CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Feb 04 QST op-ed article

To: "Mark Beckwith" <mark@concertart.com>,<cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Feb 04 QST op-ed article
From: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 02:35:38 -0800
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Why NOT limit contests on 20M to below 14.297?

That would work fine for smaller contests like the Sprint,
NAQP, state QSO parties, etc. Of course one can argue
that these contests already do this on their own naturally
(activity tends to cluster around the sponsors suggested
frequency range). In high activity contests like CQ WW,
ARRL DX, SS Phone, etc I don't think its a workable idea.
Their just isn't enough room for everyone even when the
whole phone band is used. What we need is an STA
from the FCC to use 14.350 to 14.700 on contest
weekends (lotsa luck, right?). Another variation on this
approach which I have never seen proposed before
would be to come up with a dynamic bandplan. In a big
contest like CQ WW Phone, with static bandplans fixed
by regulation, the bottom 150 KHz of 20 meters remains
lightly used while hundreds of stations fight it out for a
frequency in the top 150 KHz of the band. This is not
a very efficient use of spectrum. With this scheme, CW
and Digital operators enjoy a large contest-free zone
which is probably larger than what they need, while
non-contest phone operators are left with nothing in the
way of a contest-free zone. A better solution would be
to change the bandplan on big contest weekends so
that some of the bottom 150 KHz was reallocated for
SSB operation. This would provide a little extra room
for the contest (which is badly needed) and some space
for contest-free phone operation.

Since our signals don't respect international boundaries
with the associated myriad sovereign regulatory bodies,
this kind of thing would have to be coordinated by the IARU.
This would be no small task, so some might argue to
just shift from fixed (e.g. regulated) bandplans to
"gentleman's" agreement (e.g. unregulated) bandplans
with provisions in the gentleman's agreements
for contest-weekend-only expansion of SSB subbands.
I am skeptical, however, that gentleman's agreements can
be made to work on the higher bands. Even on 160 meters
the gentleman's agreement has proven less than perfect.
There will be always a few dunderhead inbreds who will -
wallowing in self-righteousness and the letter of the law -
thumb their noses at the gentleman's agreements and ruin
it for everyone else.

Anyway, it's just a thought. Flame suit donned and ready.

73 de Mike, W4EF.............


>
> Please don't reply stating all the standard responses we hear all the time
> when somebody curses phone contests.  I am NOT the enemy, and I already
know
> the arguments.  I wasn't born yesterday.
>
> Mark, N5OT
>
>




---------------------------------------------------------------
    The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!
       http://home1.pacific.net.sg/~jamesb/
---------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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