CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] CQ 160m SSB contest

To: Contest <CQ-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQ 160m SSB contest
From: Roger Parsons <ve3zi@yahoo.com>
Reply-to: Roger Parsons <ve3zi@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 15:08:02 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I am sure this sentiment will be unpopular on this reflector - sorry.

As I'm sure everybody knows, this was the weekend of the CQ 160m SSB contest. 
This has meant that the band has been full of loud SSB station from 1800 up to 
rather over 1900 kHz. There was very little activity in the upper part of the 
band most of the time. The bottom part was however saturated.

I know there is no formal band splitting requirement, but there is a band plan 
which says that the bottom 40kHz is for CW and narrowband data modes only. 
However, I know also that many of the countries that allow SSB only over part 
of the band usually include only 1830-1850 kHz. 


This weekend also marked the last two days of the 9U4U expedition. Burundi is a 
pretty rare country and a lot of people were still hoping to work them this 
weekend. It would have been utterly impossible for any CW operator (at least in 
NA) to hear the 9U under the SSB. Actually, it would have been pretty difficult 
to have any CW contact at all. This strikes me as being a little unfair and 
rather thoughtless.

It would be nice if just some of the band could be free from SSB during 
contests. How about 1800 - 1820 kHz? The bottom 10kHz is not allocated to 
amateurs in much of the world, so my suggestion would allow 10kHz for 'local' 
NA CW contacts, and 10kHz for international contacts. 

Would this not be a reasonable accommodation? It does after all leave 90% of 
the band for SSB.


Whilst there is no chance whatsoever of a regulated plan, it would be entirely 
possible for CQ and other contest organisers to write it into their rules. I 
believe that they should do just that.

I am sure somebody will produce the (spurious) argument that they cannot make 
their antenna work except at the bottom of the band. 80m is wider in percentage 
terms than 160m and people seem to manage just fine there.

73 Roger
VE3ZI
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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