Well
Then they must fix it in region 3.
There need to be new common rules for rbn sir. :)
Much better keep up in band when finally got 100khz extra for" years!!" søndag,
07 februar 2016, 05:04p.m. +01:00 from Rudy Bakalov < r_bakalov@yahoo.com> :
>It is hard to argue with the actual RBN data. Data from JA skimmers from CQ WW
>RTTY 2015 shows Japanese stations in the 7023-28 segment.
>
>Rudy N2WQ
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: "post@lb3re.com" < post@lb3re.com >
>To: Rudy Bakalov < r_bakalov@yahoo.com >
>Cc: Tim Shoppa < tshoppa@gmail.com >; "rtty@contesting.com" <
>rtty@contesting.com >; DK4VW Ulrich Mueller < dk4vw@darc.de >; Don AA5AU <
>aa5au@bellsouth.net >
>Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2016 11:00 AM
>Subject: Re[2]: [RTTY] 40M RTTY band plans
>
>7020 ??? Are you out of mind???
>7040 is absolutly lowest on 40m for RTTY last 5 years!! It all mode going up
>in band is better
>
>I sit in HF commity of IARU region 1.
>We are enough complain about DQRM of dxpeds. But if skimmers give no care to
>bandplans? It will be more war in cw segment!!
>73 LB3RE søndag, 07 februar 2016, 04:26p.m. +01:00 from Rudy Bakalov via RTTY
>rtty@contesting.com >:
>
>Tim,
>There is one limitation of the RBN data to keep in mind- the vast majority of
>RTTY skimmers have narrow segments due to the significant CPU requirements to
>process wide segments. I have set mine to the following, precisely to see what
>happens during contests like CQ WPX and CQ WW RTTY:
>RttySegments=3523000-3610000,7020000-7105000,14040000-14145000,21040000-21155000,28040000-28182000
>
>Rudy N2WQ
> From: Tim Shoppa < tshoppa@gmail.com >
> To: Rudy Bakalov < r_bakalov@yahoo.com >
>Cc: " rtty@contesting.com " < rtty@contesting.com >
> Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2016 10:12 AM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] 40M RTTY band plans
>
>Rudy, that's a brilliant set of graphs. Thank you so much! I'm going to see if
>I can do the same use reversebeacon data for other major RTTY contests.
>For BARTG I'm not surprised that the EU band plan is adopted, given what the
>"B" in BARTG stands for.
>But in ARRL RTTY RU I'm surprised we don't let the EU guys CQ below 7050 where
>they like to be while the NA guys go above 7080. Instead there's a bunch of NA
>guys below 7050 CQ'ing and making it hard to work the EU. Not a good way to
>make RTTY RU more popular in EU (and I would like it to be more popular in EU).
>Now, in CQ WW RTTY, all gloves come off :-)
>Correct me if I'm wrong... in CQ WW RTTY we spread out all the way to 7100.
>While the EU stuff tends to be lower, I worked a lot of EU RTTY above 7080 in
>CQ WW RTTY. So I'm thinking it's tradition or avoiding phone QRM that the EU's
>like to stay lower, that they don't actually have rules prohibiting RTTY above
>7080? Maybe in a super major RTTY contest like CQ WW RTTY the phone guys are
>avoiding 7080-7100 but in the less major contests like ARRL RTTY RU there is
>not that critical mass to drive phone out of that segment?
>Tim N3QE
>On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Rudy Bakalov < r_bakalov@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
>Here's where the stations are, based on RBN data from BARTG
>https://public.tableau.com/views/BARTGRTTYSprint2016/FrequencybyContinent?:embed=y&:display_count=yes&:showTabs=y
>
>Rudy N2WQ
> From: Tim Shoppa < tshoppa@gmail.com >
> To: rtty@contesting.com
> Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2016 9:48 AM
> Subject: [RTTY] 40M RTTY band plans
>
>Bill writes:
>> This anomaly on 40 is a result of the JA band restrictions
>> which were in place for many years. The JAs were limited to
>> 7030-7045 so that's where everyone congregated, even when
>> working non JAs.
>
>I can certainly understand that perspective from the west coast. But as I
>see it from the east coast, the reason is that in EU the 40M phone segment
>starts at 7050 or 7060, and all the EU guys like to be below 7050 :-)
>
>40M band plan has improved in recent years, as SW broadcasters move up or
>out. Still it's very common for 7080 region to be littered with phone stuff
>from Europe or South America (incidentally... most of them not ID'ing...
>just saying I'm pretty sure it's not legal ham activity.)
>
>In CQ WW there's enough RTTY activity that activity spreads out all the way
>up past 7080 to 7100 easy.
>
>A real highlight of my RTTY RU 40M experience, given that it happens near
>winter solstice, is when I'm calling CQ on 40M well before my sunset and
>work JA's (presumably long path). That's a thrill. So I'm real glad there's
>been recent improvements to JA 40M RTTY segment.
>
>I'm actually surprised that I had so many QSO's below 7050 in RTTY RU yet
>there is not a whole lot of EU in RTTY RU. (Certainly not like CQ WW where
>there is a whole lot of EU activity on 40M and well every band!). Don't get
>me wrong, I love working the EU guys in RTTY RU, but I'm surprsied that we
>"adopt the EU band plan" in RTTY RU despite the fact that EU is small
>compared to domestic stuff in RTTY RU. You might think a more rational
>approach, would be to let the EU guys CQ below 7050, and we go down there
>to work them, while we are CQ'ing higher up. Instead all the NA guys go
>CQ'ing below 7050 and make it dang hard to work the EU guys who genuinely
>have a reason to be dowh there.
>
>80M is still less than optimal with EU able to do RTTY above 3600 but not
>USA. So in the really big RTTY contests we end up going below 3580 which
>starts some frequency fights with other digital modes in the 3570-3580
>region.
>
>Tim N3QE
>_______________________________________________
>RTTY mailing list
>RTTY@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>RTTY mailing list
>RTTY@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|