Re: Topband: DX Window
Ashton Lee wrote: "The issue I believe is that many people’s 160 antennas are limited in frequency breadth. There is really just one SSB contest." Many 80m antennas will not cover both the CW and phone parts of that band, and people manage quite fine there. It is entirely possible to make a 160m antenna work all across the band but it's just a little more complicated. I don't see that as a reason, but an excuse. With respect, there are at least two major 160m phone contests - CQWW phone and CQ 160m phone. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
The issue I believe is that many people’s 160 antennas are limited in frequency breadth. There is really just one SSB contest. On Dec 9, 2013, at 7:55 AM, Roger Parsons wrote: > I agree with the remarks made by others regarding the DX window in the ARRL > contest. > > I have been more concerned for many years about the various phone contests > which take place on 160m. During those contests phone operation takes place > right down to the bottom of the band, effectively making any CW operation > impossible during those weekends. Last year one ssb contest coincided with a > Dxpedtion to 9U - an exceptionally rare country on 160m. Whilst it is true > that there are only a few phone contests on the calendar, it is also true > that there are only a few weekends where exceptional conditions happen, > particularly during sunspot maxima. > > > Frequency allocations on top band vary from country to country, but it is > generally true to say that the 'prime real estate' for phone operation is > from 1830 - 1850 kHz, with the 1810 - 1830 kHz segment being next most > desirable. Very few countries allow phone (or any) operation below 1810 kHz. > A significant number of countries (particularly North America) also allow > operation all the way up to 2 MHz.. > > Even in the busiest contests it is rare to hear any operation above 1900 kHz. > > It would be nice if the regulations were changed (particularly in NA) to > limit the permissible frequencies for ssb, but I think we all know that will > never happen. > > However, contest organisers can very easily define the allowable frequency > bands for each individual contest, and as has been mentioned by others this > is already done for some (particularly European) contests. > > I would like to propose that phone contests disallow the use on ssb of any > frequency below a dial frequency of 1820 kHz. That leaves 8 kHz of > international frequencies for CW operation whilst still giving the ssb > contesters 32 kHz of the 'prime real estate' - and 150 kHz of the apparently > less desirable frequencies above 150 kHz. > > I did suggest this on the contest reflector last year and was immediately > flamed, but I honestly think this would be an attainable and reasonable > compromise. > > 73 Roger > VE3ZI > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
I agree with the remarks made by others regarding the DX window in the ARRL contest. I have been more concerned for many years about the various phone contests which take place on 160m. During those contests phone operation takes place right down to the bottom of the band, effectively making any CW operation impossible during those weekends. Last year one ssb contest coincided with a Dxpedtion to 9U - an exceptionally rare country on 160m. Whilst it is true that there are only a few phone contests on the calendar, it is also true that there are only a few weekends where exceptional conditions happen, particularly during sunspot maxima. Frequency allocations on top band vary from country to country, but it is generally true to say that the 'prime real estate' for phone operation is from 1830 - 1850 kHz, with the 1810 - 1830 kHz segment being next most desirable. Very few countries allow phone (or any) operation below 1810 kHz. A significant number of countries (particularly North America) also allow operation all the way up to 2 MHz.. Even in the busiest contests it is rare to hear any operation above 1900 kHz. It would be nice if the regulations were changed (particularly in NA) to limit the permissible frequencies for ssb, but I think we all know that will never happen. However, contest organisers can very easily define the allowable frequency bands for each individual contest, and as has been mentioned by others this is already done for some (particularly European) contests. I would like to propose that phone contests disallow the use on ssb of any frequency below a dial frequency of 1820 kHz. That leaves 8 kHz of international frequencies for CW operation whilst still giving the ssb contesters 32 kHz of the 'prime real estate' - and 150 kHz of the apparently less desirable frequencies above 150 kHz. I did suggest this on the contest reflector last year and was immediately flamed, but I honestly think this would be an attainable and reasonable compromise. 73 Roger VE3ZI _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
A..Mennn... -Original Message- From: Tom W8JI Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2013 2:55 PM To: j...@johnjeanantiqueradio.com ; Topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window If you put a couple dozen strong EU stations CQ'ing in the Window then they can hardly hear the USA callers as they are all QRM'ing each other. "Back in the Day" many of the QSO's were done Split due to power limits in many countries as well as frequency allocation in many countries. Then the "Window" made a bit more sense. A Window still makes absolute sense today. Power levels did not change a thing, because power went up on both ends of the path. Most of Europe increased around 16dB, and the USA increased around 12dB. Since the Window's function is to limit local QRM, and since local and DX signals are stronger by about the same amount, nothing changed with power. From past experience here, simplex or a non-window plan is only a good idea for people who have clear shots, or people who rarely or never work DX on crowded nights. By clear shots, I mean people who are located where very few strong signals are between them and the DX. I thought the entire 160 bandplan group made a tremendous mistake in getting rid of the DX Window. I believe the plan failed to consider anyone's interest, other than the viewpoint large east coast stations. Since most of the influence is from east coast stations and big guns, the people away from the coast, in particular with smaller or modest stations, are out of luck. 73 Tom _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
I support the concept of a 'quiet' area, for weak signals. I am also a realistic, and competitive contester. I cannot control what OTHERS do, but I consider calling CQ in the DX window akin to cheating. You will never hear ME do that. Unfortunately, I have to QSO stations that do, or else face a self-imposed penalization. In these days of Cabrillo logging, it would be an easy task to eliminate all same-continent QSO's from contest credit, if they violated the stated rules of the contest. Then the problem is partially solved. Only peer pressure can discourage strong DX signals from squatting there, perhaps by a widespread feeling that it is an unnecessary 'crutch' and only for listening for your antipode. Careful, if you allow the concept of a 'window' into your mind, it will migrate to your heart before you know it. There is also an interesting trend, in Europe at least, for contest-free band segments. Below 3510 or above 3560, for example. Presumably, there must be either monitors, or computerized log analysis (probably both.) As long as all competitors play by the same rules, it meets MY definition of 'fair.' Hey, I don't even have all of the questions, let alone the answers. Allen - N2KW -- Original Message ------ From: "Tom W8JI" To: Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 >> According to http://www.arrl.org/160-meter "The segment 1.830 to 1.835 >> should be used for intercontinental QSOs only." I hear a lot of contacts >> being made between stateside stations. The rule is very easy to understand. When operating between 1830-1835, all stations cannot work other stations on the same continent as they are on. This rule does not preclude USA or VE stations from CQ'ing in that range, but it certainly does prohibit NA-to-NA contacts. Despite people thinking DX Windows are for listening only, there was never a rule like that. They only preclude local or same-continent contacts. NA and SA are considered the same continent, but for a Ham radio ARRL contest most reasonable people would use the ARRL/IARU continent list. The problem today is, with our decreased overall education and desire for freedom, people in the USA think cities are continents and any rule against what we feel like doing is a bad rule. Good luck on getting any rule made clearer.:) _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband Odd Carb-Hormone Trick 1 EASY tip to increase fat-burning, lower blood sugar & decrease fat storage http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/52a52796a74f727964abfst02duc _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
On Dec 8, 2013, at 3:00 06PM, Mark Lunday, WD4ELG, wrote: > Well, we always have the CQ 160 contest in January. Exactly! All contests do not need to be the same. All contests should NOT be the same. All contests do not need to emphasize international DXing -- especially a single-band contest that leaves all sorts of other spectrum available for DXing. Bud, W2RU _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
It's always refreshing to tune the window & hear the odd DX station, or two, residing therein, & working many of the "...less-than-KW" domestic stations... A welcome change from the usual hurly-burly of strong North American "CQ TEST" machines that otherwise permeate the entire band, wall-to-wall. ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
If you put a couple dozen strong EU stations CQ'ing in the Window then they can hardly hear the USA callers as they are all QRM'ing each other. "Back in the Day" many of the QSO's were done Split due to power limits in many countries as well as frequency allocation in many countries. Then the "Window" made a bit more sense. A Window still makes absolute sense today. Power levels did not change a thing, because power went up on both ends of the path. Most of Europe increased around 16dB, and the USA increased around 12dB. Since the Window's function is to limit local QRM, and since local and DX signals are stronger by about the same amount, nothing changed with power. From past experience here, simplex or a non-window plan is only a good idea for people who have clear shots, or people who rarely or never work DX on crowded nights. By clear shots, I mean people who are located where very few strong signals are between them and the DX. I thought the entire 160 bandplan group made a tremendous mistake in getting rid of the DX Window. I believe the plan failed to consider anyone's interest, other than the viewpoint large east coast stations. Since most of the influence is from east coast stations and big guns, the people away from the coast, in particular with smaller or modest stations, are out of luck. 73 Tom _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
If you put a couple dozen strong EU stations CQ'ing in the Window then they can hardly hear the USA callers as they are all QRM'ing each other. "Back in the Day" many of the QSO's were done Split due to power limits in many countries as well as frequency allocation in many countries. Then the "Window" made a bit more sense. John k9uwa John Goller, K9UWA & Jean Goller, N9PXF Antique Radio Restorations k9...@arrl.net Visit our Web Site at: http://www.JohnJeanAntiqueRadio.com 4836 Ranch Road Leo, IN 46765 USA 1-260-637-6426 --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
According to http://www.arrl.org/160-meter "The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs only." I hear a lot of contacts being made between stateside stations. The rule is very easy to understand. When operating between 1830-1835, all stations cannot work other stations on the same continent as they are on. This rule does not preclude USA or VE stations from CQ'ing in that range, but it certainly does prohibit NA-to-NA contacts. Despite people thinking DX Windows are for listening only, there was never a rule like that. They only preclude local or same-continent contacts. NA and SA are considered the same continent, but for a Ham radio ARRL contest most reasonable people would use the ARRL/IARU continent list. The problem today is, with our decreased overall education and desire for freedom, people in the USA think cities are continents and any rule against what we feel like doing is a bad rule. Good luck on getting any rule made clearer.:) _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
I agree completely with Bud's take on the contest. This was my first year of participating and I found the rules unclear and poorly written.In fact, until a friend corrected my misunderstanding, I hadn't even understtod that USA-USA contacts were allowed. The official "objective" of the contest says " For Amateurs worldwide to exchange information with W/VE amateurs on 160-meter CW." I (mistakenly) interpreted "amateurs worldwide" to mean non-USA stations, and that the goal for them was to work as many USA stations as possible. I also observed that the supposed DX window was a sham, with USA stations monopolizing the 1830-1835 window, even after other stations reminded them that it was reserved for DX. (Seems like the ARRL contest software could automatically penalize participants for non-DX contacts in the window.) My personal goal in the contest was to work DX, in order to test my new 1/4 wave transmitting antenna and build up my 160m DXCC total. My antenna worked great, and I worked every DX station I could hear, usually on the first call. Unfortunately, that was only about 20 stations. Admittedly, conditions weren't good, but my impression is that the international DX community pretty much ignores this contest, and for good reason. With every part of the spectrum monopolized by USA contesters, there's no way they could break through the clutter. Frankly, I think the entire concept of this contest needs to be reasssessed. There's really no point in awarding points for DX-USA contacts, if there's only a miniscule DX participation. Better just to make it a ARRL/RAC section contest, the objective of which is to build interest and drum up activity on the band. 73, Jim W8ZR > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of W2RU - Bud > Hippisley > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2013 5:59 AM > To: Mike Waters > Cc: topband > Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window > > Whatever the ARRL intent may have been, the wording of that particular rule is defective, > and has been for as long as I can remember. > > Consider: How does one _start_ an "intercontinental QSO"? Usually one party or the other > sends "CQ". So to make a QSO in the DX Window someone has to send "CQ TEST" or > self-spot, then deliberately choose not to answer anyone from his/her own continent! Sure > sounds like an intelligent rule to me. Not! > > The only way I can see an "intercontinental only" rule working would be to say something > along the lines of "Only stations outside North America should CQ in the DX WIndow, and > North American stations should transmit in that window only when calling and working > those DX stations." > > But the ARRL 160 always was -- and still is -- first and foremost an ARRL/RAC Sections > contest. Given that, it's not clear why there should be _any_ rule giving favors to > intercontinental QSOs. Contest rules might be better advised to simply "prohibit" _all_ > contest contacts and their solicitation in the DX Window, so as to leave that 5 kHz segment > for non-contest CW DXers. > > Bud, W2RU > > > On Dec 7, 2013, at 11:34 11PM, Mike Waters wrote: > > > I see a lot of USA station, including a couple of regular contributors to > > this reflector, calling CQ TEST between 1830 and 1835. > > > > According to http://www.arrl.org/160-meter "The segment 1.830 to 1.835 > > should be used for intercontinental QSOs only." I hear a lot of contacts > > being made between stateside stations. > > > > I thought this was for DX stations, and that's mostly what I've heard call > > CQ TEST there. Maybe someone can clarify this. :-) > > > > 73, Mike > > www.w0btu.com > > _ > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
