The 160 m Band Plan was only fairly recently formalised in Australia, a
decade or so ago.
We have 1800 - 1875 kHz, with the CW sub-band 1810 - 1840 kHz.
The digital narrow band modes seem to have established themselves on 1838
here with no great problems, but there are few users of the band he
operating events (eg: contests).
73 JEFF K1ZM/VY2ZM
-----Original Message-
From: Ed Sawyer
To: topband
Sent: Wed, Nov 29, 2017 7:44 pm
Subject: Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
I'm sorry but I don't buy the argument that the way to be a "gentleman" is
to accept everyone else's inte
likely) create a lot of food fights going forward.
>> At the end of the day - we must respect that 160M is a most UNUSUAL band and
>> there are no really HARD ans FAST inviolate sub-bands in the traditional
>> sense that we find on the higher bands.
>> Personally - I
ting events (eg: contests).
73 JEFF K1ZM/VY2ZM
-Original Message-
From: Ed Sawyer
To: topband
Sent: Wed, Nov 29, 2017 7:44 pm
Subject: Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
I'm sorry but I don't buy the argument that the way to be a "gentleman" is
to accept everyone else&
UAL band
> and there are no really HARD ans FAST inviolate sub-bands in the
> traditional sense that we find on the higher bands.
>
>
> Personally - I am not an FT8 user - but I respect the rights of others to
> use this new mode. We cannot hold back technology here - that ne
rstand the need to be FLEXIBLE - especially during
competitive operating events (eg: contests).
73 JEFF K1ZM/VY2ZM
-Original Message-
From: Ed Sawyer
To: topband
Sent: Wed, Nov 29, 2017 7:44 pm
Subject: Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
I'm sorry but I don't buy the argument t
My two cents is - at least with FT8 so far 99.99 percent of the folks stay in
the 2 - 3 khz segment .
I am amazed I see virtually nothing about the proliferation of 3 khz wideband
digital two way hash on all HF bands . For instance last night on the ZA1WW on
3536 , it covered both the ZA and
KH7XS/K4XS
-Original Message-
From: Greg
To: 'topband'
Sent: Wed, Nov 29, 2017 7:26 pm
Subject: Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
Jeez -- enough already...how difficult is it to avoid 2.5 khz of bandwidth
that is not even in the DX portion of the band! Leave FT8 alone and fight
the QRM below
Hi Ed,
Being a gentleman isn't not about putting one's own interests ahead of
everybody else, either.
73,
Bill KU8H
On 11/29/2017 11:47 AM, Ed Sawyer wrote:
I'm sorry but I don't buy the argument that the way to be a "gentleman" is
to accept everyone else's interests above your own. A "ge
oun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ed Sawyer
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 11:23 AM
To: 'Greg'; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
You should ask that question on the FT8 users group actually. There is an
interest group that is wanting to use the frequency for a shor
-Original Message-
From: Greg [mailto:n...@windstream.net]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 12:44 PM
To: sawye...@earthlink.net
Subject: RE: Topband: FT8 qrm
Just because you have the right to be on a frequency, if you know another
interest group wants to use it and it has become that group&#
To me, the reality is FT8 is no matter how
someone spins it, using a tiny part of the
spectrum. A reality is few there are using
power with FT8, my Cook Island contact
with FT8 was with something like 40 or so
watts and to many using FT8, that is high
power.
As I see it, here's what'll happe
This is Joe Taylor K1JTs description of how WSJT-X default
frequencies (windows) are established:
"The authors of WSJT, MAP65, WSPR, and WSJT-X have never attempted to
impose standards for operating frequencies of our various modes.
Sometimes we have made initial suggestions, usually with IARU
band [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tim Shoppa
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 7:53 AM
To: Wes Stewart
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
You don�t understand how the FT8 guys work. They have a 2kHz slice they all
work in whether they were there firs
e. 73,
Greg-N4CC
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ed Sawyer
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 9:48 AM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
I'm sorry but I don't buy the argument that the way to be a "gen
>>established band usage
Out of curiosity, exactly who "established" 1840 + 2.5 KHz as the FT8
"window"?
Mark K3MSB
On Nov 29, 2017 12:04 PM, "Brian D G3VGZ"
wrote:
I shall be operating this weekend full legal limit *below* 1837.5 CW, and
also FT*/JT65/JT9 at up to the legal limit above 1838.
