Has anyone considered the fact that DX will most likely pick a
receive frequency that will most likely be occupied by the numerous ragchewers
that live above 1843? These are the guys with low dipoles and other poor
antennas. They will not be heard by the DX station who will think that the
receive frequency is clear and when the U.S. DXers with good antennas find out
where they need to transmit they will transmit right on top of the locals and
create a mess similar to what happens on 75m almost nightly. Your ideal
solution just creates other headaches. I enjoy 160m and weak signal work as
much as the next guy but I am not overjoyed with the prospect of creating a
nuisance for many others in order to solve the problems of a few. Too bad I
can't go back and change my submission to the FCC on the the bandplan proposal
now that I realize what the true motives of it were.
73, Ken N4UK
Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> AA1K wrote:
>I heard HUNDREDS of European stations below 1843 kHz last night, and
>Caribbean stations, who were not listening above 1843 kHz for USA stations.
>If ALL of the USA participants had been operating below 1843 I would only
>have been able to hear a small portion of these.
Bingo! This is what K1ZM and I have been trying to say to
those who think there is not a problem with USA stations continuously
CQ-ing below 1843. It may take awhile for EU stations to adjust to
listening up, but FAR many more of them will be heard AND worked if we
don't cover them up. The smarter ones will adjust very quickly since
one NA QSO is worth 5 EU QSO's in this contest.
Very early last evening (2330?) I briefly listened and heard S57M,
9A2VR and OT2T all with very readable signals but I would not call them
transceive. If they had only briefly tried "Listening here and XX"
(43 or above) they would have another 10 QSO points in their log today.
>TA3J was one of the loudest stations heard, but didn't listen up so
>couldn't work him.
Kudos to you for not calling Jon! I noticed several USA stations
CQ-ing below 1843 seemed to have relatively few takers and eventually left.
If 95% of us honor the bandplan, the other 5% will quickly get the
message...or have scores far lower than what they could have had.
>Bright spot was working 5R8FU on CW at his sunrise for a new one in spite
>of all the SSB crud on 1834 kHz.
Would this have happened without most honoring the bandplan?
I doubt it! A few years ago during Saturday night of the CQ 160 SSB,
it was absolutely all I could do to manage a CW QSO with E44/HA1AG on
1812 for a new one. He was an honest S9 but only 399 because of the
S9+30 SSB on top of him and it took ~3 repeats to complete the QSO!
Another interesting thing was that the band above 1930 was NOT
terribly crowded. There was still plenty of band available for non-
contest SSB QSO's even in the middle of the world's most popular 160
SSB contest, and even with most USA SSB contesters above 1843. The
bandplan can truly be a win-win for everyone if we follow it.
Overall, I was quite pleasantly surprised with the behavior
in this first CQ 160 SSB under the new bandplan. I'm sure Europe will
eventually learn to listen up...if they want my 10 points that is.
73, Bill W4ZV
P.S. We don't need policemen telling USA to move above 1843! Just
don't work them and they will get the message eventually.
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
--
SECC on the Web: http://secc.contesting.com/
Submissions: secc@contesting.com
Administrative requests: secc-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-secc@contesting.com
|