IS EVERYONE AWARE OF THE RISK OF LOSING THE 2M BAND TO AERONAUTICAL SERVICES?

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by I0SJX, Jun 27, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: K5AB-Elect-1
  1. I0SJX

    I0SJX XML Subscriber QRZ Page

  2. VA3VF

    VA3VF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Yep...kiss it goodbye, otherwise, create an "Occupy 2M" movement to populate the band.;)
     
    G0UKP and KA4DPO like this.
  3. I0SJX

    I0SJX XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    They better switch to more efficient modulation techniques....
     
  4. VA3VF

    VA3VF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Depends on what you mean by more efficient modulation techniques. In this case, full usage of the spectrum is the key, regardless of modulation type. FT8 is very efficient, but would likely justify the take over, not block it, since it's not going to fully utilize the MHz of spectrum at stake.
     
    WQ4G likes this.
  5. KG5RZ

    KG5RZ Ham Member QRZ Page

  6. VA3VF

    VA3VF Ham Member QRZ Page

  7. I0SJX

    I0SJX XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I meant their current spectrum may be better used than it is with more modern techniques, rather than stealing ours which is shared by a multiplicity of systems, also helpful in case of public emergency and disaster recovery
     
  8. WA4ILH

    WA4ILH Subscriber QRZ Page

    The proposal specifically stated that it is NOT a SAFETY of LIFE service, which means what? texting for rich pilots ??? Even if this is only implemented in region 1, it could still interfere with the amateur satellite service.
    Tom WA4ILH
     
    WA9SVD, K0UO, N4FZ and 1 other person like this.
  9. VA3VF

    VA3VF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Got it!
     
  10. N3HGB

    N3HGB Ham Member QRZ Page

    3rd thread so far, so I think we are aware.
     
    KD8DEY, WD4IGX and KK5JY like this.

Share This Page

ad: GNOHF-1