[UK-CONTEST] 40m CQWW SSB

[Callum (Home)]

Dave,

>>I don't currently have any HF SSB gear at the moment

Well, there's an honest man with an opinion. Let me tell you that 40 meters
is just too cramped Dave - full stop. It is physically impossible to cram in
hundreds (thousands?) of keen European contesters on 40 meters during CQWW.
Roll on 2008 (or whatever) when apparently, we'll *ALL* be allowed to
venture up to the 7.2 line and perhaps beyond (has this been decided..?). 

I spent 48 hours on SSB on 100 watts this year. It was like an enjoyable
torture. I only did it to beat last years score! However, Not only did I
score a few points by operating as low as 7.00??.. something(!) but I also
called CQ high and listened low. I was part of the problem.

I find that I don't have much sympathy for the complainers - and I do joke
with them on 80 meters quite often. It's competitive events like this that
keep us *ALL* going. Had it not been for contesting, I would have hung up
the antenna by now. Surely only CQWW SSB beats up 40 meters quite this hard?
Can it really be that bad?

I look at it this way, if "my band" was chock-a-block for a couple of
weekends a year by a mode that wasn't my cup of tea, would I care? No - I
would move somewhere else and think "Thank goodness the contesters are
demonstrating that we don't have enough space"! It might also give me the
opportunity of leaning more about other bands.. I might even get to know my
wife again! Shock horror :)

. . . of course one day, you'll turn up at the Post Office and be able to
buy a "Ham License" for £20. Just bring a copy of your electricity bill with
you so you can demonstrate what the stuff is.

Anyway - it's only once a year - I don't remember WPX being this bad.

-	Single band, 40 meters, 100 watts
-	396 Qs, 61 Cs and 11 Zs

Callum
M0MCX



-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Sergeant [mailto:dave at davesergeant.com] 
Sent: 02 November 2005 10:10
To: uk-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] 40m CQWW SSB

And some comments from the other side of the fence.

These arguments have raged for years, and the level of bandplan 
infringement has also got worse year by year. I don't currently have 
any HF SSB gear at the moment, but I specifically do not support CQWW 
SSB for this reason. Although it is clearly the most popular SSB 
contest (as the CW leg is the most popular CW one) it is wrong to 
suggest everybody takes part. In fact listening around this weekend 
on CW I was surprised to hear how many well known calls were heard 
working CW and clearly not in CQWW. There are also a large number of 
casual operators, some of whom will enjoy the contest for the 
opportunity of working a few new ones, and some who will find their 
normal operating patterns disturbed by the contest.

Perhaps the reason why this causes so much annoyance among the non 
contesters is the very attitude Nigel and Gerald put forth in their 
mails. Not only is is seen as inevitable that the SSB segments will 
spread in contests, but that it is totally acceptable to do so. In 
the CW leg I do indeed have some QSOs above 7035, and for CW it is a 
grey area since the USA stations are working there in their normal 
bandplan segment, and CW is allowed there under our bandplan. But I 
certainly feel guilty about it, and if I am aware that there is 
appreciable SSB activity I refrain and QSY lower. I certainly do not 
consider it my right to operate there. Likewise, I accept in SSB 
contests there is likely to be a little overflow, but operating right 
down to 7003 LSB is really pushing it a bit far. And I see Gerald 
does not even mention Top Band, where the problem is just as bad, if 
not worse - I tend not to work much on that band anyway as my signal 
is pretty puney there.

It is constantly suggested by the proponents of this 'policy' that 
the WARC bands are always available and contest free. While I would 
not argue with that, and do use them at these times, the fact remains 
that at the times when 160 and 40 are full of SSBers (ie the night 
time hours) the WARC bands are effectively closed - even 30m has been 
closing soon after dark lately, and 12m is only open for a short 
time. During darkness hours, if 40m and 160m are effectively out of 
bounds, 80m is the only available QRM free CW band.

It was rather encouraging this weekend to hear a lot of CW QSOs on 
40. OK, there were frequent complaints about the SSB QRM, but it was 
certainly possible to ignore it and have QSOs regardless. I had a few 
myself, on QRP. But the presence of those sending strings of dots and 
QSY does not help at all and I regretted hearing those.

On the subject of the US hurricane traffic on 20m, I think it is 
unwise for us this side of the pond to comment too much. The recent 
IARU conference did agree spot frequencies in the bandplans for 
emergency traffic, but this weekend emphasises yet again that such 
allocations are unlikely to work for the simple reason it is 
impossible to get the word to the whole world that an emergency is 
taking place and these slots are 'no go'. There may be many reasons 
why 20m was used in preference to 17m, one of the most relevant being 
that the emergency stations were set up in difficult situations with 
low power equipment etc and at the time 20m was considered more 
appropriate for the area being worked. As to the type of traffic and 
whether more of it should have been on 2m we are not in a position to 
judge.

Enough ramble for me.

73 Dave G3YMC

On 1 Nov 2005 at 22:16, Nigel G3TXF wrote:

> Hullo Gerry,
> 
> Well said!
> 
> I worked as low as 7003.5 on SSB this last weekend, and (as a CW op)
> had no qualms about doing so. Low 40m listening frequencies were being
> indicated by several of the US big-guns calling CQ higher up the band.
> 
> What was saddening however, was to hear presumably indignant CW-ops
> deliberately jamming SSBers.
> 
> As you rightly said CQWW SSB is the biggest Amateur Radio global
> operating event of the year, bar none, and if we hams can't be a bit
> flexible to meet this demand, then we really are in the soup.
> 
> And yes, in five weeks' time I'll certainly be working stuff as high
> as 14120 on 20m on CW and not minding at all about doing so.
> 
> Voluntary bandplans are one thing. Commonsense is another.
> 
> 73 - Nigel G3TXF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Gerard Lynch" <gerrylynch at freenetname.co.uk>
> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 9:47 PM
> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] 40m CQWW SSB
> 
> 
> > Taking my life in my hands, I posted this to VivatMorse:
> >
> > ----
> >
> > At the risk of being lynched, and as someone who rarely operates SSB
> > outside contests, but was active with the club station at the
> > weekend, let me humbly disagree.
> >
> > The reason why CQWW SSB populates the entire 40 m band from 010 up
> > with 20-30 over 9 signals during European dark hours is that it is
> > simply the most popular operating event in amateur radio.  More than
> > 90% of the stations active on 40 last weekend will have been SSB
> > contest stations, and I'm afraid 90% band occupancy on that basis
> > seems reasonable.  And it's only one weekend a year.
> >
> > Interestingly, on WPX, the contesters seems to spread down to around
> > 020 or so, and I was active in the wee hours of Sunday morning on 40
> > CW during WPX SSB weekend this year and there seemed to be no
> > trouble with people fitting in to the QRM free 20 kHz.  And there
> > were few complaints.  And that makes at most two weekends a year
> > where the band gets wiped out - in the others, CW exclusive segments
> > seem to be respected, even in WAE and ARRL SSB.
> >
> > So for those two weekends a year, what's wrong with being a bit cosy
> > - heaven help us, you might even **work** some people?  Or moving to
> > another band?
> >
> > 30 metres - even on major CW contest weekends, I rarely hear any CW
> > stations above 10.125 even though our exclusive segment goes up to
> > 140.
> >
> > 17 metres is never crowded even on major CW contest weekends.
> >
> > 12m - does anyone hear QSOs in the 910-920 CW exclusive segment,
> > even in solar maxima?  Thought not!
> >
> > 80m - always plenty of space on 80 for a natter, occupancy really
> > thins out above 3550 and I never hear anyone much above the QRQ boys
> > on 3569.
> >
> > 20m - the SSB segement is getting as bad as 40 in CQ WW now, I
> > suppose a combination of low sunspots keeping 10 closed and the
> > no-code HFers. Still, the 14.100 band limit was well respected when
> > I was on the band.  On the other hand, we regularly push up over 100
> > in CQ WW CW, 125 or so seems to be the limit, and I seem to remember
> > ARRL contests going that high in the past. Oh yes, I remember the
> > days when 20 CW could be crowded on non-contest Saturdays, but
> > they're long gone, aren't they?
> >
> > 40m is the only CW band which is remotely crowded, and yes, it does
> > get crowded most weekends.
> >
> > It seems you can't win - on the one hand one hears constant
> > complaints about the lack of activity (and you can spend a long time
> > calling CQ on 40 during weekdays with little change, and yes, I get
> > out well on 40), but when there is a serious amount of activity,
> > people whinge because it's too much!
> >
> > Oh, and don't forget the SSB boys will be complaining in 4 weeks
> > when *we* spread up to 7.075 or 80 - although any whingers are told
> > in no uncertain terms by me to read their bandplan carefully.
> >
> > Oddly, there was plenty of SSB activity below 21.150 this weekend,
> > about which I've heard no complaint, and the digital contests, which
> > cause QRM to the 40 CW exclusive segment almost every weekend these
> > days, with far less participants, cause much less online complaint. 
> > Is this a case of people waiting all year just so they can have a
> > good whinge (after all, a good old amateur radio pastime) in the
> > last weekend in October?
> >
> > Like that DL/OE eejit who has obviously retirement QSYed down to the
> > Med somewhere who spends all weekend shouting "only in CW" to SSB
> > ops at the bottom of the band?  Like operating without a callsign is
> > just like, sooooo, legal, mate.
> >
> > And remember, 40m bandplans are different in every part of the
> > world, so expecting the CQ committee to police all of them is a bit
> > silly.
> >
> > Flame away, my asbestos suit is on.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Gerry G0RTN

http://www.davesergeant.com

_______________________________________________
UK-Contest mailing list
UK-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest