Indeed Stefan, but some of us with a line to influence, do listen to your comments and ensure they reach the "right places"  :-))

 

Alan G3NYK

----- Original Message -----

From: DK7FC

To: [email protected]

Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 12:03 PM

Subject: Re: LF: bandplan proposal at the next IARU Regon I Interim Meeting (Vienna,16-17 April 2016)

...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:

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