[CQ-Contest] W4ZV's Most Disruptive Contest

[Tom Rauch]

> Who has 200 Khz available should use it *cum grano salis*, eventually
> issueing his national (autarchycal) band plan but following good ideas
> rather than old traditions. Contesting on low bands with SSB it's surely
> most productive in intercontinental traffic if working split, but's this
> is hard to do if the other continent  will have CW where SSB calls take
> place. 

Not so. The beauty of CW is you can notch it right out without 
hurting a wider SSB signal. 

On the other hand, a wide SSB signal can not be notched from a 
narrower signal without destroying the narrow signal.

This is traditionally why wider modes are restricted to certain areas 
away from narrow modes, while narrow modes are allowed wide 
latitude. Even in the 1940's we had the technology to remove 
narrow signals without disturbing wide signals significantly.

Given a choice, I'd much rather be required to notch a few strong 
CW signals from a weak SSB signal than attempt to copy a weak 
SSB signal through splatter from another SSB station!!

Any more all it takes is one button push, and the CW is virtually 
gone. 
73, Tom W8JI
W8JI at contesting.com 


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


>From Leigh S. Jones" <kr6x at kr6x.com  Wed Aug 22 13:37:14 2001
From: Leigh S. Jones" <kr6x at kr6x.com (Leigh S. Jones)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 05:37:14 -0700
Subject: [CQ-Contest] W4ZV's Most Disruptive Contest
References: <200108220958.f7M9wHk15946 at paris.akorn.net>
Message-ID: <060601c12b07$2cc94d40$ede3c23f at kr6x.org>


Tom, this is true for CW.  Digital modes, foreseen in the Committee
recommendation to occupy 1800-1810, will not respond to a notch
filter.  Even extremely narrowband TTY modes fail to respond to two
notch filters due to the modulation sidebands.  And packet operators
don't even listen to their frequency before opening up.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji at akorn.net>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>; "Maurizio Panicara" <i4jmy at iol.it>
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 3:57 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] W4ZV's Most Disruptive Contest


>
> > Who has 200 Khz available should use it *cum grano salis*,
eventually
> > issueing his national (autarchycal) band plan but following good
ideas
> > rather than old traditions. Contesting on low bands with SSB it's
surely
> > most productive in intercontinental traffic if working split,
but's this
> > is hard to do if the other continent  will have CW where SSB calls
take
> > place.
>
> Not so. The beauty of CW is you can notch it right out without
> hurting a wider SSB signal.
>
> On the other hand, a wide SSB signal can not be notched from a
> narrower signal without destroying the narrow signal.
>
> This is traditionally why wider modes are restricted to certain
areas
> away from narrow modes, while narrow modes are allowed wide
> latitude. Even in the 1940's we had the technology to remove
> narrow signals without disturbing wide signals significantly.
>
> Given a choice, I'd much rather be required to notch a few strong
> CW signals from a weak SSB signal than attempt to copy a weak
> SSB signal through splatter from another SSB station!!
>
> Any more all it takes is one button push, and the CW is virtually
> gone.
> 73, Tom W8JI
> W8JI at contesting.com
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
>
>


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