|[AMRadio] Heard amidst the corntesters on 75....|
ka1kaq at gmail.com
Mon Nov 20 13:44:10 EST 2006
On 11/20/06, Jim Wilhite <w5jo at brightok.net> wrote:
> This is a very good reason to claim more than one frequency
> in different parts of the band. When the group becomes very
> large it would be nice to be able to transmit more than one
> time in 1/2 hour.
That wasn't the case here, Jim. I got on and called CQ for a while
around 2200 before Gary called me, then Dave joined in. I didn't
realize how tired I was from my trip until it crept up on me, so I
bowed out as a few more folks came in. When I shut down the receiver,
there were only 4-5 guys in the group.
But I agree completely with what you're saying with respect to
different groups. I've never understood the 'clump' factor on AM,
anymore than I understand the fellows who don't like roundtables
joining in then trying to convert everyone to break in.
I don't know that it's as related to the band being congested as it is
to having too few stations on at a given time. Plenty of nights the
bands are all but void of AM activity. Rather than joining in with a
large group in progress, why not just change frequency and start up
another group? Or maybe have a few of the guys defect to another
frequency, thereby shortening up the response time in the roundtable?
I've left groups before and moved away to call CQ.
I enjoy a good roundtable as much as most other guys, but why build an
enormous group on one frequency instead of utilizing 2-3 frequencies
or more spread over the band? Seems like several groups would make it
easier to join in with all of your friends at different times, as well
as meeting new folks. Especially with the increase in phone spectrum
coming up, there should always be plenty of room for those who want to
run break in, those who want to roundtable, and those who like to
~ Todd/'Boomer' KA1KAQ
More information about the AMRadio mailing list
This page last updated 20 Oct 2017.