[Wswss] 33cm Bandplan

[Jerry B.]

I think we need more than the bottom 100 Khz.
In the past I have had plenty of garbage on 902.100 and had to go up the
band.

I suggest going for the bottom 500 Khz as there may be a few beacons around
902.300.
After all 33 cm is a rather wide band for amatuer use and there should be
plenty of room for
every one.

73
Jerry
N6AJ
DM06

-----Original Message-----
From: wswss-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:wswss-bounces at mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of Ron Patterson
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 12:03 PM
To: narcc at yahoogroups.com; w6cyx at arrl.net
Cc: Jim Klitzing; wswss
Subject: [Wswss] 33cm Bandplan


Merry Christmas all,

It has been brought to my attention that NARRC is curently discussing
the band plan for 902 Mhz. In looking at the proposed plan on the NARRC
website, I see that there has been no provision for weak signal
operations. In the ARRL bandplan 902 to 903 Mhz is reserved for weak
signal operation. In the SCRRBA band plan for southern California
902.0000 to 902.1000 Mhz is reserved for weak signal operation.

With the availability of inexpensive surplus cellular amplifiers, I have
seen an increase in weak signal activity on the band. I myself have
acquired a 250 watt amplifier. Stations as far north as the bay area are
working stations around California. This activity takes place between
902 and 902.1 Mhz. Coordinating repeater inputs in this portion of the
band is a recipe for future interference problems.

I urge the NARCC Spectrum Management Committee at a minimum to conform
to the SCRRBA band plan. This would mean no repeater inputs below
902.1125 Mhz. Looking at the coordinated repeaters, I see that there are
three repeaters that may have inputs in this area. I would strongly
suggest that no more repeaters be coordinated for this portion of the band.

Ron Patterson W6FM
NARCC Org# 296

_______________________________________________
Wswss mailing list
Wswss at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/wswss