That plus the bandwidth of 160M antennas were probably taken into account in
the decision to put it at 1.840. Moving the FT8 frequency much higher would
shut a lot of the CW guys that like both modes.
73,
Bill WE5P
Comfortably Numb
> On Oct 9, 2020, at 19:48, Mail 10 wrote:
>
> I rarely
I rarely see CW activity much above 1830 kHz. The only issue I see from
time to time is SSB interference to the 1840 kHz FT8 channel.
VK band is 1800 - 1875 kHz. If a particular mode were moved above 1900
kHz, some here would miss out. We would have to do what JA FT8 ops did
until recently
In Region 1 there is no 160m band above 1900 for most countries.
1840 is a good place, it only takes 2.5kHz of spectrum.
Anyway as there are no cw stations at all most of the 160m band is not
used most of the time.
I did try to cq on cw some weeks ago when I did have holidays but no
I enjoy low band dxing and contesting. And have an above average set up. All
that said, I get on when I want.or not. Last I checked ham radio is still a
hobby not an obligation. Re FT8: My only gripe is its location on 1840. PLENTY
of room above 1900 so it wouldn't interfere with other
Hi allI been calling CQ on cw but the QRM is pretty high here at my QTH,i
workfew USA stations,I like cw and also digital modes so when is to much qrmon
the cw portion i operate FT8 with very good results. Using an invertedL antenna
and running 20 watts i been working USA, SOUTH and
QRN still at summer levels here in Ohio.
Has been especially bad with the storms
that have passed thru the south. The lightning
static from them is single hop to most of the
eastern US.
de K8RYU
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Sorry guys, I thought I posted the following about a month ago. Must be a long
delay echo on the 160 reflector!
Tom G3OLB
Just to say that I wholeheartedly endorse Roger's comments on repeat 160 metre
contacts. We are not all certificate hunters and many are only too happy to
rag-chew. In 58
Subject: Topband: 160 activity
From: topband@contesting.com
I made a point when I was operating W1AW/8 to try to work 160 phone a
few times.
The QSO rate was low compared to 20, but I think I made a lot of people
happy, at least based on the comments I got, and for a QSO party, I
thought
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 04:33:36 -0700 James Rodenkirch
rodenkirch_...@msn.com writes:
Agree, Larry, with all of your points . but.just where ARE
other ops, like you, who subscribe to the position that having a
15 second QSO on 160 is a good thing?
I have never been a fan of the 15
I made a point when I was operating W1AW/8 to try to work 160 phone a
few times.
The QSO rate was low compared to 20, but I think I made a lot of people
happy, at least based on the comments I got, and for a QSO party, I
thought that was the point.
A contest is a different kettle of fish
10 matches
Mail list logo
