[CQ-Contest] Inconsiderate CW Operators....

[Bill Coleman]

On Jan 30, 2007, at 8:02 PM, Doug Renwick wrote:

> Now Bill, if you had taken a little time to think before you
> spoke, you would not have stated your frustration as you
> have.

Oh, I think I thought about this a lot....

> If you would have actually listened, you would have found,
> as I did, that the band was FULL of cw signals from top to
> bottom with practically no place to insert another signal.

Yup.

> Compressing 1800 - 1890 into 1800 - 1843 would not have
> worked.

No, it wouldn't.

>   Indeed there were inconsiderate contest operators,
> but probably not the kind you refer to.  The band was so
> full of signals that stations were operating on top of one
> another.  It must have been a lot worse on the east coast
> with European signals included than out in the northern mid
> west.  We should all be pleased at the level of 160m
> activity rather than bitching.  Bill, join the fun and
> operate in the contest if you are stuck on 160m.

Doug, I wasn't really, really serious about that posting. The <grin>  
at the end should have given that away.

My point was to highlight that our bandplans and regulations allow us  
to flexibly use the 160m spectrum. In a few weeks when the CQ 160m  
SSB contest runs, I hope we don't have similar complaints about SSB  
operators below 1843 kHz.

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