VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] 2 meters

To: VHFcontesting@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] 2 meters
From: Keith Morehouse <w9rm@calmesapartners.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:12:40 -0600
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Josh - remember, CW is allowed ANYWHERE in ANY BAND.  Changing trhe
CW-only portion of 2M would not effect any other operations.

I enjoy CW operation, utilize it all the time and wish more ops would
discover the huge signal/noise advantage.  But, the 2M band below
144.100 is a vast wasteland here and hardly ever used.

Jay W9RM


On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Joshua M. Arritt <jarritt@vt.edu> wrote:
> I'll second support for putting some band plan on the digital activities.
> This is a good suggestion to avoid congestion.
>
> Re: putting CW activity down low ....  I really enjoy and take QRP-advantage
> of the present CW/SSB co-habitation on 2m, .170-.230 and higher freq.bands.
> Seems to help the Q-count, even out of contest. Most ops I encounter have no
> trouble working, or working around CW.
>
> Conversely on 6m, that CW/SSB mode segregation (50.070-'.100; and
> 50.130-'.180) is rather advantageous to the humble QRP op in hot-hot Es.  I
> enjoy working below 50.100 in contests when the action is high.
>
>
> 73,
>  - Josh / KF4YLM
>
>
>
>
> On 1/27/2014 12:21 PM, Paul Decker wrote:
>>
>> Hi Herb,
>> I like it, but I usually see EME stations running from 144.10 to 144.155,
>> quite a number of the mid west EME stations seem to be fixed on 144.145 or
>> so, perhaps this is where their antennas perform best.
>>
>> Additionally, in our area, there are many non digital voice SSB stations
>> running from 144.130 and up, this causes havoc with the weak signal
>> especially when they are running legal limit and pushing their amplifiers
>> beyond their limits.
>>
>> Just my $0.02
>> Paul
>> kg7hf
>>
>>
>>
>>         ----- Original Message -----  From: Herb Krumich
>> <wa2fgk@yahoo.com>  To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com  Sent: Mon, 27 Jan 2014
>> 17:01:33 -0000 (UTC)  Subject: [VHFcontesting] 2 meters   I would like to
>> throw this around and see what others might feel about my idea.  As everyone
>> knows, our six meter band is segmented and we know exactly what mode to use
>> and where. The last several years have been very effective when we go below
>> 50.100 to do CW, and move up to do digital near 50.260. All SSB contacts are
>> between 50.127 and 50.180, unless the band is open. EME is done around
>> 50.200  Now lets talk about two meters. Most SSB activity is from 144.170
>> through 144.230. Rovers hang out a bit higher.  This past contest, there was
>> quite a mix up in the lower area. Stations trying to do scatter while others
>> were trying to do EME. It can't work. The sequences are totally different
>> and you can't work both modes in the same area.   Most digital EME is
>> between 144.110 and 144.130. I totally s
>
> ug
>>
>>   gest using that area for EME and from 144.135 to 155 for scatter FSK.
>> Everyone will be in the same sequence, and contacts will be made QRM free.
>> On FSK stations to the east always transmit second, so you would have no QRM
>> from other local stations.  As for CW. I am told by some that it's an old
>> mode no longer used.  I don't buy it. If we would all go to the same area,
>> your grid totals would swell. We have below 100 on two meters to enjoy some
>> nice long distant contacts. It's being done on six meters, why not two
>> meters. I suggest 144.080 to 144.100 to do battle. No SSB splatter and
>> plenty of filters on our radios to make some great contacts.  If a plan is
>> gotten, I believe our enjoyment of the two meter band will be doubled  Let's
>> throw it up in the air.   Herb K2LNS  Stn mgr for the WA2FGK station
>> _______________________________________________  VHFcontesting mailing list
>> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>> _______________________________________________
>> VHFcontesting mailing list
>> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

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