QRP in the novice subbands
Locked
 
|
Speaking of novice bands. Since the power output on those subbands is
reduced, why aren't the QRP frequencies in those bands? It would seem logical to me to put the QRP crowd into the low power band segment, right? I really feel the Novice subbands are pretty much a waste. I'd like to see the subbands absorbed back into the main band plan. Give another 25 KC to SSB, move digital stuff up a bit and give more space to CW as well. YMMV. - Keith - -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Daniel Reynolds Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 1:26 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: [Elecraft] K1 on 80/40m Novice bands? I'm trying to make suggestions to a new ham, and having not built a K1, can anyone tell me if the 2-band filter boards can be built to allow for access to the 80 and 40m Novice subbands? Thanks, Daniel AA0NI Oklahoma City _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: QRP in the novice subbands
|
|
On Oct 19, 2005, at 2:47 PM, Darwin, Keith wrote: > Speaking of novice bands. Since the power output on those subbands is > reduced, why aren't the QRP frequencies in those bands? It would seem > logical to me to put the QRP crowd into the low power band segment, > right? I thought 7112 kHz was a common QRP frequency. > I really feel the Novice subbands are pretty much a waste. Well, the big problem is -- there are no more Novices! 30 years ago, when I was first licensed, the Novice class was common. FCC hasn't issued a Novice license for years now, and anyone who would meet the requirements would now be a General. So, they are, indeed, a waste. > I'd like to > see the subbands absorbed back into the main band plan. Give > another 25 > KC to SSB, move digital stuff up a bit and give more space to CW as > well. Sounds like a good idea. The FCC has already received a similar petition from the ARRL. I think the FCC is just biding it's time until it can make a bunch of rules at one whack. For a good QRP band, there's always 30m, too. No Novices, but it is restricted to 200 watt PEP just the same. Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Darwin, Keith
In a message dated 10/19/05 11:37:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [hidden email]
writes: > Well, the big problem is -- there are no more Novices! Yes, there are! Also Tech Pluses and "Techs-with-HF", who have the same privileges as Novices. 30 years ago, > > when I was first licensed, the Novice class was common. FCC hasn't > issued a Novice license for years now, and anyone who would meet the > requirements would now be a General. > These are the numbers of current, unexpired amateur radio licenses held by individuals on the stated dates, and the percentage of the total number of active licenses that class contains: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 (7.3%) Technician - 205,394 (30.4%) Technician Plus - 128,860 (19.1%) General - 112,677 (16.7%) Advanced - 99,782 (14.8%) Extra - 78,750 (11.7%) Total Tech/TechPlus - 334,254 (49.5%) Total all classes - 674,792 As of October 15, 2005: Novice - 27,606 (4.2%) [decrease of 21,723] Technician - 272,111 (41.0%) [increase of 66,717) Technician Plus - 45,994 (6.9%) [decrease of 82,866] General - 135,881 (20.5%) [increase of 23,204] Advanced - 75,043 (11.3%) [decrease of 24,739] Extra - 107,178 (16.1%) [increase of 28,428] Total Tech/TechPlus - 318,105 (47.9%) [decrease of 16,149] Total all classes - 663,788 (decrease of 11,004) Note that these totals do not include licenses that have expired but are in the grace period. They also do not include club, military, RACES or other station-only licenses. Note also that effective April 15, 2000, new Novice, Technician Plus and Advanced licenses are no longer issued. Since April 15, 2000, FCC has renewed all existing Technician Plus licenses as Technician. It is therefore informative to consider the totals of the two classes, since the Technician class includes a significant number of Technician Plus licenses renewed as Technician. > So, they are, indeed, a waste. > > > I'd like to > > see the subbands absorbed back into the main band plan. Give > > another 25 > > KC to SSB, move digital stuff up a bit and give more space to CW as > > well. > > Sounds like a good idea. Except there's no separation between Morse Code and data modes on those subbands, at least in the USA. Data modes aren't allowed in the HF 'phone image subbands, but outside them, all the data modes share the same space as Morse Code. Only good operating practice keeps them apart. The FCC has already received a similar > > petition from the ARRL. I don't think that petition has been filed yet. It proposes regulation by signal bandwidth, not mode. It has some good ideas and some flaws. I think the FCC is just biding it's time > > until it can make a bunch of rules at one whack. > No - just the opposite. Currently the only pending NPRM is about Morse Code testing (05-235) . Comments on that one close at the end of this month. There were 18 petitions to FCC from mid-2003 to mid-2005 about changing license classes, Morse Code and written testing, new entry-level license classes, subbands, and a whole bunch more. They all got RM numbers and comments. FCC replied to all 18 petitions by 05-235, which proposes to simply drop Element 1 (the 5 wpm code test) and make no other changes at all. The ARRL regulation by bandwidth petition is a separate deal. > For a good QRP band, there's always 30m, too. No Novices, but it is > restricted to 200 watt PEP just the same. > > Yup - because it's shared. -- For a snapshot of current US licensing, see: http://www.arrl.org/fcc/stats.html 73 de Jim, N2EY _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Darwin, Keith
