I have never understood this attitude that countries outside the U.S.
should be able to have to move down for voice transmissions. What it
says to me is those operatiors view those lower areas as having more
room without QRM.
When I compare the amount of ham signals on the bands to say 25 years
What is going to happen when and if the HF bands are
opened up for SSB to the "no-coders" ? Pick a number
for your turn on a band or just a 27Mhz free-for-all.
At 10:59 PM 2/6/06, you wrote:
>Since most, if not all Central and South American countries have no
>subbands, they go where they want, wh
Maybe most countries, but certainly not all...
Jose, CO2JA
--- Danny Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since most, if not all Central and South American
> countries have no
> subbands, they go where they want, when they want.
> Our SSB moving down any
> bit at all, with simply cause them to
John,
It may very well be that there are not all that many no-code HF
interested hams. Look what happened with the no-code Technician License.
We did get an initial influx of course, and we will see that with a
no-code HF license too, but after that we may find that there really are
not that m
I don't find anything unusual at all about other countries giving
their phone operations room to roam below the US bands. If I was
located there, I would be asking for that too! I don't know about
160, but there is plenty of 'foreign' interference on 80 and 40.
As far as CW goes, 5 wpm is pain
For those who may be interested to know
80 metres
*
3.500 to 3.510CW DX portion
3.500 to 3.560CW band allocation
3.560 to 3.585Novice portion
3.580 to 3.620CW and digital modes
3.620 to 3.800Phone allocation and CW
3.775 to 3.800Phone DX portion
I cannot recal
this is almost identical with the VOLUNTARY
bandplan currently being followed in Canada, the exception being
no phone ops under 3.700, and SSB to 4.000. ditto
on hearing no CW in the phone bands except between 3.7 and 3.725, and we
do
not have a novice band
John
VE5MU
- Original M
I have been following this thread about band blans since its inception,
with great intere
st, and I wonder why it is that the US hams seem to think that the world
starts and finishes in the USA.
There is an awfull lot of world outside of the "States". The US hams
seem to think that any country t
It's nature Kevin, please forgive us. We will catch up to the rest of
the world some day!
Ron W4LDE
Kevin O'Rorke wrote:
>I have been following this thread about band blans since its inception,
>with great intere
>st, and I wonder why it is that the US hams seem to think that the world
>sta
Might even adopt the Metric system within another century or so.
My Dutch-born mother-in-law says that if she could get used to miles and
pounds and inches at age 40+, Americans could easily get used to the
Metric system if they started learning it in school.
Alan NV8A
On 02/07/06 07:21 pm W4
Dave:
This is scary... we actually agree...
I even like your wording.. which makes a Heck of a
lot of sense...
__Howard S.
White Ph.D. P. Eng., VE3GFW/K6 ex-AE6SM KY6LAWebsite: www.ky6la.com "No Good Deed Goes
Unpunished""Ham
I dont think anyone has said that band plans, just because they are
different than ours, are wrong. What has been said is that having different
band plans can lead to difficulties for one or the other, or both. If your
band plan allows your operators to work modes on frequencies where anothers
ba
At our local VEC Meeting we heard that the FCC is
rumored to be eliminating the CW barrier in its entirety in the next week...or
so... effective about July
So there will be an influx of new General "No
Coders'
But do not get your hopes up...
I have been teaching Tech and Gen
Thanks for sharing your direct experience from
UK, Canada and Australia.. on your voluntary bandplans..
I have personally also had direct experience with
these plans and found just like you all have found that they work exceedingly
well..
And of course, there is no good reason to think
We silly Americans think that just because
we prop up the rest of the world with $$$ and also protect it from the "real"
bad guys, that the world should do everything "our way".
I seem to remember a mantra that was
prevalent about 19 years ago when I first got my license. It went somethi
Great! I hope you will join me in vigorously opposing adoption of
the current ARRL proposal (RM-11306) in favor of one consistent with
the proposal below.
After reading many of the submitted comments, I am persuaded that RM-
11306 if also wrong-headed with respect to AM, but this is not the
pla
No, that's not how it is. Many of these band plans
have been in active use for over 50 years. What makes you think that the rest of
the world
will abandon historical band plans because the USA
says so.
think Again! ( we are open to invasion
Monday Wednesdays and Fridays Only)
Jo
This "bickering", as you call it, has been occurring on portals,
reflectors, news groups, and mailing lists all over the internet.
That's why there are more than 900 RM-11306 comments filed on the
FCC web site, compared with the 20 comments filed when 97.221 was
proposed in April 1995.
Whateve
Please dont put words in my mouth. I did not
say that the rest of the world should abandon band plans because the US says
so. I am saying the WORLDS Hams SHOULD INSIST on international band
plans. Having 50 different plans is more useless than not having one at
all. I know how those pl
Hear, hear.
cheers Graeme zl1gbb
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Danny Douglas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Please dont put words in my mouth. I did not say that the rest of
the world should abandon band plans because the US says so. I am
saying the WORLDS Hams SHOULD INSIST on interna
20 matches
Mail list logo
