Big deal? We did the same thing between the Buckeye Net, (3580 KHz),
the Eighth Region Net (3530 KHz), and the Eastern Area Net (3670 KHz)
during a Simulated Emergency Net sometime in the 60's or the early
70's. We had two stations, one on either the Buckeye Net or the Eastern
Area Net (They weren't on at the same time) and the other on the Eighth
Region Net. The receivers were 75A4's - don't recall what the
transmitters were, but we could receive messages on one net, physically
pass the written traffic on paper to the other station, and list it
almost immediately thereafter. The Net Control sometimes got flustered,
because he/she didn't understand why we didn't list all the traffic at
the beginning of a session. However, with overlapping cycles of the
National Traffic System, it seemed logical to have the Eighth Region Net
is continuous operation, and able to pass traffic to/from the
lower/higher eschelon traffic nets on a real time basis.
I don't know how a 75A4 stacks up to a TR-7, but there was absolutely no
interference between two rigs which were closer than 50 KHz apart on 80
metres. Don't recall if we experimented with how close in frequency we
could get without interference. The 75A4 was considered near "gold
standard" for the day.
The antennae were dipoles at about 50', and physically separated by
about 600 feet. One was fed with open wire line, the other with RG-213.
73 de n8xx Hg
Past 8th Region Net Manager
On 7/31/2010 3:00 PM, cq-contest-request@contesting.com wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 22:32:30 +0000 (GMT)
> From: kr2q@optimum.net
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQ and S&P on the same band
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
>
> Well, all you have to do is look at the CQWW on-line (public) logs and you
> will note lots of guys have been doing just this, especially non-NA. It's no
> big deal.
>
> As for history, as others have stated, this was done ~35-40 years ago. At
> N2AA/K2GL I did this successfully on 10m with my own simple design. We used
> a pair of TR7s (when that was considered the "hot" radio). One rig went to
> our 10 over 10 stack "up on the hill" while the other radio could use a pair
> of phased 1/4 wave verticals, physically positioned for minimal pickup from
> the yagi's when the yagis were pointed at Europe, which is where they usually
> were, except for the JA openings (remember those on 10m?).
>
> Without any "extra" filters or slight of hand, we could listen without any
> issue at all within 5kc of our own xmit QRG. And the verticals heard real
> well (just a simple 4 radial system for each one).
>
> We also had listener yagi "in the woods" on the other bands and I don't
> remember on what other bands. Not sure how well they worked, but I do know
> that the phased verticals were killers for listening while transmitting.
>
> de Doug KR2Q
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|