Missed this the first time through ...

QRM to the non-contester, but a 1 kHz pileup for N6YIH/7 is not?

??? A pileup for YIH???? We're not THAT desperate, are we?





---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Voicenet WebMail.
http://www.voicenet.com/webmail/

Let me put my two cents' worth in here ...

I think there's a big difference between a major contest (Field Day, Sweepstakes, etc) and
the TDW in terms of the amount of activity that will be generated. I doubt if the (at
most) 75 of us will generate much traffic at all, in comparison to the rest of the hams on
the bands.

Given that, I doubt if anyone would care very much if there are a few folks calling "CQ
070" on any band, 30m included. As long as there aren't ten signals in a row, all sounding
the same (like in the Rumble a few weeks ago), it probably won't even be obvious that
we're running a contest.

There's actually very little difference between calling "CQ 070" and "CQ RSARS", for
example. (I remember a few months ago wishing that one Scotland station would call a
general CQ, instead of being so restrictive.)

Finally, there's nothing to stop any of us (short of equipment limitations--hi) from
calling a general CQ on any band at all. If you get an 070er in response, great--that QSO
counts. If it's not one of "us," then a short QSO with someone else won't take much time.
(I know that at least two of my QSOs during the Rumble were with non-contesting DX
stations. I held a short, pleasant QSO, and then put them in the log. The info they
transmitted included more than enough for the required exchange, and I DIDN'T say "that's
enough--I just need your name for the contest." I didn't work anyone, though, who
specifically said "no contesters.")

Just my thoughts ....

Steve
W3HF

Subj: RE: contesting on the WARC bands
Date: 5/9/2001 6:15:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: sford@... (Ford, Steve, WB8IMY)
To: N3DQU@... ('N3DQU@... ')

Jay:

There is a general agreement in the contest community (and all ARRL contests
adhere to the agreement)that the WARC bands should be off-limits to
contesting. This prohibition has been respected ever since the WARC bands
were opened for amateur use. The idea is to set aside spectrum for
non-contesters that would be free of interference even during the most
popular contests.

73 . . . Steve Ford, WB8IMY
QST Editor

Above is the official word from Newington re contesting on the WARC bands.
There is a thread on this topic at contesting.com that you may want to read
up on btw,
as there is/was some discussion going on as to whether the WARC bands should
be
reserved as sacred ground for the non-contester. From what I read there, the
ARRL
actually allowed Field Day contacts on the WARC bands at one time, but has
since
changed the rules.
Here are some thoughts on the subject from this end. Personally, I think
the WARC
bands are sorely underused and at a time when the commercial interests are
doing a
smash and grab for every bit of spectrum they can get their hands on,
Newington should
be promoting activity on underused bands, not chasing activity away. If some
big
communications conglomerate had their eye on 17m for some planned system for
example,
don't you think the ARRL would suddenly be forced to change their position on
this subject
and yell "QST everybody QSY to 17m contesters included" to show them how
important this
band is to the hamming community? You bet your Aunt Martha's socks they would!
Secondly, I would like to point out that altho contesting is not done on
the WARC
bands, the DXCC does encourage dx-peditions to go there by giving country
credit for
stations worked on those bands. So why is a 10 kHz pileup for Spratly Island
acceptable
QRM to the non-contester, but a 1 kHz pileup for N6YIH/7 is not?
And finally, I would like to note that altho some members of PODXS are
also members
of the ARRL (myself included), the Penn-Ohio DX Society is not affiliated
with the ARRL, never
has been and never will. Nothing against the ARRL mind you (well....), but
when we organized
PODXS we set it up purposely as an independent ham club, so that we could
steer our own
course, not to be subject to the whims and caprices of others.
So is contesting on the WARC bands illegal? No!
Is it against the current practice of the ham radio community? Yes!
Would we get into trouble if we held the TDW on the WARC bands? No!
Your thoughts on this topic greatly apprecated. If it appears that there is
much anxiety against
holding the TDW on the WARC bands, then we can change the rules. A member
survey might
be in order. Consider this however....
THE TDW COULD BE THE BOSTON TEA PARTY OF HAM RADIO! Jay, N3DQU.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
070-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Voicenet WebMail.
http://www.voicenet.com/webmail/

Subj: RE: contesting on the WARC bands
Date: 5/9/2001 6:15:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: sford@... (Ford, Steve, WB8IMY)
To: N3DQU@... ('N3DQU@... ')

Jay:

There is a general agreement in the contest community (and all ARRL contests
adhere to the agreement)that the WARC bands should be off-limits to
contesting. This prohibition has been respected ever since the WARC bands
were opened for amateur use. The idea is to set aside spectrum for
non-contesters that would be free of interference even during the most
popular contests.

73 . . . Steve Ford, WB8IMY
QST Editor

Above is the official word from Newington re contesting on the WARC bands.
There is a thread on this topic at contesting.com that you may want to read
up on btw,
as there is/was some discussion going on as to whether the WARC bands should
be
reserved as sacred ground for the non-contester. From what I read there, the
ARRL
actually allowed Field Day contacts on the WARC bands at one time, but has
since
changed the rules.
Here are some thoughts on the subject from this end. Personally, I think
the WARC
bands are sorely underused and at a time when the commercial interests are
doing a
smash and grab for every bit of spectrum they can get their hands on,
Newington should
be promoting activity on underused bands, not chasing activity away. If some
big
communications conglomerate had their eye on 17m for some planned system for
example,
don't you think the ARRL would suddenly be forced to change their position on
this subject
and yell "QST everybody QSY to 17m contesters included" to show them how
important this
band is to the hamming community? You bet your Aunt Martha's socks they would!
Secondly, I would like to point out that altho contesting is not done on
the WARC
bands, the DXCC does encourage dx-peditions to go there by giving country
credit for
stations worked on those bands. So why is a 10 kHz pileup for Spratly Island
acceptable
QRM to the non-contester, but a 1 kHz pileup for N6YIH/7 is not?
And finally, I would like to note that altho some members of PODXS are
also members
of the ARRL (myself included), the Penn-Ohio DX Society is not affiliated
with the ARRL, never
has been and never will. Nothing against the ARRL mind you (well....), but
when we organized
PODXS we set it up purposely as an independent ham club, so that we could
steer our own
course, not to be subject to the whims and caprices of others.
So is contesting on the WARC bands illegal? No!
Is it against the current practice of the ham radio community? Yes!
Would we get into trouble if we held the TDW on the WARC bands? No!
Your thoughts on this topic greatly apprecated. If it appears that there is
much anxiety against
holding the TDW on the WARC bands, then we can change the rules. A member
survey might
be in order. Consider this however....
THE TDW COULD BE THE BOSTON TEA PARTY OF HAM RADIO! Jay, N3DQU.