With a not so great station, I don't get on and "run" very often. So, I
always tell the qrm gang to be nice, because if I leave, someone with a real
signal will take my place. Doesn't work, but at least I've warned them!
73, Mike K9MI
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Steven Williams" <k9gx@n4gn.com>
To: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>; "CQ Contest"
<cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 04:06
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Frequency owners
> Ken,
>
> I had a similar experience on 14.292. Found a clear spot about 292.5,
> asked
> if the frequency was in use for 30 seconds, heard nothing and started
> CQing.
> About 25 minutes later, Barney Fife showed up and informed me that I was
> QRMing the Maritime Mobile (pinhead) Net on 290! I asked why he had not
> responded to my "QRL?" earlier and whether he understood the function of
> the
> IF PBT knob on his rig. Of course this ushered forth a torrent of epithets
> about the evil scourge of contesting and threats to wreak the wrath of
> Charlie down upon my obnoxious 100 watt QRM machine which, apparently was
> trashing the band for tens of kilohertz up and down the band.
>
> Not wishing to continue this clever, but useless, repartee with Officer
> Fife, I decided to QSY down the band to the first available clear spot.
> Found one at 287.2. Thinking 2.8 kilohertz below the supposed net should
> have been sufficient I attempted to resume my NAQP efforts. I should add
> here that up to this point I'd heard nothing but some sporadic rag chewing
> on 290.
>
> You know the rest. After a few minutes Sheriff Taylor came down and
> informed
> me that I was QRMing the above mentioned net and that if I didn't cease he
> and Floyd the Barber were going to beat me severely about the head, take
> my
> boomset, tear up my license and throw me in the Mayberry slammer! I told
> him
> maybe that sort of talk worked with Otis, but it wasn't going to work on
> me.
> QRZ....
>
> So, the bottom line appears thus:
>
> The 20 Meter "Maritime Mobile Nets" apparently have special FCC
> authorization to operate exclusively at frequencies every 10 kilohertz
> across the band.
>
> This authorization is effective even in the absence of natural disasters,
> ie, hurricanes, tsunamis or other threats to maritime navigation and
> safety.
>
> 3 kilohertz wide "guard bands" must be maintained on either side of such
> Federally mandated assigned carrier frequencies.
>
> Receiver features like IF passband tuning, IF and audio filters and VFOs
> are
> to be avoided at all costs.
>
> I'm not sure these clowns could copy health and welfare traffic if it were
> hand delivered on printed pages with really big letters.
>
> One other memorable "highlight" of this NAQP SSB was the KF6 who gave me a
> signal report of "539" after his exchange...so I guess that means he knows
> what CW is.
>
> CU on the bands,
>
> 73,
>
> MSW
>
> Mark S. Williams
> K9GX
> Elizabeth, IN
> k9gx@n4gn.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
> To: "CQ Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 3:29 PM
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Frequency owners
>
>
>> On Saturday in the NAQP, I spent at least two hours CQing on 14.260
>> MHz.
>> A little after 0130 UTC, someone came on frequency and "informed" me that
>> I
>> was operating on the IOTA frequency, and that I was interfering with one
>> or
>> two active IOTA DXpeditions who would rather be using this frequency,
>> and could us contesters be so kind as to keep just this one frequency
>> clear,
>> seeing as how it is the IOTA frequency after all, and I wasn't on an
>> island, blah, blah, blah.... He was reasonably polite and all, even gave
>> a callsign, but of course he was taking like 90+ seconds to make his
>> point,
>> and I decided that, even though I had really good rate on that band, it
>> was
>> time to be CQing on 40M anyway, so I left him to argue with himself for
>> who
>> knows how much longer. Checking 14.260 later on with the second radio, I
>> never heard anyone else using that frequency, but maybe that was because
>> signals of adjacent activity that moved in around it made it just as
>> unusable
>> as if I had been there all along.
>>
>> Looking up this IOTA business on the web, I find that these people
>> think they own no fewer than fifteen (15) frequencies on the HF ham
>> bands.
>> What utter hubris!
>>
>> I also at one point on Saturday heard some station giving someone on
>> 14.298 MHz grief about how the Maritime Mobile Net had been on 14.300 MHz
>> for over 40 years, blah, blah, blah - of course, when I tuned up to
>> 14.300
>> MHz, there's NOBODY there!
>>
>> Can someone tell me, is there any special interest group in ham radio
>> today that _doesn't_ think it owns a frequency on 20 meters phone?
>>
>> --
>> Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
>> kenharker@kenharker.com
>> http://www.kenharker.com/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|