[VHFcontesting] Widening the 20-kHz-Wide Six Meters CW Sliver

[WM3M]

I agree, there is a lot of the 6 meter band that is not used much and with 
most all of the activity both CW and SSB crowded between 50.080 and 50.200 
or so, even with a pretty good rig, local stations running lots of power 
make my 6 meter contest activity very difficult.  I am at FM19kg and there 
are lots of stations within 20 miles or less of me.  Splatter from both CW 
and SSB locals was so bad I gave up on 6 meters.  6 is my favorite band and 
I have 4 six meter rigs in my shack, they all get overcome with the 
splatter.  One possible suggestion would be during crowded 6 meter band 
conditions, keep power levels low, 100 watts or less, until more power is 
needed to make a contact.  Just my thoughts…..
Emory  WM3M

-----Original Message----- 
From: Paul Kiesel
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 1:26 PM
To: vhfcontesting at contesting.com
Subject: [VHFcontesting] Widening the 20-kHz-Wide Six Meters CW Sliver

This ARRL June VHF Contest had a lot of activity in the scant spectrum of 
50.080 to 50.100 MHz. Again,
the QRM was fierce. I know it's okay to spread out further down into the 
beacon band, but nobody does it. It's like GARDOL. For those not old
enough to remember the TV commercials, GARDOL "presents an effective
invisible protective shield". I realize that nobody (including the FCC)
knew, back then, that having the beacons located there would have such
an adverse effect on future operating, but it did and does. And, it's
not just during contests that we experience the squeeze, but also during 
intense band openings. And, it's not just the number of signals in that 
space, but also the quality of some of them that causes others to want to 
distance themselves from that stuff. You never know how many rigs are 
afflicted with nasty key clicks and other noise that is so broadbanded that 
roofing filters are useless across the whole 20 kilohertz gap until you are 
in the midst of them. And I need not even try to convince those who live in 
close proximity to a beacon and need to use their noise blankers.


I figure it will be like moving heaven and earth to affect a change in the 
location of the beacon band, but we ought to try getting the ARRL to 
petition
the FCC to move it down band so as to allow more spectrum for CW
activity below the DX window.


Moving the beacons to a lower slot in the band would mean that some beacon
owners would have to "re-crystal" their transmitters. That would be the
only real disadvantage to the move, but I think that most beacon owners
would go along with the change while keeping their grumbling to a low
level. After all, it's a service they are providing, right?.


Having witnessed their past decisions regarding it, I know the FCC is likely
to not want to enhance anything related to CW operating. A second option 
might be to get the FCC to remove the mandate for having untended
beacons in the 50.060 to 50.080 MHz slot, which would allow the beacons
to occupy spectrum closer to 50.000 MHz - spectrum that is utilized by a
few tended US beacons and beacons in Canada and other countries.


Just some thoughts...

73, Paul K7CW
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting