CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] RE: Feb 04 QST op-ed article

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] RE: Feb 04 QST op-ed article
From: "Bud Hippisley, K2KIR" <k2kir@telenet.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:39:38 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
At 12:49 PM 2004-01-17, Eric Scace K3NA wrote:
>   There would be less SSB contest activity pressure on the bands if USA 
> stations were permitted to operate down to 3600, 7100,
>14100, etc...

Nahhh.   There is a semi-inexhaustible supply of SSB stations waiting in the 
wings to get on the air the minute the perceived QRM level lessens.

Later he wrote:
If USA non-contest phone operators want some relief from congestion, they could 
join us in agitating for sub-band expansion.

Nahhh again.  No relief from congestion will occur.  The bands will fill up to 
the current level of congestion -- the only difference is that there would be 
at least 20% more non-contesters complaining.  

The irony of this discussion is that it's been a full half-century since the 
last meaningful reduction in voice bandwidths (SSB) hit the HF bands.  Instead 
of petitioning for a change in sub-bands that's a drop in the bucket, why not 
put all that psychic energy into inventing and implementing a new, more 
efficient mode of voice transmission?

Bud, K2KIR 

---------------------------------------------------------------
    The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!
       http://home1.pacific.net.sg/~jamesb/
---------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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