Quoting Paul Kelley N1BUG <paul.kelley.n1bug@gmail.com>:
> Psst! Shhhh! The activity up there is a well kept secret! ;-) Most NA
> ops haven't figured out I'm not only making many contest Q's but also
> working new DXCC entities above 1850 in this contest... less QRM, fewer
> pileups, plenty of DX.
OK That does it! Mea Maxima Culpa! I suffered with a low Q rate because I
screwed up by respecting the Band Plan and not operating on 1.868! Right?
Please, please, please be carefull in the advocacy of spreading the contest
across the topband. Watch what you ask for as certainly one of those old fogy
midwest AM-ers will decide he has been offended and his territory infringe
upon.
It could end up quickly with him and his gang retaliating big time down the
band...and we may end up with no useable DX segment at all during contests.
My point is, if thousands of contest contacts during countless contests have
taken place from 3.500 to 3.525 over the years. Why isn't the voluntary topband
gentlemens agreement alocation sufficient?
Or maybe next year I should try 1995KHz and hope someone spots me up there.
Isn't the efficiency of my antenna better? Some OT's used to claim that there
was a automatic built-in 2db DX skip propagation enhancement on 1999.5 KHz over
1800.5KHz. Just like working Japan on 1.910 several decades ago there were
claims of beter propagation with smaller antennas..but then it was not just
limited frequencies, ersatz equipment (compared to today) and simple Marconi
antennas alone back then, remember we were also fighting megawatt Loran
services around the globe. A diode variable shunt 1N34A noise blanker was all
that I had back in the 50's. Look what is on the table in front of you today!
I bet it beats the pants of my S-40B!
73
Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
|