I take it as that window is for DX stations to be heard without having to compete with the wall of sound coming from the states. I had a terrible time pulling some EU & AF stations when they were being clobbered by 20 over CQing signals from stateside. No way they can compete with such a signal 30Hz away. That 5KHz is miniscule compared to the rest of the band. I'm all for that being reserved for DX calling only. You'll never find me CQing in there even in a non ARRL contest. 73, Gary KA1J > Whatever the ARRL intent may have been, the wording of that > particular rule is defective, and has been for as long as I can > remember. > > Consider: How does one _start_ an "intercontinental QSO"? Usually > one party or the other sends "CQ". So to make a QSO in the DX > Window someone has to send "CQ TEST" or self-spot, then deliberately > choose not to answer anyone from his/her own continent! Sure sounds > like an intelligent rule to me. Not! > > The only way I can see an "intercontinental only" rule working would > be to say something along the lines of "Only stations outside North > America should CQ in the DX WIndow, and North American stations > should transmit in that window only when calling and working those > DX stations." > > But the ARRL 160 always was -- and still is -- first and foremost an > ARRL/RAC Sections contest. Given that, it's not clear why there > should be _any_ rule giving favors to intercontinental QSOs. > Contest rules might be better advised to simply "prohibit" _all_ > contest contacts and their solicitation in the DX Window, so as to > leave that 5 kHz segment for non-contest CW DXers. > > Bud, W2RU > > > On Dec 7, 2013, at 11:34 11PM, Mike Waters > wrote: > > > I see a lot of USA station, including a couple of regular > contributors to > > this reflector, calling CQ TEST between 1830 and 1835. > > > > According to http://www.arrl.org/160-meter "The segment 1.830 to > 1.835 > > should be used for intercontinental QSOs only." I hear a lot of > contacts > > being made between stateside stations. > > > > I thought this was for DX stations, and that's mostly what I've > heard call > > CQ TEST there. Maybe someone can clarify this. :-) > > > > 73, Mike > > www.w0btu.com > > _ > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
This is the way I thought it supposed to work. Actually early in the contest the DX window had little problem with stateside CQers. I worked some Europeans and other stations. On this side of North America, Europe is easier but if the window is plugged up with strong CQers it sure makes it tough for everyone else. It does not help the prestige of those plugging up the window either. 73 Bruce-K1FZ The only way I can see an "intercontinental only" rule working would be to say something along the lines of "Only stations outside North America should CQ in the DX WIndow, and North American stations should transmit in that window only when calling and working those DX stations." Bud, W2RU _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
Whatever the ARRL intent may have been, the wording of that particular rule is defective, and has been for as long as I can remember. Consider: How does one _start_ an "intercontinental QSO"? Usually one party or the other sends "CQ". So to make a QSO in the DX Window someone has to send "CQ TEST" or self-spot, then deliberately choose not to answer anyone from his/her own continent! Sure sounds like an intelligent rule to me. Not! The only way I can see an "intercontinental only" rule working would be to say something along the lines of "Only stations outside North America should CQ in the DX WIndow, and North American stations should transmit in that window only when calling and working those DX stations." But the ARRL 160 always was -- and still is -- first and foremost an ARRL/RAC Sections contest. Given that, it's not clear why there should be _any_ rule giving favors to intercontinental QSOs. Contest rules might be better advised to simply "prohibit" _all_ contest contacts and their solicitation in the DX Window, so as to leave that 5 kHz segment for non-contest CW DXers. Bud, W2RU On Dec 7, 2013, at 11:34 11PM, Mike Waters wrote: > I see a lot of USA station, including a couple of regular contributors to > this reflector, calling CQ TEST between 1830 and 1835. > > According to http://www.arrl.org/160-meter "The segment 1.830 to 1.835 > should be used for intercontinental QSOs only." I hear a lot of contacts > being made between stateside stations. > > I thought this was for DX stations, and that's mostly what I've heard call > CQ TEST there. Maybe someone can clarify this. :-) > > 73, Mike > www.w0btu.com > _ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window
No clarification Mike ... you're assumptions are correct. When I got up this a.m., it was filled with U.S. stations. Most of them were well known contesters too. "Sad day in the naborhood!" It's an empty hole to put your signal! 73 de NS9I On 12/7/2013 10:34 PM, Mike Waters wrote: I see a lot of USA station, including a couple of regular contributors to this reflector, calling CQ TEST between 1830 and 1835. According to http://www.arrl.org/160-meter "The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs only." I hear a lot of contacts being made between stateside stations. I thought this was for DX stations, and that's mostly what I've heard call CQ TEST there. Maybe someone can clarify this. :-) 73, Mike www.w0btu.com _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Topband: DX Window
I see a lot of USA station, including a couple of regular contributors to this reflector, calling CQ TEST between 1830 and 1835. According to http://www.arrl.org/160-meter "The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs only." I hear a lot of contacts being made between stateside stations. I thought this was for DX stations, and that's mostly what I've heard call CQ TEST there. Maybe someone can clarify this. :-) 73, Mike www.w0btu.com _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
I learned long ago that after winning all bands single and multi and single band phone and CW with a world record on CQ WW (except 40 phone) that these "records" would all disappear in the following years as they all did. Because of the geographic point advantage to stations 300 miles south of me could easily get a higher score with less Q's and less multipliers.So I have come up with self competition like trying to work WAS on 160 in 10 hours and now I have done that in under 4 hours on 160. Or trying to do DXCC on 160 in one weekend. I think Jeff, VY2ZM does this with ease now. So these little self assigned goals are really exciting especially when you can make your quota. But getting in the top ten with a standard home station is getting more and more difficult with all the super stations all over the world. Contesting is like a war to some but those who take it too seriously I offer this memorable line by General Patton as portrayed by George C. Scott in the movie. For over a thousand years, Roman conquerors returning from the wars enjoyed the honor of a triumph - a tumultuous parade. In the procession came trumpeters and musicians and strange animals from the conquered territories, together with carts laden with treasure and captured armaments. The conqueror rode in a triumphal chariot, the dazed prisoners walking in chains before him. Sometimes his children, robed in white, stood with him in the chariot, or rode the trace horses. A slave stood behind the conqueror, holding a golden crown, and whispering in his ear a warning: that all glory is fleeting. Such is contesting and "all glory is fleeting." Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ On 12/7/2012 1:24 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: I would hazard a guess that few of us enter it with an eye purely on score. If folks only entered contests they would "win" there would only ever be one entrant in each contest, a great loss for us all. I enjoy contest activity even though I've never won any :-) Truer words were never spoken. That's the way it works in all sports, except radio sports. :-) ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 13:45 -0800, mike l dormann wrote: > i am authorized to comment on this since i have (and a photo of my shack > wall can be produced if requested) a real honest sent by US postage > N0TT QSL card... > > after i get to the back of the yard i have to walk through the woods to > get to the ham shack. now why would anyone have his computer connected to > his key line? keys use the same type plugs as guitars and head phones > don't they? mine does. > > mike w7dra Hi Mike, If we use a logging program it is capable of throwing the T/R switch and then sending Morse. You have to wire stuff up so the puny little computer port can handle your grid-block and things like that but it's not too difficult. The big dogs who do the "runs" use it to help with fatigue from sending CQ TEST over and over and over and over again. I dunno what they do if we ask them for a fill. I suppose they have to actually type something. I think you do the search and pounce like I do instead of the hunt and peck like they do. I'm getting old now but I can still handle the keying for QSOs. I am getting ready to use the LOTW so I am using the computer to do logging now. I probably don't need it sending sterile CW for me at the same time. BTW...I'm building a contest grade receiving system for 160 through 40 meters using a rack of ARC-5 receivers . I was going to use a RAL for that like you do but so far - no RAL. 73, Bill KU8H ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S™III, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphonemike l dormann wrote:i am authorized to comment on this since i have (and a photo of my shack wall can be produced if requested) a real honest sent by US postage N0TT QSL card... after i get to the back of the yard i have to walk through the woods to get to the ham shack. now why would anyone have his computer connected to his key line? keys use the same type plugs as guitars and head phones don't they? mine does. mike w7dra On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 16:20:55 -0500 Bill Cromwell writes: > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 17:48 +, Missouri Guy wrote: > > > With electronic log submission easy to enforce, just invalidate > any > > > QSOs by W/VE run stations in the window. > > > > That's not practical to enforce via logs because some participants > > > may be using radios that have no connection to the computer other > than > > the > > key line. > > > > 73 Charlie, N0TT > > Hah! > > That "key line" is one more connection than my radio has to a > computer. > My computer is actually turned on while am on the air more than it > was > even last year. Sometimes I'm actually *using* the computer. > > A couple of years ago I updated my station to use just one > mechanical > switch that I throw to go from transmit to receive or back again. > The > switch and the morse key are arranged so I can T/R with my left hand > and > immediately start sending CW OR grab the pencil and write. Either > direction takes a fraction of a second. > > Before that I used a T/R system published by R. Goldberg that > involved a > chicken running back and forth pecking appropriate buttons while > plugging and unplugging patch cables. I had to install the present > system after a fine chicken dinner one day. > > I know of some hams who do NOT even have a computer. > > 73, > > Bill KU8H > > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > Woman is 57 But Looks 27 Mom publishes simple facelift trick that angered doctors... http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/50c263aed65ce63ae0aadst01vuc ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
i am authorized to comment on this since i have (and a photo of my shack wall can be produced if requested) a real honest sent by US postage N0TT QSL card... after i get to the back of the yard i have to walk through the woods to get to the ham shack. now why would anyone have his computer connected to his key line? keys use the same type plugs as guitars and head phones don't they? mine does. mike w7dra On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 16:20:55 -0500 Bill Cromwell writes: > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 17:48 +, Missouri Guy wrote: > > > With electronic log submission easy to enforce, just invalidate > any > > > QSOs by W/VE run stations in the window. > > > > That's not practical to enforce via logs because some participants > > > may be using radios that have no connection to the computer other > than > > the > > key line. > > > > 73 Charlie, N0TT > > Hah! > > That "key line" is one more connection than my radio has to a > computer. > My computer is actually turned on while am on the air more than it > was > even last year. Sometimes I'm actually *using* the computer. > > A couple of years ago I updated my station to use just one > mechanical > switch that I throw to go from transmit to receive or back again. > The > switch and the morse key are arranged so I can T/R with my left hand > and > immediately start sending CW OR grab the pencil and write. Either > direction takes a fraction of a second. > > Before that I used a T/R system published by R. Goldberg that > involved a > chicken running back and forth pecking appropriate buttons while > plugging and unplugging patch cables. I had to install the present > system after a fine chicken dinner one day. > > I know of some hams who do NOT even have a computer. > > 73, > > Bill KU8H > > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > Woman is 57 But Looks 27 Mom publishes simple facelift trick that angered doctors... http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/50c263aed65ce63ae0aadst01vuc ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 17:48 +, Missouri Guy wrote: > > With electronic log submission easy to enforce, just invalidate any > > QSOs by W/VE run stations in the window. > > That's not practical to enforce via logs because some participants > may be using radios that have no connection to the computer other than > the > key line. > > 73 Charlie, N0TT Hah! That "key line" is one more connection than my radio has to a computer. My computer is actually turned on while am on the air more than it was even last year. Sometimes I'm actually *using* the computer. A couple of years ago I updated my station to use just one mechanical switch that I throw to go from transmit to receive or back again. The switch and the morse key are arranged so I can T/R with my left hand and immediately start sending CW OR grab the pencil and write. Either direction takes a fraction of a second. Before that I used a T/R system published by R. Goldberg that involved a chicken running back and forth pecking appropriate buttons while plugging and unplugging patch cables. I had to install the present system after a fine chicken dinner one day. I know of some hams who do NOT even have a computer. 73, Bill KU8H ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
