Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+Response\s+to\s+ARRL\s+request\s+for\s+inputs\s+for\s+new\s+Band\s+Plan\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+Response\s+to\s+ARRL\s+request\s+for\s+inputs\s+for\s+new\s+Band\s+Plan\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: Terry <ab5k@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 10:45:14 -0500; We now have 2 weeks left to respond to the ARRL request for inputs to the new band plan. There are several options: 1. A few submit band plans that are useful but are not 100 percent aligned. A lot o; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00126.html (7,479 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 12:10:41 -0400; If the Commission agrees to ARRL's stupidity, any bandplan should restrict wideband digital to existing "automatic control" sub bands and only on amateur bands where there is a *separate* "RTTY, dat; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00129.html (9,476 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: "Anthony (N2KI)" <n2ki.ham@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 12:29:40 -0400; Wideband will definitely become an issue. We already are squeezing into the band plan as it is. Unless the FCC plans on expanding the amateur frequency allocations beyond their current boundaries, th; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00130.html (11,052 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: Jay WS7I <ws7ik7tj@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 09:45:55 -0700; Plenty of room. For example. 14.000 - 14.035 CW more than enough. 14.035 - 14.050 RTTY, 14.050-14.060 PSK31, 14.061 - 14.070 500 Hz. 14.110-14.150 wideband. RTTY just needs to move way down into the; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00131.html (9,139 bytes)
5. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: Terry <ab5k@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:56:03 -0500; Hi Anthony, There is room for them. For example on 20 meters from 14.100 to 14.112 and perhaps higher. On 80 meters we are crunched as the FCC took away a big chuck of digital spectrum a few years ag; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00133.html (12,408 bytes)
6. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 10:20:05 -0700; I am not sure that the old rules has *ever* impeded the development of more innovative keyboard-to-keyboard modes. A good example is DominoEX, which automatically tunes as fast as the best RTTY opera; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00136.html (9,156 bytes)
7. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: Wa3frp <wa3frp@aol.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 14:00:02 -0400 (EDT); Terry, This is a very good idea and I support it. Please consider the proliferation of beacons - outside of the NCDXF HF beacons which are coordinated and use minimal bandwidth. Please also see the a; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00139.html (10,546 bytes)
8. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: Terry <ab5k@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 13:22:11 -0500; Yes I agree the band plan should address beacons. The current ARRL Band Plan includes the NCDXF beacons and the current region 2 band plan allows beacons from 14.099 to 14.101. So if we modify the cu; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00140.html (11,410 bytes)
9. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: Tom Osborne <w7why@frontier.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 13:58:02 -0700; Hi Jay Not that much room if you're not an Extra :-) 73 Tom W7WHY _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rt; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00141.html (8,828 bytes)
10. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: "Ron Kolarik" <rkolarik@neb.rr.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 16:45:03 -0500; Terry I already sent my comments in with the suggestion they try to follow the IARU bandplan to bring the US into better alignment with the rest of the world. I also pointed out the recommendation to; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00146.html (10,864 bytes)
11. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: "Ron Kolarik" <rkolarik@neb.rr.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 16:58:42 -0500; Lack of experimentation? Page 64 of April QST, H4FSK from KN6KB. Ron K0IDT -- Original Message -- From: "Kok Chen" <chen@mac.com> To: "RTTY Reflector" <rtty@contesting.com> Cc: "Terry" <ab5k@hotmail.; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00147.html (10,793 bytes)
12. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: John Becker <w0jab@big-river.net>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 17:11:26 -0500; Lack of experimentation? Page 64 of April QST, H4FSK from KN6KB. March was my last QST. Has it been posted anyplace else? _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contes; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00150.html (9,191 bytes)
13. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band Plan (score: 1): Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:21:45 -0700; http://www.arrl.org/news/the-april-issue-of-digital-qst-is-now-available Page 64, in Steve Ford's "eclectic" department. Vy 73 Chen, W7AY _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00151.html (9,664 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 13
Page: [1]