Wow, great info Jim,
Buy I still wonder why we QRP duded didn't decide to have the QRP frequencies in the low power section of the band. I suspect it is because there aren't any signals there ;-) And yes, 30 m is one of my favorite bands because it has no phone signals and now high power amps. If you hear them they're "in your league" and can be worked. - Keith KD1E - ________________________________ From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 7:28 AM To: [hidden email]; Darwin, Keith Cc: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] QRP in the novice subbands In a message dated 10/19/05 11:37:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [hidden email] writes: Well, the big problem is -- there are no more Novices! Yes, there are! Also Tech Pluses and "Techs-with-HF", who have the same privileges as Novices. 30 years ago, when I was first licensed, the Novice class was common. FCC hasn't issued a Novice license for years now, and anyone who would meet the requirements would now be a General. These are the numbers of current, unexpired amateur radio licenses held by individuals on the stated dates, and the percentage of the total number of active licenses that class contains: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 (7.3%) Technician - 205,394 (30.4%) Technician Plus - 128,860 (19.1%) General - 112,677 (16.7%) Advanced - 99,782 (14.8%) Extra - 78,750 (11.7%) Total Tech/TechPlus - 334,254 (49.5%) Total all classes - 674,792 As of October 15, 2005: Novice - 27,606 (4.2%) [decrease of 21,723] Technician - 272,111 (41.0%) [increase of 66,717) Technician Plus - 45,994 (6.9%) [decrease of 82,866] General - 135,881 (20.5%) [increase of 23,204] Advanced - 75,043 (11.3%) [decrease of 24,739] Extra - 107,178 (16.1%) [increase of 28,428] Total Tech/TechPlus - 318,105 (47.9%) [decrease of 16,149] Total all classes - 663,788 (decrease of 11,004) Note that these totals do not include licenses that have expired but are in the grace period. They also do not include club, military, RACES or other station-only licenses. Note also that effective April 15, 2000, new Novice, Technician Plus and Advanced licenses are no longer issued. Since April 15, 2000, FCC has renewed all existing Technician Plus licenses as Technician. It is therefore informative to consider the totals of the two classes, since the Technician class includes a significant number of Technician Plus licenses renewed as Technician. So, they are, indeed, a waste. > I'd like to > see the subbands absorbed back into the main band plan. Give > another 25 > KC to SSB, move digital stuff up a bit and give more space to CW as > well. Sounds like a good idea. Except there's no separation between Morse Code and data modes on those subbands, at least in the USA. Data modes aren't allowed in the HF 'phone image subbands, but outside them, all the data modes share the same space as Morse Code. Only good operating practice keeps them apart. The FCC has already received a similar petition from the ARRL. I don't think that petition has been filed yet. It proposes regulation by signal bandwidth, not mode. It has some good ideas and some flaws. I think the FCC is just biding it's time until it can make a bunch of rules at one whack. No - just the opposite. Currently the only pending NPRM is about Morse Code testing (05-235) . Comments on that one close at the end of this month. There were 18 petitions to FCC from mid-2003 to mid-2005 about changing license classes, Morse Code and written testing, new entry-level license classes, subbands, and a whole bunch more. They all got RM numbers and comments. FCC replied to all 18 petitions by 05-235, which proposes to simply drop Element 1 (the 5 wpm code test) and make no other changes at all. The ARRL regulation by bandwidth petition is a separate deal. For a good QRP band, there's always 30m, too. No Novices, but it is restricted to 200 watt PEP just the same. Yup - because it's shared. -- For a snapshot of current US licensing, see: http://www.arrl.org/fcc/stats.html 73 de Jim, N2EY _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Darwin, Keith
In a message dated 10/20/05 8:21:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[hidden email] writes: > Wow, great info Jim, You're welcome > > Buy I still wonder why we QRP duded didn't decide to have the QRP > frequencies in the low power section of the band. I suspect it is > because there aren't any signals there ;-) I think it's because of a bunch of reasons... There was a time when the Novice subbands were jampacked with signals during the best operating times. Before the early 1970s, Novices had to use crystal control, so the QRM was even worse due to most QSOs being effectively "split" (using two frequencies). On top of this, since Novices could only use those narrow subbands (only 100 kHz total below 21 MHz), it was considered bad form for higher class licenses to use those subbands unless they intended to work Novices. Since most QRP folk were Generals or higher, they tended to avoid the Novice subbands. -- There have been several proposals to "refarm" the Novice subbands, widen the 'phone subbands, create new entry-level license classes, and offer extended privileges or even automatic upgrades to existing Novices and Tech Pluses. But FCC has denied all of them. The current NPRM effectively says that if someone wants the privileges they should just pass the test(s) and upgrade. Anyone who has ever held a Novice license, even if it expired decades ago, can get Morse Code test credit it if they can provide documentation. So the only upgrade tests for Novices are writtens. Similar rules apply to pre-1991 Technicians. 73 de Jim, N2EY > > And yes, 30 m is one of my favorite bands because it has no phone > signals and now high power amps. If you hear them they're "in your > league" and can be worked. > _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
