Pedro, I agree with Guy. I have had the option of both the 250 Hz & 500 Hz filters. When the pile up is thick, the 250 Hz is a necessity. I have gone to the wider filter and have work some fellas twi
I use a different approach. As the pileup thickens (granted, a much smaller pileup from W3 land than V31) I QRQ. That in itself, thins the pileup, and lets you work faster. As the pileup thins again,
If you are getting answers to your CQ's, it can't be a big problem. Good point, though. It's certainly preferable to have a wider clear bandwidth, but not always possible on a crowded band. However,
Nope. It's a jungle out there - if you are getting results and are happy with the situation, then you don't have to do anything. With respect to 500 versus 250, I think the shape of the filter is mu
I've observed the same thing on HF. In the absence of strong QRM, a weak signal is just as easy, or easier, to copy with a wide bandwidth. Since wide filter bandwidth clearly must reduce the S/N rati
Quite some number of excellent replies here, responding to all of them in general, so no quotes below... One of the nice things about TR in S&P is it's keeping a bandmap. What I see is an average 500
Cascaded filters, in two IF's, are essential for serious contest operation. Also, if you want to add one additional 250 Hz filter, it should be in the 455 kHz IF, as that filter will have much better
Sorry, I can't buy this one, and I don't think others should either. I believe it's the height of rudeness to plop down within someone else's 500Hz bandwidth and blast away, then simply ignore the pl
Well - I figured my comments would generate some responses. Glad to see a discussion about this. What if you are in the position of not being able to find a clear place on the band? I often have a p
Well, there's a name for this effect, which has been documented previously in other fields. In my advanced years I can't remember it, though. The essence, as I recall, is that the "right" amount of b
Many years ago I read an article in the Journal of the Franklin Inst (I think) about some research that was done on the ability to recognize tones below 0 dB S/N ratio. It seems that the brain can se
I think this is what is called Stochastic Resonance. wide Justin Snow G4TSH justin@g4tsh.demon.co.uk -- CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/ Administrative requests: cq-contest-R
Yep, that's it!!! (I thought of it about six hours after posting my original message, when I was nowhere near an e-mail connection. Thanks for the assist. Bud, K2KIR -- CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.
I sympathize, but in real life it seems to me that often the two stations start out not interfering, and then things change. Propagation shifts, or one or the other station tweaks his VFO ever so sli
either. I else's the In the beginning , transmitting and receiving bandwidths were limited by antenna resonances only and were many MHz wide. The TRF and vacuum tube transmitters changed this to hun
I was away in Thailand when this thread was discussed, but I can't help weighing in on the subject at this late date. As one of my mentors, the late W3GRF, Contest Hall-of-Famer always said, "It's a
else's receiving bandwidth should be by sending "QRL" when in fact I'm several > hundred Hz from being zero-beat with him. use" > when I am in fact is: "If you had to move the dial to tell me it was
and Hi Fred, The one thing that I found to be tremendously different the two times that I operated from up your way was how easy it was to get a frequency and hold a frequency. I recall not ever havi
Fred Laun K3ZO sez But Fred I have been setting here listening on this frequency since I finished my morning All Bran and prune juice. John AE5B -- CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-co
As always, Fred shows his wisdom & experience. From the old school, we listen, we don't hear any activity, we CQ. To expose one of the old tricks, if someone "QRL?'s", many believe that the questioni