[PaQSO] (no subject)

[Michael Coslo]

On Feb 23, 2005, at 10:41 PM, Al Zelna wrote:

> Gene,
>
> You have the name wrong.  It's not Al Queda, it's Al Zelna.  I'm not 
> sure
> who's this other person you mentioned.
>
>
> BTW
>
> I get a kick out of two comments raised in all these replies.  I 
> warned you
> this topic would liven up this list.
>
> First and funniest is "RTTY interfering with CW".  I assume... and I 
> hate to
> do that... everyone is referring to 40M.  Who cares about the higher 
> bands,
> right?  Well, as a CW op myself... if you are above 7070 working CW, 
> you are
> either working real, real slow CW or you are not making any CW 
> contacts at
> all.  I realize RTTY can be run lower on 40M all across the prime CW
> frequencies.  I was there for RTTY WPX recently.  However, if the PQP 
> rules
> clearly stated RTTY "SUGGESTED FREQ'S" high on band, then what is the 
> issue?
>
> Oh that's right, another annoying suggested frequency.  Just like 
> parking
> and calling CQ right by those annoying little Mobile Windows.

	I'm not sure I understand here Al. Are you suggesting that we do away 
with suggested frequencies, or make frequencies mandatory?



>  Maybe the
> Mobiles can comment on some real world interference, not this 
> hypothetical
> one.
>



> Secondly, is "RTTY interfering with PSK".  That is a laugh!  Ever 
> cruise
> over a hot PSK frequency in FSK with a 500 kHz or narrower filter?  Do 
> it
> once and you will QSY quick!  No RTTY op in there right mind would hang
> there and subject their ears to that wild sound.   Again, what is the 
> issue?
>

	Al, I suspect that some of the RTTY Ops may not be listening to the 
PSK racket. I've been operating PSK31 and simply had the RTTY open up 
right on top of us. Hard for our low power signals compete with a wide 
strong signal like that.

	- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -