Topband: FW: Proper Decorum On The "Gentleman's Band"...

[James Rodenkirch]

When the SSB fellas enjoy, essentially, 1860 up to 1999, I'm not sure it's "they've got it figured out" as much as living in the lap of luxury, in terms of bandwidth to muck about it...
 
"Without CW, it's just CB"
 
72, Jim Rodenkirch, K9JWV

 

 

> From: bryonveal at msn.com
> To: jacek at sp5drh.com; rodenkirch_llc at msn.com; tposey at nettally.com; topband at contesting.com
> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 10:10:55 -0700
> Subject: Re: Topband: FW: Proper Decorum On The "Gentleman's Band"...
> 
> It would be great if a firm volunteer band plan would be created and 
> supported to spare us all the grief of overlapping modes- One that would be 
> up to date on today's technology and various international band allocations- 
> It just seems from 1.800-1.850, the overlap continues between contesting, 
> DX'ing, and modes of operation......while all the SSB ops up above 1.900MHz 
> seem to have it figured out-
> 
> 
> 
> Bryon "Paul" Veal MAED
> n0ah at arrl.net
> FCC Amateur Radio License - N0AH
> ARRL Certified Volunteer Wireless Technology Instructor
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Jacek SP5DRH
> Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 8:27 AM
> To: 'James Rodenkirch' ; tposey at nettally.com ; topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: FW: Proper Decorum On The "Gentleman's Band"...
> 
> Soon we will be facing problems on Top Band, like one famous IT9 fellow on
> 3795 is creating ....
> Sad story.
> Jacek
> SP5DRH
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: topband-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com]
> On Behalf Of James Rodenkirch
> Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 4:12 PM
> To: tposey at nettally.com; topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: FW: Proper Decorum On The "Gentleman's Band"...
> 
> 
> Sigh - even Top Band is going the way of 75 meters and 20 meters, it would
> seem....
> 
> Hey, it's even worse as a QRP type operator, trust me but........then again,
> anyone crazy enuff to operate QRP on Top Band (raising hand to waive)
> deserves some extra grief, 'eh?
> 
> BUT - I am SO glad to be able to be on Top Band, operating QRP,
> participating in the contests and working towards QRP WAS on 160 (need SC,
> CT, ME and VT) - it doesn't get any better than this!
> 
> 72 to all - Jim Rodenkirch, K9JWV
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > From: tposey at nettally.com
> > To: topband at contesting.com
> > Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 08:34:08 -0500
> > Subject: Topband: FW: Proper Decorum On The "Gentleman's Band"...
> >
> > VE3CUI wrote in part:
> >
> > "...Why is it that some obviously seasoned operators on the band
> repeatedly
> > ignore queries as to frequency occupancy, preferring instead to rudely
> > pounce upon unsuspecting callers in a manner that would surely convince
> > newcomers that the term "Gentleman's Band" is merely a quaint reference to
> a
> > bygone age...?"
> >
> > HI Eddy -
> >
> > Most likely it is not the "obviously seasoned operators" who are causing
> you
> > and all the rest of us grief on Top Band. It is a repeating occurrence
> > during casual daily operation and guaranteed on any DXpedition frequency.
> > This morning on ZK2C was no exception. These are blatant QRMers, not
> > ignorant lids. I also believe there are at least three different recurring
> > offenders (predators?) that slither about 160m cw causing the tripe. It is
> > up to other local Top Banders to identify these scoundrels amongst them.
> In
> > the mean time, I use very narrow filters to avoid the QRM as much as
> > possible.
> >
> > 73, Terry K4RX
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
> 
> _______________________________________________
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
> 
> _______________________________________________
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK