Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
40 meters fixed, sort of
Will all the hubub about dropping CW. The change in six years on 40 meters
will be very important to ham radio. We in region 2 (North/South America) stay the same. BUT Region 1 and 3 moves the broadcast crap above 7200. AND Europe gets another 100 kc. From 7.0 to 7.2. About time. Dan/W4NTI |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Dan/W4NTI"
writes: The change in six years on 40 meters will be very important to ham radio. We in region 2 (North/South America) stay the same. BUT Region 1 and 3 moves the broadcast crap above 7200. AND Europe gets another 100 kc. From 7.0 to 7.2. FANTASTIC! This effectively doubles the amount of 7 MHz spectrum available to amateurs on a worldwide basis! 40 is one of the best all-around bands. It's good for domestic and DX work. You can get out with limited power, and the antennas aren't too big. Almost always usable around the clock and around the sunspot cycle. The only thing wrong with 40 is there isn't enough of it. About time Dang straight. The nonsense of sharing with megawatt SWBC has gone on since before WW2. Now to get the resto of the band for regions 1 and 3. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ...
Will all the hubub about dropping CW. The change in six years on 40 meters will be very important to ham radio. We in region 2 (North/South America) stay the same. BUT Region 1 and 3 moves the broadcast crap above 7200. Moving the BC signals out of the 7.000-7.100 Region 2 CW and digital haunts and into motormouth country above 7.200 oughta draw a discussion or two about who really gains what with this move. AND Europe gets another 100 kc. From 7.0 to 7.2. About time. Amen. Dan/W4NTI w3rv |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... Brian Kelly wrote: Moving the BC signals out of the 7.000-7.100 Region 2 CW and digital haunts and into motormouth country above 7.200 oughta draw a discussion or two about who really gains what with this move. I don't think it'll matter much. 7.2-7.2 has long had a full share of SWBC anyway, and it wouldn't surprise me to see the BC units that move to just move on up above 7.3, assuming that as a possibility. Dick I think the MAJOR improvement will be opening to EXCLUSIVE AMATEUR 7.0 to 7.2. That will enhance the band world wide. I used to operate from Germany (DA2LJ 71-74/76-79) and 40 was a total mess. This was BEFORE the major digital influx. There just is not enough room on 40 for the rest of the world. And when the band is good and Europe rolls in...forget it. It is a regular zoo. In six years the Europeans can spread out. Dan/W4NTI |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I wonder if they eliminate CW (all but certain, but not to as when), will
they expand the phone bands downward a bit? 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 7/4/03 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ...
Brian Kelly wrote: Moving the BC signals out of the 7.000-7.100 Region 2 CW and digital haunts and into motormouth country above 7.200 oughta draw a discussion or two about who really gains what with this move. I don't think it'll matter much. 7.2-7.(3) has long had a full share of SWBC anyway, The BC stations in 7.0-7.1 have always seemed to me to be much more of a problem than they are in 7.2-7.3 but maybe that's just a perception on my part. Beyond that cleaning out 7.0-7.1 will be a huge improvement for the CW and digital crowd but the phone guys will still have work to do at upcoming WRCs to obtain the same improvements. and it wouldn't surprise me to see the BC units that move to just move on up above 7.3, assumingthat as a possibility. That would certainly make sense, would completely eliminate the conflict between the hams and the BC industry, everybody would win. I have no idea how or why the BC stations choose their specific operating freqs within their bands. Gotta be strategies involved. Any clues here? One thing I do know is that significant freq shifts can cost the BC stations a bunch of money because the equipment and antenna arrays are purpose-built & tweaked for operating on specific freqs. I understand that they cannot just grab a big knob and twist it to QSY 150 kHz like we can. I 'spose this is why it'll take six years to fully implement their move out of 7.0-7.1. Dick Brian |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Hampton" writes:
I wonder if they eliminate CW (all but certain, but not to as when), will they expand the phone bands downward a bit? I hope not. If they do, I hope the band plans still reserve the CW spectrum, and hams obey them. Regards, Len. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
From everyhting I've read on the subject, it's clear to me that as soon as the
revised treaty is ratified, FCC could just drop Element 1. No NPRM, no NOI, no comments, nothing, zip, nil, nada. FCC could honestly and accurately say that the whole issue had been debated and dealt with back in 1998-99 restructuring and again in the Wormsey-Adsit-Dinelli Petition for Reconsideration. Suits me just fine. Today, I passed element 3 by two questions, and missed element 4 by two questions. Not one minute of study time, yet. Tomorrow calls for a trip to the library to 621.38 for that extra test book they had... Saving my pennies for that IC706MKIIG. -Scott, a dual part operator, 95 & 97. (With the right radio for the band.) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On 6 Jul 2003 01:10:01 -0700, Brian Kelly wrote:
have no idea how or why the BC stations choose their specific operating freqs within their bands. Gotta be strategies involved. Any clues here? Four times a year, the ITU International Frequency Registration Board (or whatever it's called nowadays) holds a conference for SW broadcast frequency assignment. Most of it is by paper submission and is routine "we've been on this frequency for 70 years....." stuff. For new requests, the requesting Administration will have submitted info on the location of the transmitter, directionality and power, hours of service, and the target area. A computerized frequency coordination study is made by the IFRB to determine what frequency in the band in question would cause no harmful interference to existing (earlier priority date) stations. Quite often the coordination will be for less or different hours or power than requested to avoid any harmful interference to or from the applicant. This coordination will be "ratified" at the quarterly conference and a priority date assigned. One thing I do know is that significant freq shifts can cost the BC stations a bunch of money because the equipment and antenna arrays are purpose-built & tweaked for operating on specific freqs. I understand that they cannot just grab a big knob and twist it to QSY 150 kHz like we can. I 'spose this is why it'll take six years to fully implement their move out of 7.0-7.1. Or so they say. A 150 kHz shift is no big deal as long as the broadcaster is willing to take the transmitter down for a period of time (weeks? months?) to find the proper coil and capacitor settings (synthesizers are a no-brainer nowadays). A good friend of mine was a tech at a SWBC station years ago and could do a band change with pre-set taps in less than two minutes (of course the walk-in 50 KW GE monster was shut off during that time). The long lead time comes in not where the broadcaster has to order and install parallel equipment currently (from scratch it should take no more than 2 years at the very outside) but where the broadcaster wants to amortize the equipment, i.e. when they are ready to order a new transmitter they will order it for the new frequency. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #649 | Dx | |||
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #649 | Dx | |||
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #649 | General | |||
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #629 | Dx | |||
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #629 | General |