About Us

October 28th 04, 04:01 AM

= = = (StephenH) wrote in message
= = = om...
dxAce wrote in message ...
StephenH wrote:
It's shortsighted to write off DRM so soon. It must be given a
chance.

Sure, keep the QRM a coming....

As sarcastic as that may (be intended to) sound, you know, I know and
I'm sure everyone else knows that is a serious point. DRM *is*
causing serious problems to adjacent channels. The evidence is there
on a daily basis, and if DRM is to grow this problem will only get
worse.

This is where the HFCC should come in. If DRM is going to be taken
seriously, even by long-term hardcore DXers, then it can't be made to
co-exist smack back in the middle of established AM broadcasts. There
*has* to be a "DRM corner", on a few or all of the broadcast SW metre
bands. Initally, a space of 50 to 100 kHz on each band, dedicated to
DRM only broadcasts. Where this might be allowing more capacity than
required for DRM in the meantime, it should allow DRM to grow a little
more - possibly to the extent where it might begin to be commerically
attractive/viable - with NO impact on existing AM broadcasts. As time
goes on, increase the DRM "band" while reducing the AM band. AM
doesn't need to disappear completely, nor do I believe it will. (Same
with FM vs DAB/IBOC)

But there must be more to it than this. Maybe I'm making it sound too
simple, there *must* be a real, logical reason as to why this approach
hasn't already been taken. Otherwise, doesn't this approach solve
most problems with interference, whilst giving DRM the space it needs
to grow a little more?

Stephen Howie,
Reading, U.K

SH,

As you have suggested, a 'phase-in' Implementation of DRM over
a number of years:
* Years 1-5 each Shortwave Band would have 25% dedicated to DRM.
* Years 6-10 each Shortwave Band would have 50% dedicated to DRM.
* Years 11-15 each Shortwave Band would have 75% dedicated to DRM.
* After Year 16 each Shortwave Band would have 100% dedicated to DRM.

IIRC: The current 'channel' Spacing on the Shortwave Bands is 5 kHz.

With the phase-in implementation of DRM, wouldn't a 10 kHz, 20 kHz
or even 25 kHz be a more acceptable and practical 'channel' Spacing
to reduce interference from any 'adjacent' Channels.

~ RHF
..
..

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1415 Â September 24, 2004	Radionews	Shortwave	0	September 24th 04 05:56 PM
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1402 Â June 25, 2004	Radionews	Shortwave	0	June 25th 04 07:32 PM
Amateur Radio NewslineÃ¢â€žÂ¢ Report 1402 Ã‚Â June 25, 2004	Radionews	Dx	0	June 25th 04 07:28 PM
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1379 â€“ January 16, 2004	Radionews	Broadcasting	0	January 19th 04 12:57 AM
Amateur Radio NewslineÃ¢â€žÂ¢ Report 1379 Ã¢â‚¬â€œ January 16, 2004	Radionews	Dx	0	January 18th 04 09:34 PM

Menu

About Us