[600MRG] Measuring power

[John Langridge]

Charles,

I will be happy to send you what I send individuals making the same inquiry.  Give me a bit to get to a machine where I can access it...

one comment that I will make is that even if you think your main interest is CW, DO NOT limit yourself to CW only on the application.  You can add a multitude of other useful modes for no additional cost.. 

73 and be looking for my next email.

John XIQ

--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 3/23/15, Charles Conner <kzerong at gmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [600MRG] Measuring power
 To: "Edward R Cole" <kl7uw at acsalaska.net>
 Cc: 600mrg at w7ekb.com, sbjohnston at aol.com
 Date: Monday, March 23, 2015, 3:12 PM
 
 Greetings All
 
 Some one offered to send out
 tips for filling out the FCC 600-625 KHz
 Application form.  (?) . under Part 5.  Help
 would be appreciated.
 
 My
 mane interest at this time is to Use CW (Morse).  I have
 enough
 equipment and parts and also have a
 "3 wire"vertical 45 ft tall and fair
 ground system . Thanks all.
 
 PS:  I like comparison of 600-625 to any of
 the Navaids ( side band power )
 Which
 generally amounts to about 12.5 watts to a fair antenna and
 I hear
 most of them quite well !
 
 73 DE Charlie, K0NG    ..
 
 
 
 
 On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 6:28
 PM, Edward R Cole <kl7uw at acsalaska.net>
 wrote:
 
 >
 > A few (very few) comments:
 >
 > At 10:07 AM
 3/22/2015, sbjohnston at aol.com
 wrote:
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >> >Any news on aband for USA?
 >>
 >> Not that
 I've heard.  I'm getting the impression that the
 passive,
 >> wait-and-see approach
 being taken by US amateurs regarding a 630m
 >> allocation is not working.
 >>
 >> I've
 contacted my reps and officers at the ARRL several times
 over the
 >> past few years since the
 international spectrum folks decided there could
 >> be a ham band at 475 kHz and was told
 each time that they are working with
 >> the FCC on this issue.  But I got the
 impression in each case that they
 >>
 were not actively lobbying for it - just asked nicely and
 waited.
 >>
 >> It
 is also clear to me that this has a low priority with the
 Commission.
 >> If no one is pushing
 for it, and no one at the FCC is excited about it,
 >> then it will probably never happen.
 >>
 >> If even a
 tenth of the effort and enthusiasm were put into this issue
 as
 >> is being expended on the current
 "Amateur Radio Parity Act" then we'd have
 >> an amateur allocation in short
 order.
 >>
 >
 > Yep.  Perhaps if Icom/Kenwood/Yaesu
 "sniffed" making a few "mega-bucks"
 > selling 600m ham gear it would get
 attention.  If Verizon thought 600m
 >
 would work good for cell phones it would have happened in a
 washington
 > micro-second.
 >
 > Makes me thankful I
 did not invest $10-20K into manufacturing transverters
 > for the "new ham band".
 >
 > BUT, we should be
 thankful that the FCC is agreeable with assigning
 > experimental licenses to those that are
 "really" interested in exploring
 > 600-630m.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 73, Ed - KL7UW
 > http://www.kl7uw.com
 >     "Kits made by
 KL7UW"
 > Dubus Mag business:
 >     dubususa at gmail.com
 >
 >
 >
 >
 _______________________________________________
 > 600MRG mailing list
 >
 600MRG at w7ekb.com
 > http://w7ekb.com/mailman/listinfo/600mrg_w7ekb.com
 >
 _______________________________________________
 600MRG mailing list
 600MRG at w7ekb.com
 http://w7ekb.com/mailman/listinfo/600mrg_w7ekb.com