CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

80M and sprint phone

Subject: 80M and sprint phone
From: Rich L. Boyd" <rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd)
I was behind on reading my reflector mail.  Now I know why W3LPL kept 
asking me on the repeater if I had any problem with rednecks during the 
phone sprint on 80!

For some reason I didn't have any problem with them, nor did I in SS 
phone where I worked 1,250 guys on 80 phone.  My perception of sprint 
phone has been that with everyone moving around I don't find myself 
around long enough to be harassed much.  If I find a particular frequency 
is crappo I slide left or right until I find something good to work or a 
clearer frequency to use.  I don't spent more than a few seconds 
pondering the nature of the problem with that frequency.  At least in 
sprints you can't afford that kind of time.

It seemed to me that almost all the sprint phone activity was in the 
3820-3850 range.  I didn't hear much in the way of "regular" QSOs going 
on in that relatively small slice of spectrum dring the 60 minutes or so 
some of us (sprint phone guys) decided to make some QSOs there.

Sprint phone is a very frequency agile activity.  Bad frequency?  No 
problem, slide this way or that 'til there's something good.  I'm never 
on one frequency long enough to much bother anybody, and if they want the 
frequency, it's theirs, I'm gone.

I personally had a good time with this sprint phone, after the 
frustrations and distractions that led to a 30-minute late start.  I 
agree, the conditions were not very good -- 20 was really long early and 
40 was similar.  Banging through the broadcast QRM on 40 phone is 
standard fare in sprint phone and you just work with it; part of the 
challenge of this particular contest.  As with 80, we're only on 40 a 
little while and we can handle it.

I only made a couple QSOs above 3850 and it was clear to me that lower in 
the band was a better place because of all the non-sprint activity above 
3850.  But I found there were plenty of guys to work below that, where 
the ragchewers didn't seem to be, and plenty of holes to CQ on if I 
couldn't find a new callsign to work.

I think the idea of using 160 instead of 80 is an interesting one, tho.

Other than the conditions, it seemed to me that maybe the activity was 
down on this sprint, but maybe I'm wrong.  73

Rich Boyd KE3Q


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • 80M and sprint phone, <rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) <=