Topband: Topband and the DX-Window herbs at
Wed Feb 15 10:57:16 EST 2006

Quoting Tom Rauch <w8ji at>:

> There are good logical technical reasons why wider modes
> should be restricted by law, and not by "good nature and
> consideration".

Having been on topband for a long time, even back when the FCC had meticulous
power regulations down to 25 watts in some areas, I would appreciate hearing
the reason why no CW sub-band )(narrow mode protection as Tom would call it)
was ever established on 160 meters as is the case for every other amateur
band.  Was it because for so long 160 was a kinder and gentler place to

I have been trying to work 3Y0X on 40 CW for several days.  I can't help but
notice the vast difference in  high quality of operators on 160 compared to
cacophony zoo of crazies and apparant malcontents on 40 CW. Maybe 160 will
remain the "gentleman's band" a bit longer before it gets hacked to pieces by
bureaucrat's idea of where digital modes, SSTV, PSK, code practice, bulletin
stations and retro-AMers should all be segregated.  IMHO, *neccessity* should
drive the regulatory process, not the other way around. Or if I reconfigure
something Yogi might have said  "It is better to not need it and not have it
than to have it and not want it.

Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
St. Croix, USVI

More information about the Topband mailing list