lowfer/ham QRM (was Re: [Lowfer] Medfer TX Loop Question(s)??)

[Ralph Hartwell]

> > Bill brings up some good points about keeping 1750 the way it is but
misses
> > one important point.  Some LOWFERS are not licensed hams and an
official
> > Ham allocation would knock them out until they got licensed, if they
wanted
> > a license.  If there's to be a VLF allocation, I hope it's down at
135 khz
> > like the Eu's and 1750 remains regulated and license free.
> >
> > 73,
> > Jon W1JHJ
>
> I echo those sentiments, for at least a big portion of 160-190 kHz.
My
> worry is bad interference when "the big bad guys" run lots of power
with
> lousy signals (as evidence locally by a lot of the signals on 75 meter
> phone) and generate interference to other services.
>
> Ed
> W6IZJ

It may not be as much of a problem as you think.  After all, if an
antenna is any good at these frequencies, its Q will be high enough so
as to pretty well eliminate any out of channel garbage by itself.  And
since the antenna would present a high reactance off frequency, a TX
that is putting out serious spurs and trash would quickly find itself in
trouble - it might even let the magic smoke escape!  I also suspect that
for the most part, only a few serious operators will get on the band,
and probably use narrow band, weak signal modes.  Just as with PSK31 and
the like, you can easily work around a strong but clean signal if you
have reasonably good RX gear.

73,

Ralph   W5JGV / WC2XSR / 13

(not on 166.5 - yet!)

http://home.att.net/~shmrg

http://home.att.net/~ralph.hartwell.