|
how a policy issue for a change...local bandplaning
On 18 Oct 2005 18:03:49 -0700, wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: KØHB wrote: "an Old friend" wrote I was trying to tlak the subject in general merely giving an example ??????????????????????? His local gang was tlaking to their new club official. None of them knew anything about frequencies used for 6m AM operation. not at all I was trying to spark an On Topic discussion HERE about how folks would go about local band planing It is "band planning", Mark and it isn't done on a local basis. It can be on vhf and above frequencies. You just need to open your mind a little, a very little. It is done on a national and regional basis. If we decided to implement a local band plan for 2m here, the 2m users in Pittsburgh, Morgantown, Parkersburg, Marietta and Columbus would be in a dither. There is still room for local variation in a regional plan. You told us of your lack of knowledge of where 6m AM activity might be found. A couple of us told you. Now you'll undoubtedly string us along for a number of posts as you did over the 60m "band". Dave K8MN Perhaps he and other associates have no 6M crystal for where the AM activity might be found and wants a local variation. or in our case some of us would rather operate where folks will not come looking for as DX. I have a nice AM tube set (built from the article in CQ VHF before it shut down) others have have various rigs and would like to use em more another area I hear folks around talk about is 440(70cm) since we are north of the "a" line the national does not serve some folks needs as well as it could _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
how a policy issue for a change...local bandplaning
On 18 Oct 2005 17:56:35 -0700, wrote:
an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: wrote: KØHB wrote: "an Old friend" wrote cut the band plans themselve mention the possiblity of local varriations Oooh! Ouch!! No!!! Say it ain't so.... The MMM have spoken, and the ARRL Repeater Guide is Wrong, Wrongg, WRONGGG!!! Guess the suggestions made were too simplistic? We HAVE to have a fight over this? guess you do A$$hole Flambe' gotta have a fight. I was just trying to spark On topic discussion related to the prupose of NG on a subject I have always been curious about Yikes! Whatever possessed you to try an on-topic discussion? Hope my reply helped. You're in Michigan? Do you want to coordinator's info? we are Yoopers can't seem to raise anyone at the listed coordinator OTOH neither do the emails bounce not alone in this obsevation either _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
how a policy issue for a change...local bandplaning
wrote we are Yoopers can't seem to raise anyone at the listed coordinator OTOH neither do the emails bounce I don't think the repeater coordinators care what you do on other modes. Here in Minnesota, at least, they concern themselves only with the repeater sub-bands. If I wanted to establish a new local AM presence I wouldn't even involve the coordinator, if for no other reason than it's outside their job description, and once you have their advice it becomes a "rule" of sorts. Fugitit! As I mentioned earlier, in this area the casual AM'ers seem to be clustered between 50.400 and 50.550, although I think there are a couple of nets that use 50.355. My inclination would be to stay above the SSB weak signal guys and below the digital stuff. That gives you 600KHz, or roughly 75 6KHz AM slots with 3KHz guard channels interleaved. Beep beep de Hans, K0HB -- Lord High Liberator of the Magic Electric Smoke |
Quote:
I think what KB9RQA is trying to say is that he doesn't want to tlak about what is done elsewhere, therefore your example is an insult. The Man in the Maze QRV at Baboquivari Peak, AZ |
how a policy issue for a change...local bandplaning
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 02:27:12 +0000, Iitoi
wrote: KØHB Wrote: "an Old friend" wrote I was trying to tlak the subject in general merely giving an example ??????????????????????? K0HB, I think what KB9RQA is trying to say is that he doesn't want to tlak about what is done elsewhere, therefore your example is an insult. nice try at bomb throwing The Man in the Maze QRV at Baboquivari Peak, AZ _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
how a policy issue for a change...local bandplaning
|
how a policy issue for a change...local bandplaning
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 04:45:07 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: KØHB wrote: "an Old friend" wrote I was trying to tlak the subject in general merely giving an example ??????????????????????? Hans appears incapable. Try your local frequency coordinating body, perhaps the repeater coordinating body for 6M, if that is your interest. Each state or locality is different. Not for 6m AM, SSB or CW it isn't. No? Every state and locality can be different. For 6m AM, SSB and CW? You're simply incorrect. more pronoucement from on High you make the assertion explain why One size does not fit all. Read your ARRL repeater guide. Notice all the caveats wrt band plans, coordination, and even spacing. Those are regional differences, not local ones. What does the repeater guide say about 6m AM operation? Do you know of any 6m AM repeaters anywhere? Do you know why there can't be? There is no reason that my house can't be chartreuse...but it isn't. Do you know of any 6m AM repeaters? Just one will get you off the hook. which matters how no reason a 6m Am repeater can be built. I know Riley was going on about a 2m AM repeater at one point Dave K8MN _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
how a policy issue for a change...local bandplaning
|
how a policy issue for a change...local bandplaning
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:16 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com