Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Should band plans be revised?  (Read 12855 times)
KA7PLE
Member

Posts: 25




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: December 02, 2010, 09:41:42 PM »

Just a couple of facts about CW. It takes only a S/N ratio of 3:1 to get a CW signal through, it takes 7:1 to get SSB through.
If you chase DX, work contests, Etc, by not using CW you are missing a lot of contacts.
CW use is actually on the rise. Check out the ARRL stats on the contest contacts. Also check the stats on clubs like SKCC, FISTS, NAQCC, Etc. Their membership is on the rise.
The manufactures of radios IE Yaesu, ICOM, Kenwood are still making CW a priority in their designs. If CW was dead or dying, do you think those companies would still be making such an effort?
CW only Kits are more popular than ever, look at Elecraft and other smaller companies who make them.
Reallocating the CW bands IMHO is a very bad idea, and I would argue against reducing the CW part of the spectrum.
I operate SSB and PSK31 too. On any given weekend with out a major contest going on I actually find it easier to make contacts on CW than on other modes. If you are into QRP operation, than CW should be your choice of modes. As I mentioned earlier you can hear a CW signal, and be heard much easier than with SSB.
Anyhow, off my soap box now. I don't want to reduce anyone's enjoyment of this great hobby. I hope and wish everyone felt the same way.

73
KA7PLE
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3913




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: December 03, 2010, 02:55:55 AM »

b)  "More modern types of communication" Huh  Like SSB -- about fifty years old, and unchanged in that time ?   

A small historical point...SSB is much more than 50 years old.

The theoretical basis for SSB was stated in the 19-teens, and was first used for a wired telephone carrier system more than 85 years ago.

The first use of SSB on radio was for the transatlantic telephone, on LF (55 kHz IIRC). Went into commercial operation in the late 1920s, more than 80 years ago.

The first use of SSB by hams was in the early 1930s, more than 75 years ago. (W6DEI and a few others).

SSB as a popular mode with hams got its start in the late 1940s, due to simplified ways of generating a signal (Dome's phasing networks and crystal/mechanical filters), post-WW2 prosperity, and WW2 surplus parts. That's more than 60 years ago.

Yet SSB is "modern" and Morse Code is not?

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 6055




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: December 03, 2010, 06:35:36 AM »

Contrary to belief, CW is increasing in popularity, not decreasing as you think it to be.  The bandplans ought to be left alone.  There is already enough encroachment on the CW portions, and if those portions were to be reduced, the encroachment would move into the lessened spaces even faster than now.  On the other hand, CW is not restricted to the bandplan space alloted to it, it can be used just about anywhere in the bands.  Only the fact that most CW operators are more gentlemenly than other operators prevent that from happening--but sadly, that is also changing.

Lets not roil the waters and get others upset, shall we?  In other words, if it isn't broken, don't try to fix it.
Logged
AA4PB
Member

Posts: 12990




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: December 03, 2010, 09:01:30 AM »

Actually, what we like to call the "CW portion" is actually CW/Digital so it is already shared by CW, RTTY, PSK31, MFSK, MT63, Packet, Pactor, and Amtor, among others. SSB ops however basically only share with AM, and slow scan.
Logged
N4KZ
Member

Posts: 602




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: December 03, 2010, 01:08:45 PM »

A few points to make.....

N3QE, I'm sorry you apparently have received one or more OO cards about operating CW on or about 7035 on 40m. You simply should have not have received that card(s) because you violated no FCC rule I know of.

The primary assumption made by the original poster that implied that CW is less popular now and therefore needs less spectrum is based on a faulty assumption. After being on the ham bands for 41 years, I can tell you the amount of CW on the air now is as much as ever, maybe a little more. CW has already been squeezed quite a bit -- thanks to a much smaller 80 meter CW band and a growing amount of HF digital modes and activity.

Thanks to the so-called novice refarming, where the former novice bands on 80, 40, 15 and 10 meters went away, I can tell you that the amateur population, in general, and the FCC specifically have not done a good job of reclaiming that spectrum for typical ham operation. The 80 meter novice band just went away period. The segment from 7100 to 7125 on 40 meters is lightly populated by U.S. stations. There are 50 khz of space on 20 meters largely wasted by U.S. from 14100 to 14150. I know, I know. Historically, the U.S. has tried to preserve that slice of spectrum for foreign phone operators. The rationale was many had modest stations and they needed a spot on 20 meters where they could "get away" from the strong U.S signals. Friends, those days are past. Many hams in other nations have stations as good as or often better than those found in the U.S. They don't need protection from U.S. any longer. Nothing against DX stations at all. But in most nations, they have far fewer amateurs than we have and the numbers dictate that we in the U.S. should do a better job of utilizing the spectrum we have.

Ditto on 15 meters where 21100 to 21200 is largely wasted by American stations. And look at the vast portions of 10 meters than are under-utilized also.

