Topband: DX window

[Ron Feutz]

Craig,

I posted before reading K1GUN's post, so I take back point #2 from my 
response to you.

I'm not sure if we are disagreeing about anything, although I have never 
found the DX window 1830-35 to be useless, regardless of how crowded it 
is.  Stations there come and go, and one or two don't clog it up for very 
long. I don't know if you have ever operated a 160 contest from the 
midwest, but hearing even the big gun DXers among the 20+ CQers is plenty 
tough.  Hearing the little pistols is nearly impossible. With the window, 
those of us who are not near the east coast can tell if the band is open 
for DX, and can work a few stations there.  Inertia from the previous "band 
plan/gentlemen's agreement/contest sponsor recommendations" has kept the 
old window relatively free of NA CQ'ers up until now, but that is 
changing.  If the window dies out completely from neglect, a lot of the fun 
of the 160 contests will be gone for many of us.

I believe there is wide support to have some sort of window. DX likes the 
concept as much as us fly-over types.  Keeping the old window is simply the 
path of least resistance.  If it were included in contest rules as a 
recommendation like it used to be, the new 160 ops would learn and comply 
just like we all did. I think much of the debate on the subject is in the 
realm of, "letting the perfect be the enemy of the good."

73,

Ron - WA9IRV



At 01:29 PM 12/29/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>At 12:03 PM 12/29/2003, you wrote:
>>Not sure how anything you say applies.  It is expected, and has been 
>>common practice forever, for NA stations to call and work DX on their 
>>calling frequency in the window, unless the DX specifies otherwise.  No 
>>one has suggested that the FCC mandate a window.  It has always been by 
>>Gentlemen's Agreement.
>
>I respectfully disagree Ron.
>
>I have been a 160 DX'er since 1972 and DX'ed in the era you are speaking 
>about. I remember band partitions and LORAN power limits as I am sure you 
>do to.
>
>In the past, both US and DX stations would call CQ and give specific QSX 
>frequencies.  Today many DX stations call CQ in the "window" and work 
>simplex. One or two DX stations can clog the "window" to the point of 
>rendering it useless.
>
>In a mail to the list yesterday, K1GUN (aka KA1PE) states "Hi People, In 
>my humble opinion,unless fcc with input from arrl doesn't come out and 
>make a hard and fast rule defining the "DX WINDOW" what ever that may be 
>we are constantly going to be at odds where the heck it is...or."
>
>The bottom line is that I agree that the "window," where ever it is 
>located is and should be by gentleman's agreement. What has happened in 
>the past 30 years is that we have a great increase of 160 ops that have no 
>idea or concept of what OUR gentleman's agreement from the days of W1BB in 
>a band plan. At times, that creates chaos especially when the 
>"alligators," all mouth and no ears get on.
>
>I think there is a lot of relevance to my opinion and I stand by what I 
>said earlier.
>
>
>73, Craig Clark, K1QX
>
>RADIOWARE AND RADIO BOOKSTORE
>PO  BOX 209
>RINDGE NH 03461
>603 899 6957
>WWW.RADIO-WARE.COM
>
>