Thank you for the responses, I now understand this
"reverse split" scenario much better now......I
appreciate everyone's time.
73,
Bill K4WSW
678.296.6919
On 10/29/2012 11:15 AM,
secc-request at contesting.com wrote:
> Send SECC mailing list submissions to
> secc at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/secc
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> secc-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> secc-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of SECC digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW (Bill Weathers)
> 2. Re: Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW (Lee Hiers)
> 3. Re: Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW (Hal Kennedy)
> 4. Re: Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW - split ops (Kevan Nason)
> 5. Re: Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW (wb4sq at yahoo.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 10:09:11 -0400
> From: Bill Weathers <bill-weathers at comcast.net>
> To: secc at contesting.com
> Subject: [SECC] Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW
> Message-ID: <508E8E07.4070701 at comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
> Hello, I am a recent new member; thanks for your
> patience.
>
> I had an improved CQWW year over year, last year :
> 2011 105 QSO, ~26K pts; 2012 154 QSO, ~86K pts (26
> zones, 77 entities) Single op unassisted low power
>
> Question pertaining to band plan compliance.
> I heard operators on 40M saying they were split,
> with the listening frequency down in the data
> segment below 7.125Mhz. (i.e. Op is on 7.154,
> listening 7.038)
> Is this practice acceptable? 40M is the only band
> I heard this on, however was confused and didn't
> work those stations.
>
> Can someone help me understand this approach and
> if acceptable or point me to the answer if asked
> previously by a "newb" like myself?
>
> Thank you in advance, have a great day.
>
> Bill K4WSW
> 678.296.6919
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/secc/attachments/20121029/eaf688ce/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 10:15:00 -0400
> From: Lee Hiers <aa4ga at contesting.com>
> Cc: secc at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [SECC] Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW
> Message-ID:
> <CAEEr=7MRFZ7kN-OX6ieM4mYFb2M0GNKLAdg_ra_dJV4iEF3j9w at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Bill Weathers
> <bill-<bill-weathers at comcast.net>
> weathers at comcast.net <bill-weathers at comcast.net>> wrote:
>
> I had an improved CQWW year over year, last year : 2011 105 QSO, ~26K pts;
>> 2012 154 QSO, ~86K pts (26 zones, 77 entities) Single op unassisted low
>> power
>>
> Congrats on the improvement!
>
>
>> I heard operators on 40M saying they were split, with the listening
>> frequency down in the data segment below 7.125Mhz. (i.e. Op is on 7.154,
>> listening 7.038)
>> Is this practice acceptable? 40M is the only band I heard this on,
>> however was confused and didn't work those stations.
>>
> If you were hearing folks CQing at 7154 and listening 7038, that was most
> likely US guys running DX - you wouldn't want to work them anyway. But
> obviously you wouldn't transmit SSB at 7038 in any event.
>
> You should listen outside the US phone segment for DX stations calling CQ
> and listening up in the US phone band. Say an Italian transmitting at 7075
> and listening for US at 7200. It's perfectly fine to call these guys.
>
> HTH,
>
> 73 de Lee
> --
> Lee Hiers, AA4GA
> www.aa4ga.com
>
> Submit your totals to the unofficial QRP DXCC standings - go to *
> http://www.aa4ga.com/p/qrp-dxcc.html* for more info!
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/secc/attachments/20121029/f0376f61/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 10:22:47 -0400
> From: "Hal Kennedy" <halken at comcast.net>
> To: "'Bill Weathers'" <bill-weathers at comcast.net>
> Cc: 'South East Contest Club' <secc at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [SECC] Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW
> Message-ID: <8728B2CF63FD4F2E976EECA0265F4116 at N4GG4>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Bill,
>
>
>
> This is common practice. Although your example is backwards.the DX usually
> transmits between 7030 and 7100 on SSB, which is allowed in EU and states a
> listening freq in the US phone band above 7.125. Its perfectly legal.
>
>
>
> It performs many functions -
>
> - Its spreads out the DX
>
> - I allows the DX to not have to control a pileup
>
> - It allows the DX to listen on their own freq and the US freq at
> the same time if they are using a modern radio.
>
>
>
> Once in a while US stations will turn it around and call CQ in the US phone
> band and listen on their freq plus down below. For the same reasons above.
>
>
>
> Its done on 40 given the small space on the band, the IARU regulations not
> matching the band plans, etc.
>
>
>
> 73
>
> Hal
>
> N4GG
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: SECC [mailto:secc-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Weathers
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 10:09 AM
> To: secc at contesting.com
> Subject: [SECC] Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW
>
>
>
> Hello, I am a recent new member; thanks for your patience.
>
> I had an improved CQWW year over year, last year : 2011 105 QSO, ~26K pts;
> 2012 154 QSO, ~86K pts (26 zones, 77 entities) Single op unassisted low
> power
>
> Question pertaining to band plan compliance.
> I heard operators on 40M saying they were split, with the listening
> frequency down in the data segment below 7.125Mhz. (i.e. Op is on 7.154,
> listening 7.038)
> Is this practice acceptable? 40M is the only band I heard this on, however
> was confused and didn't work those stations.
>
> Can someone help me understand this approach and if acceptable or point me
> to the answer if asked previously by a "newb" like myself?