RE: QRP in the novice subbands
|
|
In reply to this post by Darwin, Keith
KD1E wrote:
Buy I still wonder why we QRP duded didn't decide to have the QRP frequencies in the low power section of the band. I suspect it is because there aren't any signals there ;-) ------------------------------------------------------------ 7,050 and 14,060 have been "QRP" frequencies for at least 30 years now that I'm aware of and probably longer than that. So, I'm sure the frequency choice had nothing to do with the Novice band. Thirty years ago Novice band was just that: a place for new operators to get some on-air experience. Others were encouraged to work Novices regularly but it was understood that one expected shaky fists, frequently poor overall operating skills and the need to QRS. After all, that was why the Novice band was there. QRP operators, on the other hand, often ran QRQ and were looking for skilled operators as much as any other non-Novice station might be. I'm not sure just when QRP became defined as 5 watts output. When I was active in the QRP-ARCI, "QRP" was defined by the club as 50 watts d-c input to the final plate, or between 30 and 40 watts output for most rigs. In any case, the original QRP movement was meant to encourage and demonstrate to the great General/Extra classes of Amateurs just what QRP could do as a "typical" power for most Amateur communications. The "QRP" frequencies were supposed to be "calling frequencies" for those looking for the weak signals. But many QRP operators simply QSO'd with QRO stations to show them that running 50 watts input was often undetectable from the signal their higher powered station ran. Ron AC7AC _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: QRP in the novice subbands
|
|
In reply to this post by N2EY
On Oct 20, 2005, at 7:28 AM, [hidden email] wrote: > In a message dated 10/19/05 11:37:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > [hidden email] writes: > >> Well, the big problem is -- there are no more Novices! > > Yes, there are! Also Tech Pluses and "Techs-with-HF", who have the > same privileges as Novices. But those Techs aren't restricted to operating CW like we were 30 years ago. Extremely few of them are active on HF CW. > > se are the numbers of current, unexpired > amateur radio licenses held by individuals > on the stated dates, and the percentage of > the total number of active licenses that > class contains: > > As of October 15, 2005: > > Novice - 27,606 (4.2%) [decrease of 21,723] > Technician Plus - 45,994 (6.9%) [decrease of 82,866] QED. And of the licensees that exist -- how many of them are actually active on the HF novices bands? Trust me, I remember when the novice bands were full of activity every evening. That's just not the case any more. The nature of the hobby has changed -- the path of activity that people take is now different. If they are operating CW, it isn't in the Novice bands, by and large. > Except there's no separation between Morse Code and data modes on > those subbands, at least in the USA. Data modes aren't allowed in > the HF 'phone image subbands, but outside them, all the data modes > share the same space as Morse Code. Only good operating practice > keeps them apart. And there's nothing wrong with good operating practice. We use it to great effect on 160m. > I don't think that petition has been filed yet. It proposes > regulation by signal bandwidth, not mode. It has some good ideas > and some flaws. I wasn't talking about the bandwidth petition, but the Novice band refarming petition. > There were 18 petitions to FCC from mid-2003 to mid-2005 about > changing license classes, Morse Code and written testing, new entry- > level license classes, subbands, and a whole bunch more. They all > got RM numbers and comments. FCC replied to all 18 petitions by > 05-235, which proposes to simply drop Element 1 (the 5 wpm code > test) and make no other changes at all. > > The ARRL regulation by bandwidth petition is a separate deal. I thought the Novice band refarming was still active. Seems there was an NPRM for that, too. Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Darwin, Keith
In a message dated 10/20/05 11:17:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [hidden email]
writes: > On Oct 20, 2005, at 7:28 AM, [hidden email] wrote: > > > In a message dated 10/19/05 11:37:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > > [hidden email] writes: > > > >> Well, the big problem is -- there are no more Novices! > > > > Yes, there are! Also Tech Pluses and "Techs-with-HF", who have the > > same privileges as Novices. > > But those Techs aren't restricted to operating CW like we were 30 > years ago. Extremely few of them are active on HF CW. All true - but it's been like that for decades now. I think what we're really seeing is that a lot of hams are minimally active or completely inactive. This isn't just a ham radio thing - lots of activities have experienced serious downturns in activity. I think there was a book called "Bowling Alone" about the decline of bowling leagues. > > > > se are the numbers of current, unexpired > > amateur radio licenses held by individuals > > on the stated dates, and the percentage of > > the total number of active licenses that > > class contains: > > > > As of October 15, 2005: > > > > Novice - 27,606 (4.2%) [decrease of 21,723] > > Technician Plus - 45,994 (6.9%) [decrease of 82,866] > > QED. What has been demonstrated? Since April of 2000, the FCC has issued no more new Novice, Tech Plus and Advanced licenses, so those license classes are bound to decline by simple attrition. They've also been renewing all Tech Pluses as Technician, and left it up to the licensee to maintain documents showing they are code-tested. If the rules are simply left alone for the next 55 months, we'll see the number of Tech Pluses go to zero as the last ones are renewed as Techs. And of the licensees that exist -- how many of them are actually > > active on the HF novices bands? > A few, but very few. > Trust me, I remember when the novice bands were full of activity > every evening. Me too! And yet in those days there were only about 10,000 to 20,000 Novices, and Techs had no HF at all. That's just not the case any more. The nature of the > > hobby has changed -- the path of activity that people take is now > different. If they are operating CW, it isn't in the Novice bands, by > and large. > That change started in the 1970s and accelerated in the 1980s - because of VHF/UHF FM. Instead of starting out on HF CW as most hams had done for decades, a lot of newcomers began to start out on VHF/UHF FM, to work the local repeaters and such. Many bypassed the Novice completely and went straight for Tech so they could use 2 meters and 440. That change significantly affected how new hams viewed ham radio. Their introduction was voice, not Morse, and their focus became local/regional rather than national/international. Etc. If they ever did get on HF, it was long afterwards. The old (pre-mid-1970s) Novice was only good for a short time (one year until 1967, two years afterwards, nonrenewable and "nonretakeable"). This put serious pressure on a new ham to get active and upgrade before the license ran out. Most of the Novices I knew back then (at least the ones who had any sense) had a station all set up and ready to go before the license arrived, because they'd not want to split their time between setting up a station and operating it. The change to all license classes being 5 years renewable (mid 1970s) and later 10 years renewable (early 1980s) changed all that. Many if not most new hams got the license first, then set about putting a station together. But there was no hurry because there was no license deadline like in the old days. > > Except there's no separation between Morse Code and data modes on > > those subbands, at least in the USA. Data modes aren't allowed in > > the HF 'phone image subbands, but outside them, all the data modes > > share the same space as Morse Code. Only good operating practice > > keeps them apart. > > And there's nothing wrong with good operating practice. We use it to > great effect on 160m. > There have already been problems with folks not following the bandplan on 160. On the HF bands the problems are worse because of more use and greater coverage with a typical setup. For example, until a few years ago 3579 was a prime "glowbug" frequency, because you could get colorburst xtals from old TV sets and build simple 80 meter rigs around them. Then a PSK31 rig called the Warbler came out. It caused a sensation, and put a lot of hams on PSK31. That made the area around 3579 "the PSK part of the band", even by those not using Warblers. End result was that the glowbug folks were driven away by the QRM. The Warbler designers weren't anti-glowbug; they simply didn't know about the problem when they were designing the rig. > > I don't think that petition has been filed yet. It proposes > > regulation by signal bandwidth, not mode. It has some good ideas > > and some flaws. > > I wasn't talking about the bandwidth petition, but the Novice band > refarming petition. > My mistake, I misunderstood. > > There were 18 petitions to FCC from mid-2003 to mid-2005 about > > changing license classes, Morse Code and written testing, new entry- > > level license classes, subbands, and a whole bunch more. They all > > got RM numbers and comments. FCC replied to all 18 petitions by > > 05-235, which proposes to simply drop Element 1 (the 5 wpm code > > test) and make no other changes at all. > > > > The ARRL regulation by bandwidth petition is a separate deal. > > I thought the Novice band refarming was still active. Seems there was > an NPRM for that, too. > I don't think FCC wants that change. The impression I get from the NPRM is that FCC doesn't want to change *anything* other than dropping the code test. What they seem to be saying is that, over time, the Novice and Advanced licenses will simply disappear through attrition as licenses expire and hams upgrade. They repeatedly mention that upgrading requires only written test(s) for all hams except Technicians who have not passed a code test, and that if the code test is dumped, all hams will be just written tests from whatever license they want. The NPRM also seems to me to be saying that FCC's vision of the future is that Techs will be all VHF/UHF, Generals will have most privileges, and Extras will have it all. Simple progression, fewer license classes, etc. And no extra work for FCC - just let the closed-off license classes fade away. This happened once before, too. The FCC stopped issuing new Advanceds at the end of 1952, and for almost 15 years there were no new ones issued. Then in 1967, as part of the incentive licensing changes, the Advanced was reopened to new issues. 73 de Jim, N2EY _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |