[CQ-Contest] Re: Choice of CW Narrow filters

[Barry Kutner]

I use a different approach. As the pileup thickens (granted, a much 
smaller pileup from W3 land than V31) I QRQ. That in itself, thins 
the pileup, and lets you work faster. As the pileup thins again, QRS.

As far as squeezing in between stations using 250 Hz filters, ponder 
this: YOU may be okay copying the other guy. But, how many of the 
third and fourth tier EUs (the bread and butter for us E. coasters) 
also have 250 Hz filters to copy YOU just above or below  W3LPL, K1AR, 
N3RS, etc?
73 Barry

On 16 Apr 99, v31jp at logical123.net <v31jp at logical123.net> wrote:

> 
> Pedro,
> 
> I agree with Guy. I have had the option of both the 250 Hz & 500 Hz
> filters. When the pile up is thick, the 250 Hz is a necessity. I have gone
> to the wider filter and have work some fellas twice, once when they
> were working the station below me and again when they got on my
> frequency. I found the 250 Hz filter helps me zero beat the stations
> I am calling, as it narrows down my window of zero beat choice. I
> keep hearing the statements about using the filters between the ears.
> The problem with this filter is it does not keep your AGC from being
> pumped up by the guy calling someone just off your frequency and the
> weak guy who is on your frequency is now down in the mud. Do I
> miss the guys calling me off frequency because my filter is narrow,
> probably a few. But I miss less of those that are calling on frequency
> because of the narrow filter. God bless my RIT!
> 
> "Guy Olinger, K2AV" wrote:
> 
> > Working folks above and below the INRAD 400 hz bandpass
> > is fraught with 3 qso penalty risk. If one doesn't return a call to an
> > off-frequency station, they will either get on your frequency, or they  were
> > working someone else.  The residue that can't figure out how to work you on
> > your frequency aren't worth the risk.
> >
> > 73, y'all.
> > Guy.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Barry Kutner <w2up at mindspring.com>
> > To: Contest Reflector <CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
> > Date: Thursday, April 15, 1999 12:57 PM
> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Help on choice of CW Narrow filter
> >
> > > Pedro Pedroso wrote:
> > >  At first I thought that the 250Hz would be the best one, but on
> > > >second thoughts maybe it is too narrow and it would not let me
> > > >hear operators that are not so well tuned on my frequency but
> > > >still are trying to answer my call.
> > >
> >
> > Personally, I like the 500 Hz filter in my FT-1000D for running. I
> > really don't like keeping one hand on the RIT all the time, and I use
> > my brain's DSP to do additional filtering :.)  During ARRL CW, I was at
> > a mulitop and used an FT-1000MP with an IRI 500 Hz filter. I thought it
> > was too narrow and did have to do a lot of tuning. Plenty of stations
> > call off frequency!
> > 73 Barry
> > --
> > Barry Kutner, W2UP                            Internet: w2up at mindspring.com
> > Newtown, PA                                   Frankford Radio Club
> >
> > --
> > CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> > Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
> >
> > --
> > CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> > Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
> 
> --
> 73 de K8 Joe "Palooka" & Beverly
> Joe Pontek
> 26441 Devaney Road
> Arcadia, IN 46030
> USA
> 317-984-7388
> K8JP, V31JP, VP5/K8JP, VP5JP, K8JP/VA2, ex-K8HKM
> Read "The Contest Traveler" in The National Contest Journal
> CJ5 '65
> 
> 
> 
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
> 
> 
--
Barry Kutner, W2UP                            Internet: w2up at mindspring.com
Newtown, PA                                   Frankford Radio Club

                                           


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com