interesting. having spend much of my time in competitive swimming and running, the most i ever won was a"survivor" tee shirt; and what i disserve winning this last ARRL160 a "survivor" tee shirt would be most appropriate mike w7dra On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 12:24:13 -0500 "Tom W8JI" writes: > > I would hazard a guess that few of us enter it with an eye purely > on > > score. If > > folks only entered contests they would "win" there would only ever > be one > > entrant > > in each contest, a great loss for us all. I enjoy contest activity > even > > though > > I've never won any :-) > > Truer words were never spoken. > > That's the way it works in all sports, except radio sports. :-) > > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > Fast, Secure, NetZero 4G Mobile Broadband. Try it. http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT2 ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
I am not sure we need any punitive post-contest action. Several W's-CQing-in-DX-Window was very obvious on the first night. I think due to somebody seeing our discussion here, and relating it to the problem ops, on the second night the problem was far less. Who knows, maybe the contest director contacted the problem ops by landline. I would prefer that behavior be improved through friendly reminders during the event, rather than post-contest action long after the event. I worked a good amount of DX (OK, a good amount for me, remember I'm not your guy to say that I worked 128 JA's in a morning!) in the contest, both in and outside the DX window and was happy. I am reluctant to recommend a rewrite of next years wording to the word "shall". I think DX should be allowed outside the window and I think "shall" would require the DX to be in the window. That would be unfortunate. Tim N3QE -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Missouri Guy Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 12:49 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window > With electronic log submission easy to enforce, just invalidate any > QSOs by W/VE run stations in the window. That's not practical to enforce via logs because some participants may be using radios that have no connection to the computer other than the key line. 73 Charlie, N0TT ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
Thanks Tim...Very well said ! This expresses my feelings about TB radio contesting. "The challenges of competition can be stimulating and enjoyable. But when beating the oponent takes precedence in the mind over performing as well as possible, enjoyment tends to disappear. Competition is enjoyable only when it is a means to perfect one's skills: when it becomes an end in itself, it ceases to be fun." Mihaly_Csikszentmihalyi How else could a fairly sane QRPer look at life on Top Band ? And my "Swish Swish" noise problem seems to appear and vanish in sync with my neighbor's outside Christmas lights even though they don't appear to blink on and off. Merry Christmas Everybody ! jim / W1FMR --- On Fri, 12/7/12, Shoppa, Tim wrote: From: Shoppa, Tim Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux To: "Tom W8JI" , "he...@vitelcom.net" , "topband@contesting.com" Date: Friday, December 7, 2012, 12:03 PM > There is a person down here always complaining about contest life being > unfair, and wanting distance based multipliers in other contests. He wanted > support for that idea. > [...] > The end result of distance based scoring or score by distance, power, and > number of QSO's is certainly very different, but it is far from level. It > simply tilts things in a different way. > [...] > It winds up effectively being a "northern polar path" or "southern polar > path", and unpopulated one-hop radial area penalty. The concept of a "completely level playing field contest" is an interesting one. There were several contests in the 1960's that attempted to level the playing field for all participants worldwide. These contests very often ended up with tables of multipliers based on CQ zones that attempted to give bonus points/mults for the most difficult contacts, e.g. over the pole. Check out for example page 57 of QST September 1967 issue for a very large table of QSO scoring based on CQ zone matrix of correspondents. What should be a lesson, is that these contests invariably ended up with bigger lookup tables for "correcting" QSO's for difficulty, than they had entrants It will be a stretch for anyone to remember the names of these contests although old issues of QST are a start. That's how successful the "universal correction" was. This was before gridsquares of course. I think the TBDC hits a nice middle ground and best of all nobody has to compute their own score. In fact it is by definition impossible to compute your own score (not knowing whether the other guy is HP, LP, or QRP.) Even with these factors there are still some locations and styles and stations that have advantages over others. I would hazard a guess that few of us enter it with an eye purely on score. If folks only entered contests they would "win" there would only ever be one entrant in each contest, a great loss for us all. I enjoy contest activity even though I've never won any :-) Tim N3QE ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
> With electronic log submission easy to enforce, just invalidate any > QSOs by W/VE run stations in the window. That's not practical to enforce via logs because some participants may be using radios that have no connection to the computer other than the key line. 73 Charlie, N0TT ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
I would hazard a guess that few of us enter it with an eye purely on score. If folks only entered contests they would "win" there would only ever be one entrant in each contest, a great loss for us all. I enjoy contest activity even though I've never won any :-) Truer words were never spoken. That's the way it works in all sports, except radio sports. :-) ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
Here's a partial post I emailed to the Arizona Outlaws Contest Club reflector following the 2011 ARRL 160: "On the positive side the DX window from 1830-1835 was mostly well observed by W/VE and provided a haven for Caribbean, SA and EU stns to establish runs of their own altho no copy on the Euros here." The window is a valuable asset for encouraging DX participation in what is for the most part a 160m Sweepstakes. The ARRL could change "should" to "shall" in Rule 6 thereby making compliance mandatory. With electronic log submission easy to enforce, just invalidate any QSOs by W/VE run stations in the window. I didn't participate in this year's ARRL 160 as I always enter contests SO Assisted and have had enough of being lumped in with multi-op in the results which is ridiculous IMHO. I'll be a non-participant in future ARRL contests with this policy but will continue to enjoy CQ and JA sponsored contests. I just hope to live long enough to see the ARRL establish a separate SO(A) category or merge SO(A) and SO(U). My 2 cents. 73/Pres, N6SS GET FREE SMILEYS FOR YOUR IM & EMAIL - Learn more at http://www.inbox.com/smileys Works with AIM®, MSN® Messenger, Yahoo!® Messenger, ICQ®, Google Talk™ and most webmails ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
> There is a person down here always complaining about contest life being > unfair, and wanting distance based multipliers in other contests. He wanted > support for that idea. > [...] > The end result of distance based scoring or score by distance, power, and > number of QSO's is certainly very different, but it is far from level. It > simply tilts things in a different way. > [...] > It winds up effectively being a "northern polar path" or "southern polar > path", and unpopulated one-hop radial area penalty. The concept of a "completely level playing field contest" is an interesting one. There were several contests in the 1960's that attempted to level the playing field for all participants worldwide. These contests very often ended up with tables of multipliers based on CQ zones that attempted to give bonus points/mults for the most difficult contacts, e.g. over the pole. Check out for example page 57 of QST September 1967 issue for a very large table of QSO scoring based on CQ zone matrix of correspondents. What should be a lesson, is that these contests invariably ended up with bigger lookup tables for "correcting" QSO's for difficulty, than they had entrants It will be a stretch for anyone to remember the names of these contests although old issues of QST are a start. That's how successful the "universal correction" was. This was before gridsquares of course. I think the TBDC hits a nice middle ground and best of all nobody has to compute their own score. In fact it is by definition impossible to compute your own score (not knowing whether the other guy is HP, LP, or QRP.) Even with these factors there are still some locations and styles and stations that have advantages over others. I would hazard a guess that few of us enter it with an eye purely on score. If folks only entered contests they would "win" there would only ever be one entrant in each contest, a great loss for us all. I enjoy contest activity even though I've never won any :-) Tim N3QE ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
- Original Message - From: "Herb Schoenbohm" To: Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux On 12/6/2012 5:23 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: "There isn't any competition in any area can be all things to all people, nor can it be completely fair to everyone everywhere." Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 4:59 PM TBDC comes very close to being just that. You get credit for distances and a nice boost for not being a QRO alligator. I think that this is steadily gaining in popularity over the years as it should. There is a person down here always complaining about contest life being unfair, and wanting distance based multipliers in other contests. He wanted support for that idea. When I objectively looked into the notion distance based scoring would level or nearly level the playing field, it was not even close to true. Stations from Minnesota or the Dakotas, for example, are closer to Europe than I am, yet I have a much easier time working them. This is because of path attenuation and unreliability of paths closer to the magnetic poles. Also, signals suffer exaggerated attenuation with each additional hop. Signal attenuation is not linear with distance, because of the way the signal propagates. The end result of distance based scoring or score by distance, power, and number of QSO's is certainly very different, but it is far from level. It simply tilts things in a different way. For example, a very large transmitting antenna low-power station in a one-hop location to very large numbers of stations can totally dominate the contest, while a person with modest transmitting antennas at a location requiring multi-hop or refractive or skirting paths through high attenuation areas will suffer. It winds up effectively being a "northern polar path" or "southern polar path", and unpopulated one-hop radial area penalty. People running low power in the middle of populated areas have a distinct advantage, because signal levels do not decrease linearly with increased distance and because not all paths are equal. Not only that, large transmitting antennas in populated areas will still win. I understand the frustration Herb, but the ARRL obviously never intended the ARRL 160 to be anything like a WW DX contest. It is very different from CQ WW contests, and more along SS and other USA centered contests. That's why large stations from the Midwest do so well, and why DX activity is generally low. 73 Tom ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Why don't folks ever name names? (callsigns) Are we such a "PC" group of humans worldwide these days that we should not risk stepping on someones' toes dare we insult them or shame them into obeying the rules ? (gasp!) In this last contest Vermont Station W1SJ (is that WB1GQR?) was on 1830.5 or 1830.75 (somewhere like that) and totally was taking out weak DX for me. There were others, but like the previous poster, I didn't keep a list. I just remember SJ as he was LOUD and had a nice call easy to remember and I fought with his QRM for hours, seemingly every time I tuned by. I just don't understand why peer pressure won't work for these people who disregard the rules. Invariably they are the older, experienced ops with big stations (who know better), not the casual 160m op who is new to the band that infiltrate the window and ruin it to some extent for the rest of us ! Mike VE9AA P.S.- I did note there was 1 real big station who was NOT (for once!) parked in the window for this contest, who sometimes is, so I'll bet peer pressure or some outside force worked on this person. P.S.S.-you'll note I did not bash, call names or anything to W1SJjust named his callsign. Keep it clean folks ! ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
Slightly off subject BUT the problem with the ARRL 160m Contest from a DX point of view Is that You get 5 points for working me but I only get 2 points for working you. 2.5 times as much. That is why I do not operate in that contest anymore. I know it's all relative but it is still wrong. And why it has become an almost Completely domestic contest. 73 Clive GM3POI -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim Brown Sent: 07 December 2012 00:23 To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux On 12/6/2012 1:23 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: > > It seems to me the ARRL intended it as a local **ARRL** sectional > contest, not as a worldwide DX contest to encourage DX participation. > It is more like a sweepstakes contest keyed to sections. That makes no sense -- DX contacts are weighted 2.5x US/VE contacts, and there are country multipliers. It's much closer to being the ARRL DX Contest for 160M. > 1.) I think there should be a DX Window of some sort so stations > located inland have some improved shot at hearing DX away from strong > local signals. I do not think the idea to completely eliminate the > window was, overall, a good" idea. I think it was done primarily from > the view or perspective of people on the east coast with large > stations, and without due consideration of how eliminating a window > impacts everyone else. I found a year old post that confirms your suspicions. See quote below. John, If it had not been for the window I could not have worked what I have on 160. I would say it had gotten me at least a dozen new ones. One year I remember giving ON4UN Zone 3 in the window. I wish you could walk in my shoes once and do a 160 contest from out here. It might enlighten you. 73 Hardy N7RT - Original Message - From: "John Crovelli" To: Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 8:19 AM Subject: Topband: DX Window No Long Relevant As a courtesy, last weekend our Multi operation, as a courtesy, refrained from calling CQ in what some still consider the DX Window (1830 - 1835). BUT lets be realistic here, this is 2011, not 1961. Split operation, a necessary operating technique of the W1BB era is no longer necessary. Frequency allocations between ITU regions and individual countries have become more aligned. All world class radios have narrow filtering capability, etc. fully capable of handling the worst pileups. The need for a "window" has diminished to the point it has become irrelevant in today's world. Only the ARRL seems to hold onto the notion of a DX window in their 160 contest rules, but they are well known for there slowness to react to current world realities. So I vote we assume THE 160M DX WINDOW is DEAD and move on to topics which might have significantly more value to the masses. 73, John W2GD/P40W = = = = = = = My comments: In the context of 160M, Maine, VE1, VY0, and VY2 are DX if you're operating from California. VY2 is closer to Oslo, Dublin, London, Paris, Amsterdam, Brussels, and Madrid than he is to me, and the path to those cities is only 300 miles longer from Boston. Their path to EU is all water, and not over the pole. My path to them is over dirt. So if we're gonna have a DX window, how about one where west coaster with less than a superstation can call CQ with a chance to work the east coast? And while we're at it, how about 5 points/QSO for the west coast working the east coast? 73, Jim K9YC ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com === Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2900, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20900) http://www.pctools.com/ === === Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2900, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20910) http://www.pctools.com/ === ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
