NW7D wrote:
> I'm wondering if it would not make more sense on 40 meters to
> have RTTY contesting up in the traditional .80 to .100
> segment of the band rather down in the 7030 to 7050 CW
> portion where we have to co-mingle with CW ops? The .80 -
> .100 segment seems to be completely vacant much of the time
> and seems like a wasted band segment today. I know that some
> CW ops tend to get very irritated with the RTTY contesting in
> the 7030-7050 portion. If I understand it correctly, some DX
> countries were required to operate down in the lower section
> but now with the recent changes to 40 Meters band plans,
> would it make sense to try and move up to the 7080-7100
> portion so that CW ops and RTTY contesters are not QRM'ing each other?
Telecommunication laws differ in each country and determine what frequencies
licensees can transmit on. For example, US hams can use CW or digital from
7000-7125 on 40m. Japanese hams are only allowed 40m RTTY on 7020-7045.
Therefore non-split-frequency QSOs must take place in this segment if Jas
are to be worked.
Band plans are non-binding suggestions for mode frequencies to help share
the spectrum. However, there are multiple band plans and they there are
many conflicts between them. It is impossible to satisfy them all,
especially with international QSOs.
1. IARU band plans. "There is no worldwide IARU band plan. IARU band plans
are adopted at the regional level by the three regional conferences." (from
the IARU.org website.) Each of the three regions has a different band plan
and they are inconsistent, making non-split communication between regions
impossible to conform to all the band plans. Region one specifies digital
modes only from 7040 to 7050 with "all modes" up to 7200. Region 2 shows
digital only from 7035 to 7043 with all modes up to 7300.
2. In the US, the ARRL has a band plan (called "Frequency Guide") which
shows "RTTY/Data DX" on 7040 and RTTY/Data from 7080 to 7125.
3. In addition, there are special interests such as PSK31, QRP, etc. that
each have (sometimes multiple) band plans espoused by specific
organizations. Not surprisingly there a many conflicts between these
unofficial band plans. Using 40 meters as an example, on rare occasions
QRPers or Packet users have chased me off 7040 during both CW and RTTY
contests, claiming exclusive right to that frequency. Unfortunately, some
people interpret anything written down and titled "band plan" as an absolute
rule which it is not.
Events like DXpeditions and contests temporarily increase activity across
larger frequency segments (which is good overall for radiosport retaining
used spectrum), so other users will need to tolerate the inconvenience for
the good of our mutual hobby. Analogies are bicycle races, parades,
farmer's markets, etc where the roads are temporarily dedicated to the event
and not generally available to the public. Contesters should try to avoid
commonly used frequencies by other interests. But, if a major event is so
popular that it legally utilizes more spectrum than normal, so be it. We
all need to continue working together to share amateur spectrum and it is a
dynamic situation, not one that is precisely governed by exclusive worldwide
frequency assignments.
The only real rule is one's country telecom regulations which must be
adhered to. A non-split-frequency QSO must be held where the laws of each
country overlap. Beyond that, IARU and other "band plans" are non-binding
suggestions to help share the spectrum among varied users, but the plans
conflict greatly with each other.
73,
Ed
-------------------------
Ed Muns - W0YK
www.w0yk.com
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|