vienna,16-17 April 2016)
To: [email protected]
Date: Monday, 21 March, 2016, 12:03
...instead of putting efforts in the definition of a band
plan i
suggest they focus on working to push the power limit by 10
dB upwards!
That would be helpful.
I bet, no one of those who want to decide where which mode
can be used
has ever been QRV, nor will ever!
73, Stefan
Am 21.03.2016 10:48, schrieb Rik Strobbe:
#yiv3281890512 P {
MARGIN-TOP:0px;MARGIN-BOTTOM:0px;}
#yiv3281890512 P {
MARGIN-TOP:0px;MARGIN-BOTTOM:0px;}
Dear all,
at the next IARU Regon I Interim Meeting (Vienna,
16-17 April
2016) there is a proposal that concerns the 630 m
band:
It is recommended that beacons will be accepted
in the plan of usage of the 472 - 479 kHz band (630 m)
in addition to
the Recommendation VA14_C4_REC_02: 476 - 477 kHz beacons
–
maximum bandwidth 200 Hz. Maximum power output 1 W
EIRP. Beacon proposals should adhere
to beacon recommendations in the IARU Region 1 HF
Managers' Handbook,
and should be approved by the IARU Region
1 Beacon Coordinator
(introduced by NRRL)
Besides the fact that I am not a fan of the urge
to put everything into strict rules
and I have doubts about the usefulness
of beacons
(there are dozens of NDB's in and near the 630 m
band), I
do fear that an "official" beacon
band might attract people or clubs to
put up a nice "tech project" and leave us with
the QRM.
The targeted range (476-477 kHz) is
de facto used for QRSS, a some
"wideband" CW beacons can cause a lot of
harm.
I wonder if NRRL consulted the
few Norwegian hams that are active on
630 m and if other in societies the
band users were asked for advice?
73, Rik ON7YD - OR7T
|
