[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

RE: Musings about 1.25 meters

Jason --

> Now, I don't claim to understand exactly why the bands for
> Satellite uplinks
> and downlinks were chosen, but is there a reason why 220
> wasn't included? I
> read in the magazines that we should all be using this band
> so we don't lose
> it. Is there a reason why we shouldn't make a case for having
> this band
> opened up for satellite use? It seems perfect.. Low use and
> so I'm assuming
> less QRM from terrestrial users, and it's higher in frequency
> then 2 meters

 The main reason is that satellites are not legal on 220 MHz. The
International Telecommunications Union (ITU) that allocates different
frequency ranges has set aside the "international" portions of 40M, 20M,
17M, 15M, 10M, 2M plus 435-438 MHz and higher frequencies for the Amateur
Satellite Service.

Note that 6M, 72 MHz (in common use in the UK) and 220 are not in this list.
The reason is that these are note international allocations for Amateur
Radio. Amateurs in Europe, Africa, Japan, Russia, etc have no 220 MHz band
available to them. In a similar vein, on 23 cm the Amateur Satellite Service
has only a portion of the band allocated, and that portion is for uplink
only; much of the reason is that France and other countries have national
interests in that band, using it for Radar.

Good idea, but it can't be done.

73 de Tom, W3IWI

Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org