[RTTY] ARRL 160 Band Plan

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

Tom,

You are typical of the class of self serving jerks who hasn't bothered
to learn what amateur radio is about, its history, or even enough about
the technology to understand when you are wrong.  You don't even know
enough to respond accurately to me but then half-truths an made up
"facts" are a better story for you.

For example: "Also digital modes operation around 1838 kc +/- is in
agreement with the ITU region 2 band plan.  Unfortunately though
the ARRL band plan counteracts the ITU  band plan."

First the ITU does not have a bandplan for 160 meters ... the ITU
doesn't give a hoot how amateurs divide the band.  Secondly, it is
not Region 2 ... that is the North and South America and IARU 2 have
not published a bandplan (www.iaru.org/bandplans.html).  You are
speaking about the IARU Region 1 bandplan.  That bandplan: 1) is
not valid outside Region 1 (Europe, the countries of the former
USSR, and Mongolia), 2) carries no "force of law" - it is a
suggestion just as the ARRL bandplan is a suggestion for US
amateurs.

I suggest that you check the implementation dates for the IARU
Region 1 bandplan and the ARRL 160 meter bandplan.  Had the Region
1 plan included recommendations on 160 meters when the ARRL plan
was under development, know the members of the ARRL ad hoc committee
well enough to know that they would have taken note of its existence
and recommendations.

RM-10325 is only one in a long line of attempts to apply the same
reason to 160 meters as applies on all other amateur bands in
medium and high frequency range.  You weren't even licensed the
first time the issue was raised.

I won't even go into how many principles of electromagnetics you
violate in the antenna claims on your web site ... however, that
is nothing new one with an 11 meter mentality.

Go ahead and delude yourself ... W1AW will be operating below 1810
before the end of this year as of that really matters.

