No it's not asking too much...if we had 150 kc of CW. Which, in reality, we
don't and have not had for decades.
CW has been crunched into the bottom 40 kc/s for a decade now. And with the
advent of massive RTTY signals it is now down to 30 or less. Don't believe
me? Listen to the low end ANYTIME. You will hear RTTY/digital as low as
the very bottom of the CW segement in the Extra sub-band.
It is all intentional. I don't buy for a minute the RTTY stations are a
bunch of good guys.
Dan/W4NTI
----- Original Message -----
From: "K4SB" <k4sb@bellsouth.net>
To: "secc" <secc@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: [SECC] Poor Operating? nawwwwww
> ku8e@bellsouth.net wrote:
>
> 40 meters is really messed up and the FCC needs to act on it now....
> Jon, the
> problem is that many of the RTTY guys in the contest would
> intentionally QRM those doing the NAQP on CW...
> -----------------------------
> Again, I subscribe to the RTTY reflector, and it would be difficult to
> find a more congenial bunch of operators. They are not individuals who
> would intentionally QRM another operator.
>
> Again, using filters 200 cycles wide generaly means they do not even
> hear you.
>
> Again, is giving up 15 kc to RTTY too much to ask for a cw band of 150
> kc?
>
> And the FCC cannot do a damn thing about 40. It is, and has been a
> topic for discussion at the annual IARU meetings, and this year, the
> ARRL is optimistic that 40 can be reorganized world wide. And that
> also means getting rid of all those broadcast stations.
>
> 73
> Ed
> _______________________________________________
> SECC mailing list
> SECC@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/secc
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005
|