[Boatanchors] =The_SSSOBs_Inspire_Me_Again?

[Donald Chester]

David Harmon K6XYZ wrote:

> ...why didn't you say anything about those SS stations that have set
> their transmit bandwidth intentionally wide?
> There are a lot more of those guys that are far too wide than AM stations!

It's one thing to have a clean signal and transmit a wide audio bandwidth, which naturally increases the bandwidth of the RF signal.  That's why I have selectable 5 kHz and 3.4 kHz low pass audio filters, or the option of no filter.  When the band is  lightly occupied, I sometimes switch out the filters entirely.  Normally, I prefer the 5 kHz filter, but under congested conditions I switch to the 3.4.  With properly equalised audio in the speech amp, I often get reports of "broadcast quality" with the 3.4 kHz filter in line.

The same goes for the SSB stations running so-called ESSB.  I see no problem with those who do it right and transmit clean signals with wide frequency  response audio, even if the signal is 6 kHz  wide.  It's the Hammy Hambones who try to brute-force a stock plastic radio equipped with a stock 2.7 kHz SSB filter to transmit a 6 khz-wide sideband using only outboard "audio processing" equipment, who cause the problem.  They just end up with a lot of distortion and splatter on both sides of their barely-readable 2.7 kHz wide SSB signal.

But the 75m SSB group under discussion is another story.  I have monitored 3.890/92 in the past and heard a  couple of miscreants openly admit to deliberately over-driving their transceivers and leen-yars for the intended purpose of generating  splatter to annoy the AMers in QSO down on 3885.  The AMers operating on 3885 pretty well co-existed with the SSB QSO on 3892 for many years, but when they recently decided to move down to 3890, mutual interference was inevitable, and they knew that from the outset.

A good selective receiver helps.  I have found my 55-year old 75A-4 to be practically immune to that sort of garbage, with the help of an array of outboard mechanical filters, a variable front-end attenuator, my Sherwood Engineering SE-3 analogue synchronous detector, and selectable receiving antennas, including a terminated beverage directive to the northeast.

Never whinge and whine over the air about deliberate QRM... that just makes their day.  Ignore the jammers and pretend they don't exist.  With skilful listening techniques you can nearly always get the gist of  what the other station said,  if not 100% copy.  To paraphrase Teddy Roosevelt, "strap softly and turn up the wick".

There is a lot of open space between 3600 kHz and 3700 kHz.  When the phone band was first expanded, a lot of AMers began to operate down there and I heard many comments about how great it was to get away from the congestion and nonsense in the 3870-90 AM Ghetto. A few guys even upgraded to Extra just so they could operate down there.  Unfortunately, once the novelty wore off, most of the activity gradually migrated back up to the old stomping grounds, and now very little AM activity is heard "down below". I agree with Rob that more effort should be made to maintain AM presence in that part of the band.  In its petition to withdraw 50 kHz of the phone band at 3600-3650, one of the  statements ARRL made to justify the change was that those frequencies were "lightly used".  Of course, most of us who were on the air back then know they were even more lightly used when it was limited to CW/RTTY/digital only. 

Last but not least, no matter what frequencies you operate,  "Get more fi-yah in the wi-yah, and get the wi-yah hi-yah!"


Don k4kyv