I don't want to fall into the 160 meter band plan issue "you said I said"
hissing war trap but as you cc:'ed the RTTY e-list instead of emailing me
directly only, I will respond to you one time on this e-list and then will
no longer post anything on this subject on this e-list or any other e-list
for that matter.
Joe you are part of the very small group of 1 x 2 callsign hams with
gigantic runaway egos that insist that they are omniscient by virtue of
their license class, ARRL DXCC entity totals and electrical engineering
backgrounds, anal retentives! A small group that has repeatedly attempted to
create their own private playground gated community on 160 meters but
fortunately have failed in every attempt.
I led the charge against your RM-10325 which sought to turn 160 meters into
a private CW only playground and gated community and defeated it and I led
the charge that halted at least for now the QSY of W1AW CW broadcasts from
1817.500 kc to 1807.500 kc. I will always actively oppose all selfish acts
that your small group attempts to perpetuate on the rest of we 160 meter
operators. It's all about right and wrong, I'm right and you are wrong and
you can't handle a well articulated opposing viewpoint.
As far as the digital modes between 1800-1810 kc, I advised Mr. Sumner, K1ZZ
today of the following:
.....There is quite a bit of PSK31/63, MFSK16 and OLIVIA MFSK activity
between 1800-1810 kc, some RTTY too. We appear invisible to the casual
listener due to the low output powers being used. Using DSP based software
such as MixW we are able to copy one another up to 18 db below the noise
floor. That gives the appearance of no activity between 1800-1810 kc.
If I may be allowed to suggest there is allot of room for the W1AW
broadcasts above 1900 kc. There is some SSB and AM between 1900-2000 kc but
that frequency range is pretty empty. I'm a newcomer to the digital modes (4
years) and attempted to get digital operations moved above 1900 kc but
failed.....
Joe you don't want digital operations between 1800-1810 kc so naturally you
want the ARRL's W1AW operations to QSY down on top of us. Because of your
selfishness and personal bias you are unqualified to comment on the issue.
And by the way feel free to cc: W4ZV the Topband e-list owner of my opinions
if you would like as I'm not on that e-list.
As far as digital modes operation around 1838 kc +/-, there is activity
there every night between the U.S. and Europe/Africa. You just can't hear it
99% of the time because it's weak. Also digital modes operation around 1838
kc +/- is in agreement with the ITU region 2 band plan. Unfortunately though
the ARRL band plan counteracts the ITU band plan.
--... ...--,
Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF
Lakeland, FL, USA
Grid Square EL97AW
kn4lf@arrl.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <W4TV@subich.com>
To: "'Thomas Giella KN4LF'" <flcyclone@tampabay.rr.com>; "'a RTTY COL
eList'" <rtty@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 4:58 PM
Subject: RE: [RTTY] 160 Band Plan/RTTY On 160
>
> You are so far off the truth about 160 meter history that you might
> as well be writing fiction.
>
> There have been multiple efforts to define a CW/SSB split to 160
> going back to immediately after the LORAN segmentation and power
> limits were eliminated in 1979 or 1980 ... I was one of those who
> proposed that the Commission "rationalize" 160 meters and bring it
> into conformance with the rest of the, then current practices on the
> other MF and HF allocations.
>
> In those days the "DX Window" was 1825 to 1830 and data modes were
> specifically not permitted on 160. The "DX Window" migrated up to
> 1830 - 1835 to relieve pressure on other CW activities below 1830
> over some years as many of the non-US countries received additional
> 160 meter allocations (1810 to 1830 or 1810 to 1850 was very common
> in much of the world).
>
> The impetus to the current "bandplan" was the attempt by several
> anti-CW digital mode individuals to set up camp with MFSK on 1838
> - right in the middle of the most heavily used CW spectrum. The
> committee that recommended the current bandplan hardly consists
> " of a very small group of 1 x 2 callsign hams with gigantic runaway
> egos that insist that they are omniscient by virtue of their license
> class, ARRL DXCC entity totals and electrical engineering backgrounds,
> anal retentives!"
>
> In fact, the committee consisted of three ARRL Directors or Vice-
> Directors, one staff member (Member Services Manager) and two of
> the most experienced 160 operators in the US.
>
> Oh by the way ... the bandplan says: 1800 - 20000 CW
>
> There is nothing that says "CW is prohibited below 1810." If, after
> extensive monitoring in multiple areas of the US by several experienced
> operators, ARRL believed it was best to move W1AW to 1807.5 it should
> have done so. It should STILL DO SO as activity lower in the band is
> much less that between 1815 and 1840.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com
>> [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Thomas Giella KN4LF
>> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 11:12 AM
>> To: a RTTY COL eList
>> Subject: [RTTY] 160 Band Plan/RTTY On 160
>>
>>
>> It was real nice to see all of the RTTY activity on 1808 kc
>> +/- yesterday evening. There is already quite a bit of PSK,
>> MFSK and OLIVIA MFSK activity between 1800-1810 kc. We appear
>> invisible to most due to the low power used and I hope the
>> activity continues as the more the merrier.
>>
>> As far as 160 meter band plans the CW mode only on 160 meters
>> DX community attempted to have the Gentleman's Agreement
>> 1830-1835 kc CW and 1840-1850 SSB DX windows reaffirmed in
>> 2001 via the ARRL 160 Meter Ad Hoc Committee. However in the
>> end that didn't happen so there is now no official DX windows
>> on 160 meters. They didn't like the end result of the new
>> band plan so tried to get the DX windows codified into 46 CFR
>> Part 97 via FCC rulemaking but failed there too.
>>
>> The alleged powerful politics people consist of a very small
>> group of 1 x 2 callsign hams with gigantic runaway egos that
>> insist that they are omniscient by virtue of their license
>> class, ARRL DXCC entity totals and electrical engineering
>> backgrounds, anal retentives! They have repeatedly attempted
>> to create their own private playground gated community on 160
>> meters but fortunately have failed in every attempt.
>>
>> This group was behind the pressure placed upon W1AW to QSY
>> off of 1817.500 kc.
>>
>> I notice the 160 meter bandplan does not even mention any DX window
>> at all. Between this glaring omission and the 40 meter RTTY DX
>> calling frequency fiasco, one can only wonder what's going on at
>> headquarters. I suspect some powerful politics but I have no personal
>> knowledge.
>>
>> For some additional detail on the ARRL bandplan, see "The Considerate
>> Operator's Frequency Guide" at
>> http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/conop.html
>>
>> 73, Bill W6WRT
>>
>> --... ...--,
>> Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF
>> Lakeland, FL, USA
>> Grid Square EL97AW
>> kn4lf@arrl.net
>>
>> Proof Of God Through Science:
>> http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/audio/newevidence.htm
>> KN4LF Amateur & SWL Radio History: http://www.kn4lf.com
>> KN4LF 160 Meter Propagation Theory Notes:
>> http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf8.htm
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.1/272 - Release Date: 3/1/2006
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.1/272 - Release Date: 3/1/2006
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|