Topband: strange propagation

John K9UWA john at
Fri Jan 15 18:33:41 EST 2016

Years ago it was "Lists" to work DX that were objected to. Remember Go 
Ahead k9xxx make your call. k9xxx gives call and report. DX says was that 
4/5 ?  List Taker Nope DX was that 4/7 List taker Nope in between. OK GOT 

And all the complaining continued about List Takers and People who worked 
DX on a LIST. 

Then it was Packet Clusters. Even worse no searching no looking for the DX 
no tune the radio. Automated Programs Alert you to the fact that So and So 
DX you need is on such and such frequency. You hit one mouse button and 
throw in your call. Log It. Done. And all the complainers complaining. That 
ISN"T FAIR. And today it is auto uploaded to LOTW. 

Remember the days of Sending IRC's and QSL cards off and waiting and 
hoping for maybe a year before you actually got the QSL card? Well most 
didn't complain about that change. 

Then it was ARRL CHANGED THE RULES so that people could MOVE to a 
different part of the country and take their DXCC with them rather than 
having to start all over. And again .. all the complaining and crabbing about 
that bit. Let me aska question here. How many people from Chile, Argentina, 
Brazil complained about this "Rule Change" I don't remember any who did. 
Yet those countries are rather large in area and therefore the propagation is 
considerably different from one extreme in those countries to another 

Then all the complainers started in again when FCC said you can move 
within the country and don't have to swap in your callsign for a new one in 
another District of the country. Now you can APPLY for a callsign from a 
different District in the country if you want to do so. 

Then in 2007 it was NO CODE licenses and again complainers and whiners 
aplenty. Well sorry but ITU and finally FCC and ARRL agreed and we have 
NO CODE licenses. 

Finally we come to Remote Stations and OH the complainers again 
complaining that's terrible. Even worse we have RHR for those who live 
where they can't have a decent station or whatever the reason is they 
subscribe and operate through those RHR stations. Or one of the many 
remote stations that aren't on the RHR list. Well sorry but FCC and ARRL 
say that it is legal to operate such stations. A small group of complainers 
aren't going to change this rule just like no one is going to change the above 
changes in Ham Radio. 

Notice that other than the Low Banders 80 and 160m types you don't hear 
much complaining about RHR and Remotes. Not enough difference in 
propagation to most parts of the world on the upper bands. 

I suppose that to keep all the complainers from complaining we should go 
back to Crystal Controlled Transmitters with a Hallicrafters S-38 receiver. 
And oh by the way on 160M only use 25 watts due to Loran systems etc. 

In case your wondering I too have a remote station. It is my own station in 
Northern Indiana where I spend my summers. I winter in Florida and operate 
my station remotely. Boy is that a steep learning curve for this old Analog 
Coot trying to break into the digital world. But I really should build another 
station in Florida because the propagation on 160M is better here than it is 
from Indiana! And, if I do someone will complain about that as well. 

So quit being a bunch of old crotchety men who resist change. Either you 
like it and use it or you don't like it and don't use it. No amount of crabbing 
about it is going to change it. 

John k9uwa

More information about the Topband mailing list