Let's definitely keep the discussion going. The recent surge (well, wavelet) of posts concerning 1750 meters shows there is still some interest out there among folks who like a challenge.But at risk of pouring cold water on the whole thing, I must at least risk dampening enthusiasm in two regards.
1. Whatever we end up doing not only should be legal, it must be legal in the end. And,
2. There are no miracle antennas. Sorry, Glenn, I don't want to dash your hopes, but there never has been such a thing and (odds are) never will be, either. The principles of electromagnetic radiation are just too well understood and too thoroughly proven in practice.
In connection with electrically small antennas, I can state this categorically and without exception: At no time in the past 160 years has anyone ever yet demonstrated any antenna of any geometry that radiates better in the far field than a properly built top-loaded vertical (or a loop with a large diameter conductor) of the same dimensions, let alone a plain quarter-wave vertical over a decent ground system. But ley me repeat, my intention is not to discourage you from rxperimenting, but to urge you not to build unrealistuc hopes.
Ed, I am definitely past due on my more-or-less once per decade review of the state of Part 15 rules in The LOWDOWN. Ed Larson KI6R has a great collection of older articles on classic LowFER equipment and procedures that would provide a lot of useful background, if you'd like to contact him about storing it in our Library section. (Do you happen to have a background involving HTML, by any chance?) There are tons more resources we could bring to the public venue if the demand is there.
Garry is correct that it's hard to keep up interest in something as inherently difficult as 1750 m when there are so many fancy modern tech goodies to attract folks' attention. The "neglected band" has always been a niche interest at best.
There are always some who appreciate a challenge, but they are harder to reach, now that there are no more general interest magazines like Popular Electronics out there on newsstands, pointing out these niche fringes. The Internet has two big drawbacks that tend to suppress hobbies of inherently limited interest:
(a) "Livin' on Internet Time." If it's not on my screen right this very moment, it must not be anything I'm interested in or maybe doesn't even exist any more...and what or who are we talking about again?
(b) "The Little Search Engine That Couldn't." By their nature, search engines are fairly literal critters. You have to be looking for something that you already know a little something about--at least one word or name that it might hopefully recognize as similar to a term you've heard somewhere before already. Otherwise...nada. Moreover, search engine results are based in large part on the frequency with which the topic is mentioned online. So even if you use the precise term LowFER with exactly the 'right' capitalization, you'll see women's shoes named "LowFERs" before you see the radio references, as of 3 Jan 2026!
Between the A.D.D. aspect of the Internet and the "bubble effect" (surrounding yourself with more of what you already are...or are statistically assumed to be...interested in) thereby leads to more conformity and less exposure to new information and activities. If we want to attract newcomers to the hobby, the Internet alone is not going to do much for us, even with all the gussying up this Web site is about to undergo. Creative publicity hounds wanted!
John H. Davis
