http://uksmg.org/ en-gb Unless otherwise stated, all text, images and sound recordings are the copyright of the UK Six Metre Group. This Web site is published on a strictly non-profit basis but please note that UKSMG is not a registered non-profit organisation. The opinions expressed are the opinions of the authors alone and not that of any associated organisations or employers or hosting Internet service providers. No material may be used in other media unless full credit is given to the UK Six Metre Group or the credited original source of the material.
webmaster@nospam.com (G8FXM) webmaster@nospam.com (G8FXM) Tue, 07 Sep 2010 22:34:56 +0100 Tue, 07 Sep 2010 22:34:56 +0100 http://backend.userland.com/rss e107 (http://e107.org) 60 http://uksmg.org/e107_images/uklogo3_col.gif http://uksmg.org/ 88 31 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1343
Below are my thoughts open for discussion and criticism by all.


Background
At the Region 1 IARU meeting held during March 2010 in Vienna David Butler, G4ASR, proposed moving the beacon sub band from 50.000 - 50.080 MHz to 50.400 – 50.500 MHz and to allocate 50.000 – 50.100 MHz for telegraphy exclusive use.

Subsequently many opinions have been aired and the proposal in its existing form is largely opposed by UKSMG. However, in the ensuing debate two common views emerged.

Firstly, changing the beacon sub-band in 2012 does not allow sufficient time to ensure a smooth transition to the new frequencies and changes should not take place during a sun spot maxima, and

Secondly, re-organisation of the beacons offers a rare opportunity to re-examine the complete band plan.

The existing IARU 50 MHz band plan was adopted in 1984 with slight amendments in 1996 and some minor tinkering, largely on a national basis, since then.

Many new and emerging technologies need a band allocation, whilst
improving equipment specifications also have an impact.

Objective
The objective is to achieve a coherent, multi-regional resolution to the band plan issue not merely the issues concerning beacon sub band re-allocation.

It must be remembered that any band plan is voluntary but the more logical and coherent it is the more likely it is to be adhered to.

Any band plan will be a compromise and will not/cannot satisfy every special interest group.

Process
National Societies, lead by either the existing VHF Manager or by an individual appointed specifically for the task, should consult with local interest groups and individuals with specific expertise to define key criteria and a “wish list” to give an outline shape to a revised bandplan.

IARU vhf/uhf delegates should examine this information and assess the degree of communality and, taking account of any specific region requirements, propose an outline multi-regional revised band plan.

This should be referred back to the initial National proposers for comment, suggestions and development.

Regular communication between all interested parties should result in an iterative process with revised information being passed through the chain.

A revised band plan will then emerge which will, of course, be a compromise but due to the detailed two way communication all should appreciate why the band plan has the shape it does even if it does not fulfil individual wishes.

Schedule
Agreement for the new reasoned, multi-regional band plan should be reached by the end of 2014 with National Societies responsible for implementation by the end of 2017. This will include any relocation of beacons.

Conclusion
The opportunity to modify and modernise the current band plan should be wholeheartedly embraced, creating a framework for the six metre band for the next twenty-five years.
]]> g4jzs@nospam.com (David, G8LZE) Sat, 04 Sep 2010 14:55:52 +0100 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1343 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1342 g3zyy@nospam.com (Trev, G3ZYY) Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:01:50 +0100 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1342 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1341 http://www.techvert.com/sunspot-photo-is-most-detailed-ever/
[ image disabled ]]]> la7dfa@nospam.com (Per, LA7DFA) Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:06:48 +0100 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1341 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1340 WSPR is an easy way to take part in radio propagation experiments.

There is a growing group of amateurs using WSPR on six meters, you may be surprised what propagation is possible when the band is "dead"!

There is a very good introduction to WSPR by G4ILO at http://www.g4ilo.com/wspr.html 

You can see what propagation is being reported in (almost) real time by going to http://www.wsprnet.org Registration is free.

