Topband: Am I the only one in step?

Roger Parsons ve3zi at
Tue Mar 1 17:01:09 EST 2016

A few more comments seem necessary:

I do of course agree strongly with Greg ZL3IX. The only reason I am arguing for a smaller CW segment is that there is very strong entrenched opposition from the contesting community to any change whatsoever, and I am trying to be more than reasonable.

Mike N2MS wrote:

"The only way this would work is if CQ limits the SSB contest to a certain segment of 160 meters."

That is exactly what I have been proposing.

Frank W3LPL wrote:

"Severe power restrictions above 1850 are very common as are restrictions on SSB operation below 1840."

That's why I am suggesting that the great majority of the 'prime' 1810-1850 kHz part of the band remain available for SSB contests.

Ed N1UR wrote:

"There are really only 3 contests heavy with SSB on 160.  ARRL DX SSB, CQ WW SSB, and CQ WW 160 SSB.  WPX is zero, FD is essentially zero, and IARU is essentially zero.  Maybe NAQP?  Not sure, don't really do those."

OK, so there is no reason at all from a contester's perspective why all the contests and QSO parties that have low 160m usage should not have SSB restricted to 1820 and above, and I would appreciate your help in achieving this.

He also wrote:

"Is this really a problem? I don't think so."

Clearly it is not a problem for contesters, as they are currently unrestricted, but I assure you that it is a considerable problem for others. I am suggesting a minor change to the rules of applicable contests to allow a very small part of the band to be usable for CW and DX during SSB contests. Some contests already incorporate restrictions on allowable frequency use (I am aware of a number of RSGB contests and I am sure there are more).

160m is supposed to be the Gentleman's Band. In my book that means co-existence, co-operation and respect.

How about it contesters?

73 Roger

More information about the Topband mailing list