Re: [digitalradio] Re: USA digital bandplan chart
Correct, it IS the FCC's plan but with the concepts of Regions 1's plan squeezed in. . the suggestion is that we digital mode freaks use narrow mode at the low end of the band segment, leave the weak signal folks alone, keep wider variants like Olivia and ROS16 for the upper segments, and keep unattended modes at the upper end, where possible. On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 2:16 PM, wd4kpd wd4...@suddenlink.net wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien k3uka...@... wrote: http://www.obriensweb.com/bandmap.html A quick and dirty chart. Comments welcome. well Andy, quick and dirty this is almost the way the FCC has dictated it. of course following it in the wide mode sections will by the laws of physics and other human reasoning cause qrm to somebody. so lets all get a life and accept it. david/wd4kpd
Re: [digitalradio] Re: USA digital bandplan chart
David, Would you like to try a QSO on 432.090 using ROS 16 baud (or even 1 baud)? We are 250 miles apart, but every morning I can QSO in SSB phone with Charlotte, NC, stations on 432.095 at 200 miles even when there is no propagation enhancement, and with a Georgia, station at 225 miles. We are also currently testing Olivia 16-500 on SSB on that band with good success. I am retired and available most of the time, so just email me for a sked if you like. My grid is FM02bt. If necessary, we could start with CW, but if the -35 dB minimum S/N of ROS is correct, we should at least be able to make it at one baud if we coordinate frequencies closely. There is no question about the legality of using ROS on 432 MHz. 73 - Skip KH6TY kh...@comcast.net http://kh6ty.home.comcast.net/~kh6ty/ wd4kpd wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien k3uka...@... wrote: http://www.obriensweb.com/bandmap.html http://www.obriensweb.com/bandmap.html A quick and dirty chart. Comments welcome. well Andy, quick and dirty this is almost the way the FCC has dictated it. of course following it in the wide mode sections will by the laws of physics and other human reasoning cause qrm to somebody. so lets all get a life and accept it. david/wd4kpd
[digitalradio] Re: USA digital bandplan chart
Hi Andy, First I'd like to say that I think I can argue both sides of the coin on this matter. I think it is a very good idea to have a generally accepted and commonly known watering holes for the various modes to facilitate ease of finding another station in a particular mode. How about a specific frequency unique to every mode that would be a calling freq. You establish communications and move off elsewhere. I also like the idea of, by a gentleman's agreement, setting aside some specific freqs for some of the unattended modes/protocols: ALE, Winmor, PACTOR, (possibly other modes like: PropNetPSK, WSPR) etc. to ease interference issues both ways. On the other hand, I would not want a 3rd party who is non-involved in a particular communication with a station to come on freq and berate me for using a mode out of the spectrum slice allotted. For example, what if you and I were using Olivia 500 on 20M (more specifically 14.092 MHz) and then we decided we wanted to use MT-63 1k. Would we have to move?? I think that should be decided by both stations depending on how busy the adjacent frequencies are. We should also take into account if by using a wider mode if we would be interfering with another ongoing communication. I don't think it should be set in stone that if we were to switch modes that we would have to also switch spectrum slices, it might make it harder for us to re-establish communications if the frequency we agreed upon was in use by someone else. We should however keep in mind that we might want to move to a different spectrum slice to help alleviate any overcrowding and allow other stations that wished to use a certain mode in the allotted spectrum slice to do so. On 20M, I would suggest reversing the order of RTTY and digi modes for the segments of 14.080-14.093 14.093-14.096. The reason I say that is because in my opinion I feel that it is already a preconceived agreement by a wider group that RTTY is operated starting at 14.080 and on up, and is used pretty heavily during contests and DXing. I think we'd be pushing a boulder uphill. In this case work with a stronger force rather than against it. I also feel that the amounts of the spectrum slices in this case should be reversed. Give the greater amount to RTTY and the lesser amount to the digital modes. During a RTTY contest weekend I think many stations would start around 14.080 and work upwards. With that in mind, I'm curious why we don't use the higher end of the 20M CW subband more predominantly for digi modes; I'm referring to higher than 14.100 MHz (leaving adequate room for the NCDXF beacons there). Please forgive my ignorance, but wouldn't that suffice for bandplans worldwide? I feel that even if we were to use PSK31 RTTY that there would be plenty of room still for all of the other digital modes upstairs. Generally speaking it's pretty quiet; look at the number of QSO's you've had there in digi or CW. Again, my opinion is that I feel that giving spectrum slices to groupings of digi modes can be beneficial to users. I would like it to be recommended more as a gentleman's agreement, rather than set in stone that ONLY those modes can and should be operated there. A general guideline rather than a law. 73 de W8RIT Dave --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andy obrien k3uka...@... wrote: http://www.obriensweb.com/bandmap.html A quick and dirty chart. Comments welcome.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: USA digital bandplan chart
Thanks for the feedback, some very good points. I think the higher end of CW portions, is an especially good point. Andy K3UK On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 9:50 PM, W8RIT w8...@qsl.net wrote: Hi Andy, First I'd like to say that I think I can argue both sides of the coin on this matter. I think it is a very good idea to have a generally accepted and commonly known watering holes for the various modes to facilitate ease of finding another station in a particular mode. How about a specific frequency unique to every mode that would be a calling freq. You establish communications and move off elsewhere. I also like the idea of, by a gentleman's agreement, setting aside some specific freqs for some of the unattended modes/protocols: ALE, Winmor, PACTOR, (possibly other modes like: PropNetPSK, WSPR) etc. to ease interference issues both ways. On the other hand, I would not want a 3rd party who is non-involved in a particular communication with a station to come on freq and berate me for using a mode out of the spectrum slice allotted. For example, what if you and I were using Olivia 500 on 20M (more specifically 14.092 MHz) and then we decided we wanted to use MT-63 1k. Would we have to move?? I think that should be decided by both stations depending on how busy the adjacent frequencies are. We should also take into account if by using a wider mode if we would be interfering with another ongoing communication. I don't think it should be set in stone that if we were to switch modes that we would have to also switch spectrum slices, it might make it harder for us to re-establish communications if the frequency we agreed upon was in use by someone else. We should however keep in mind that we might want to move to a different spectrum slice to help alleviate any overcrowding and allow other stations that wished to use a certain mode in the allotted spectrum slice to do so. On 20M, I would suggest reversing the order of RTTY and digi modes for the segments of 14.080-14.093 14.093-14.096. The reason I say that is because in my opinion I feel that it is already a preconceived agreement by a wider group that RTTY is operated starting at 14.080 and on up, and is used pretty heavily during contests and DXing. I think we'd be pushing a boulder uphill. In this case work with a stronger force rather than against it. I also feel that the amounts of the spectrum slices in this case should be reversed. Give the greater amount to RTTY and the lesser amount to the digital modes. During a RTTY contest weekend I think many stations would start around 14.080 and work upwards. With that in mind, I'm curious why we don't use the higher end of the 20M CW subband more predominantly for digi modes; I'm referring to higher than 14.100 MHz (leaving adequate room for the NCDXF beacons there). Please forgive my ignorance, but wouldn't that suffice for bandplans worldwide? I feel that even if we were to use PSK31 RTTY that there would be plenty of room still for all of the other digital modes upstairs. Generally speaking it's pretty quiet; look at the number of QSO's you've had there in digi or CW. Again, my opinion is that I feel that giving spectrum slices to groupings of digi modes can be beneficial to users. I would like it to be recommended more as a gentleman's agreement, rather than set in stone that ONLY those modes can and should be operated there. A general guideline rather than a law. 73 de W8RIT Dave
