[NLRS] Fw: 50 mhz CW

[Al Ward]

John
I concur with moving a DX calling frequency back down the band because down
here there is no way that the idle chat will ever move off of
144.200.....Remember we used to use 144.110 as the DX calling frequency?
73
Al W5LUA 

-----Original Message-----
From: nlrs-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:nlrs-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of John (JK) Kalenowsky, K9JK
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 1:20 AM
To: Herb Krumich; nlrs at mailman.qth.net
Cc: n0jk at arrl.net
Subject: Re: [NLRS] Fw: 50 mhz CW



Herb, NLRSers, (and cc: Jon, N0JK)

IF "we" are talking about moving down 30-50 kHz to "create an area for CW
activity"...why stop there with the frequency movement, "go farther" and USE
the frequency range 'dedicated' 
to CW that ALREADY EXISTS on the 2 meter band!

I recognize that Herb mentioned this and that "nobody is using that area"
BUT how do "we" know that folks would use an area from 144.150 to
144.170...or more precisely, WHY would folks use 144.150 to 144.170 if they
are NOT using the area below 144.1?

If "we" agree to establish something in this vein, let "us" just move ALL
THE WAY to the 'dedicated' CW portion of the 2 meter band, down 100-120 kHz,
to 144.080 to 144.100? Perhaps suggesting 144.090 as a "2 Meter CW Calling
Frequency"? For that matter, how about a network of 2 Meter CW Skimming
receivers throughout the country as a source of propagation info,
potentially as good as (or better?) than the APRS Mapping.

Dare I also suggest that 144.125 become the 'new' national calling frequency
for the 2 meter band and 144.100 to 144.125 would be the "DX Window"? (Just
Kidding on the latter but I AM SERIOUS about the former.)

My 1/5 cent worth (inflation adjusted).

73, JK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Herb Krumich" <wa2fgk at yahoo.com>
To: <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
Cc: <n0jk at arrl.net>
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 16:12
Subject: [NLRS] Fw: 50 mhz CW


>
>
> As everyone knows, 50 mhz activity on CW has been tremendous. 
> Especially during openings and contests. So many stations can 
> pile into a small area.
> Over the last few years, as activity increases on 6 meters, 
> the activity on 144 mhz has dwindled. Even during contests 
> when your struggling for contacts and switch to the CW mode, 
> there are very few stations to work.
> I would like to throw this idea out to different loggers to 
> see what the response would be.
> Would it make sense to take a portion of two meters that is 
> not used, and create an area for CW activity. I realize some 
> people are going to say the lower portion of 144 mhz is for CW 
> contacts. But nobody is using that area.
> We generally use 20 khz on 50 mhz from 50.080 to 50.100
> May I suggest 144.150 to 144.170 for CW activity. At least 
> during contests. When I switch to CW on 50 mhz, there are many 
> contacts made that could never be made on SSB.
> I will be in contact with the ARRL to make this suggestion.
> Please throw this around on this logger and lets see where it 
> goes.
> 73's Herb K2LNS
> Station mgr for the WA2FGK location
> ______________________________________________________________
> NLRS mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: 
> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 

______________________________________________________________
NLRS mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html