On 12/6/2012 1:23 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: It seems to me the ARRL intended it as a local **ARRL** sectional contest, not as a worldwide DX contest to encourage DX participation. It is more like a sweepstakes contest keyed to sections. That makes no sense -- DX contacts are weighted 2.5x US/VE contacts, and there are country multipliers. It's much closer to being the ARRL DX Contest for 160M. 1.) I think there should be a DX Window of some sort so stations located inland have some improved shot at hearing DX away from strong local signals. I do not think the idea to completely eliminate the window was, overall, a good" idea. I think it was done primarily from the view or perspective of people on the east coast with large stations, and without due consideration of how eliminating a window impacts everyone else. I found a year old post that confirms your suspicions. See quote below. John, If it had not been for the window I could not have worked what I have on 160. I would say it had gotten me at least a dozen new ones. One year I remember giving ON4UN Zone 3 in the window. I wish you could walk in my shoes once and do a 160 contest from out here. It might enlighten you. 73 Hardy N7RT - Original Message - From: "John Crovelli" To: Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 8:19 AM Subject: Topband: DX Window No Long Relevant As a courtesy, last weekend our Multi operation, as a courtesy, refrained from calling CQ in what some still consider the DX Window (1830 - 1835). BUT lets be realistic here, this is 2011, not 1961. Split operation, a necessary operating technique of the W1BB era is no longer necessary. Frequency allocations between ITU regions and individual countries have become more aligned. All world class radios have narrow filtering capability, etc. fully capable of handling the worst pileups. The need for a "window" has diminished to the point it has become irrelevant in today's world. Only the ARRL seems to hold onto the notion of a DX window in their 160 contest rules, but they are well known for there slowness to react to current world realities. So I vote we assume THE 160M DX WINDOW is DEAD and move on to topics which might have significantly more value to the masses. 73, John W2GD/P40W = = = = = = = My comments: In the context of 160M, Maine, VE1, VY0, and VY2 are DX if you're operating from California. VY2 is closer to Oslo, Dublin, London, Paris, Amsterdam, Brussels, and Madrid than he is to me, and the path to those cities is only 300 miles longer from Boston. Their path to EU is all water, and not over the pole. My path to them is over dirt. So if we're gonna have a DX window, how about one where west coaster with less than a superstation can call CQ with a chance to work the east coast? And while we're at it, how about 5 points/QSO for the west coast working the east coast? 73, Jim K9YC ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I was able to do this repeatedly with my Flex 3000. Only way was with the 100 Hz filters on max sampling, but it worked perfectly (thankfully) and I was able to hear and work KH7X and D44AC with S9+ stateside stations just 500 Hz away Mark WD4ELG ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
What do you think 10 callers in Europe will do? And nobody will stop for as long as 2.5 sec. So only the strongest stations in Europe would benefit from a dx window. 73 Peter, DJ7WW -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of N4IS Sent: Freitag, 7. Dezember 2012 00:12 To: k...@arrl.net; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX window Art >> A DL wondered how many DX can coexist in 5kHz. Not many. << I think 5 KHz can hold a lot of DX , CW and 100 Hz BW can do miracles, however just one local CQ machine gun calling CQ stopping only 2.5 sec can kill the same 5 KHz in the whole state. Regards JC N4IS ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I worked several EU near my noise floor (S 0-1) with my radio set to 150 Hz (Icom 756 ProII) and an omni antenna sandwiched I between stateside Ops that were S9 or stronger. Yes, the really close in ones, less than about 400 Hz, add to the challenge, but anyone more than 500 Hz away is a non-issue. I have two stations (at a KW+) about two miles from me in opposite directions and we easily operate within a KHz or each other routinely with no issues. We do see each other on the spectrum scopes, but nothing degrading operation. Maybe we are lucky. tnx Mike / W5JR / GA On Dec 6, 2012, at 6:12 PM, "N4IS" wrote: > Art > A DL wondered how many DX can coexist in 5kHz. Not many. > << > > I think 5 KHz can hold a lot of DX , CW and 100 Hz BW can do miracles, > however just one local CQ machine gun calling CQ stopping only 2.5 sec can > kill the same 5 KHz in the whole state. > > Regards > JC > N4IS > > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Art >> A DL wondered how many DX can coexist in 5kHz. Not many. << I think 5 KHz can hold a lot of DX , CW and 100 Hz BW can do miracles, however just one local CQ machine gun calling CQ stopping only 2.5 sec can kill the same 5 KHz in the whole state. Regards JC N4IS ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
Herb, The reason there is hardly anyone on TB during SS is that there is no incentive to be there. There are no band multipliers and you can work everyone on the other 5 bands. Keep up the good work. de Milt, N5IA -Original Message- From: Herb Schoenbohm Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 2:55 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux On 12/6/2012 5:23 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: "It is more like a sweepstakes contest keyed to sections" It seems this was the ratinale Tom but that the ARRL SS allows 160 meters and a single band entry. However there are only a few station I have ever heard calling CQ SS on TB. maybe thats not such a bad thing? Herb, KV4FZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5940 - Release Date: 12/06/12 - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5940 - Release Date: 12/06/12 ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Topband: DX Window
Only in the past 4-5 years have I paid serious attention to 160m, and I thought that the DX Window had faded away and was no longer observed. It looks like I was wrong. I understand its purpose, and I'm perfectly willing to abide by it. Perhaps all that is needed (for many of us) is a reminder that it is indeed active, and please to respect it. I spend a lot of time on 6m in the summer, and many newbies, unaware of the DX window (50.1 - 50.125), blithely call CQ and work each other there, until its purpose is explained to them. All same 160m. (DX = off continental NA, so Herb, etc., are welcome there.) I consider myself re-educated. How about: QDW (pse respect the DX window) as a reminder? Ralph, VE7XF ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
On 12/6/2012 5:23 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: "There isn't any competition in any area can be all things to all people, nor can it be completely fair to everyone everywhere." TBDC comes very close to being just that. You get credit for distances and a nice boost for not being a QRO alligator. I think that this is steadily gaining in popularity over the years as it should. Herb, KV4FZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
On 12/6/2012 5:23 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: "It is more like a sweepstakes contest keyed to sections" It seems this was the ratinale Tom but that the ARRL SS allows 160 meters and a single band entry. However there are only a few station I have ever heard calling CQ SS on TB. maybe thats not such a bad thing? Herb, KV4FZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
is disingenuous. First the contest planners have already turned their back on DX. DX was included as an after thought. Why, because 160 meter legend DX-er W0NWX-W0DX-VP2VI was ARRL President and lived during the winters in BVI a scant 7 miles from U.S.VI. It seems to me the ARRL intended it as a local **ARRL** sectional contest, not as a worldwide DX contest to encourage DX participation. It is more like a sweepstakes contest keyed to sections. I can't see any conspiracy. If someone is in an ARRL section, it counts as an ARRL section. If someone in a country next door is not in an ARRL section, it is DX. Now Tom suggests that I should be sanctioned for calling CQ inside the window...even though I am really looking for EU and Asia. I must not answer NA stations calling because that is Intercontinental but a PJ of a P4 a few hundred miles south of me can do so without impunity. Just to be clear, I certainly did not suggest a sanction against any specific person, especially you Herb. 1.) I think there should be a DX Window of some sort so stations located inland have some improved shot at hearing DX away from strong local signals. I do not think the idea to completely eliminate the window was, overall, a good" idea. I think it was done primarily from the view or perspective of people on the east coast with large stations, and without due consideration of how eliminating a window impacts everyone else. 2.) I also think, if something is in the rules or "suggestions" of a contest, people should follow them or suffer a penalty of some type. This is true no matter who they are. 3.) There isn't any competition in any area can be all things to all people, nor can it be completely fair to everyone everywhere. That doesn't mean it is a conspiracy. This is just my opinion. 73 Tom ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
One sure way to open the DX window to DX is to blacklist us/ve who CQ there. At least temporarily. Which is what I do, just pass them by even when they're 40 over and I need the mult. Tough love. If there's a DX station nearby I'll surely try to work it, perhaps with a judicious VFO offset to make sure the DX can hear me. Not that I keep a list or anything. I don't. If they just keep CQn in the window I'll never work them. Sooner or later they'll find me up or down the band. A DL wondered how many DX can coexist in 5kHz. Not many. But its a lot more than is possible to work if US/VE are CQing in that 5kHz! Another noted there's no "rule" in terms of licensing structure about the window. True. Its been a gentlemen's agreement since way before I was first licensed. -- 73 Art K6XT~~ Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiasm. ARRL, GMCC, CW OPS, NAQCC ARRL TA ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window-Redux
I would say with all that is already wrong with the ARRL 160 meter contest which is a beehive of CQ machines, Dx or no DX, window or no window, that for them to make such a statement (this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs only, as a mere suggestion, not a rule, is disingenuous. First the contest planners have already turned their back on DX. DX was included as an after thought. Why, because 160 meter legend DX-er W0NWX-W0DX-VP2VI was ARRL President and lived during the winters in BVI a scant 7 miles from U.S.VI. So there was an attempt, a poorly designed one for inclusion of one person based on politics rather than fairness. DX in the U.S. Territories seems to be of little or no value except for a multiplier. There weren't any PR stations on in the last event and if I would have carried out my plans for a NA boycott, no VI multiplier either. All the DXCC U.S. entities in the Caribbean are all counted as VI or Puerto Rico even though KP1 is about as rare as a place on earth for anyone to work on any band, but it counts for the VI. Now Tom suggests that I should be sanctioned for calling CQ inside the window...even though I am really looking for EU and Asia. I must not answer NA stations calling because that is Intercontinental but a PJ of a P4 a few hundred miles south of me can do so without impunity. Makes no sense as some continents like Asia extend half way around the world. Intercontinental or intercontinental is a broad brush that falls apart when DX shows up and they direct you where to go. If you don't listen to instructions then you don't work them, period. This is the way that self regulation works. I would say that the ARRL suggestion is just that, a suggestion. If they were just not following an old worn out tradition of Viking Rangers and HQ-129 Receivers, and if they want to be certain they mean what they say, all the need to is change the world from "should" to "must". But you know the CAC can not even suggest this as they must be "tasked" by a secretive internal council at HQ to rubber stamp their suggestions. So nothing is going to change. We all go where the DX is and if ZL9HR on 1826 says up 10 ...lets not kid ourselves, we are gong to call up ten, and start calling. Today with very directional RX antennas for serious DX-ers the kindness and ethics of the "gentleman's" band should be enough. This seems to noticeably fall apart during the ARRL 160 Contest disaster..which few really like anyway and so many complain about. In direct contrast, we are all redeemed at the end of this month by the Stew Perry Distance Challenge that everybody likes and the rules are straight forward and simple. DX is! You don't even have to score your results and everyone gets a category they can choose from. The ARRL160 Meter event always causes more ruffled feathers and the TBDC is just the opposite. What Lew and Tree came up with is substance. What a board room of insiders at HQ foisted on 160 is all about symbolism and about working some ARRL sections, not about developing the skills to work weak signals on a crowded band. I have been trying for years to get them to change this but all I get is some sort of arrogant slap down. I though that the league itself is supposed to remember their own motto and that motto should extend to TB'ers as well. CU in the Stew during the Christmas season and watch how the DX crawls out of the woodwork to get in someones logs. It is a contest that those that try the most with the least have a chance in being recognized. The Stew is really the anti-alligator anti big gun event which is never drudgery like the plethora of CQ machines across the band. 73 Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ On 12/6/2012 12:40 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: I stand by my suggestion and I don't see my suggestion as nonsense in the least. Go here and read section 6.1 http://www.arrl.org/160-meter - The ARRL who host this contest state plainly that this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs only, ergo: the DX window. Since US & VE are disregarding this directive and using it selfishly to the detriment of the others in the contest who are playing by the rules, I say the offending stations should be penalized for ignoring the rules. What is nonsense about that? That is a good suggestion, because it is what the contest rules suggest. It is a place for intercontinental QSO's, and W/VE should not CQ there. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
