Topband: Re: [CQ-Contest] 160 band plan and contests

[K1ZM@aol.com]

Hi Ron & Others on the 160M Reflector

Ron, I am responding to your recent email post to the 160M reflector and 
specifically to your comments on the issues related to SSB contesting that 
will surface as a result of the new ARRL 160m bandplan which was adopted by 
the ARRL BOD in July of 2001. 

Since I was on the bandplan committee, I can tell you that 100% of the 
bandplanning committee was composed of active contesters & Dx'ers:

Our team was:

K1ZM  
W4ZV
K5UR
K0TO
K1KI
N7NG (who manages the Communications Department (and Contest branch) of ARRL)

While it is true that contesters have HISTORICALLY ventured below 1843 in SSB 
contests (in violation of the ARRL bandplan) it was clear to us that there 
existed a very well-defined need to do three things when reformulating a 
revised bandplan for 160M:

1) Provide space for newer digital modes eg: PSK-31 etc (this was provided 
from 1800-1810)
2) Provide space for experimental modes (this was provided at 1995-2000 with 
Beacons assigned at 1999-2000)
3) Separate WIDEBAND modes (SSB/AM/SSTV) and NARROWBAND MODES (CW, Digital, 
RTTY) from each other in some meaningful way.

This was done by assigning the Narrowmode activity to the region 1800-1843 - 
which was eminently logical in that this was the predominantly existing 
HISTORICAL USAGE PATTERN for MOST daily operating activity on 160M and 
assigning the WIDEBAND modes to the region 1843-2000.  This too was logical 
since MOST SSB activity on a daily basis on Topband occurs (most of the time) 
above 1840kHz.

This was not only in keeping with historical usage patterns on 160M but it 
also represented a fair and equitable proportionment of the band spectrum - 
eg: 22% of the available spectrum for narrowband modes and 78% of the 
available 160M spectrum for wideband modes.

The only real issue that faced us on the committee was just where to set the 
lower limit for the wideband segment of the band.  This was keenly debated by 
us on the committee for about two months with consideration given at various 
times for 1850, 1855 and even 1860, for example.  It would be fair to state 
that this was probably our most difficult decision to make during our 
deliberations on the committee.

In the end, we selected 1843 for the lower limit for the wideband mode region 
as this represented (on LSB) a carrier center frequency of 1840 - which is 
where MOST CW operation ends today on any given evening.  Certainly, in the 
midst of a solar MINIMA (which we are now approaching), one will find CW 
Dx'ing taking place each night to about 1840kHz on Topband - this being 
viewed, of course, during the Winter months in the Northern hemisphere of the 
world.

Contest activity is obviously an issue because contesters have been ignoring 
the bandplan for years.  This is surely no small issue and it was one that 
received lengthy consideration by the committee.  The Committee in its final 
report recommended that the ARRL BOD ask the ARRL Contest Branch to redraft 
its rules for future 160M SSB contests in order that they might be made 
consistent with the new 160M Bandplan.  The Committee also requested that the 
ARRL BOD write to the CQ Contest Committee to request that they also consider 
acting similarly with respect to their 160m SSB contest events.

In the end, for me (and here I am speaking only for myself and not 
necessarily for the other members of the 160M Bandplanning Committee), I 
think this can best be dealt with by a bahavioural change among the contester 
community.   What I think we can do is adjust our operating practices in two 
simple ways in order to respect our new bandplan:

1) Work simplex in Dx contests above 1843 eg: call CQ DX above 1843 and 
listen "on frequency" for Dx callers.  Many countries around the world can 
operate SSB to 1850 - some to 1860 and some even to as high as 1870.

OR

2) Call CQ above 1843 and listen SPLIT **below** 1843 for DX callers as is 
done quite successfully today on 80M and 40M during the CQWW and ARRL DX 
contests.

On a personal note,  I should note that we on the committee received over 800 
email inputs for our consideration.  There were four predominant themes that 
came through to us out of this body of input received.

A large number of emails that we received requested such a **SEPARATION** of 
WIDEBAND and NARROWBAND modes on Topband.

This I think we have faithfully done, in response to what was requested, and 
I am personally most gratified to see the FCC stepping up to the plate and 
starting to enforce the bandplan.

Contesters can and will adjust to this new reality if they desire to - as 
contesters are known to follow contest rules as long as they are clearly 
expressed.  If the contest community does follow the bandplan in fact and 
restricts US and Canadian LSB activity to a carrier frequency of 1840 - dial 
frequency of 1843,  in the end, our guys in the MORE GEOGRAPHICALLY 
DISADVANTAGED REGIONS WITHIN THE US ESPECIALLY will experience a material 
BENEFIT as a result.

There will be a relatively "clear zone" in which DX stations may CQ in - eg: 
from about 1811-1840 and, in this case, these overseas folks should naturally 
listen UP above 1843 for US and VE callers in the contest.

The guys in the "black hole" will now be able to HEAR these weaker DX 
stations (especially those coming out of Europe and Africa) because they will 
no longer be covered up by EAST COAST CQ callers, for the most part.

In the end, we on the 160M bandplanning committee did our level best to be 
fair to all our universe of respondents and I do believe the end result is a 
fair and equitable bandplan for all 160M folks to enjoy and be proud of.  On 
balance, it is a good plan.

I hope guys will give it a chance to work and be supportive of our efforts.

We tried very hard to be responsive to our input and, in the end, I do 
believe we did just that.

Please let me note once again, that some of the opinons stated here are my 
own and are not necessarliy reflective of all the other members of the 160M 
bandplanning committee.  However, the other Committee members are fully 
capable of speaking their minds on this topic, if they wish, and may elect to 
do so at a point in the future.

73 JEFF, K1ZM
160M DXCC #58

K1ZM@aol.com