On Sep 28, 2006, at 9:35 AM, <ku8e at bellsouth.net>
<ku8e at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> You don't get the point and are side stepping the issue. Sure, It
> is true that legally you canoperate RTTY where the FCC rules say
> you can , which includes the whole bottom
> end of 40 meters.
Unlike CW, which includes the WHOLE of 40m.
> The point is there have been bandplans, gentleman's agreements
> (both formal and informal)
> or whatever you want to call them in place for longer than you and
> I have been hams.
Bandplans are not absolute. The plans to not account for all the
possible factors involved in the operation of amateur radio. If the
bandplans were absolute, they would be part of the regulations.
> You know as well as I do that there is a DX window of 160 meters -
> 1825-1830.
Actually, I'm not so sure. For years, there was a DX window on 160m.
For years and years, it was 10 kHz. Today, it does not appear in the
ARRL bandplan. Nor does it appear in the "Considerate operator's
frequency guide." In contrast, the 10 kHz DX window from 3790-3800
kHz DOES appear in the bandplan.
> These agreements are meant to
> be a gentlemanly way to "keep the peace" and allow everyone to
> enjoy whatever activity they like to do be it DXing , ragchewing,
> CW, RTTY or whatever...
I thought it was more so like-minded operators could find each other.
> Many of the new RTTY operators out there are just ignore these
> agreements and operate where they want and use the same arguments
> you do that it's their "right" because the FCC says they can
> operate on a certain frequency.
I am a new RTTY operator. I did not try the mode until last year. I
certainly want to be able to operate RTTY in the lower 50 kHz of 40m,
at least until 2009 -- because that's where the DX is.
Is it so outrageous to want to operate RTTY on the same frequencies
as other RTTY operators?
> I have had a RTTY operator start up on a frequency I have been
> on many times. At least on CW you can do a QRL? to ask if the
> frequency is is use.
I don't know about anyone else, but I do this. I send QRL? DE AA4LR
in RTTY. I'll probably send it twice and listen before continuing
operations on that frequency.
I also listen to frequencies. More than once I found a relatively
clear frequency only to hear a CW station a few seconds later. I
moved on -- that frequency is in use. I also try to avoid certain CW
watering holes. I'll go above 7040, and below 7040, but I'll keep my
tones away from 7040 exactly. Too many crystal-controlled QRP CW
stations there.
> I doubt that RTTY operators do this... they just start up where
> they want too.
You know at least one RTTY operator does this -- me. I don't start up
where I want to -- I listen first.
> I'm not saying there are not bad apples on CW.. there probably are
> and maybe they are handling things the wrong way by jamming a RTTY
> station who might of interupted their QSO.
The issue here is not at all about RTTY. It's about poor operating
practices. If you want to rail away like the Old Man about crappy
operating practices, I'll join you!
> The bottom line is this RTTY/CW issue didn't exist before a few
> years ago until programs like MMTTY became available to make it
> easy to get on this mode without much investment of $$$...
Yes, there are more RTTY operators. And yes, some of them are poor
operators.
The solution is to educate the poor operators on good operating
practices.
Grousing that all the RTTY operators ought to go elsewhere on 40m
doesn't help. It's not a solution, because there's nowhere else for
them to go, at least not until 2009. And it certainly doesn't address
the poor operating practices.
Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr at arrl.net
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
-- Wilbur Wright, 1901
|