well, my radio has a dial on it that goes from 0 to 180 somewhere around 10 i stop hearing cw, which means that is the bottom of the band, and around 180 or so can hear ssb, which to me is the top of the band. don't need much more calabration than that. mike w7dra On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 09:07:16 -0500 Bill Cromwell writes: > Hi Darrell, > > I have started wading into computer logging and I usually use > paper. > After the contest I enter the info into the computer but I plan to > just > have the computer running and do it one QSO at a time. > > None of my radios have any kind of CAT "feature". I do NOT want my > radio > to be smarter than me so they have to stay pretty dern stooopid. > The > logging programs let me enter the frequency I am using in whatever > format I want AND just keep using the same info for each QSO until > I > change it. I would enter something like 160M or 1.8 (as in mc) but > I > could as easily put in 1.835001. Radios smarter than me can tell > the > computer where they are operating (maybe to the nearest 50 or 100 > cycles. Checking for W/VE QSOs in the DX window would work for at > least > those stations with Baccalaureate radios. Any kind of policing of > that > nature would be encumbered with challenges and appeals processes > and > final results could take years. > > If CAT and computer logging become a requirement those of us without > CAT > or computer logging will be banned - de facto. Come to think of it > my > contest operation is already pretty low key. There are always the > WARC > bands and the expected new allocation at 600 meters. I can't > imagine > contests in THAT band. > > Or...we could all just play by the contest rules and agreements. > > 73, > > Bill KU8H > > > On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 18:22 -0800, Darrell Bellerive wrote: > > Being unencumbered by knowledge of contest log reporting and > checking > > perhaps I am missing something. > > > > Since virtually all contest stations use automated logging > programs and > > these programs could get the actual transmit frequency directly > from the > > transceiver as the contact is logged, then why couldn't a log > check > > computer program simply check for non DX contacts within a DX > window? > > > > I guess that would mean requiring an exact frequency rather than a > > > generic frequency to be submitted in the Cabrillo format, but > certainly > > that doesn't seem to hard to code into the logging program. > > > > I suppose this could even be crosschecked in the other station's > log to > > rule out computer errors. > > > > Apply penalties for a certain number of violations to allow for > true > > mistakes, but once above a certain limit, disqualification. > > > > I will crawl back under my rock now. > > > > 73, Darrell VA7TO > > > > Darrell Bellerive > > > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > Woman is 53 But Looks 25 Mom reveals 1 simple wrinkle trick that has angered doctors... http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/50c0db639f4545b634966st01vuc ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Exactly Correct Peter Put a dozen high powered EU stations in the 5 Khz Window and THEY can't hear any of the US/VE stations called them. John k9uwa > I agree when the discussion is about the ARRL 160m contest only. > But, how many stations outside W/VE can share those 5kHz? > > 73 > Peter, DJ7WW John Goller, K9UWA & Jean Goller, N9PXF Antique Radio Restorations k9...@arrl.net Visit our Web Site at: http://www.JohnJeanAntiqueRadio.com 4836 Ranch Road Leo, IN 46765 USA 1-260-637-6426 ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
As Peter has responded, there are two JA windows; 1810-1825 and 1907.7-1912.5 . Until a few years ago the JA hams only had the upper 1907.7-1912.5 allocation. Because the band was segmented in much of the world most international contacts on 160 Meters were done split frequency. From here in the USA the common method was for US stations to transmit in the 1.820-1.830 area where their narrow band TX antennas were resonant and listen for the JA stations in the above 1.9 MHZ JA allocation. The JA stations would do the opposite, TXing above 1.9 and listening down low. Initially USA transmitted 1800-1810 on CW, usually below 1805. It wasn't just JA. The west coast USA had 1975-2000, the east coast 1800-1825. ZL only worked up around 1875. Many Europe and Africa only had 1825 up to 1830, some more. Now the JA's are still very restricted with the two segments you mentioned and no SSB. Other places have a variety of areas to operate. This still does not exclude a DX Window for Europe and the rest of the world, just because JA can't above 1825. Also, the OLD standard was USA CQ on the start of the odd fives, and listen on the even start of 5's when DX CQed. For example, I might CQ at 0500Z and G3PU at 0505. http://www.w8ji.com/160%20History/hist160dx.pdf 73 Tom ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Gary You have a god point, if we don't care they don't mind. I think we cc download the RBN file with all callers on the DX window during the contest, it is available in .csv, easy to filter using excel and send a formal complain to ARRL contest managers, It is not necessary to publish that list because is available for everybody download. Let see the ARRL reaction. If we don't protect the DX windows, we can't complain because we are gentlemen's and we made possible the gentlemen's band throughout the years and it was not staying aside the line and just watching. Any comments or actions? Regards JC ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
On 2012-12-06, at 10:37 AM, Gary Smith wrote: > I stand by my suggestion and I don't see my suggestion as nonsense in > the least. Go here and read section 6.1 > http://www.arrl.org/160-meter - The ARRL who host this contest state > plainly that this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs > only, ergo: the DX window. > > Since US & VE are disregarding this directive and using it selfishly > to the detriment of the others in the contest who are playing by the > rules, I say the offending stations should be penalized for ignoring > the rules. What is nonsense about that? > > My point is the W/VE should not be within the DX window calling CQ in > the first place. I can't imagine anyone would be there calling CQ and > expect a constant pileup of DX to be calling them. What is more > likely is they may feel by being in that window they will be in a > perfect location to get the maximum DX multipliers and by holding > that bandwidth in that limited and specific segment, minimize the # > of multipliers others will be able to get. Hi Gary, I agree with your sentiments 101%, FWIW... Alas & alack, nothing will ever come of it: our Ham "society" to-day seems to have embraced the domain of society at large, in that we'd rather go out of our way, rather than to "offend" the "offender". Is it in keeping with our seemingly universal mantra anymore of being politically correct...? Or have we collectively & suddenly become oh-so-very-kind to one another that the last thing we'd want to do is tell someone that maybe---just "maybe"!---their behaviour is not quite up to standards...? I don't know, it sure beats me: just as I am still gobsmacked by the "...shy & retiring" Topband person(s) who, a few years ago, would anonymously send transmissions"klix" right at the end of my transmissions, & who would besmirch my otherwise "good name" on various sites because my signal didn't quite measure-up to some ethereal golden "standard" in the eyes (and ears) of that beholder... Maybe that's the key...? The Kilocycle Kop(s) should dedicate time & energy to park in the DX window, & send "WINDOW HR" at the conclusion of each & every CQ by NA stations...?! (Where are those Kc Kops when you need one...?!) ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I agree when the discussion is about the ARRL 160m contest only. But, how many stations outside W/VE can share those 5kHz? 73 Peter, DJ7WW -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Gary Smith I stand by my suggestion and I don't see my suggestion as nonsense in the least. Go here and read section 6.1 http://www.arrl.org/160-meter - The ARRL who host this contest state plainly that this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs only, ergo: the DX window. Since US & VE are disregarding this directive and using it selfishly to the detriment of the others in the contest who are playing by the rules, I say the offending stations should be penalized for ignoring the rules. What is nonsense about that? My point is the W/VE should not be within the DX window calling CQ in the first place. I can't imagine anyone would be there calling CQ and expect a constant pileup of DX to be calling them. What is more likely is they may feel by being in that window they will be in a perfect location to get the maximum DX multipliers and by holding that bandwidth in that limited and specific segment, minimize the # of multipliers others will be able to get. Gary KA1J > What a nonsense. > Do you expect a station calling cq during a contest in the DX window > and being called by a non dx station to qsy with that station to a > frequency outside the dx window? And how many stations can share the > dx window? By the way, I don´t see any frequency marked dx window in > the ARRL band plan. And no dx window is seen in our region 1 band plan > either. > > 73 > Peter, DJ7WW > > > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of > Gary Smith > > Make it known every QSO within that DX window from W/VE not working a > DX station will have a punitive docking of points. If they have the > guts to do this, there will quickly be a hole in the ether for DX to > be heard. > > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I think "tradition" for the ARRL has been to only find "DX" stations there CQing. That's why it is in the rules. It is often the first time some of the "little guns" have ever heard DX on the band. >From time to time - I find some USA stations there CQing - and typically they leave after being reminded about the window. However, from time to time you see a serious station setup camp and run off 100 or more domestic stations - which seems like it is taking advantage of the rule. Tree On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Tom W8JI wrote: > I stand by my suggestion and I don't see my suggestion as nonsense in > the least. Go here and read section 6.1 > http://www.arrl.org/160-meter - The ARRL who host this contest state > plainly that this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs > only, ergo: the DX window. > > Since US & VE are disregarding this directive and using it selfishly > to the detriment of the others in the contest who are playing by the > rules, I say the offending stations should be penalized for ignoring > the rules. What is nonsense about that? > > That is a good suggestion, because it is what the contest rules suggest. > It is a place for intercontinental QSO's, and W/VE should not CQ there. > __**_ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I stand by my suggestion and I don't see my suggestion as nonsense in the least. Go here and read section 6.1 http://www.arrl.org/160-meter - The ARRL who host this contest state plainly that this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs only, ergo: the DX window. Since US & VE are disregarding this directive and using it selfishly to the detriment of the others in the contest who are playing by the rules, I say the offending stations should be penalized for ignoring the rules. What is nonsense about that? That is a good suggestion, because it is what the contest rules suggest. It is a place for intercontinental QSO's, and W/VE should not CQ there. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
I stand by my suggestion and I don't see my suggestion as nonsense in the least. Go here and read section 6.1 http://www.arrl.org/160-meter - The ARRL who host this contest state plainly that this segment should be used for intercontinental QSOs only, ergo: the DX window. Since US & VE are disregarding this directive and using it selfishly to the detriment of the others in the contest who are playing by the rules, I say the offending stations should be penalized for ignoring the rules. What is nonsense about that? My point is the W/VE should not be within the DX window calling CQ in the first place. I can't imagine anyone would be there calling CQ and expect a constant pileup of DX to be calling them. What is more likely is they may feel by being in that window they will be in a perfect location to get the maximum DX multipliers and by holding that bandwidth in that limited and specific segment, minimize the # of multipliers others will be able to get. Gary KA1J > What a nonsense. > Do you expect a station calling cq during a contest in the DX window > and being called by a non dx station to qsy with that station to a > frequency outside the dx window? And how many stations can share the > dx window? By the way, I don´t see any frequency marked dx window in > the ARRL band plan. And no dx window is seen in our region 1 band plan > either. > > 73 > Peter, DJ7WW > > > -Original Message- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of > Gary Smith > > Make it known every QSO within that DX window from W/VE not working a > DX station will have a punitive docking of points. If they have the > guts to do this, there will quickly be a hole in the ether for DX to > be heard. > > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
