Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change

To: Jon Zaimes <jz73@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change
From: Tim Shoppa <tshoppa@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 10:56:02 -0400
List-post: <mailto:topband@contesting.com>
I think the 1.830-1.835 rule had been removed and reinstated at least once
before (maybe back in the 90's?). While the ARRL contest portal is great,
I'm not sure where to find archived copies of rules for previous years. I
have a query out to the ARRL contest desk but maybe the 160 experts here
had more insight.

I investigated the Dec 2019 ARRL 160 public logs, and while there was more
intercontinental activity in 1.830-1.835 than several other segments, it
was never more than 20% of the logged QSO's on those frequencies.

In several past years, I had the most success running EU by CQ'ing very
high in the band (even above 1.860) where NA QRM was less. To misquote Yogi
Berra, "Nobody CQ's for DX in DX Window anymore. It's too crowded!"

Tim N3QE

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 10:43 AM Jon Zaimes <jz73@verizon.net> wrote:

> Interesting Tim.
>
> November QST came in a few days ago, and the summary of rules in there
> says "1.830-1.835 MHz should be used for intercontinental contacts only."
>
> Dropping that rule was long overdue so glad to see it stated in the rules
> online.
>
> 73/Jon AA1K
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Shoppa <tshoppa@gmail.com>
> To: topBand List <topband@contesting.com>
> Sent: Thu, Oct 22, 2020 9:35 am
> Subject: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change
>
> Also as I review this years ARRL 160M rules...
>
> An earlier version of the rules (current in 2012) here
>
> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Contest%20Rules%20PDFs/2012/2012-160M-Rules-V2.pdf
> says "6.1 The segment 1.830 to 1.835 should be used for intercontinental
> QSOs only".
>
> The latest version here
> https://contests.arrl.org/ContestRules/160M-Rules.pdf notes that "6. the
> 1830-135 kHz window is no longer reserved for W/VE-to-DX QSOs in this
> contest".
>
> Does anyone recall, when the rule was officially changed? It wasn't being
> well respected in some previous years if it was in effect.
>
> Tim N3QE
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
> Reflector
>
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

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