[AMRadio] deliberate encroachment


Rob Atkinson ranchorobbo at gmail.com
Sat Dec 5 20:50:00 EST 2009


Hmm, interesting turn in this exchange.  I think you are both right.
I do not see a problem with stations gravitating to multiples of 5 for
frequency as it seems to organize things under normal circumstances
and helps insure that there is less QRM between AM stations.  However,
when things get tight, you have the freedom of moving around with a
VFO if you have one, as necessary.

Think of the band as a big dinner table in a restaurant.  it starts
out with everyone having equal space.  but people keep showing up to
eat at the table and start squeezing in.  That's okay and everyone
puts up with the occasional elbow going where it is not wanted but
besides that everyone eats and is happy.

So if the band is relatively free or your part of it is, and you have
the luxury of picking a frequency to CQ on, why not pick a multiple of
5 or close to it if you have a VFO, but if someone is on 3873 say, you
slide up to 3878 if there is a QSO on 3884 to 5 (not everyone zero
beat).  You can call it the dreaded "channelized" word but I think of
it as being sensibly orderly.  I don't like being channelized either
but I don't mind this as it is voluntary and no one is taking my VFOs
away from me and giving me a click stop xtal switch numbered 1-40.  :
)

73

Rob
K5UJ

On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 7:24 PM, Todd, KA1KAQ <ka1kaq at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Dave Mayfield W9WRL <wrl at gwltd.com> wrote:
>> Because, Some guys are rock bound. It is normal operating procedure that
>> AM op's take place at 3880, 3885, 3890. No one buys a rock to operated a
>> vintage transmitter at 3887. You can say what you want the bottom line
>> is this. the net control for the Military net should have done a better
>> job, and no one should start a Q on 3887 the middle of the road. To do
>> so is just not understanding what your doing.
>
> Not trying to pick a fight Dave, but I have to agree with Bernie on
> this one. Being rockbound is a choice and can be fun, but I'd bet it's
> more the exception than the rule. Sometimes the situation dictates
> using an odd frequency simply to give another, ongoing QSO enough
> space (regardless of mode). Everyone I know who operates with crystal
> control also has a VFO option available to use in order to participate
> in such conversations. Not only that, I have a lot of odd frequency
> crystals in the box here that were ground decades ago.
>
> Applying channelized thinking to today's bands for fone work is just
> too limiting. Right up there with restricting yourself to an imaginary
> "AM Window" tiny sliver of space. The same rules apply to frequencies
> in use regardless of whether they are even, odd, whole, or round. It's
> not like the bands are terribly congested these days. Expecting the
> vast majority to restrict their spectrum use to suit the possible few
> doesn't make sense either, in my opinion. But it is a hobby, and folks
> are free to operate what and how they choose, within the rules.
>
> Of course, I also heard Bernie respond with an S9+20 signal to a CQ on
> 40m a few weeks back 4 kcs away from an ongoing QSO I was in with
> several other ops, then complain about the interference we were
> causing. Being 40, I chose to give him the benefit of the doubt. (o:
>
> ~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4
> ______________________________________________________________
> Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
> AMRadio mailing list
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/
> List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
> List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
> Post: AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
> To unsubscribe, send an email to amradio-request at mailman.qth.net with
> the word unsubscribe in the message body.
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>


More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 18 Dec 2017.