It is true that some rigs (depending on how they are operated) can produce
signals that appear wider than normal. Can you think of a way to express
this in technical terms rather than using a K3 as a reference. Contesting
needs to have a dialog around what is the accepted standard for signal width
or "cleanliness".
What test equipment would some use to evaluate their own signal in the
shack?
What would be a good test standard for someone listening to capture the
essence of the signal quality?
Randy, K5ZD
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Jim Brown
> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2014 4:57 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Handicap For Dirty Rigs
>
> In my study of the TX Noise produced by current transceivers, I noted the
> significant advantage enjoyed by users of dirty rigs by pushing other
> stations away from their TX frequency, and making it difficult (or
> impossible) for stations to S&P near them. Consider the lineup of
> hundreds of NA stations in the 15 kHz 160M JA window, and comparable
> conditions from east coast to EU. One FTDX5000D burns five K3 channels;
> one ICOM 7800,7700, 7600, burns three. I run a K3 and a Ten Tec Titan,
> which is quite clean. I've established a run frequency for JA only to run
> off by a guy with a dirty power amp 700 Hz away.
>
> Competitors using these dirty rigs should pay the price competitively. I
> propose a scoring penalty of 15% to the users of FTDX5000 and other Yaesu
> rigs in that family (study ARRL data to understand why that's valid), and
> 10% to users of IC7800, 7700, 7600. KE1B, who uses a 7600 to drive a
> solid state amp, wipes out 10 kHz of whatever band he is on for me on CW,
> more on SSB. I'm not a WRTC competitor, but K6XX is, and his dirty TX
> hurts Bob worse than me. By contrast, Bob and I, with K3s and tube amps,
> can work 500 Hz apart and barely know the other is there. And Bob is
> three miles closer than KE1B.
>
> Is this fair? I contend that with the right to run high power comes the
> responsibility to produce the CLEANEST signal consistent with the state
> of the art. K3 has established the state of the art, and preliminary data
> from the mfr suggest that Flex 6000-series may be as good. Kenwood
> TS590S is 10 dB worse, at a very modest price. I contend THAT is state of
> the art, and that ICOM and Yaesu fail to meet it.
>
> Yes, I'm saying that users of these dirty rigs need to replace them with
> cleaner ones. In 2008, I sold a pair of loaded FT1000MPs at significant
> loss to be replaced by K3s. I did this because I could see from specs
> that I needed to do that to coexist with my neighbors. Before that, I
> owned a pair of TS850s and K2s. All sold.
>
> And remember -- this is ARRL's data, not mine. :)
>
> From my days in the civil rights movement of the '60s and '70s -- "if
> you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem!" I've dumped
> my dirty rigs -- how about YOU?
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|