If you deregulated the bands, (in terms of modes), then you would have something similar to 160 meters here in the U.S.
Just because you deregulate the bands does not mean there is no bandplan. We have bandplans for our VHF and higher bands and they are generally followed fairly well. Because CW was the favored mode for many decades, the "new" modes (AM and later SSB voice) tended toward the top of the bands. I have heard that at least part of the reason for this is that as ionospheric changes occur, the lower part of a given band tends to be affected later than the upper part so the CW ops wanted this advantage. As an example, the phone band can be pretty much dead on 20 meters even though there is still some digital/CW possible lower down for a little while longer when the band drops out. It is not unreasonable that we would have about the same effect on 80 meters where the bottom of the band would remain mostly CW and at the top of what would be the defacto CW area you would find the QRP ops and the slower ops. Then it would transition into Data/RTTY modes, often with the narrowest modes marking the bottom of the data area and wider ones up higher and RTTY up a bit more. Even though we are going to have an Extra Class 80 meter mega subband for voice, I wonder if it will be used all that much. We may go from an underutilized Data/RTTY band to an underutilized voice area except perhaps during contests. I suppose the Geritol Net will go lower in freq too:) 73, Rick, KV9U larry allen wrote: >If you could deregulated the 80 meter band, where would you put what?... >Eg where would you put the voice subband??. >Larry ve3fxq > > >