Download the free software and have a go. 

David]]> g4jzs@nospam.com (David, G8LZE) Wed, 18 Aug 2010 16:01:00 +0100 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1340 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1327
On 2M it gave 2,7 kW output easy. After some years on 6M I decided to convert the amplifier to 50 MHz. Mainly because it was only collecting dust since I was no longer active on 2M.
After some try and error I came up with a Pi filter output circuit.
The first C is quite critical because the high voltages. I use a normal variable C. But a vacuum high voltage one should do much better. With 75 W input RF it delivers 3,4 kWatt out easy. That's within the 1 dB compression point. With 100 Watt drive I get nearly 4 kW. This amplifier failed only once. When I did a long tune sequence the pertinax body of the RF choke got in fire and shorted the 5 kV HV. (very loud bang)

After all these years I am now running my second tube. The tube is an old fashioned design but very reliable. It's in use by many HF and 2M operators. It runs full power within 10 seconds. Perfect for 6M.

Such an amplifier is not a beginners project. High voltages, strong RF fields and even some Rontgen needs a lot of safety precautions. It can be a killing project!

My amp is fed by a three fase 400 Volt mains. The fillament is 6 Volt at @ 30A AC. Efficiency is around 55%. Gain +/- 16 dB.

73, Peter PA2V
]]> peter@nospam.com (Peter, PA2V) Thu, 12 Aug 2010 15:29:49 +0100 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1327 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1336 Mike,
The problem is that the MM design tended to be fluid and "subject to improvement" at any time. I suspect that this is why the circuit supplied with the units were photocopies.

As a starter you could try http://www.qsl.net/wa2wim/eme/eme.htm

Near the bottom of the page is a link to MMT28-144 schematic. 