    ... Joe, W4TV

PS. That "small group of 1 x 2 callsign hams with gigantic runaway
egos that insist that they are omniscient by virtue of  their license
class, ARRL DXCC entity totals and electrical engineering backgrounds"
have helped more people get on 160 meters that you will ever help.
Very few of them have EE backgrounds ... there are pastors, school
teachers, business persons and even a CEO or two among the long time
users of 160.   Most of them had been on the band for 20 years before
you were even licensed and you could have learned a lot from them.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Thomas Giella KN4LF
> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 6:17 PM
> To: a RTTY COL eList
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] ARRL 160 Band Plan
>
>
> I don't want to fall into the 160 meter band plan issue "you
> said I said"
> hissing war trap but as you cc:'ed the RTTY e-list instead of
> emailing me
> directly only, I will respond to you one time on this e-list
> and then will
> no longer post anything on this subject on this e-list or any
> other e-list
> for that matter.
>
> Joe you are part of the very small group of 1 x 2 callsign hams with
> gigantic runaway egos that insist that they are omniscient by
> virtue of
> their license class, ARRL DXCC entity totals and electrical
> engineering
> backgrounds, anal retentives! A small group that has
> repeatedly attempted to
> create their own private playground gated community on 160 meters but
> fortunately have failed in every attempt.
>
> I led the charge against your RM-10325 which sought to turn
> 160 meters into
> a private CW only playground  and gated community and
> defeated it and I led
> the charge that halted at least for now the QSY of W1AW CW
> broadcasts from
> 1817.500 kc to 1807.500 kc. I will always actively oppose all
> selfish acts
> that your small group attempts to perpetuate on the rest of
> we 160 meter
> operators. It's all about right and wrong, I'm right and you
> are wrong and
> you can't handle a well articulated opposing viewpoint.
>
> As far as the digital modes between 1800-1810 kc, I advised
> Mr. Sumner, K1ZZ
> today of the following:
>
>
> .....There is quite a bit of PSK31/63, MFSK16 and OLIVIA MFSK
> activity
> between 1800-1810 kc, some RTTY too. We appear invisible to
> the casual
> listener due to the low output powers being used. Using DSP
> based software
> such as MixW we are able to copy one another up to 18 db
> below the noise
> floor. That gives the appearance of no activity between 1800-1810 kc.
>
> If I may be allowed to suggest there is allot of room for the W1AW
> broadcasts above 1900 kc. There is some SSB and AM between
> 1900-2000 kc but
> that frequency range is pretty empty. I'm a newcomer to the
> digital modes (4
> years) and attempted to get digital operations moved above
> 1900 kc but
> failed.....
>
>
> Joe you don't want digital operations between 1800-1810 kc so
> naturally you
> want the ARRL's W1AW operations to QSY down on top of us.
> Because of your
> selfishness and personal bias you are unqualified to comment
> on the issue.
> And by the way feel free to cc: W4ZV the Topband e-list owner
> of my opinions
> if you would like as I'm not on that e-list.
>
> As far as digital modes operation around 1838 kc +/-, there
> is activity
> there every night between the U.S. and Europe/Africa. You
> just can't hear it
> 99% of the time because it's weak. Also digital modes
> operation around 1838
> kc +/- is in agreement with the ITU region 2 band plan.
> Unfortunately though
> the ARRL band plan counteracts the ITU  band plan.
>
> --... ...--,
> Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF
> Lakeland, FL, USA
> Grid Square EL97AW
> kn4lf at arrl.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <W4TV at subich.com>
> To: "'Thomas Giella KN4LF'" <flcyclone at tampabay.rr.com>; "'a RTTY COL
> eList'" <rtty at contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 4:58 PM
> Subject: RE: [RTTY] 160 Band Plan/RTTY On 160
>
>
> >
> > You are so far off the truth about 160 meter history that you might
> > as well be writing fiction.
> >
> > There have been multiple efforts to define a CW/SSB split to 160
> > going back to immediately after the LORAN segmentation and power
> > limits were eliminated in 1979 or 1980 ... I was one of those who
> > proposed that the Commission "rationalize" 160 meters and bring it
> > into conformance with the rest of the, then current practices on the
> > other MF and HF allocations.
> >
> > In those days the "DX Window" was 1825 to 1830 and data modes were
> > specifically not permitted on 160.  The "DX Window" migrated up to
> > 1830 - 1835 to relieve pressure on other CW activities below 1830
> > over some years as many of the non-US countries received additional
> > 160 meter allocations (1810 to 1830 or 1810 to 1850 was very common
> > in much of the world).
> >
> > The impetus to the current "bandplan" was the attempt by several
> > anti-CW digital mode individuals to set up camp with MFSK on 1838
> > - right in the middle of the most heavily used CW spectrum.  The
> > committee that recommended the current bandplan hardly consists
> > " of a very small group of 1 x 2 callsign hams with gigantic runaway
> > egos that insist that they are omniscient by virtue of their license
> > class, ARRL DXCC entity totals and electrical engineering
> backgrounds,
> > anal retentives!"
> >
> > In fact, the committee consisted of three ARRL Directors or Vice-
> > Directors, one staff member (Member Services Manager) and two of
> > the most experienced 160 operators in the US.
> >
> > Oh by the way ... the bandplan says: 1800 - 20000 CW
> >
> > There is nothing that says "CW is prohibited below 1810."  If, after
> > extensive monitoring in multiple areas of the US by several
> experienced
> > operators, ARRL believed it was best to move W1AW to 1807.5
> it should
> > have done so.  It should STILL DO SO as activity lower in
> the band is
> > much less that between 1815 and 1840.
> >
> > 73,
> >
> >    ... Joe, W4TV
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: rtty-bounces at contesting.com
> >> [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Thomas
> Giella KN4LF
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 11:12 AM
> >> To: a RTTY COL eList
> >> Subject: [RTTY] 160 Band Plan/RTTY On 160
> >>
> >>
> >> It was real nice to see all of the RTTY activity on 1808 kc
> >> +/- yesterday evening. There is already quite a bit of PSK,
> >> MFSK and OLIVIA MFSK activity between 1800-1810 kc. We appear
> >> invisible to most due to the low power used and I hope the
> >> activity continues as the more the merrier.
> >>
> >> As far as 160 meter band plans the CW mode only on 160 meters
> >> DX community attempted to have the Gentleman's Agreement
> >> 1830-1835 kc CW and 1840-1850 SSB DX windows reaffirmed in
> >> 2001 via the ARRL 160 Meter Ad Hoc Committee. However in the
> >> end that didn't happen so there is now no official DX windows
> >> on 160 meters. They didn't like the end result of the new
> >> band plan so tried to get the DX windows codified into 46 CFR
> >> Part 97 via FCC rulemaking but failed there too.
> >>
> >> The alleged powerful politics people consist of a very small
> >> group of 1 x 2 callsign hams with gigantic runaway egos that
> >> insist that they are omniscient by virtue of their license
> >> class, ARRL DXCC entity totals and electrical engineering
> >> backgrounds, anal retentives! They have repeatedly attempted
> >> to create their own private playground gated community on 160
> >> meters but fortunately have failed in every attempt.
> >>
> >> This group was behind the pressure placed upon W1AW to QSY
> >> off of 1817.500 kc.
> >>
> >> I notice the 160 meter bandplan does not even mention any DX window
> >> at all. Between this glaring omission and the 40 meter RTTY DX
> >> calling frequency fiasco, one can only wonder what's going on at
> >> headquarters. I suspect some powerful politics but I have
> no personal
> >> knowledge.
> >>
> >> For some additional detail on the ARRL bandplan, see "The
> Considerate
> >> Operator's  Frequency Guide" at
> >> http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/conop.html
> >>
> >> 73, Bill W6WRT
> >>
> >> --... ...--,
> >> Thomas F. Giella, KN4LF
> >> Lakeland, FL, USA
> >> Grid Square EL97AW
> >> kn4lf at arrl.net
> >>
> >> Proof Of God Through Science:
> >> http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/audio/newevidence.htm
> >> KN4LF Amateur & SWL Radio History: http://www.kn4lf.com
> >> KN4LF 160 Meter Propagation Theory Notes:
> >> http://www.kn4lf.com/kn4lf8.htm
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.1/272 - Release
> Date: 3/1/2006
> >
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.1/272 - Release
> Date: 3/1/2006
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>