[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Band edge violations

To: <barry@mxg.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Band edge violations
From: "Rich Gelber, K2WR" <k2wr@njdxa.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 16:39:07 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

First of all, I don't agree that the band edge violation is an
"idiosyncracy" or even a technicality.  The concept that all our emissions
up to a specified measurement standard, not just the carrier or suppressed
carrier frequency must be contained within the frequency allocation in
question is a basic regulatory issue of amateur radio.  I believe there are
several questions in the question pools on the subject.

Secondly, you've described a bunch of people (who used listening frequencies
outside of the Region 1 IARU band plan) as "simply self-centered, selfish,
competitors..."  I think that's a rather broad brush to paint people with,
not to mention entirely unecessary name-calling.  More likely, most of the
individuals you're referring to heard a clear frequency and announced it as
the QSX frequency without thinking about a band plan that didn't apply to
them.  To use an operating practice to impugn their character goes a bit too

As far as the band plan itself, I think it's a laudatory attempt to separate
incompatible uses of shared spectrum.  However, the band plan is not
necessary practical in every instance.  In my opinion, the ARRL Int'l DX
Contest (both modes) represents two such instances.  There are a few others,
although not very many.  Some people advocate inflexible application of the
band plan at all times.  I do not.  That is one of the differences between a
band plan and a rule.  As long as the radio regulations for a specific
country, or the specific rules of a contest, do not absolutely require
adherence to a band plan without deviation, then I think people are only
limited by the specific written terms of their license.  Maybe I wouldn't
personally announce a listening frequency of 7020 kHz on SSB, but I'm not
going to castigate an operator at W3LPL or anywhere else for doing so as
long as it's within license terms.

As has been noted elsewhere, this will all get better when 40m expands in a
few years.

Rich K2WR (20m operator at K1TTT, if anyone cares)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Merrill" <barry@mxg.com>
To: "'Rich Gelber, K2WR'" <k2wr@njdxa.org>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 3:28 PM
Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Band edge violations

> Has anyone actually received an FCC notification of
> a violation for operation between 14347 and 14350?
> Do you really think they care?  Who actually has
> use of the 14350 to 14352 or so frequencies on
> which your audio can be heard?  What's the impact?
> I'm a whole lot more concerned with the US Stations
> who solicit violations of the 40 meter band plan
> by Calling CQ and listening below 7040, as that
> DOES impact other hams, i.e., those who want to
> operate on the non-contest-mode of 40 CW, and
> equally concerned with the Foreign stations who
> answer those calls, or who use those frequencies
> to call their CQs from.
> All of those operators, US and Foreign, are simply
> self-centered, selfish, competitors with no concept
> of courtesy to non-contestors, and are certainly
> not gentlemen, in their conscious choice to violate
> our gentleman's agreement.
> Those who called the CU2 on 14349.3 did not impact
> any other hams, caused no interference to anyone,
> and did nothing consciously to violate a rule or a
> gentleman's agreement; I suspect many of the callers
> were not even aware of the idiosyncracy that says
> we can't use the top 3KHZ of any band when on USB.
> Barry, W5GN

    The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>