The original poster talked about squeezing CW stations into smaller and smaller segments. If you want more space for HF SSB and digital, talk to your ARRL director and get the League to support getting into discussions with the FCC about making better use of lightly used parts of 40, 20, 15 and 10 meters. There's plenty of spectrum there to support more SSB and digital. Ditto for six meters too.

73, N4KZ
Logged
N5RWJ
Member

Posts: 461




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: December 03, 2010, 01:24:49 PM »

Would it be good to have a slow code area ,5 or 10 wpm  on 40 meters  or other bands?
Logged
K0RS
Member

Posts: 785




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: December 03, 2010, 02:15:27 PM »

@KD8KQH

With 235 lookups on QRZ it appears your activity level is on life support.  Why would you care how the bands are apportioned?  Not enough bandwidth to support your massive level of activity? Roll Eyes

Would it be presumptuous to suggest you get a bit more experience under your belt before you make assumptions about viability of various modes?

For most of us in this forum, SSB is anathema.  I personally find activity in the SSB ghetto equivalent to CB.  If it weren't for CW, I wouldn't even own a radio.  YMMV.
Logged
N3QE
Member

Posts: 2364




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: December 03, 2010, 05:36:26 PM »

N3QE, I'm sorry you apparently have received one or more OO cards about operating CW on or about 7035 on 40m. You simply should have not have received that card(s) because you violated no FCC rule I know of.
In retrospect I am 99% sure I was QRMing some semi-rare DX that was on PSK31 7035. Mostly my ignorance of PSK31. Partly me operating my Eico 720 with one of my handful of 40 meter crystals.

I think the OO's are justified in trying to point out in a friendly way (and truly they try to be friendly) that modes or activities are stepping on each other. A postcard from the OO is appreciated more than long-term animosity between operating hams who unintentionally did step on each other.

I do admit that it is easy to for me as a CW op, to just mentally "tune out" the PSK31. I spent my youth on 40M ignoring nearby carriers from Euro SW broadcasters.

Which brings us to something you write and I key on, that may be even more important than just PSK31 and CW ops stepping on each other (I snip a little to arrive at the part about 40M, my favorite band):

Quote
Thanks to the so-called novice refarming, where the former novice bands on 80, 40, 15 and 10 meters went away, I can tell you that the amateur population, in general, and the FCC specifically have not done a good job of reclaiming that spectrum for typical ham operation. ... The segment from 7100 to 7125 on 40 meters is lightly populated by U.S. stations ...

IMHO the issue on 40M and the poor use of reclaiming spectrum: It's not just that it was the former novice band. It's more that it used to be thick with Euro SW broadcasters. They're gone and that's a good thing. (Although pirate SW broadcasters still seem to show up. Grrr!!!!) But it's not so good that hams are not actively using the space they used to occupy so persistently and obnoxiously. 40 Meters has never been a "local" band to me, it's always been the band that long haul worldwide DX is always interesting on. The IARU and other organizations etc need to stop treating it in band plans as a "local allocation plan" band and treat it in a truly global allocation plan.

Tim.
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3913




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: December 03, 2010, 07:25:01 PM »

I think Morse Code activity is on the rise in amateur radio - not that it ever went away. Here are some indicators:

1) Log entries and scores in contests by CW ops have been rising, despite the long sunspot minima.

2) There are more companies than ever before making and selling keys, keyers, Morse Code software, etc.

3) There are more rigs than ever which do a really good job on CW. Almost all current-production rigs can have a CW filter easily added. Neither of those things used to be the case.

4) The bands are busy!

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
NN4RH
Member

Posts: 330




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: December 04, 2010, 07:17:03 AM »

Blatant troll.

Either that, or someone who badly wanted to use the word "anachronic" in a sentence and couldn't think of any other way.
Logged
K7KBN
Member

Posts: 2825




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: December 04, 2010, 09:04:40 AM »

Blatant troll.

Either that, or someone who badly wanted to use the word "anachronic" in a sentence and couldn't think of any other way.


And even used the wrong word.  I think the OP was thinking of "anachronistic", which has a completely different meaning from "anachronic".

Logged

73
Pat K7KBN
CWO4 USNR Ret.
WX7G
Member

Posts: 6214




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: December 04, 2010, 09:12:44 AM »

Would it be good to have a slow code area ,5 or 10 wpm  on 40 meters  or other bands?

There is a slow code area on 40 meters; 7100 to 7125 kHz.
Logged
K1DA
Member

Posts: 525




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: December 04, 2010, 10:51:07 AM »

   I like the plan just the way it is.  Frankly there are a lot of operators in other countries who wonder where the ham fisted 2 wpm extras in the extra portion came from. 
Logged
W7ETA
Member

Posts: 2527




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: December 04, 2010, 02:33:26 PM »

Write your proposal and send it off to the FCC.
73
Bob
Logged
WB3CQM
Member

Posts: 121




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: December 04, 2010, 02:44:43 PM »

not that this means any thing but one day left and ZL8X has made so far 78359 cw contacts

     43046 ssb contacts

     that is 35313 more cw qso 


 I would not trade one of my cw contacts for 10 ssb.

I can not wait to see the final statics

JIM

Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!