I generally operate LP or even QRP. It's not often that I find someone
deliberately trying to take over even my less than rock crusher run
frequency. More often than not a) both of us were running on the same
frequency and propagation changes so we merge. (Happens all the time on 80M
at night; b) Stations don't hear each other but callers do; c) because my
signal is weak they assume theirs is also and it won't interfere d) He's
actually 150 Hz off my frequency with rx DSP and roofing filters squeezed.
That doesn't bother me too much on crowded bands. Unfortunately, callers
using spots or poor technique don't always call on frequency which is why
most of the time when running we widen the passband beyond what is really
necessary with a good receiver.
For all the above plus the ones who know they're bullying me, I summon up
all my limited pile-up copying ability and do my best to just keep on
working my callers. Unlike road traffic, there are no bent fenders for
refusing to yield. Nothing drives 'em nuts more than finding they aren't
successful and often they'll move on. As a last resort against the obvious
800 kg gorilla, when I surrender, I might respond to his CQ on "my"
frequency, but surprise, surprise, that QSO sometimes just doesn't make it
into my log. (Possibly it's a glitch caused by me having to switch from run
to S&P and I'm very sorry that he may get a 3x NIL penalty for that. Maybe
when he sees the LCR it will ring a bell.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Bookout" <steve@nr4m.com>
To: "Dale Putnam" <daleputnam@hotmail.com>
Cc: "Peter Voelpel" <dj7ww@t-online.de>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX CW
All,
There are always going be situations that will be unique. Like I stated,
and I think others have similarly written, 'stuff' happens.
I believe that almost all stns that wind up in a bad situation, don't get
there because of any bad intent by either stn. That is contesting.
But, there are stns, and stn owners, that believe this type of on-the-air
bullying is legitimate contest strategy.
Anyone of us can think of many, many top grade stns and operators, current
and past, whose contest operating ethics were never in question. So, why
have to put up with the arrogant, poorly mannered, few?
Like I wrote to someone privately, this thread should be a wake-up call to
those with poor operating ethics, that they need to do things differently,
to at least the point where their tactics are defendable.
Right now, in my opinion ( and, we all have our own) there is no plausible
defense for what I have, personally, been seeing from a couple of stns.
73 de Steve, NR4M
On May 30, 2013, at 9:05, Dale Putnam <daleputnam@hotmail.com> wrote:
So.. is that deliberate interference? Created, designed and accomplished
by the operator?
Have a great day,
--... ...--
Dale - WC7S in Wy
From: dj7ww@t-online.de
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 13:40:55 +0200
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX CW
It always happens when multiple antenna directions are used by the big
gun
stations on tx and a single antenna direction on rx.
73
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Mats Strandberg
Sent: Donnerstag, 30. Mai 2013 06:08
To: k5zd@charter.net
Cc: Steve Bookout; cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX CW
This is a very important point.
I am myself not better than others. I was "jumped on" by a few Aligator
big
guns, with signal strenghts of around 559-579 on 20 meters. I do not
think
they intentionally wanted to steaa my frequency (20 meter CW, me using
800
W), but more a simple issue that the difference in power between us
made
them not hear my 800 W "QRP" signals...
I feel tempted to address this openly on the forum with call signs,
because
this is a SYSTEM more than an unlucky coincidence.I now begin to
understand
which stations run more and which run less than Full Legal Limit. Anyone
else noticed ths same phenomena?
But still I am gathering "courage" and as close to 100% statistical
evidence
that my assumptions are correct.
The same intereting issue is that some stations seem to have extremely
"noicy" RX conditions - always. With such signal strenghts as described
above, I still always (no exceptions) need to repeat my call and serial
numbers many times, while this is not the case when calling weak US big
guns
during poor conditions when signal strengths are 519-539.
In 95% of the cases, US and Canadian stations are still able to get both
my
call and serial numbers just sent one.
Interesting difference between US and European (and other) big guns...
73 de RM2D (Mats)
2013/5/30 Randy Thompson K5ZD <k5zd@charter.net>
They will be "held accountable" when people are willing to name calls
in these public complaints...
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On
Behalf Of Steve Bookout
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:29 PM
To: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com
Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX CW
Hello all,
As we know, sometimes 'stuff' happens when changing rcvr filters,
RIT or changing antennas. These bad situations shouldn't really
last longer than it takes to flip a switch or spin the dial.
Sometimes neither station feels THEY should be the one to move. Like
I
said 'stuff'
happens and this is contesting.
This becomes a problem, WHEN THE SAME STATION, time after time,
contest after contest, drops on top of you and starts CQ'ing.
People, +\- 100 Hz is not a clear frequency!
There are a couple of stations that are infamous for this. When will
they be held accountable for their arrogance and poor operating
ethics?
73 de Steve, NR4M
On May 29, 2013, at 7:28, Cqtestk4xs@aol.com wrote:
My favorite is a certain zone 8 station that called me on my
frequency and then after he worked me, began to call CQ 100Hz away
from my run freq. It took a couple of minutes to pry him off me.
Bill K4XS/KH7XS
In a message dated 5/29/2013 10:48:23 A.M. Coordinated Universal
Tim, g4odv@yahoo.co.uk writes:
Hello Jesus,
I am truly sorry to have caused you this concern, I should have
said that it was a remarkable coincidence that you landed on my
qrg, which did happen 3 or 4 times . I really should have put that
in a better way or preferably not mentioned it at all. Please
accept my
public apologies..
73 Bria
________________________________
From: EC1KR Jesus <ec1kr@ec1kr.com>
To: g4odv@yahoo.co.uk
Sent: Tuesday, 28 May 2013, 17:24
Subject: WPX CW
Hi Brian.
Just read your comments at 3830scores about
us:
-------------------------
On the other hand it was remarkable the number of times ED1R
chose to land on my qrg. He was weak and I am not saying he was
hearing me but I was hearing his callers who were busting up the
esp numbers I was trying to get..
--------------------------
If we were weak there perhaps we did not hear you at all as you
are off the back or off the side of our beams. Also we set very
narrow filtering. Elementary it is not our intention to make
delibetate QRM and we always play within the contest rules.
Nevertheless we apologize for the trouble. Next time please do not
hesitate to turn your antenna and ask for QSY.
We do not seek controversy, but understands that is a Contest
with a very bad propagation conditions where punishment not we
heard each other.
A greeting.
73 de Jesus EC1KR / ED1R
Blog. www.ec1kr.com
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|