[RTTY] Lids running RTTY on the JT65 Frequency

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

 > With all due respect Ed, here’s my problem with this. While on the
 > surface, this appears to be the “gentlemanly” thing to do, but in
 > reality, I have an issue with this notion of working around their
 > “watering hole” during a contest. During normal operations, I agree
 > with the general principle of making sure a frequency is clear before
 > we claim it and honestly do make every attempt to adhere to that.

What is the difference between operating in a contest and during
"normal" times when it comes to gentlemanly operating?  When a band
is open, it is generally full of users - that applies to the JT and
PSK "centers of activity" just as much as the broader bands.  Even
this morning when I hear (see with the P3 panadapter) no RTTY signals
on 15 meters, there is activity in the JT65/JT9 segments.  The same is
true on true on 40, 30, 20, 17, 12 and 10 meters ... there may be very
little RTTY activity but there a dozen or more JT-mode signals visible
on the waterfall/P3 *per band*.  Those stations don't "go away" on the
weekend/during a contest ... just the opposite open bands are even more
active during the weekend.

There seems to be an attitude that WINLINK/PACTOR and contesting are
the "highest and best use" of the bands and therefor contesters do not
need to listen for other activity and that WINLINK/PACTOR can fire up
on top of even contesters.  Most amateurs would agree that attitude is
simply *wrong*.

As Ed suggested, contesters need to be aware where these other modes
congregate.  Avoid those frequencies if possible but *if you must*
operate there, *know the characteristics of those signals* so you can
recognize them and not treat them as noise to run roughshod over.
Unfortunately like so many others, contesters don't appear to bother
to learn about the characteristics or centers of activity of the non-
mainstream modes.  Perhaps it is time for contest sponsors to include
that information in their announcements and start removing credit and
multipliers if necessary.

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV


On 2015-01-07 7:24 AM, Scott Schultz wrote:
> Ed W0YK wrote:
>
> “Operationally, the safest thing to do is simply avoid these small,
> known areas.  If there is no other place to operate on the band, then
> we need to take the time to carefully discern if there is on-going
> operation in those areas before assuming the bandwidth is clear and
> then claiming it temporarily for our RTTY transmissions.”
>
> With all due respect Ed, here’s my problem with this. While on the
> surface, this appears to be the “gentlemanly” thing to do, but in
> reality, I have an issue with this notion of working around their
> “watering hole” during a contest. During normal operations, I agree
> with the general principle of making sure a frequency is clear before
> we claim it and honestly do make every attempt to adhere to that. But
> also, there is an actual rule that no station can “own” a frequency.
> Just because it is a well know and well advertised “watering hole”,
> this does not guarantee that users of that mode will have
> interference free use of it at all times. There is nothing special
> about those JT modes, or any other mode, that gives it special
> privileges or makes then exempt from those rules. When I choose to
> respond to some of those “too many contest” rants, although this may
> seem rude to some people, I make it clear to them that if someone
> promised that you would have interference free access to any mode on
> any band any time you want it, they lied to you!
>
> The bottom line is that I do not thing we are being unreasonable.
> Amateur radio is a recreational past time (no matter what the EMCOMM
> people tell you!) and working the JT modes is a choice some chose to
> make within the hobby. What I resent is the suggestion that I MUST
> work around them all of time.
>
> In his next letter, Ed wrote:
>
> “As an example of how each us can have very diverse reactions, take
> today's thread that developed after W4HM's post about avoiding PSK
> and JT gathering frequencies.”
>
> OK, I admit to taking credit (blame?) for starting that line
> reactions. But let’s be clear, I was not admonishing him for
> suggesting that we should steer clear of the JT frequencies, it was
> because he claimed that by avoiding them, it did not adversely affect
> his score. Obviously he thought I was being a bit harsh, but I think
> the general consensus here is that his statement was ludicrous. If he
> found my “less-than-subtle” approach to be rude, I have to believe
> that sooner or later someone else would have said something that
> would have ended up with the same end result.
>
> A frequent theme of these post-contest posts are that we need to
> share the bands. I am all for that, 100%. When that is said however,
> it is usually addressed to the people doing the contesting, not the
> people complaining about so-called “unfair” contest behavior. Well
> now let me turn the coin over. Claiming a particular frequency for
> your own personal mode of choice and expecting to have interference
> free access to it any time you want is not sharing!
>
> 73, de Scott N0IU _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>