Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
3599 kc's
On Nov 18, 1:45*pm, "SX-25" wrote:
You are so right, Tim. If you do a search on this reflector you will see that I initiated (what became) a heated thread over a year ago about that very fact. There is no reason whatsoever that CW ops should not be using the space above 3600. In fact, I believe one of my tirades went so far as suggest we CW ops start using the traditional phone spectrum above 3800 for CW. Why not? It's legal and they took our spectrum so why shouldn't we exercise our prerogative to use spectrum where we're not jammed in elbow-to-elbow? The purpose of my most recent posting, however, was just to try to establish some common spot where vintage enthusiasts might listen with the hope of finding someone running something other than Kensues or YaeCOMs. Maybe they'll even be able to have something to talk about other than "RST QTH NAME WX AGE and BEEN HAM..YRS" before saying 73. One can dream, anyway. QTX ZUT es 73 WA9VLK Why do you think that you must stick to 3500 to 3600 khz. *Last I looked, cw was permited from 3500 to 4000 khz. *Why not use 3600 to 3625 khz? *It is virtually dead here on the West Coast. *I have found that 7100 to 7125 khz is a great place to work cw on 40 meters, especially with my rock bound boatanchors. *There is no reason not to do the same for 80 meters. Tim AA6DQ You are so right about the canned qso's. I have found that a boatanchor transmitter is the best ice breaker for getting a rag chew going. Now if we could just get DX stations to carry on a qso of more than 15 seconds... A side comment - as bad as some canned cw qso's are, PSK-31 is much worse. I stopped using PSK-31 when I finally go around to configuring my PSK-31 software and realized my qso was reduced to clicking three different buttons. Tim AA6DQ |