>
> Thank you in advance, have a great day.
>
> Bill K4WSW
> 678.296.6919
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/secc/attachments/20121029/7c38da5d/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:04:26 -0400
> From: Kevan Nason <knason00 at gmail.com>
> To: Bill Weathers <bill-weathers at comcast.net>
> Cc: secc at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [SECC] Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW - split ops
> Message-ID:
> <CAA6OJLqud7OTS417DoTYa010--op2T3Hxs_eNyWj6GJrCUAf+Q at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Keep up the improvement Bill!
>
> Since you are unfamiliar with the practice I'm assuming
> you don't have experience doing this. Sorry if my
> assumption is wrong. You've had a couple replies from
> others, so thought I'd add some tips and shortfalls for
> doing split operations. Operating split in the search and
> pounce mode requires a lot of attention. I know how
> easy it is to mess up!
>
> Your radio probably has a second VFO or sub receiver.
> Set the main to receive and use it to tune 7025 to 7125
> (and sometimes higher). Set the "B" or sub receiver to
> transmit. Tune your main to a station lisening "up" and
> then move the B VFO to the frequency the DX is listening
> to. You should check to make sure the DX hasn't chosen
> a freq with a US QSO on it so you don't interfere with them.
> (Many don't do that, but you should. That's one reason
> non-contesters don't like us.) Answer the DX just as you
> would if you were on the same frequency.
>
> Some logging programs allow you to change the rigs'
> frequency by typing in the last digits into the call field.
> I'll talk about N1MM and WinTest. If you're on 40, typing
> "234" in the call field takes the main VFO to 7234 KHz.
> If you type "/234" in N1MM or "-234" in WinTest, it takes
> the B VFO to 7234. By using those you can tune the low
> part of 40 with the main VFO and when you hear
> someone calling CQ and they say "Listening this
> frequency and 234", type "/234" into the call field and
> you instantly have both main and sub VFO's on the correct
> frequencies. (WinTest is nice and automatically sets
> the transmit focus to VFO B when you do that. That
> caused me problems this weekend until I figured that
> out! Sorry again Rick.)
>
> The biggest problem when working split is that you
> keep the transmit focus on the main VFO when you're
> listening below 7125. You tune your B VFO (which
> is really just a receiver now) to 7244 and then answer
> the CQ. I still mess that up! Sometimes when you're
> doing that someone will say "Check your frequency".
> No need to answer them if you are ever told that!
> I have had it said to me a couple times, but won't
> admit I've ever said it.
>
> Oh, you might hear split on 80 too, DX down in 3600 range
> listening up around 3800+. Not very common though.
>
> Kevan
> N4XL
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:15:21 -0400
> From: wb4sq at yahoo.com
> To: Hal Kennedy <halken at comcast.net>
> Cc: South East Contest Club <secc at contesting.com>, Bill Weathers
> <bill-weathers at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [SECC] Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW
> Message-ID: <81C8E64F-B77E-4336-8378-8CE252A66DEC at yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Makes contesting on 40 fun but chews up precious bandwidth...
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 29, 2012, at 10:22 AM, "Hal Kennedy" <halken at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Bill,
>>
>> This is common practice. Although your example is backwards?the DX usually
>> transmits between 7030 and 7100 on SSB, which is allowed in EU and states a
>> listening freq in the US phone band above 7.125. Its perfectly legal.
>>
>> It performs many functions ?
>> - Its spreads out the DX
>> - I allows the DX to not have to control a pileup
>> - It allows the DX to listen on their own freq and the US freq at
>> the same time if they are using a modern radio.
>>
>> Once in a while US stations will turn it around and call CQ in the US phone
>> band and listen on their freq plus down below. For the same reasons above.
>>
>> Its done on 40 given the small space on the band, the IARU regulations not
>> matching the band plans, etc.
>>
>> 73
>> Hal
>> N4GG
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: SECC [mailto:secc-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Weathers
>> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 10:09 AM
>> To: secc at contesting.com
>> Subject: [SECC] Bill - K4WSW - question post CQWW
>>
>> Hello, I am a recent new member; thanks for your patience.
>>
>> I had an improved CQWW year over year, last year : 2011 105 QSO, ~26K pts;
>> 2012 154 QSO, ~86K pts (26 zones, 77 entities) Single op unassisted low power
>>
>> Question pertaining to band plan compliance.
>> I heard operators on 40M saying they were split, with the listening
>> frequency down in the data segment below 7.125Mhz. (i.e. Op is on 7.154,
>> listening 7.038)
>> Is this practice acceptable? 40M is the only band I heard this on, however
>> was confused and didn't work those stations.
>>
>> Can someone help me understand this approach and if acceptable or point me
>> to the answer if asked previously by a "newb" like myself?
>>
>> Thank you in advance, have a great day.
>>
>> Bill K4WSW
>> 678.296.6919
>> _______________________________________________
>> SECC mailing list
>> SECC at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/secc
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/secc/attachments/20121029/f5e26fd4/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> SECC mailing list
> SECC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/secc
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of SECC Digest, Vol 118, Issue 31
> *************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/secc/attachments/20121029/fd38986f/attachment-0001.html>
|