[CW] ARRL Band Plan

Sun Apr 12 17:37:24 EDT 2015

You claim that a dozen CW signals on top of an SSB signal would not bother them...

I think that's a tiny bit of an exaggeration of the facts.

If those 12 carriers were spread out along the middle of the 3kHz the SSB boys were using and IF CW had a 17 dB advantage over SSB (which it does) then you can bet the SSB ops would be uncomfortable trying to hear each other...

Best regards - Brian Carling
AF4K 

> On Apr 12, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Danny Douglas via CW <cw at mailman.qth.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> If the IARU and ARRL bandplans were the law of the lands, it would indeed be helpful.  You appaently have not lived in a place where there was NO bandplan, and people could willy nilly do their own thing.  For instance, down in SA )(specifically Venezuela, from first hand experience).  Local will get on what is normally a cw (ONLY) frequency and start chatting with their buddies two block down the street, in SSB.  CW ops are completely blasted out of their seats, from such operation.  Especially if one is trying to work DX, who have band plans, either on a daily basis, or in contests.  The CW op simply cannot hear the rest of the world, on those sub bands.  
> 
> Just fire up a slow scan signal, or an SSB QSO on top of a CW station, and see what it does to them.  The other direction, of course, makes little difference to the SSB op, as cw is just a small percentage of their signals.  A dozen signals cant make a dent in the effectiveness of the strong SSB ops transmissions. 
> 
>    Back in the 50's and 60's there were Chinese fishing boats off the coast of Washington/Oregon who were constantly interfering with stateside ops on 80 meters - smack dab in the middle of the cw portion of the band.  I worked Novice Roundup, and several other contests, having to put up with that.  First and foremost, it is a stupid place to put safety signals, and was illegal.  Except, the FCC stated something to the point of " They are foreign licensed operations - and we have no control over them"  Well- Indeed?   They were just outside US waters, but interfering with legally licensed amateur signals. They were transmitting in frequencies which were not allowed by treaty - even within their own waters.  Back in those days, Novice licensed stations HAD to use crystal control, so they always appeared right smack in the middle of some of the favorite crystals we used.  WE could not simply QSY, as those were the crystals we had.  One day, dozens of us were on  the main two or three crystals, and we could hear the ships in there talking, but we were on before they even came up, and we stayed there.  The next day, the news casts reported a Chinese ship had put out an emergency call (voice), and no one heard it.  The ship went down, with loss of life.  As far as we could figure out, it was one of the freqs that Novices frequented, and their own ships had not heard the SOS.  Funny - it took them only two days to completely abandon the 80 meter ham bands, and we never heard them there again.  They were NOT crystal controlled, and could have changed bands at any time, but it took this for them to decide to obey the law.  
> 
> So, yes band plans are important.  If everyone had the same ones, there would be no infighting between different administrations, and the rule and regulations would be adopted by everyone, and follwed by most operators.  There are always a few- but if no one answers them, at the wrong place, they soon learn to go where they are wanted.  Has nothing to do with control freq - just common sense.  
> 
> I too am unhappy that administrations keep whacking away at the cw bands, and it doesnt make sense, considering there are now more people operating CW , than before when CW was a required test subject to obtain a ticket.  
>> Steve WD8DAS via CW	Saturday, April 11, 2015 11:25 PM
>> 
>> I am very uncomfortable with the whole business of unofficial ARRL and IARU bandplans and how they seem to "morph" into eventual official rules and regulations.  I feel these plans actually create more conflict among operators and really only serve to make control freaks happier.  I would prefer no such stuff and would let the operations naturally cluster as they will.
>> 
>> But we now have both unofficial bandplans and official rules and regulations telling us where we can operate various modes, so I choose to make my opinions known.  
>> 
>> The current ARRL proposal would increase the sub band for RTTY and other digital teleprinter modes on 40m to 7070 - 7125 kHz and carve out a special place for wider digital modes in the range 7115 - 7125 kHz.
>> 
>> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Committee%20Reports/2015/January/SUMNER%20QS4.pdf
>> 
>> Yes we could still operate CW there but if this plan moves ahead you can expect new QRM from digital operations.
>> 
>> 
>> Steve WD8DAS
>> 
>> sbjohnston at aol.com
>> http://www.wd8das.net/
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Radio is your best entertainment value.
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> CW mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
>> CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
>> Unsubcribe send email to
>> cw-unsubscribe at mailman.qth.net
>> Subscribe send email to cw-subscribe at mailman.qth.net
>> Support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> 
>> =30=
> 
> -- 
> Danny Douglas
> 
>  
> ______________________________________________________________
> CW mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
> CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
> Unsubcribe send email to
> cw-unsubscribe at mailman.qth.net
> Subscribe send email to cw-subscribe at mailman.qth.net
> Support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> 
> =30=
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/attachments/20150412/a8a27ada/attachment.html>