Bill,
One of Chen's earlier comments closed with essentially - do it (a contest)
and then we would have data. I think that was early on the best point of
this exchange.
Having a RTTY contest on 160m one time would determine, in a single weekend,
answers to all these points of debate - the impact of MP, the ability to
catch some DX, how much interference there is with other Q activity, and
most of all - allow the actual participation interest to be determined
empirically.
73/jeff/ac0c
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 10:30 AM
To: <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] 160m in RTTY Contests
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 15:37:14 -0000, "John Barber GW4SKA" <ska@bartg.org.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>A separate 160 RTTY contest has a different debate. I suspect it would
>>have
>>an almost exclusive North American entry ......
>
> REPLY:
>
> Yes, I understand 160 meters is prohibited or restricted in many
> countries, but
> having a contest would be one more reason to pressure the licensing
> authorities
> to grant those privileges. The single greatest reason to prohibit -
> Loran - is
> gone everywhere, isn't it? At least I don't hear it anymore. Are there
> other
> reasons these countries prohibit operation?
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|