Hello,

I was wondering if anyone would like to try a QSO on 60 meters:


Channel Center | Tuning Frequency
------------------------------------
5332 Khz | 5330.5 Khz
5348 Khz | 5346.5 Khz
5368 Khz | 5366.5 Khz
5373 Khz | 5371.5 Khz
5405 Khz | 5403.5 Khz

Later in the evening would probably work (say 0200Z), or, in the
morning
around 1100Z. I am in Idaho, so we would have to work that in.

If we use these "channelized" frequencies, maybe the FCC will see we
are using them and give us a whole 60 meter segment.

"Mike Speed" wrote in message
ups.com...
Hello,

I was wondering if anyone would like to try a QSO on 60 meters:


Channel Center | Tuning Frequency
------------------------------------
5332 Khz | 5330.5 Khz
5348 Khz | 5346.5 Khz
5368 Khz | 5366.5 Khz
5373 Khz | 5371.5 Khz
5405 Khz | 5403.5 Khz

Later in the evening would probably work (say 0200Z), or, in the
morning
around 1100Z. I am in Idaho, so we would have to work that in.

If we use these "channelized" frequencies, maybe the FCC will see we
are using them and give us a whole 60 meter segment.





Very doubtful amateur will ever be assigned entire 60 metre range.
Unfortunately, the FRAC (Frequency Realignment Commission)
committee of the ITU will eventually recommend amateurs lose
over half the spectrum they now have.

I don't believe you. People have been saying that for almost as long
as amateur radio has existed. What is your *confirmation*? Show me
*exactly* where on: http://www.itu.int/home/index.html anything
remotely what you claim is on the agenda. Also note I was asking for a
sked - not a diatribe.

"Mike Speed" ) writes:
I don't believe you. People have been saying that for almost as long
as amateur radio has existed. What is your *confirmation*? Show me
*exactly* where on: http://www.itu.int/home/index.html anything
remotely what you claim is on the agenda. Also note I was asking for a
sked - not a diatribe.

And interestingly, in recent decades there has been an increase in
ham frequencies in the HF segment of the radio spectrum. The WARC
bands, this new allocation.

Obviously, it's not the same as when hams had "200 metres and down",
and I'm not sure what the bands were like right before WWII. But
there is more space for hams on HF now than 60 years ago (or more
precisely when the bands were returned after WWII.

Also obviously, there have been losses, but those have been at
VHF and higher.

Michael VE2BVW

"Kalib Bahndar" wrote in message
...

"Mike Speed" wrote in message
ups.com...
Hello,

I was wondering if anyone would like to try a QSO on 60 meters:


Channel Center | Tuning Frequency
------------------------------------
5332 Khz | 5330.5 Khz
5348 Khz | 5346.5 Khz
5368 Khz | 5366.5 Khz
5373 Khz | 5371.5 Khz
5405 Khz | 5403.5 Khz

Later in the evening would probably work (say 0200Z), or, in the
morning
around 1100Z. I am in Idaho, so we would have to work that in.

If we use these "channelized" frequencies, maybe the FCC will see we
are using them and give us a whole 60 meter segment.





Very doubtful amateur will ever be assigned entire 60 metre range.
Unfortunately, the FRAC (Frequency Realignment Commission)
committee of the ITU will eventually recommend amateurs lose
over half the spectrum they now have.


Coinciding with the FRAC action reducing amateur frequencies
by half, will be the creation of an International Amateur Radio
Permit (IARP). Individual countries will no longer issue amateur
licenses. There will be only one amateur license, the IARP, and it
will be code-free and administered by the ITU and the UN. These
actions reflect the moving of the world's individual countries to a
global telecommunications community.

Under IARP, I find references to reciprocal operating only: "...has
begun issuing the International Amateur Radio Permit (IARP) that allows
US amateurs to operate from Argentina, Brazil, Peru, Uruguay, and
Venezuela without having to obtain a special license..." All search
engines results for IARP say nothing about, "There will be only one
amateur license, the IARP..."

As for: "Frequency Realignment Commission" and "FRAC," the search
engines come up with *absolutely nothing* about this.

It's easy to do away with such rubbish.