I shall be operating this weekend full legal limit *below* 1837.5 CW, and
also FT*/JT65/JT9 at up to the legal limit above 1838. There's no reason
both can't co-exist. It should be a rule in contests that all stations
deliberately operatimg out of the established band usage to be disqualified.
I re
I'm sorry but I don't buy the argument that the way to be a "gentleman" is
to accept everyone else's interests above your own. A "gentleman" is
respectful of others and treats others as he/she wants to be treated.
No one owns a frequency channel at least in the US - read your license.
If I
I think you are missing the larger issue here. It is not *just* 2.5 Khz
out of 1800-2000.
Consider that many folks have directional antennas that are cut for the
lower part of the band - typically covering 1800-1860 at best. So - that
2.5 Khz starts to represent at least 4 percent of the availab
I've been watching this thread with interest, having recently taken the
plunge and experimented with FT8 (but got bored very quickly!). Three
comments on aspects that I don't think have been covered:
1. FT8 is very new (albeit it seems to be taking the world by storm) and I
suspect many operators
I think we may be missing a key point...There are probably many 1000’s of
160m cw/ssb ops out there who have never heard –or heard of- FT8. They
probably think the noisy tone they hear is some local QRN and don’t relate
it at all to another ham signal. We all have to live with some QRM once in a
Jeez -- enough already...how difficult is it to avoid 2.5 khz of bandwidth
that is not even in the DX portion of the band! Leave FT8 alone and fight
the QRM below 1835. 73, Greg-N4CC
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
make it a better experience for all.
...Dave - N9FN
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Walker
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 9:58 AM
To: Bill Cromwell
Cc: topband
Subject: Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
Yes, you could and should.
It nee
Perhaps I shouldn't have started this thread!
The whole point of my original posting was that I was definitely transmitting
more than 500Hz HF of the FT8 tones, so from an 'analogue' perspective there
should have been no problem. As others have mentioned, FT8 is received though
an SSB bandwid
Yes, you could and should.
It needs to be looked from everyone's point of view.
Of course, that deal falls apart for the 20m sstv guys. They own the
frequency.
Mike
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Bill Cromwell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Well...we could look at who was on first from the CW op's poin
Hi,
Well...we could look at who was on first from the CW op's point of view
just as easily. It just depends on who's ox is being gored. As for not
listening longer than a few seconds after QRL that is just reasonable.
Some of us (me for example) listen around for five or ten minutes
*before*
Tim is correct.
Also, when you do operate most digital modes today (FT8, RTTY, JT65, etc),
it is 50/50 if you even have the volume turned up as you are focusing on
the waterfall. Heck, even when I do RTTY, I usually just watch the cross
hairs on the simulated scope since that is the way I grew wi
You don’t understand how the FT8 guys work. They have a 2kHz slice they all
work in whether they were there first or not by usual CW practice. They only
transmit every 30 seconds and no CW operator is gonna wait a whole 30 seconds
for a response to QRL?. Not that a FT8 guy can respond to a QRL
My scenario had the CW man on the frequency FIRST.
On 11/29/2017 4:54 AM, Tim Shoppa wrote:
A typical CW guy will hear FT8 or JT65 as a kinda whiny wobbly intermittent
carrier. And will probably think it’s just some neighborhood switching power
supply noise. He won’t CQ right on top of it (bec
A typical CW guy will hear FT8 or JT65 as a kinda whiny wobbly intermittent
carrier. And will probably think it’s just some neighborhood switching power
supply noise. He won’t CQ right on top of it (because he wants to hear a DX
respondent) but he will have no problem firing up 500 Hz away.
But
Subject: Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
So what's the protocol when a CW man checks a frequency, hears nothing, sends a
couple of QRL? and hears nothing and begins to run stations. Then sometime
later a guy running an imaginary mode...oops...sorry, FT8 shows up and wants to
park on the CW man's
So what's the protocol when a CW man checks a frequency, hears nothing, sends a
couple of QRL? and hears nothing and begins to run stations. Then sometime
later a guy running an imaginary mode...oops...sorry, FT8 shows up and wants to
park on the CW man's frequency? Who is to blame? I'll answ
alf of John Randall via
Topband
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 2:25:52 AM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: FT8 qrm
Roger,Its the old problem with contests, where people are so eager to get that
piece of paper, that they will operate across the whole band and even out of
band i
Roger,Its the old problem with contests, where people are so eager to get that
piece of paper, that they will operate across the whole band and even out of
band in many cases. The big issue is whether contests are now even worth the
effort, what with the ability to cheat ever greater by using we
34 matches
Mail list logo
