CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Split operation in CQ WW CW

To: "Pete Smith N4ZR" <n4zr@contesting.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Split operation in CQ WW CW
From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Reply-to: Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 12:57:58 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> the ruck without anyone having to send "up one" or whatever.  I'm sure
> Bob was talking about the up 5 splits, not something within 300 Hz or so.

What is the difference in spectrum used if the pile is 500 Hz up, or 5000 Hz 
up?

The spectrum used is dependent on the bandwidth of the signals and the 
spread around a second frequency, not how far away the second frequency 
is.......once it does not overlap the TX channel width.

There might be a logical reason I'm missing. I'm trying to understand the 
"ruckus" about a 5 kHz split wasting space, when the same exact space is 
used with a 2 kHz split or a 1 kHz split.

If the split is 5 kHz and the stations using that split have emission 
confined within 500 Hz, they use an extra 500 Hz over single frequency. If 
the split is 1 kHz, they still use an extra 500 Hz.  The use is at a 
different spot, but still extracts exactly the same total spectrum from 
other use.

If someone is at 7.005 and working simplex and most people have all 
emissions within 500 Hz of width (+ - 250 Hz) they use 500 Hz from 7.00475 
to 7.00525 kHz. If they listen up 500 Hz, they simply move that 500 Hz slice 
up the band from 7.00525 to 7.00575 kHz.

If they move it 5 kHz or 100 kHz up the band, they still "hog" the same 
total space.

I'm trying to figure out what people are trying to say, because it has 
nothing to do with the split distance once it is all outside the one 
transmit channel width.

73 Tom

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>