[Wswss] 33cm Bandplan

[Ron Patterson]

Jerry,

It s to late to ask for more than 100 khz at least in southern 
California. SCRRBA adopted their bandplan in May of 1990. You will 
notice that I suggest 100 khz as a minimum in northern California. I 
have heard from a member of the coordinating body for the state of 
Oregon. They are also formulating their 33cm bandplan and have 
recommended that 902.0000 to 902.3000 be reserved for weak signal 
operation. Their proposd bandplan an be viewed at 
http://www.orrc.org/33cm_band.htm .

You may want to ask Jim W6PQL about the qrm situation in the low end of 
the band. I undersand he has had to operate near the lower band edge to 
get away from the local interference from cordless phones and the like.

  I have heard from many people on this subject since my post but I have 
yet to hear anything from NARRC.

Jerry B. wrote:

>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
>
>  
>