[CQ-Contest] [RTTY] I just have to ask

[Ron Notarius W3WN]

With all due respect... the beacon network, as I recall, didn't get "shoved"
into the digital sub-band; if anything, it was the other way around.

Why are we even discussing the potential for moving the beacons?  Why do we
even want to touch, let alone open, that can of worms?

Should the beacon ops have claimed to "own" their frequencies?  No, because
they don't.  Regardless, we all know where the beacon sub-band is on each
band (or can find it out quickly enough) and should strive to avoid them if
at all possible -- and minimize QRM if not.

For crying out loud... we already have a (fortunately off the front page)
thread on one of the QRZ.COM forums from N5PVL accusing CW operators of
interfering with the digital mailboxes in the digital sub-band (and, in all
fairness, vice-versa) during a previous contest.  Do we REALLY need to fire
up the beacon ops and users as well?

-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 12:33 PM
To: w0yk at msn.com; 'W0MU Mike Fatchett'
Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com; rtty at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] [RTTY] I just have to ask

> The Beacon System doesn't own the frequencies they occupy
> (all the time). OTOH, many of us greatly appreciate their
> presence and make use of the propagation information
> provided.  If the beacon service weren't seen as broadly
> valuable, it would probably be QRM'd more.  My hope is that
> we work together to keep the Beacon frequencies clear because
> we choose to do so.

Since the beacon network is CW, why isn't it moved to 14.000.0,
21.000.0, etc.?  Moving them to the bottom of the band, they
provide a nice band edge marker and the multi-KW, multi-multi
stations can worry about protecting the beacons during
contests <G>.

Like everything else that nobody wants in "their" back yard
(including the 2 KHz wide quasi-commercial "mailboxes"), the
beacon network gets shoved into the "digital" band ... they
don't belong in the "digital" spectrum, much less the middle
of it.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of J. Edward (Ed) Muns
> Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 11:44 AM
> To: 'W0MU Mike Fatchett'
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com; rtty at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] I just have to ask
>
>
> > Would using the beacon system to check propagation put you into the
> > assisted category?
>
> No, because listening to the Beacon System or WWV solar
> conditions is not directly finding potential QSOs for you.
>
> (Let's not start another heated thread about the Assisted vs.
> Non-Assisted categories, hi!)
>
> > I am all for the beacon network.  What I don't like is the apparent
> > feeling of ownership of the frequencies by the beacon
> operators.  If
> > someone can point me to the exact waivers and rulings by the FCC
> > giving anyone exclusive
> > right to the beacon frequencies I would appreciate it.
>
> The Beacon System doesn't own the frequencies they occupy
> (all the time). OTOH, many of us greatly appreciate their
> presence and make use of the propagation information
> provided.  If the beacon service weren't seen as broadly
> valuable, it would probably be QRM'd more.  My hope is that
> we work together to keep the Beacon frequencies clear because
> we choose to do so.
>
> Ed - W0YK
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest