[CQ-Contest] Contest Rig

[Bill Coleman]

On Jun 6, 2006, at 11:33 PM, Tom Osborne wrote:

> I think there is a lot of difference between S9 noise and very few  
> signals,
> and 3 signals crammed into a 600 cycle portion of the spectrum   I  
> don't see
> what this had to do with what Dave said.

Perhaps the example was poor, but the point is still valid.

What makes a frequency "good"? Dave implied that it depends on how  
interference-free the channel was. My point was that a frequency is  
only "good" if it produces rate. I've found many clear frequencies  
that I've abandoned because they weren't producing.

Similarly, if I've been running on a frequency that is producing a  
good rate, and adjacent QRM moves in -- I'm not going to move unless  
the rate suffers. So, I might stay on a "bad" sounding frequency as  
long as it keeps producing.

The two concepts are definitely related. A channel with raging QRM  
makes it difficult or impossible to hear weak respondents. You might  
not plop down on a frequency with as much QRM as you might tolerate  
if you've been there a while. And what you really care about isn't so  
much the QRM level you hear, but the QRM that stations in the target  
area hear around you.

I still submit that rate is the definitive measure. QRM at either end  
has the potential to affect rate, but it may not.


Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL        Mail: aa4lr at arrl.net
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
             -- Wilbur Wright, 1901