Good luck,
 
David]]> g4jzs@nospam.com (David, G8LZE) Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:56:14 +0100 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1336 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1329 No. Together with friends on 6M, monitoring indicators, a lot of listening on the band and a few calls on 110 did the job. AND.... it was fun! Nowadays I am a ON4KST user. Sometimes I feel I do depend on the internet. But this season it showed again that these old operating practice does the job. This year I am very restricted in time. And I can't wait 5 minutes to have the PC on air. Dialing and monitoring sure did do the job again. So don't feel bad using 110. It is not that strickt. And aren't we all radio-amateurs? Regards, Peter]]> peter@nospam.com (Peter, PA2V) Mon, 09 Aug 2010 10:15:04 +0100 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1329 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1336
Tnx
Mike G8CMU]]> g8cmu@nospam.com (Mike ,G8CMU) Sat, 07 Aug 2010 11:00:04 +0100 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1336 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1329 As Miguel says - that is what a calling frequency is set up to be - a place where people can call CQ, on a dead or alive band to look for stations – OUTSIDE of the continent they are in – but see below. So – you get a reply ( from a different continent) – OK – you have no idea how long the band will stay open so you make a quick qso – no problem – but now what – well that depends. Either you qsy and the DX now calls CQ – or vice versa – but the general rule is that the person who was on the qrg first has right of way. OK – so more DX from another continent calls – now best practice says that you should qsy as you are now making qso’s on the calling qrg – fair enough. What should NOT happen is that the band police get on your back, nor should others call over you (but the general rule is that the person who was on the qrg first has right of way) – they are well out of order.
The DX station, if it stays on 110 should also qsy as soon as it is clear the band is open wider.
Now – what happens if you call CQ and you get a reply from your own continent? (see below)
Well bluntly you should politely tell the other station to standby while you CQ for DX outside your continent, and if after a little time you get not replies qsy up the band and qso the caller. If they persist then they are bluntly being rude.
Direction CQ’s are also a good idea (CQ DX South America – implies I only want South America to reply).
One problem is that a lot of people call 50110 the “DX calling frequency” – well that creates the problem – it is NOT – it is the “INTERCONTINENTAL calling frequency” Also what is DX? – that is different for every one of us!
I have just checked – in fact RSGB and IARU do call 50110 “DX calling”
IARU says “c. The International DX calling frequency 50.110 MHz should not be used for calling within the European part of Region 1 at any time.” But in the IARU VHF Managers Handbook it states “The intercontinental DX calling frequency 50110 should not be used for calling within the European part of region 1 at any time”
RSGB say “Note 2. No QSO’s on this frequency. Always QSY when working intercontinental DX.”
As can be seen even IARU says different things!!
Perhaps this should be rewritten to “INTERCONTINENTAL CALLING” as clearly as it is now gives rise to different interpretations!!! But what if it is changed to INTERNATIAONAL CALLING??? – that means it fine for I to work G, DL, YU, W, JA etc all on the same qrg!! – maybe that’s what some people are doing…………
Re Per’s point – S EU to North Africa is OK – but what is EU – is 4X in EU? is 5B in EU? Is TA in EU? Is TF in EU?????? Where do we set the lines!!
Miguel’s observations are correct – the main reason is that a lot of stations – mainly all over EU and Carib tend not to follow the above – they sit on 110. – and in EU if there is E’s and /or backscatter the DX is hidden under the pile – so yes – people qsy to a “clear” qrg – sensible I think – but that doesn’t defeat the purpose of 110.
We should also bear in mind that there is an increasing problem in that those that are on the chat tend to use other qrg’s agreed with other stations on the chat so don’t call cq on 110 – for the reasons above. This gives a bigger problem in that only a very small number of people use the chats – so are unaware of what is going on – so in actual fact the chances for qso’s on and band that may only be marginally open are decreasing. People seem to be setting up their own”dx calling” qrg – personally I have mixed views – but I do understand why.
RE 50150 – many years ago when the UKSMG started I did a survey of which the outcome was that it was felt that 50150 should be used in EU as a calling qrg – in the main this still occurs and is used by those who know about it –this will explain why 50150 is used today. Personally I don’t see other “local” calling/activity qrg’s – but surely that isn’t a problem if others wish to do that?
I agree with Miguel re “internet dependency”
Per also mentions the “Internet” – please remember that, IMHO, The users that are on the Inet are very few in comparison to the Amateur population as a whole – so lets not lose sight of that – we are the minority and should leave the rules as they are and not change them to suite the minority.
DX windows are a different thing but as with all the above are fine IF people keep to the rules in the main. IMHO they should be kept – contests etc NOT in them.
”Domestic” calling / activity qrg’s are fine – just as long as they don’t infringe on the agreed ones.
A centre of activity IS different from a calling qrg – again the problem is lack of education, incorrect information and bluntly rudeness / policemen.
Most of the problems nowadays are nothing to do with the agreed qrg’s / designations etc.
They are IMHO due to us –the users. Some of us think we know it all and try to impinge our views on the rest, some of us are bluntly rude, some of us don’t know about the band plans etc. There is also, in my view, an unhealthy situation that several who have posted have hit on - the Internet / chats. Also – as above the situation re 110 is muddy – so causes problems as well.
There is an arrogance now that those on the Inet / chat /cluster know it all and that any body else is a lid etc – those of us that have this facility should remember that we are only a drop in the ocean. Remember how many qso’s E4X had in EU – and how many of those stations were on the chat / Cluster – very few of them.
Miguel’s last point is the one we should all take note of.
We should bear in mind that most of the users have no idea of band plans, don’t belong to any groups or societies etc so wont be as “educated” as those of us that are.
As long as we follow the “rules” as much as we can, be polite, NOT be rude or arrogant, and educate where possible we shouldn’t have a big problem – WE make our own problems Gentlemen – IMHO.
]]> g4igo@nospam.com (Ken, G4IGO) Wed, 04 Aug 2010 12:20:21 +0100 http://uksmg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1329