What a nonsense. Do you expect a station calling cq during a contest in the DX window and being called by a non dx station to qsy with that station to a frequency outside the dx window? And how many stations can share the dx window? By the way, I don´t see any frequency marked dx window in the ARRL band plan. And no dx window is seen in our region 1 band plan either. 73 Peter, DJ7WW -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Gary Smith Make it known every QSO within that DX window from W/VE not working a DX station will have a punitive docking of points. If they have the guts to do this, there will quickly be a hole in the ether for DX to be heard. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Don't mean to leapfrog you guys technologically. But you don't need to interface your radio to your computer, because lots of other hams have already done this. CQ'ing stations are logged in the "Reverse Beacon Network" automatically. http://reversebeacon.net/ The reversebeacon data clearly show all the US and VE CQ'ing stations I heard in the DX window. There were several consistently CQ'ing in the DX window the first night of the contest. It even shows that I (briefly, like a minute or two) CQ'ed in the window! While I like to complain too, there was a marked reduction in US/VE CQ'ing in DX window the second night of the contest and many DX stations were clearly audible to me on fairly clear frequencies both inside and outside the window. I was a little surprised that there wasn't a line of callers for the stronger DX stations. I strongly suspect comments made on this mailing list and forwarded/read by those stations, helped rectify the situation. Tim N3QE -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Cromwell Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 9:07 AM To: Topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX window Hi Darrell, I have started wading into computer logging and I usually use paper. After the contest I enter the info into the computer but I plan to just have the computer running and do it one QSO at a time. None of my radios have any kind of CAT "feature". I do NOT want my radio to be smarter than me so they have to stay pretty dern stooopid. The logging programs let me enter the frequency I am using in whatever format I want AND just keep using the same info for each QSO until I change it. I would enter something like 160M or 1.8 (as in mc) but I could as easily put in 1.835001. Radios smarter than me can tell the computer where they are operating (maybe to the nearest 50 or 100 cycles. Checking for W/VE QSOs in the DX window would work for at least those stations with Baccalaureate radios. Any kind of policing of that nature would be encumbered with challenges and appeals processes and final results could take years. If CAT and computer logging become a requirement those of us without CAT or computer logging will be banned - de facto. Come to think of it my contest operation is already pretty low key. There are always the WARC bands and the expected new allocation at 600 meters. I can't imagine contests in THAT band. Or...we could all just play by the contest rules and agreements. 73, Bill KU8H On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 18:22 -0800, Darrell Bellerive wrote: > Being unencumbered by knowledge of contest log reporting and checking > perhaps I am missing something. > > Since virtually all contest stations use automated logging programs > and these programs could get the actual transmit frequency directly > from the transceiver as the contact is logged, then why couldn't a log > check computer program simply check for non DX contacts within a DX window? > > I guess that would mean requiring an exact frequency rather than a > generic frequency to be submitted in the Cabrillo format, but > certainly that doesn't seem to hard to code into the logging program. > > I suppose this could even be crosschecked in the other station's log > to rule out computer errors. > > Apply penalties for a certain number of violations to allow for true > mistakes, but once above a certain limit, disqualification. > > I will crawl back under my rock now. > > 73, Darrell VA7TO > > Darrell Bellerive ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Hi Darrell, I have started wading into computer logging and I usually use paper. After the contest I enter the info into the computer but I plan to just have the computer running and do it one QSO at a time. None of my radios have any kind of CAT "feature". I do NOT want my radio to be smarter than me so they have to stay pretty dern stooopid. The logging programs let me enter the frequency I am using in whatever format I want AND just keep using the same info for each QSO until I change it. I would enter something like 160M or 1.8 (as in mc) but I could as easily put in 1.835001. Radios smarter than me can tell the computer where they are operating (maybe to the nearest 50 or 100 cycles. Checking for W/VE QSOs in the DX window would work for at least those stations with Baccalaureate radios. Any kind of policing of that nature would be encumbered with challenges and appeals processes and final results could take years. If CAT and computer logging become a requirement those of us without CAT or computer logging will be banned - de facto. Come to think of it my contest operation is already pretty low key. There are always the WARC bands and the expected new allocation at 600 meters. I can't imagine contests in THAT band. Or...we could all just play by the contest rules and agreements. 73, Bill KU8H On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 18:22 -0800, Darrell Bellerive wrote: > Being unencumbered by knowledge of contest log reporting and checking > perhaps I am missing something. > > Since virtually all contest stations use automated logging programs and > these programs could get the actual transmit frequency directly from the > transceiver as the contact is logged, then why couldn't a log check > computer program simply check for non DX contacts within a DX window? > > I guess that would mean requiring an exact frequency rather than a > generic frequency to be submitted in the Cabrillo format, but certainly > that doesn't seem to hard to code into the logging program. > > I suppose this could even be crosschecked in the other station's log to > rule out computer errors. > > Apply penalties for a certain number of violations to allow for true > mistakes, but once above a certain limit, disqualification. > > I will crawl back under my rock now. > > 73, Darrell VA7TO > > Darrell Bellerive ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
It does. Here's me with cabrillo format working herb & he was in the DX window. QSO: 1830 CW 2012-12-01 0323 KA1J 599 VP2V/AA7V 599 VP2-V QSO: 1833 CW 2012-12-01 0339 KA1J 599 KV4FZ 599 VI QSO: 1833 CW 2012-12-01 0342 KA1J 599 OL7M 599 OL Freq 1.833 for Herb KV4FZ Sorry for QRMing you when I got the OL... hehe Gary KA1J > Being unencumbered by knowledge of contest log reporting and checking > perhaps I am missing something. > > Since virtually all contest stations use automated logging programs > and these programs could get the actual transmit frequency directly > from the transceiver as the contact is logged, then why couldn't a log > check computer program simply check for non DX contacts within a DX > window? > > I guess that would mean requiring an exact frequency rather than a > generic frequency to be submitted in the Cabrillo format, but > certainly that doesn't seem to hard to code into the logging program. > > I suppose this could even be crosschecked in the other station's log > to rule out computer errors. > > Apply penalties for a certain number of violations to allow for true > mistakes, but once above a certain limit, disqualification. > > I will crawl back under my rock now. > > 73, Darrell VA7TO > > Darrell Bellerive > > On 12-12-05 12:25 PM, Gary Smith wrote: > > What I see as reasonable is to make operating in the DX window a > > penalty where when the test scores are sent in by cabrillo, those > > working the window would be identified. When the scores are sent in, > > the IP address is added to the x-header and simply going to > > http://aruljohn.com/track.pl and entering the IP will tell you where > > the senders location is. > > > > Make it known every QSO within that DX window from W/VE not working > > a DX station will have a punitive docking of points. If they have > > the guts to do this, there will quickly be a hole in the ether for > > DX to be heard. > > > > Gary > > KA1J > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Being unencumbered by knowledge of contest log reporting and checking perhaps I am missing something. Since virtually all contest stations use automated logging programs and these programs could get the actual transmit frequency directly from the transceiver as the contact is logged, then why couldn't a log check computer program simply check for non DX contacts within a DX window? I guess that would mean requiring an exact frequency rather than a generic frequency to be submitted in the Cabrillo format, but certainly that doesn't seem to hard to code into the logging program. I suppose this could even be crosschecked in the other station's log to rule out computer errors. Apply penalties for a certain number of violations to allow for true mistakes, but once above a certain limit, disqualification. I will crawl back under my rock now. 73, Darrell VA7TO Darrell Bellerive On 12-12-05 12:25 PM, Gary Smith wrote: What I see as reasonable is to make operating in the DX window a penalty where when the test scores are sent in by cabrillo, those working the window would be identified. When the scores are sent in, the IP address is added to the x-header and simply going to http://aruljohn.com/track.pl and entering the IP will tell you where the senders location is. Make it known every QSO within that DX window from W/VE not working a DX station will have a punitive docking of points. If they have the guts to do this, there will quickly be a hole in the ether for DX to be heard. Gary KA1J ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
Hi Milt, It sure helps me. I don't make any bones about new to 160. My antenna and my transmitter have been giving me a lot of grief so I have had only a few QSOs...maybe a couple dozen. I am not a "seasoned professional" on top band. I'm just an amateur. My license even says so (evil grin). So far when I have tried to get on the air, "reasonable amateur practice" has kept me out of serious trouble. Lots of listening and a query before using a "vacant" frequency. I know what a pileup sounds like so even if I can't hear the DX I know (s)he is around. It's helpful when in Rome to know what the Romans do. 73, Bill KU8H On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:55 -0700, Milt -- N5IA wrote: > Bill, > > As Peter has responded, there are two JA windows; 1810-1825 and > 1907.7-1912.5 . > > Until a few years ago the JA hams only had the upper 1907.7-1912.5 > allocation. Because the band was segmented in much of the world most > international contacts on 160 Meters were done split frequency. > > >From here in the USA the common method was for US stations to transmit in > the 1.820-1.830 area where their narrow band TX antennas were resonant and > listen for the JA stations in the above 1.9 MHZ JA allocation. The JA > stations would do the opposite, TXing above 1.9 and listening down low. > > The method of contacting each other was not random. When you CQed, you > added at the end the couple of digits that indicated where you were > listening in the other fellows band. For example, I would CQ CQ de N5IA > N5IA r83. What this meant to the JA stations that I was listening on > 1.908.3. We did this both for casual DXing and in the contests. > > Since the new, wider allocation to JA at the 1.810 to 1.825, to my knowledge > all contest contacts are done simplex in that portion of the spectrum. If > you want to work JA on 160 Meters you have to be within that window also. > > I don't know for a fact, but I suppose the above 1.9 MHZ allocation is > probably used by JA for local, in country contacts. Anyone out there know > how that portion of the spectrum is now used in JA? > > I hope this helps you and perhaps others, Bill. > > 73 and good evening de Milt, N5IA ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
Bill, As Peter has responded, there are two JA windows; 1810-1825 and 1907.7-1912.5 . Until a few years ago the JA hams only had the upper 1907.7-1912.5 allocation. Because the band was segmented in much of the world most international contacts on 160 Meters were done split frequency. From here in the USA the common method was for US stations to transmit in the 1.820-1.830 area where their narrow band TX antennas were resonant and listen for the JA stations in the above 1.9 MHZ JA allocation. The JA stations would do the opposite, TXing above 1.9 and listening down low. The method of contacting each other was not random. When you CQed, you added at the end the couple of digits that indicated where you were listening in the other fellows band. For example, I would CQ CQ de N5IA N5IA r83. What this meant to the JA stations that I was listening on 1.908.3. We did this both for casual DXing and in the contests. Since the new, wider allocation to JA at the 1.810 to 1.825, to my knowledge all contest contacts are done simplex in that portion of the spectrum. If you want to work JA on 160 Meters you have to be within that window also. I don't know for a fact, but I suppose the above 1.9 MHZ allocation is probably used by JA for local, in country contacts. Anyone out there know how that portion of the spectrum is now used in JA? I hope this helps you and perhaps others, Bill. 73 and good evening de Milt, N5IA -Original Message- From: Bill Cromwell Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 1:21 PM To: Milt -- N5IA Cc: Bill and Liz ; topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: DX WINDOW On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 11:47 -0700, Milt -- N5IA wrote: All JA stations worked called me on my Run frequencies within the 'JA Window'. CU all in the SPDC. 73 de Milt, N5IA, op at N7GP The JA window? 73, Bill KU8H ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 21:39 +0100, Peter Voelpel wrote: > 1810-1825 and 1907.7-1912.5 is allocated in Japan (CW only) > > 73 > Peter, DJ7WW Thank you Peter, That's useful information here. I now know how to stay out of the way AND... I know where to look for them. 73, Bill KU8H ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
1810-1825 and 1907.7-1912.5 is allocated in Japan (CW only) 73 Peter, DJ7WW -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Cromwell The JA window? ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
Dear TopBanders, My license says CW can be used from 1810 kHz up to the end of the band. However, no Phone modes are allowed below 1840 kHz. I am sure most European licenses are similar. IARU Region 1 bandplan says all modes between 1810 kHz and the upper end of the band - so let's talk ONLY about SSB in the CW portion and not the other way around. CW on 1875 kHz is legit. SSB on 1823 isn't. Monitoring an SSB contest needs human resources. "Three verifiable complaints" is not good enough, as it would lead to a very high number of "complaints". IMHO the organizers of the contest should appoint monitoring stations. The same should be applied on 40 meters, where QSX listening on 7015 - 7035 in CQWW was quite common... But let me provoke you: How many serious SSB contest on 160 meters? Two? Three? Why can't the mazochists contesting on 160 SSB have the whole band for 6 days in a year? 73 Steve HA0DU On 05/12/2012 21:01, Ian Wade G3NRW wrote: ___Original Message_ From: Tom W8JI Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 Time: 12:54:35 Without working together, we need the Government to make rules and impose penalties. Tom I'm not sure that Government intervention is a very good idea (it certainly wouldn't be in this country!), but you hit the nail fair and square on the head when you talk about penalties. The contest rule makers should get real tough about stations who persistently work in the "wrong" part of the bands during contests. In CW contests we've all heard CW signals stomping all over the phone end of the band. In phone contests we've all heard phone stations all over the bottom part of the band. In RTTY contests ... well, we all know what happens there. "Three verifiable complaints and you're out" should be the rule. With SDR receivers available these days, that shouldn't be too difficult to police. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
