At the time we lost 11 meters, things were a lot different than they are now.. At that time, most hams used crystal control transmitters. VFO's were, mainly, used in more expensive radios.. The other hams bands, 160 through 10 meters are frequency multiples of 160 meters.. Oh.. most hams converted their vfo's to 80 meter fundamentals as a 160 meter vfo often were missadjusted, no fault of the ham, to give an output onto 5 mhz.. Anyways, to get onto 11 meters required a vfo with a fundamental output outside subharmonic band, eg below 3.5 mhz... and by the time you frequency multplied that signal, you also got frequency drift... So 11 meters got little use.... hence we lost it.... Unfortunately bands like 144 and 450 are now getting too much use.. New hams are buying radios for 144 and 450 and not being encouraged to use the relatively unused bands like 220 and 902 and 1296 etc... If we want to protect those bands we should start encouraging new hams to use those bands rather than automatically directing them to 144 and 450 mhz... Larry ve3fxq
----- Original Message ----- From: "DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <digitalradio@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2006 10:43 AM Subject: RE: [digitalradio] OT: Why we lost 11 meters I can buy a 2W MURS radio (talkie) today for less than $150 and some for as low as $99. Also, you can run a MURS radio on an external antenna up to 60 ft with no restrictions on antenna gain. If the antenna is on the top of a building, the antenna can be no more than 20 ft above the building. I have many friends who are serious campers, hikers, cycle riders, "explorers" and survivalist who use MURS radios very effectivl. Some have gain antennas on their talkies. Others set up a base station with the antenna at 20-30ft and a 3-5 dB gain antenna and talk 5-7 miles reliably to talkies and mobiles with real mobile antennas (not mag-mounts). They talk 15-20 miles between base stations. The gain antennas, good coax (most use LMR400UF) cost more than the radio. Some are using separate mikes and speakers as well as external power supplies or larger gell cell type batteries for base stations. Walt/K5YFW -----Original Message----- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of bruce mallon Sent: Friday, December 08, 2006 8:54 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] OT: Why we lost 11 meters Correct E. F. Johnson pushed for 27 nhz. SADLY MURS goes unused if the FCC used its brain it would promote MURS by allowing it to be built into a CB radio. Right now radios for MURS are expensive and hard to get. --- KV9U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Although this is a bit off topic, unlike the on > topic discussions of > amateur radio and digital programs and operating > systems ... > > The FCC was looking for a band of frequencies that > they could allocate > for a minimally licensed citizens radio service. > Radio amateurs were > rarely using 11 meters and had nearby 15 meters > below and 10 meters > above so we had a very limited need. > > The FCC also needed to find a band that was low > enough in frequency so > that the technology of the time, the mid 1950's, > could manufacture such > equipment that was affordable. VHF/UHF equipment was > much more expensive > to make, thus the lower frequencies in the HF band > made it practical. > > Of course the huge downside was that these > frequencies also had F skip > when the sunspot cycle was cooperative and they knew > it was going to be > a problem with "hobbyists" using the frequencies for > amateur radio type > activity which was not their intent. I don't think > they really > understood the skip conditions would be so strong at > times, that local > communications could be nearly useless, even though > the FCC made longer > contacts illegal. > > Due to other happenings (Arab oil embargo of early > 1970's), more people > bought CB equipment and the violations were > completely overwhelming to > the FCC and they eventually gave up even pretending > to have licenses for > the service. > > Today we have the "licensed" GMRS and the unlicensed > FRS, and most > recently MURS services that are much better > frequencies for local, short > range, tactical type communications that actually > work without long skip > interference. But this was only possible due to the > much lower cost of > developing and manufacturing equipment for these > frequencies with more > recent technology. > > 73, > > Rick, KV9U > > > larry allen wrote: > > >We lost 11 meters because we were not using it > enough... > >Larry ve3fxq > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know. Ask your question on www.Answers.yahoo.com Connect to telnet://cluster.dynalias.org a single node spotting/alert system dedicated to digital and CW QSOs. Yahoo! Groups Links
