Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: CY9C

To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: CY9C
From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Reply-to: jim@audiosystemsgroup.com
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 16:25:56 -0700
List-post: <mailto:topband@contesting.com>
On 9/6/2024 11:58 AM, Wilson Lamb via Topband wrote:
I saw the comment that they were "CQing into callers."
This breaks the dam for me.
I'm sickened to almost giving up by the deplorable manners shown on the bands 
these days.
Why shouldn't they CQ into callers?  Those callers shouldn't be calling at all!

I agree, Wilson. This summer, I was ridiculed, even to the point of hate, because I posted strongly about blind-calling DX and posting the DX Code of Conduct on the VHF Slack channel.

The principle difficulties I had in working the CY9C team were 1) propagation on 10 and 12M; 2) the blind callers on CW (never tried SSB); and 3) their receive noise seemed to be an issue on 160M. I got through 160M FT8 running 1.2kW into a 100 ft Tee with a lot of radials; they gave me -18, I gave them -15, listening on my EU Beverage which hears my neighbor's noise real well. Signal reports in FT8 are signal to noise ratio. Several good ops with good stations out here (NorCal, OR) were calling for more than an hours (and not blind calling) didn't get through in the same time frame.

The ops for the three CW QSOs I made (17, 10, and 30M) were all first rate, as were the FT8 ops for QSOs on 160, 60, and 12M. I only called them on bands where I had no QSOs from earlier expeditions.

73, Jim K9YC



_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

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