Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() 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 |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() KØHB wrote: 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. Yet there are frequency coordinators listed in the ARRL Repeater Guide that do concern themselves with with frequencies, especially if you wan't to operate outside the ordinary bandplans. 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! Yikes! Rules from people working outside "thier" job descriptions. 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. Fair enough. But they just might have some crystals for freqs in the repeater bands (whatever those happen to be at the moment), and want to do some operating as long as they don't interfere with existing users. He never did say what he wanted to do exactly. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 19 Oct 2005 14:50:07 -0700, wrote:
KØHB wrote: 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. Yet there are frequency coordinators listed in the ARRL Repeater Guide that do concern themselves with with frequencies, especially if you wan't to operate outside the ordinary bandplans. 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! Yikes! Rules from people working outside "thier" job descriptions. 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. Fair enough. But they just might have some crystals for freqs in the repeater bands (whatever those happen to be at the moment), and want to do some operating as long as they don't interfere with existing users. He never did say what he wanted to do exactly. what I have been doing is listening to the local's folks and I find there are thing about various bandplans that they don't like one is number of folks here and that Includes me) want to operate 6 AM without hearing from DX another is some arguement over FSATV here north of the "A" Line which cuts off the bottom of the band where FSATV hangs out in most places a thrid issue is some of the local are not happy about the 222 bandplan, not quite sure yet what the beef is , all I do know is that it has something to do with the fact we can reach Canada on that Band fairly often. Indeed I manage a 222 MHZ FM simplex sked most weeks with ham in Thunder Bay Ont I know it is possible to adpot local variants.it would nice nice to know how to go about it. One could just do as we please and more than likely no one will notice. I don't like that "solution" as I know it encourages chaos and if we start ignoring the bandplans in VHF then HF bandplans are real danger. what I am looking for is an alternitive, a way to deal with local within the struture so we can encourage continued adherence to bandplans by making them fit us where we can, and at VHF and up we can do this in real terms _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote: On 19 Oct 2005 14:50:07 -0700, wrote: KØHB wrote: 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. Yet there are frequency coordinators listed in the ARRL Repeater Guide that do concern themselves with with frequencies, especially if you wan't to operate outside the ordinary bandplans. 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! Yikes! Rules from people working outside "thier" job descriptions. 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 netsthat 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 AMslots with 3KHz guard channels interleaved. Fair enough. But they just might have some crystals for freqs in the repeater bands (whatever those happen to be at the moment), and want to do some operating as long as they don't interfere with existing users. He never did say what he wanted to do exactly. what I have been doing is listening to the local's folks and I find there are thing about various bandplans that they don't like OK. And this is different from any other law...HOW? one is number of folks here and that Includes me) want to operate 6 AM without hearing from DX OK...Leave your coax plugged into an dummy load...(No, not him...the 50 ohm one under the desk...) If you don't want to "hear from the DX", then just don't answer them. Otherwise you're at the whim of the Propagation God, and he doesn't give a hoot who you want to hear from or not. When six meters is open, it's open...When it's not, it's not. If you want to just "work the locals", select one of the 2M or 70cm coordinated simplex channels. There's more than enough and you're far enough away from any major city so as to not have to "deal" with the DX. another is some arguement over FSATV here north of the "A" Line which cuts off the bottom of the band where FSATV hangs out in most places So have the guys who live north of the line use the higher channels to transmit on and below the line use the lower... Problem solved. a thrid issue is some of the local are not happy about the 222 bandplan, not quite sure yet what the beef is , all I do know is that it has something to do with the fact we can reach Canada on that Band fairly often. Indeed I manage a 222 MHZ FM simplex sked most weeks with ham in Thunder Bay Ont The beef is that we gave away the lower 2Mhz. I know it is possible to adpot local variants.it would nice nice to know how to go about it. One could just do as we please and more than likely no one will notice. ta-DAAAAAAAAAAH! Just make sure you're not interfering with any users who ARE in compliance with the bandplan and you have no problem. I don't like that "solution" as I know it encourages chaos and if we start ignoring the bandplans in VHF then HF bandplans are real danger. what I am looking for is an alternitive, a way to deal with local within the struture so we can encourage continued adherence to bandplans by making them fit us where we can, and at VHF and up we can do this in real terms Know how I avoid this problem...?!?! I start off any transmission that MIGHT cause interference with... "Is this frequency in use...?!?!" Works just as well above 50Mhz as it does below it... Steve, K4YZ |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() K4YZ wrote: wrote: On 19 Oct 2005 14:50:07 -0700, wrote: KØHB wrote: 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. Yet there are frequency coordinators listed in the ARRL Repeater Guide that do concern themselves with with frequencies, especially if you wan't to operate outside the ordinary bandplans. 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! Yikes! Rules from people working outside "thier" job descriptions. 