Topband: how to set up a Skype receiving beacon

[David Sinclair]

Tom Rauch wrote:
> 
> I'm a little concerned about this. I'm not so sure it is a
> good idea.
> 
> 
> 
> A second lesser concern would be QRM. With multiple people
> attempting to access a receiver with multiple transmitters,
> we will have random transmissions on the "beacon" frequency.
> Certainly any DX receiver should be placed outside
> traditionally active areas of the bands.
> 
> This might be an unpopular statement, but I think multiple
> beacon receivers are an exceptionally bad thing long term.
> 
> 
Recently, W3GH posted about working a new one in SE Asia, one
that had not been heard for years at his QTH. How would he
have felt if, just as the DX started sending to him, some
one opened up with a series of dashes and their call sent
several times? Personally, I'd be furious if that happened to
me. There are enough problems already, day to day, from QRM
resulting from 'normal' ham operations. Why add to that,
especially on such a challenging, noisy, weak-signal band
like 160m?

I think this is either a bad idea, if you put a few such
'beacons' in a non-DXing area of the band, or a very bad idea,
if you insist on having them in prime DXing territory. Since
many top banders run narrow BW transmitting antennas, if you
run such beacons, they are going to tend to appear within the
DX band. It's inevitable.

There's no limit to human ingenuity. This is an ingenious
demonstration of the blending of old tech with new tech in ham
radio. Packet spotting is an example of that, which succeeded in
a big way, and is here to stay. We need to draw a line somewhere,
however. There is some considerable consensus, for example, that
e-QSLing is not trustworthy, and I agree with that view. I'll
stick with 'real' QSL's, personally. Likewise, the Stew Perry
contest is making a similarly strong point in regards to
'performance metrics' for top band ops. Top band is still a
marvel. Let's not end up killing it off by piling on with the
'latest, greatest' all the time. In essence, today's 160m CW DX
QSO's are a continuation of technology which has persisted for
fully a century now. It's a proud tradition. Let's 'leave it be'.

73, David K3KY