> "Three verifiable complaints and you're out" should be the rule. With > SDR receivers available these days, that shouldn't be too difficult to > police. > > -- > 73 > Ian, G3NRW I'm not so sure I like the 3 strikes policy. My reasoning is lets say some AH wanted for instance, to discredit stiff competition and pirated their call using it while intentionally create interference in the DX window. It wouldn't take long for this to disqualify that operator unfairly. What I see as reasonable is to make operating in the DX window a penalty where when the test scores are sent in by cabrillo, those working the window would be identified. When the scores are sent in, the IP address is added to the x-header and simply going to http://aruljohn.com/track.pl and entering the IP will tell you where the senders location is. Make it known every QSO within that DX window from W/VE not working a DX station will have a punitive docking of points. If they have the guts to do this, there will quickly be a hole in the ether for DX to be heard. Gary KA1J ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 11:47 -0700, Milt -- N5IA wrote: > > All JA stations worked called me on my Run frequencies within the 'JA > Window'. > > CU all in the SPDC. > > 73 de Milt, N5IA, op at N7GP > The JA window? 73, Bill KU8H ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
The dx window was useful when only the range 1832-1835kHz was allowed here. Nowadays we can use the whole spectrum starting at 1810kHz with some power limitations above 1850kHz (75W) and higher (10W from 1890). 73 Peter, DJ7WW -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Cromwell So what is this DX window? 1825 to 1830 kc? If that's where the DX calls and transmits then where do W/VE stations transmit in reply? 1820 to 1825? That's where I seem to hear W/VE stations calling CQ DX. I have at best a regional station and I am just looking for some ragchew QSOs when I am on the air. I have been dressed down for being stupid and calling CQ 1810 to 1820 because *everybody knows* there is no DX there. Duh...that's the whole point. Is that somebody else's version of some other window or just an arid desert? I already know where to not transmit to avoid W1AW. Too close to the band edge for my drifty Ranger anyway. So fill me in on where I should avoid looking for casual QSOs and where I should look. I'm happy to share the band and observe DX windows. 73, Bill KU8H ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
___Original Message_ From: Tom W8JI Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 Time: 12:54:35 Without working together, we need the Government to make rules and impose penalties. Tom I'm not sure that Government intervention is a very good idea (it certainly wouldn't be in this country!), but you hit the nail fair and square on the head when you talk about penalties. The contest rule makers should get real tough about stations who persistently work in the "wrong" part of the bands during contests. In CW contests we've all heard CW signals stomping all over the phone end of the band. In phone contests we've all heard phone stations all over the bottom part of the band. In RTTY contests ... well, we all know what happens there. "Three verifiable complaints and you're out" should be the rule. With SDR receivers available these days, that shouldn't be too difficult to police. -- 73 Ian, G3NRW > > > > > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
An examination of my log reveals the following: Of the true DX stations worked from my AZ operating location 16 stations called me on my Run frequencies over the two nights, and I found and worked 4 stations in the 'DX Window' between 1.830 and 1.835. I confess that I worked ONE each 5th District K station within the window during one of my sweeps of the band. Obviously I wasn't paying attention. My MO is to NOT work K/N/W/VE stations in the 'DX Window'. All JA stations worked called me on my Run frequencies within the 'JA Window'. CU all in the SPDC. 73 de Milt, N5IA, op at N7GP -Original Message- From: Bill and Liz Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 10:29 AM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: DX WINDOW FWIW, about half of the DX I worked in last weekend's contest was in the 1830-35 "window". I run only barefoot, and having some space where there are no big east coast CQ machines certainly helps the SOLP and QRP ops. I realize that many topband contesters have no use for LP or QRP; however, keeping in mind that the contests are for everyone, a little space for the little guys would be very nice. Of course, I don't think it's going to happen! BTW, it sure is fun creeping in under some of these CQ machines who, in many cases are alligators, and working DX. Sort of burns 'em up when you don't answer!! Bill VE3CSK/VE3NH ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
So there is confused information about DX windows and digital windows and callig windows and useless windows. Once upon a time there was something called "gentlemen's agreements" and the "DX window" was part of that. Most of us don't really let the ARRL dictate to us what we will or won't do. So we can ignore their lack of a DX window if we choose. I cannot control what other hams do on the air and I have no desire to do so (better things to to do). I'm sorry to hear that. Hams do better when they work for a common good, even if it doesn't serve what they feel like doing. Without working together, we need the Government to make rules and impose penalties. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Topband: DX WINDOW
FWIW, about half of the DX I worked in last weekend's contest was in the 1830-35 "window". I run only barefoot, and having some space where there are no big east coast CQ machines certainly helps the SOLP and QRP ops. I realize that many topband contesters have no use for LP or QRP; however, keeping in mind that the contests are for everyone, a little space for the little guys would be very nice. Of course, I don't think it's going to happen! BTW, it sure is fun creeping in under some of these CQ machines who, in many cases are alligators, and working DX. Sort of burns 'em up when you don't answer!! Bill VE3CSK/VE3NH ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
On Dec 5, 2012, at 8:42 AM, "Bill Cromwell" wrote: > > So what is this DX window? 1825 to 1830 kc? If that's where the DX calls > and transmits then where do W/VE stations transmit in reply? The idea is that W/VE stations do not call CQ in the window, but can respond to a DX station who is calling there. Respond on the DX frequency unless, of course the DX is working split. > That's where I seem to hear W/VE stations calling CQ DX. Yes, and that is part of the "problem" the DX window is trying to address. 73, Bob AA6VB > > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
It is much like billionaires making rules for the middle class and working poor. It's also like those who don't pay income tax deciding how much those who pay income taxes should pay and how those taxes are spent or those who don't own property determining how much those who own property should be taxed for that property for the benefit of others. However, since this is not a political science reflector the comments are off topic. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/5/2012 11:21 AM, Tom W8JI wrote: ...and that loss of the DX window is sadly, dear readers, why you will seldom hear DX stations outside of Europe and North America CQing on 160m in the CQ contests. Bit of a shame really, but that's (so-called) progress. I never understood, and never agreed with the "160 committee" abolishing the DX window. I thought it showed people with larger stations on the east coast have lost touch with life with smaller stations in difficult areas. It is much like billionaires making rules for the middle class and working poor. Certainly large stations on the coast have little or no use for a DX only area, but I can't imagine what possessed someone to think that was a good idea for people distant from saltwater paths. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
So there is confused information about DX windows and digital windows and callig windows and useless windows. Once upon a time there was something called "gentlemen's agreements" and the "DX window" was part of that. Most of us don't really let the ARRL dictate to us what we will or won't do. So we can ignore their lack of a DX window if we choose. I cannot control what other hams do on the air and I have no desire to do so (better things to to do). So what is this DX window? 1825 to 1830 kc? If that's where the DX calls and transmits then where do W/VE stations transmit in reply? 1820 to 1825? That's where I seem to hear W/VE stations calling CQ DX. I have at best a regional station and I am just looking for some ragchew QSOs when I am on the air. I have been dressed down for being stupid and calling CQ 1810 to 1820 because *everybody knows* there is no DX there. Duh...that's the whole point. Is that somebody else's version of some other window or just an arid desert? I already know where to not transmit to avoid W1AW. Too close to the band edge for my drifty Ranger anyway. So fill me in on where I should avoid looking for casual QSOs and where I should look. I'm happy to share the band and observe DX windows. 73, Bill KU8H ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
On 2012-12-05, at 11:33 AM, Lennart M wrote: > > Well, from a "DX perspective" I do not care much about band differenciation, > we do have equal distance to Far East and the Pacific as to SA, NA east > coast being close by and when 160 opens to NA west coast and KL7/KH6 they > are good enough to break thru any other pile, this is a Hobby Hi Len, Yes, for sure, but keep in mind that we're only talking about the setting aside of a mere FIVE KILOHERTZ of the band for this use! Now, a 5-KHz preserve may not mean much to a super NA CQ TEST machine, but it could mean all the difference in the world for making cross-continental QSOs for many---on BOTH sides of the signal path. ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
W8JI said: "I never understood, and never agreed with the "160 committee" abolishing the DX window. I thought it showed people with larger stations on the east coast have lost touch with life with smaller stations in difficult areas. It is much like billionaires making rules for the middle class and working poor. Certainly large stations on the coast have little or no use for a DX only area, but I can't imagine what possessed someone to think that was a good idea for people distant from saltwater paths." Well, from a "DX perspective" I do not care much about band differenciation, we do have equal distance to Far East and the Pacific as to SA, NA east coast being close by and when 160 opens to NA west coast and KL7/KH6 they are good enough to break thru any other pile, this is a Hobby, 73 all. Len SM7BIC ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
...and that loss of the DX window is sadly, dear readers, why you will seldom hear DX stations outside of Europe and North America CQing on 160m in the CQ contests. Bit of a shame really, but that's (so-called) progress. I never understood, and never agreed with the "160 committee" abolishing the DX window. I thought it showed people with larger stations on the east coast have lost touch with life with smaller stations in difficult areas. It is much like billionaires making rules for the middle class and working poor. Certainly large stations on the coast have little or no use for a DX only area, but I can't imagine what possessed someone to think that was a good idea for people distant from saltwater paths. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
That is exactly what I did. I bypassed the US/VE stations in there calling CQ. I felt they were being selfish and not part of the fun. Gary KA1J > A way to bring back the DX Window is to not work US stations who call > CQ in the window. Boycott them if you will. > > Dave WX7G > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
A way to bring back the DX Window is to not work US stations who call CQ in the window. Boycott them if you will. Dave WX7G ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX window
...and that loss of the DX window is sadly, dear readers, why you will seldom hear DX stations outside of Europe and North America CQing on 160m in the CQ contests. We 'search and pounce' and the loud Eu and NA superstations who can hold a frequency benefit. For those not blessed with a four-square or a big vertical and lots of watts (i.e. the vast majority), this means looking for us outside of a contest is the way. Bit of a shame really, but that's (so-called) progress. Vy 73 Steve, VK6VZ SNIP: "That so called dx window on 160m does not exist...It hasn't existed for many years." ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
So if the League is going to persist with this antiquated rule is someone at HQ writing down the calls of all the violators? Will there be disqualifications? 73/Jon AA1K On 12/1/2012 3:20 PM, Missouri Guy wrote: Carol, N2MM Rule 6.1 for the ARRL 160... "The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs only". Note that it says "should be". IMHO, following the suggestion just makes the contest more fun for everyone. Charlie, N0TT On Sat, 1 Dec 2012 00:54:30 -0500 "Carol Richards" writes: That so called dx window on 160m does not exist...It hasn't existed for many years. Carol ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
That´s mean SA-NA also or just NA/SA to EU? 73. Jorge CX6VM/CW5W -Mensaje original- De: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] En nombre de Missouri Guy Enviado el: sábado, 01 de diciembre de 2012 18:21 Para: n...@comcast.net; topband@contesting.com Asunto: Re: Topband: DX WINDOW Carol, N2MM Rule 6.1 for the ARRL 160... "The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs only". Note that it says "should be". IMHO, following the suggestion just makes the contest more fun for everyone. Charlie, N0TT On Sat, 1 Dec 2012 00:54:30 -0500 "Carol Richards" writes: > That so called dx window on 160m does not exist...It hasn't existed > for many years. > > > Carol > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
And, pray tell, how does a W or VE solicit "international QSOs" in that segment? IF (and I emphasize the IF) such a rule is desired, wouldn't it be smarter to have it read something along the lines of "Only non-W/VE stations may call CQ in the segment 1.830 to 1.835."? Bud, W2RU On Dec 1, 2012, at 2:38 PM, Tom Haavisto wrote: > From the contest rules: > > 6.1. The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs > only. ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
Carol, N2MM Rule 6.1 for the ARRL 160... "The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs only". Note that it says "should be". IMHO, following the suggestion just makes the contest more fun for everyone. Charlie, N0TT On Sat, 1 Dec 2012 00:54:30 -0500 "Carol Richards" writes: > That so called dx window on 160m does not exist...It hasn't existed > for many years. > > > Carol > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
Sam, remember the opposite can and is true. I called you near the beginning of this contest and you didn't hear me. Doug/VA5DX -Original Message- Spent whole night 2200z-0600z with 49 QSO's in the LOG. Find one moment free frequence to call CQ. 1 call back to me from VE. That's all. Full band 1800 KHz - 1880 kHz full of W/VE station's making QSO's each-other, they are very LOUD, but don't hear EU :( Maybe next night would be much more better!? Sam LY5W will be ready at 2130z 49 QSO, 23 section's, long list of station's called but not worked, called dozen of W5/W0 too with no luck ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
>From the contest rules: 6.1. The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs only. -- So, while the window might not "officially" exist, one is specifically mentioned in the rules. Tom - VE3CX On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:54 AM, Carol Richards wrote: > That so called dx window on 160m does not exist...It hasn't existed for many > years. > > > Carol > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
