Ditto. I was also at the conference and have used 144.174 for FT8 in VE7Land.
144.174 seems to me to be a reasonable choice for the PNW, South Western BC
and neighbouring areas.
If someone wants to put some effort into finding an alternative frequency that
might be better for use in all of Canada and the USA I might consider changing,
but for now I'm fine with 144.174 for FT8.
73
Mark S
VE7AFZ
mark@alignedsolutions.com
604 762 4099
> On Jul 12, 2018, at 12:34 PM, James C <jabeco@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> FWIW,
>
> In the PNW, 144.174 was chosen as the preferential and common convention
> frequency for FT8 at last years PNWVHFS Conference.
>
> That being said, We may not have the activity levels as seen in other parts
> of the country so this may be less of an issue for us.
>
> 144.174 has been getting a workout up here since it was chosen and I
> haven't seen or heard of any complaints, regionally or otherwise until now.
>
> 'If it ain't broke lets not fix it.'
>
> .-James K7KQA DN06 - PNWVHFS Vice-Pres.
>
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:33 AM, Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, very true. And in this area at least (and I'm sure others too) the
>> activity in contests goes down to at least 144.175. If you go very much
>> below that you start to encroach on the EME'ers. I myself don't use any
>> digital modes in contests. I generally operate Singe Op (QRP) Portable and
>> don't take a computer with me. I log on paper.
>>
>> 73, Zack W9SZ
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 1:21 PM, Rick R <rick1ds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The suggested frequencies for 2m "somewhere between 144.105 and 144.145"
>>> would infringe on the 2m EME JT65 activity.
>>>
>>> Rick, K1DS
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: newsvhf-bounces@mailman.qth.net <newsvhf-bounces@mailman.qth.net>
>>> on behalf of map92map@gmail.com <map92map@gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 2:17 PM
>>> To: stanka1ze--- via NEWSVHF; wz1v@sbcglobal.net
>>> Cc: vhfcontesting@contesting.com; vhf@w6yx.stanford.edu
>>> Subject: Re: [NEWSVHF] 144.174 FT8 activity
>>>
>>> How about move it somewhere between 144.105 and 144.145. Mark k1map
>>> Sent from my LG G5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
>>> ------ Original message------From: stanka1ze--- via NEWSVHFDate: Thu, Jul
>>> 12, 2018 1:11 PMTo: wz1v@sbcglobal.net;newsvhf@mailman.qth.net;Cc:
>>> vhfcontesting@contesting.com;vhf@w6yx.stanford.edu;Subject:Re: [NEWSVHF]
>>> 144.174 FT8 activity
>>> Ron, sounds good to me but what does the rest of the country think? Stan
>>> KA1ZE/3
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ron Klimas WZ1V
>>> To: newsvhf
>>> Cc: vhfcontesting ; vhf
>>> Sent: Thu, Jul 12, 2018 12:43 pm
>>> Subject: Re: [NEWSVHF] 144.174 FT8 activity
>>>
>>> I now have FT8 capability HF through 432.
>>> It's my least preferred mode.
>>> IMO it's a "necessary evil" to have or be left out.
>>> If you operate 6M you know what I mean.
>>> One thing I'd really like to change is 144.174.
>>> Who was responsible for choosing that ?
>>> Way too close to the SSB-CW part of the band.
>>> Disputes already started with a long-time 144.175 SSB Net.
>>> I'd like to start a campaign to move it to 144.165.
>>> That's where it should have been to start with.
>>> Who else agrees? Thoughts?
>>> -73 Ron WZ1V
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
|