[CQ-Contest] RX Heresy -- from the other end?

Art Boyars artboyars at gmail.com
Sun Feb 28 19:19:39 PST 2010

Alternate subj: A View From the Bottom of the Pileup

Who am I to doubt all the luminaries who say it does make a difference?  But
I don't understand all the "why's". K5ZD gave a pretty good explanation, but
he has the viewpoint of a loud station.  He can be heard on the other end,
so the K3 helps him to be able to copy (better) while operating close to a
signal that is loud at his end.  OK.

But what if 'ZD and his QRG neighbor are both loud on the other end?  What
good does it do them to be able to operate close to each other if the
K3-less target stations can't copy them separately?  Especially, say, if the
QRG neighbor is a loud EU on 40M, in which case he is likely much louder
than 'ZD in the target area.

Of course, if 'ZD's neighbor is loud at 'ZD only because they are
geographically close, and if 'ZD is louder than the neighbor in the target
area ("How could that be??"), then the K3 increases 'ZD's ability to ease in
on the frequency of the weaker station.  And that's OK, until we get
anopther thread-that-will-not-die of "How close is too close?"

For myself, lowering the intermod crud in my receiver might be a benefit of
a K3, but I'm already hearing more stations than can hear me.  I choose not
to relocate to be able to put up bigger antennas, so it seeems that to
improve my balance I need all the target stations to get K3's so they can
dig out my weak signal.

73, Art K3KU

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list