Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

That could be one reading, Don. The other is that WRC Agenda time is intensely sought after, for many changes to spectrum allocations. IARU was confronted with the prospect of failing on both its bids for WRC19 Agenda items and in effect prioritised the other (global allocation at 50 MHz)

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

So what I read into all this is: that those shared and excluded frequencies are allocated to other occupants that now rarely ( if ever) use them, but that national administrations don't think the amateur radio issue is important enough to take on the task of co-ordinating with other countries

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

[mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Donald Chester Sent: 04 March 2016 00:39 To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? > Mike - I agree the objective, but the reality is a little harder! > > The 160 allocations across Europe, for example, va

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

> Mike - I agree the objective, but the reality is a little harder! > > The 160 allocations across Europe, for example, vary widely. 1800-1810 is not generally part of the allocated spectrum. Various countries have various parts of the band with varying power privileges (you'll have seen

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

Hi, I am resurrecting an aging, 'Rip VanWinkle" radio that includes 160 meters. I was finally ready to apply power for a first test and all of those naughty SSB contesters on 160 meters provided me with a lot of test "fodder" on the receive side. I wish to thank all of the SSB contesters for

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

Yo, Have we beat this poor horse to death yet??? It's all interesting, but I think we're starting to go over ground already covered. Plus, somehow, we've dragged VHF freqs into the discussion. (Let the flames begin, so to speak) K9WN Jake _ Topband Reflector Archives -

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

On Tue,3/1/2016 2:01 PM, Roger Parsons via Topband wrote: 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. My

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

band. 73 Frank W3LPL - Original Message - From: "Ed Sawyer" <sawye...@earthlink.net> To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2016 8:46:00 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? It is common practice in the CQ WW 160M Contest for CQing

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

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

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

It is common practice in the CQ WW 160M Contest for CQing on the NA and EU side to occur in the 1810 - 1825 range. I was doing so twice in the contest last weekend. It was pretty much every 3khz CQing in the range both Friday and Saturday nights including NA and EU CQing stations. For the last

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

- From: mstang...@comcast.net To: "Don Beattie" <d...@g3bj.com> Cc: "Top Band Contesting" <topband@contesting.com>, "James Rodenkirch" <rodenkirch_...@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2016 5:02:56 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in s

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

al Message - From: James Rodenkirch <rodenkirch_...@msn.com> To: mstang...@comcast.net Cc: Top Band Contesting <topband@contesting.com> Sent: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 17:18:55 -0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? Appreciate the reminder re Region 2, Mike.but..will a

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

I’m impressed that you could hear the US SSB stations. I have never heard NZ on 160. > On Mar 1, 2016, at 9:30 AM, Greg - ZL3IX wrote: > > So far I have remained silent on this topic, although I do have a very strong > view, as follows. > > I can understand the need for

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

esentatives to work towards a common 1.8 to 2 Mhz 160 meter band at the next IARU conference. Mike N2MS - Original Message - From: James Rodenkirch <rodenkirch_...@msn.com> To: Top Band Contesting <topband@contesting.com> Sent: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 15:31:16 -0000 (UTC) Subject: Re:

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

ue, 01 Mar 2016 16:27:06 - (UTC) Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? Mike - I agree the objective, but the reality is a little harder! The 160 allocations across Europe, for example, vary widely. 1800-1810 is not generally part of the allocated spectrum. Various countries

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

So far I have remained silent on this topic, although I do have a very strong view, as follows. I can understand the need for SSB operators to 'leak' downwards into the CW exclusive part of the band during a contest. I would even say take over two thirds of the CW only segment and come down

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

Of mstang...@comcast.net Sent: 01 March 2016 16:15 To: James Rodenkirch <rodenkirch_...@msn.com> Cc: Top Band Contesting <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? That is the band plan for the US in ITU Region2.. The problem is different ITU regions and co

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

Haavisto <kamha...@gmail.com> To: Roger Parsons <ve...@yahoo.com> Cc: TopBand List <topband@contesting.com>; Contest <cq-cont...@contesting.com> Sent: Monday, 29 February 2016, 13:54 Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? Hi Roger Thanks for making me take a secon

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

Dont forget in R1 there are still countries which have only 1810-1850. As long as we dont get the full band it will be a discussion point every time. I do listen a lot on 160m. I know only of 2 contests where the CW band is not usable: CQ160 and CQWW. Other contests keep the SSB higher in

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

sto <kamha...@gmail.com> To: Roger Parsons <ve...@yahoo.com> Cc: TopBand List <topband@contesting.com>; Contest <cq-cont...@contesting.com> Sent: Sunday, 28 February 2016, 19:19 Subject: Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step? I think there is a few things that

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

>Neither CQ nor ARRL have >treated this suggestion seriously, nor come up with any alternative. >Why not? Change your complaint to ARRL so it says SSB QRM to digital QSOs and they'll petition the FCC to give you a subband. Rob K5UJ _ Topband Reflector Archives -

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

> I'd like to think the CW-only ops can be cooperative too. >>CW ops have ALWAYS had to bend over backwards during SSB contests. The problem this year, as articulated in VE3ZI's post, is that there are/were several DXpeditions out this weekend with operations on 160M that should have been

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

I have received replies both on the reflector and privately. Several suggest that the problem is that "160m antennas are narrow band". With respect, that is an excuse not a reason. It is perfectly possible to match (almost) any antenna at (almost) any frequency. People seem to manage it on

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

On Sun,2/28/2016 7:53 AM, Tim Shoppa wrote: I'd like to think the CW-only ops can be cooperative too. CW ops have ALWAYS had to bend over backwards during SSB contests. The problem this year, as articulated in VE3ZI's post, is that there are/were several DXpeditions out this weekend with

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

Roger, Pretty straightforward. Narrow Bandwidth antennas + wideband modes (like SSB) = crowding in the 1800-1850 region. (and no (or very little) room for CW ops.) I was not on this weekend *(don't particularly enjoy SSB on TopBand) but had I been on, I would have spent 99% of my time

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

Because the FCC says you can run any mode anywhere in the band just like you can run CW anywhere on any HF band. That's not to say some folks may be less than happy, but it's legal. The "DX Window" has no force of law and neither does the rest of the "band plan". 2/28/2016 9:22 AM, Roger

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

Hi Roger, I don't post here very much. I'm a casual op on 160 (no antenna at present). The problem I experience isn't a lack of "band plans" - aka gentlemen's agreements. The problem for me is there are too many of them. I can find several and they are in conflict each with every other.

Re: Topband: Am I the only one in step?

Roger - many "locals" have told me their 160M antenna system only tunes the CW section and they cannot even go above 1840 their antenna is so narrow banded. Even though I only spend a few hours on 160M phone each year, I have added some relays to remotely short out turns of L matching network at

Topband: Am I the only one in step?

I enjoy contests but... This weekend has seen the CQ 160m SSB Contest. It has also seen CW activity or attempted activity from a number of extremely rare DX entities. Why is it reasonable or even acceptable for the band to be full of SSB contesters from 1800kHz to about 1960kHz? The vast