[Lowfer] Ham VLF allocation

[Jonathan Jesse]

Yup, JA has some real good comments and proposals and I agree with him.  It
would make the band a bit more usable and easier to use while maintaining
the "level" playing ground.
The only reason I can see for 1750 to go Ham is for contesting and awards.
We still QSL and have our own awards and we can always make our own
contests if someone really needed to have one.
Look at all the bickering that goes on to the right of us (with all due
respect gents) when someone doesn't comply with the "gentlemens" agreement
band plan, granted it is a narrower slice of band.

Sign me: "Keep the Free Band FREE"

73,
JJ


At 14:01 2/18/02 -0500, you wrote:
>Bill, et al:
>
>> My feelings, exactly. I hope we can keep 1750 the same as it is because it
>> is an excellent test band. Used to think 1w isn't enought power. Not now.
>> The transmitting voltage levels are much more easy to manage than say....
>> 100w.
>
>My favorite scenario at this point would be to add the amateur allocation at
>136, and do two things at 160-190:
>
>1. Drop the "including transmission line" requirement, allowing transmitter
>PA stages to be nearer to the people running them.
>
>2. Make it one watt output power into the antenna. This would represent
>almost no change for high-efficiency PA operators, but would allow others to
>run linear amplifiers and get the one watt. This would permit more equal
>footing for modes that get crunched by non-linear amps.
>
>John Andrews
>
>_______________________________________________
>Lowfer mailing list
>Lowfer@mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer
>
>
----------------------------------------------------
Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today
Only $9.95 per month!
http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97