KØHB wrote:
wrote


In a sense the 3600Khz "band edge" simply "aligns" the traditional 80M
CW operating space with those spaces on 40 & 20. Both of which are
~100Khz wide as will be the case on 80. The sky never fell on 40 and 20
CW and it won't fall on 80 CW either.


Apples and cumquats, Brian. Do ALL the math.....

80m 3.5-3.6 CW/rtty/data = 100kc
40m 7.0-7.125 CW/rtty/data = 125kc
20m 14.0-14.15 CW/rtty/data = 150kc

The raw numbers don't mean a thing without taking into account the
other differences in the three bands. Specifically the differences in
the volume of activity per Khz per hour. Doesn't take much tuning
around the lower 100 Khz of each of the three bands to come to the
conclusion that the overall levels of activity on 40 & 20 are some
multiples of the level of activity on 80 and it's been that way since
before Hector was a pup. For the most part 80 is a great place to
indulge in pleasant in-country ragchews because there's seldom any DX
cw, DX SSB or foreign broadcast activity audible on 80 vs. all the QRM
40 & 20

So on this basis I'll stick: The little amount of 80M CW and data
activity which is found now above 3.600 will easily fit below 3.600 if
they chose to move and they'll still have more "elbow room" than we've
ever had on 40 & 20.

And no I'm not bleeding for the CW traffic nets either, they lost their
relevance on VJ day.

73, de Hans, K0HB

w3rv