All, I agree that there should be a real 160M DX Window. At least we might hear some DX outside of NA/SA. My main reason I operate 160m is to work DX - its very challenging from the West Coast and requires good antennas and operating skills. And, I do realize that the the "ARRL 160M Contest" does not have the work "DX" in it, so like the ARRL 10m contest, we work anyone we hear. However, 10m is a large band with plenty of room to spread out. Perhaps the same can be said about 160m, but then you need and antenna that will cover 100 KHZ or more. Living in NA, this contest is turning into "another" domestic contest. I feel have enough of them? BTW, I do operate the other 160m DX contests, but expeditions like the 5T0 and 7P8 are not around very often. My 2 cents! Ray, N6VR Chino Valley, AZ On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Saulius Zalnerauskas wrote: > I'm feeling good. And lot of optimism for next night :) > Result in contest is not very interesting, I need only some states to > finish my WAS - 160m. From 5/7/0 area's. > W0SD (S.D.) was great s7-8 during few hour's, called many times, > but.K0HA (NE) not so strong but some s5-7. Heard him few times. > N8OO (LA) in morning hours s9 - worked only state-side,many many > call's. > VY2ZM and K3ZM those two biggest signals, over s9. > > Biggest signal's were 22-0145z. Later snow and QRM. About 04-05z all > station's dissapear. Only few BIG ONE's. > > 73, Sam LY5W > Vertical , BV, KW > > > On 12/1/12, Jim F. <> wrote: > > Hi Saulius, > > > > I know (almost) exactly how you feel :-) > > > > 73, > > > > jim / W1FMR / QRP. > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 12/1/12, Saulius Zalnerauskas <> wrote: > > > > > Spent whole night 2200z-0600z with 49 QSO's in the LOG. > > Find one moment free frequence to call CQ. 1 call back to me from VE. > > That's all. Full band 1800 KHz - 1880 kHz full of W/VE station's > > making QSO's each-other, they are very LOUD, but don't hear EU :( > > Maybe next night would be much more better!? > > > > Sam LY5W will be ready at 2130z > > 49 QSO, 23 section's, long list of station's called but not worked, > > called dozen of W5/W0 too with no luck > > > > On 12/1/12, Eddy Swynar <> wrote: > >> > >> On 2012-12-01, at 8:39 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> I personally think that the notion of keeping 1825 - 1830-KHz "clean" > of > >>> NA stations calling CQ is a good one... > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> Hi All, > >> > >> Obviously this "typo" was a test meant to see if anyone was awake > yet...! > >> Hi > >> Hi > >> > >> Of course I MEANT to say 1830- to 1835-KHz---but fat fingers (and a > >> skinny > >> mind) got in the way. > >> > >> Thanks go to Bert for keeping things on an even keel here... > >> > >> ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ > > ___ > > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > > > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
I'm feeling good. And lot of optimism for next night :) Result in contest is not very interesting, I need only some states to finish my WAS - 160m. From 5/7/0 area's. W0SD (S.D.) was great s7-8 during few hour's, called many times, but.K0HA (NE) not so strong but some s5-7. Heard him few times. N8OO (LA) in morning hours s9 - worked only state-side,many many call's. VY2ZM and K3ZM those two biggest signals, over s9. Biggest signal's were 22-0145z. Later snow and QRM. About 04-05z all station's dissapear. Only few BIG ONE's. 73, Sam LY5W Vertical , BV, KW On 12/1/12, Jim F. <> wrote: > Hi Saulius, > > I know (almost) exactly how you feel :-) > > 73, > > jim / W1FMR / QRP. > > > > --- On Sat, 12/1/12, Saulius Zalnerauskas <> wrote: > > Spent whole night 2200z-0600z with 49 QSO's in the LOG. > Find one moment free frequence to call CQ. 1 call back to me from VE. > That's all. Full band 1800 KHz - 1880 kHz full of W/VE station's > making QSO's each-other, they are very LOUD, but don't hear EU :( > Maybe next night would be much more better!? > > Sam LY5W will be ready at 2130z > 49 QSO, 23 section's, long list of station's called but not worked, > called dozen of W5/W0 too with no luck > > On 12/1/12, Eddy Swynar <> wrote: >> >> On 2012-12-01, at 8:39 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote: >> >>> >>> I personally think that the notion of keeping 1825 - 1830-KHz "clean" of >>> NA stations calling CQ is a good one... >>> >> >> >> >> Hi All, >> >> Obviously this "typo" was a test meant to see if anyone was awake yet...! >> Hi >> Hi >> >> Of course I MEANT to say 1830- to 1835-KHz---but fat fingers (and a >> skinny >> mind) got in the way. >> >> Thanks go to Bert for keeping things on an even keel here... >> >> ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
Hi Saulius, I know (almost) exactly how you feel :-) 73, jim / W1FMR / QRP. --- On Sat, 12/1/12, Saulius Zalnerauskas wrote: From: Saulius Zalnerauskas Subject: Re: Topband: DX WINDOW To: "Eddy Swynar" Cc: topband@contesting.com, "Carol Richards" Date: Saturday, December 1, 2012, 10:37 AM Spent whole night 2200z-0600z with 49 QSO's in the LOG. Find one moment free frequence to call CQ. 1 call back to me from VE. That's all. Full band 1800 KHz - 1880 kHz full of W/VE station's making QSO's each-other, they are very LOUD, but don't hear EU :( Maybe next night would be much more better!? Sam LY5W will be ready at 2130z 49 QSO, 23 section's, long list of station's called but not worked, called dozen of W5/W0 too with no luck On 12/1/12, Eddy Swynar <> wrote: > > On 2012-12-01, at 8:39 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote: > >> >> I personally think that the notion of keeping 1825 - 1830-KHz "clean" of >> NA stations calling CQ is a good one... >> > > > > Hi All, > > Obviously this "typo" was a test meant to see if anyone was awake yet...! Hi > Hi > > Of course I MEANT to say 1830- to 1835-KHz---but fat fingers (and a skinny > mind) got in the way. > > Thanks go to Bert for keeping things on an even keel here... > > ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
On Sat, 2012-12-01 at 10:20 -0500, Eddy Swynar wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Obviously this "typo" was a test meant to see if anyone was awake yet...! Hi
> Hi
>
> Of course I MEANT to say 1830- to 1835-KHz---but fat fingers (and a skinny
> mind) got in the way.
>
> Thanks go to Bert for keeping things on an even keel here...
>
> ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
Hi Eddy,
One problem I have is identifying a DX window. I have read several
different versions and if I live by all of them I will be transmitting
on 80 meters (evil grin). I also wouldn't promote interfering with any
QSO in progress even if it is just a DX station ('nuther evil grin). So
not having a clear, unanimous agreement on a "DX window" the best I can
do is listen (more than 2 seconds) for signs of life and then inquiring
before hollering. Even if I can't hear the DX I know what a pile sounds
like - a sure clue that DX is somewhere nearby.
Once upon a time an inquiry of whether the frequency is in use was two
quick dits. If a "c" came back it's in use. Much quicker than "QRL?"
followed by expletives and curses and name calling. I used that and
still do. If no "c" then I go to "QRL?" All of that preceded by some
listening time. If somebody IS using the frequency and can't reply
sometime during all of that.. well.. I'm going for it. That's my best
offer.
The Ranger needs some attention - again. QRT on 160 for the moment. Hope
to be up before the Stew.
73,
Bill KU8H
___
Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
Spent whole night 2200z-0600z with 49 QSO's in the LOG. Find one moment free frequence to call CQ. 1 call back to me from VE. That's all. Full band 1800 KHz - 1880 kHz full of W/VE station's making QSO's each-other, they are very LOUD, but don't hear EU :( Maybe next night would be much more better!? Sam LY5W will be ready at 2130z 49 QSO, 23 section's, long list of station's called but not worked, called dozen of W5/W0 too with no luck On 12/1/12, Eddy Swynar <> wrote: > > On 2012-12-01, at 8:39 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote: > >> >> I personally think that the notion of keeping 1825 - 1830-KHz "clean" of >> NA stations calling CQ is a good one... >> > > > > Hi All, > > Obviously this "typo" was a test meant to see if anyone was awake yet...! Hi > Hi > > Of course I MEANT to say 1830- to 1835-KHz---but fat fingers (and a skinny > mind) got in the way. > > Thanks go to Bert for keeping things on an even keel here... > > ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
On 2012-12-01, at 8:39 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote: > > I personally think that the notion of keeping 1825 - 1830-KHz "clean" of NA > stations calling CQ is a good one... > Hi All, Obviously this "typo" was a test meant to see if anyone was awake yet...! Hi Hi Of course I MEANT to say 1830- to 1835-KHz---but fat fingers (and a skinny mind) got in the way. Thanks go to Bert for keeping things on an even keel here... ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
On 2012-12-01, at 12:54 AM, Carol Richards wrote: > That so called dx window on 160m does not exist...It hasn't existed for many > years. Well FWIW, I personally think that the notion of keeping 1825 - 1830-KHz "clean" of NA stations calling CQ is a good one... We bemoan the fact that this contest is, in essence, just a "WAS" contest, or, "...Son of SS"---but what of the DX station that might enter this fray with the express purpose of working a new State, or two, but that can't be heard because of all of the CQ machines grinding away on the band...? The are few incentives for an overseas station to take part now as it is: why create another dis-incentive by turning a blind eye to all of the domestic "pollution" in that 5-KHz segment...? I enjoy tuning that segment myself, on the chance of hearing anything outside of the USA & Canada: if I do, I'll work them---then leave the window. It's the "gentlemanly" thing to do, IMHO...! ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Topband: DX WINDOW
The DX window (most unfortunately) does not exist for normal operation. It does however exist for the ARRL 160m contest: "6. Miscellaneous: 6.1. The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental QSOs only." 73 Roger VE3ZI PS: Sorry, but those needing ONN will have to chase VE3CX. I tried, but just couldn't stand it ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX WINDOW
If it doesn't exist thats because some stateside people stopped using it and the DX didn't. But whatever it is called that doesn't exist, that's where I found all my multipliers except one. Gary KA1J > That so called dx window on 160m does not exist...It hasn't existed > for many years. > > > Carol > ___ > Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com > ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Topband: DX WINDOW
That so called dx window on 160m does not exist...It hasn't existed for many years. Carol ___ Topband reflector - topband@contesting.com
Re: Topband: DX Window
While my humble station & mediocre efforts in the various Topband contests hardly matter much, I try & make it a point to stay off of those "window frequencies", unless I'm responding directly to a DX station that I might hear thereon...>>> I think most contests prohibit or frown upon NA stations CQing in the DX Window. This should also include the keying or spurious sidebands of those stations. Nothing wrong with answering the DX, but I think most 160 contests prohibit or discourage CQ's. ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: DX Window
On 2012-08-31, at 10:12 AM, Hardy Landskov wrote: > This is the reason I don't contest on 160 anymore. No DX window and endless > CQ machines turn the band into just a trashy mess. Hi Guys, While my humble station & mediocre efforts in the various Topband contests hardly matter much, I try & make it a point to stay off of those "window frequencies", unless I'm responding directly to a DX station that I might hear thereon... It annoys me---for all the old & passe reasons, I guess!---to hear North American CQ Test powerhouse machines cranking endlessly away, atop both DX & domestic stations in the segment struggling to work one another. There's plenty of space to "park & bark" elsewhere on the band, irregardless of the 5-KHz wide "sacrifice", IMHO... ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: DX Window
This is the reason I don't contest on 160 anymore. No DX window and endless CQ machines turn the band into just a trashy mess. N7RT - Original Message - From: "Tom W8JI" To: ; Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 6:10 PM Subject: Re: Topband: DX Window Out west in flyover country we rue the day. Tom is spot on. I too stay out of 30-35 for CQing so my western brethren can potentially hear something. Very unfortunate to have the 30-35 window, which many DX stations use, clobbered by a very few thoughtless W CQ'ers. I didn't realize recognition of the window is a has been. Out here, not the case. This was done a long time ago. I'd bet the different experiences of east coast stations dominated the decision to get rid of the "no USA transmit" DX window. Strong signals near DX is much less of a problem out east. ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: DX Window
And I bet its mostly evident there. As I said, out here many still observe the window, or think it surely should be. 73 Art K6XT~~ Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiasm. ARRL, GMCC, CW OPS, NAQCC On 8/30/2012 7:10 PM, Tom W8JI wrote: Out west in flyover country we rue the day. Tom is spot on. I too stay out of 30-35 for CQing so my western brethren can potentially hear something. Very unfortunate to have the 30-35 window, which many DX stations use, clobbered by a very few thoughtless W CQ'ers. I didn't realize recognition of the window is a has been. Out here, not the case. This was done a long time ago. I'd bet the different experiences of east coast stations dominated the decision to get rid of the "no USA transmit" DX window. Strong signals near DX is much less of a problem out east. ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: DX Window
Out west in flyover country we rue the day. Tom is spot on. I too stay out of 30-35 for CQing so my western brethren can potentially hear something. Very unfortunate to have the 30-35 window, which many DX stations use, clobbered by a very few thoughtless W CQ'ers. I didn't realize recognition of the window is a has been. Out here, not the case. This was done a long time ago. I'd bet the different experiences of east coast stations dominated the decision to get rid of the "no USA transmit" DX window. Strong signals near DX is much less of a problem out east. ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: DX Window
Out west in flyover country we rue the day. Tom is spot on. I too stay out of 30-35 for CQing so my western brethren can potentially hear something. Very unfortunate to have the 30-35 window, which many DX stations use, clobbered by a very few thoughtless W CQ'ers. I didn't realize recognition of the window is a has been. Out here, not the case. 73 Art K6XT~~ Allison, southwest CO Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiasm. ARRL, GMCC, CW OPS, NAQCC On 8/30/2012 5:13 PM, W8JI wrote: I try to stay above 1835 or below 25 as much as possible, because I think removing that clear area was a bad idea for stations distant from the coast, who have to listen through the NE wall. ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