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. Fair enough. But they just might have some crystals for freqs in the repeater bands (whatever those happen to be at the moment), and want to do some operating as long as they don't interfere with existing users. He never did say what he wanted to do exactly. what I have been doing is listening to the local's folks and I find there are thing about various bandplans that they don't like OK. And this is different from any other law...HOW? well it is different since bandplans are not laws in any sense you are realy over the edge the ARRL does not make laws the FCC does not make laws neither of these bodies has the power to make laws thank you for showing off your mental breakdown ... cuting the rest of Stevie raving |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() raped_an_old_friends_husband wrote: K4YZ wrote: wrote: On 19 Oct 2005 14:50:07 -0700, wrote: KØHB wrote: 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. Yet there are frequency coordinators listed in the ARRL Repeater Guide that do concern themselves with with frequencies, especially if you wan't to operate outside the ordinary bandplans. 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! Yikes! Rules from people working outside "thier" job descriptions. 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 signalguys and below the digital stuff. That gives you 600KHz, or roughly 75 6KHz AM slots with 3KHz guard channels interleaved. Fair enough. But they just might have some crystals for freqs in the repeater bands (whatever those happen to be at the moment), and wantto do some operating as long as they don't interfere with existing users. He never did say what he wanted to do exactly. what I have been doing is listening to the local's folks and I find there are thing about various bandplans that they don't like OK. And this is different from any other law...HOW? well it is different since bandplans are not laws in any sense Sure they are. The FCC has said that Amateur coordination groups were the defacto band planning resources, and that persons who operated in such a way as to cause interference to those plans was violating FCC rules and regulations. you are realy over the edge the ARRL does not make laws "really" I didn't say ANYthing about the ARRL, Mark... So I'd have to say YOU are over the edge. the FCC does not make laws neither of these bodies has the power to make laws thank you for showing off your mental breakdown ... No breakdown, Markie. The FCC regulates numerous forms of communications in direct response to thier mandate in the Communications Act of 1934 and others as ammended. Congress has delegated those parts of THIER responsiblities TO the FCC in said Act The Rules and Regulations of the Federal Communications Commission as publsihed by them in the Federal Register ARE laws. cuting the rest of Stevie raving "cutting" Reinserting since there was NO "raving" QUOTE one is number of folks here and that Includes me) want to operate 6 AM without hearing from DX OK...Leave your coax plugged into an dummy load...(No, not him...the 50 ohm one under the desk...) If you don't want to "hear from the DX", then just don't answer them. Otherwise you're at the whim of the Propagation God, and he doesn't give a hoot who you want to hear from or not. When six meters is open, it's open...When it's not, it's not. If you want to just "work the locals", select one of the 2M or 70cm coordinated simplex channels. There's more than enough and you're far enough away from any major city so as to not have to "deal" with the DX. another is some arguement over FSATV here north of the "A" Line which cuts off the bottom of the band where FSATV hangs out in most places So have the guys who live north of the line use the higher channels to transmit on and below the line use the lower... Problem solved. a thrid issue is some of the local are not happy about the 222 bandplan, not quite sure yet what the beef is , all I do know is that it has something to do with the fact we can reach Canada on that Band fairly often. Indeed I manage a 222 MHZ FM simplex sked most weeks with ham in Thunder Bay Ont The beef is that we gave away the lower 2Mhz. I know it is possible to adpot local variants.it would nice nice to know how to go about it. One could just do as we please and more than likely no one will notice. ta-DAAAAAAAAAAH! Just make sure you're not interfering with any users who ARE in compliance with the bandplan and you have no problem. I don't like that "solution" as I know it encourages chaos and if we start ignoring the bandplans in VHF then HF bandplans are real danger. what I am looking for is an alternitive, a way to deal with local within the struture so we can encourage continued adherence to bandplans by making them fit us where we can, and at VHF and up we can do this in real terms Know how I avoid this problem...?!?! I start off any transmission that MIGHT cause interference with... "Is this frequency in use...?!?!" Works just as well above 50Mhz as it does below it... Steve, K4YZ UNQUOTE |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "K4YZ" wrote And this is different from any other law...HOW? Bandplans are cooperative agreements between affected amateurs, not "laws". |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() KØHB wrote: "K4YZ" wrote And this is different from any other law...HOW? Bandplans are cooperative agreements between affected amateurs, not "laws". Sigh...... Bandplans are mutually agreed upon frequency sharing arrangents that the FCC has repeatedly stated the violation of will get the violator "busted". While not codified in thier own right, they are, none the less, enforced BY the Federal Communications Commission. Refer to the current FCC list of NOV's, NAL's and Warnings. There are, unfortunately, numerous folks who have violated non-law "laws" that the FCC has demanded corrective action for. Close enough for me. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() KØHB wrote: "K4YZ" wrote And this is different from any other law...HOW? Bandplans are cooperative agreements between affected amateurs, not "laws". for an occasion we find ourselfs in absolute agreement and as amateur they are subject to modifcation by us which proves they are not laws |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The Pool | Policy | |||
New ARRL Proposal | Policy | |||
The Pool | Policy | |||
Length of Coax Affecting Incident Power to Meter? | Antenna |