[PaQSO] RTTY Roundup

[Al Zelna]

Hey Bob,

We'll have to go through over 200 QSO's to figure out just how many we made
on 40m below the PSK frequency.  I imagine it is near 50%.  Because RU is a
RTTY contest with plenty of DX multipliers and that is where they are on
40m.  PQP offers one multiplier for DX.  Oh and by the way, if you want a
real head-rush, wait until RTTY WPX next month, and your numbers will pale
by comparison.

All that said, I still bet you did not, nor will, hear any RTTY on 160m.
However, I am glad you decided to rake the muck, so please take the time to
look over my posting from December and feel free to reply.  The key to
success is a strict adherence to a gentlemen's agreement that must be
clearly printed in the contest rules long before the contest weekend.

How about this for an idea?  The NARC should use "40m Hall Monitors"
listening for those entrants who violate the gentlemen's agreement all
around.  Instead of Bonus Points, they get Penalty Points.  This way those
of us who will abide by an agreement will not have to worry about hearing
some sloppy J-38, begging CQ way up on band, and QRM'ing a PSK or RTTY QSO.



Al Zelna, N3KAE
Wyoming County
2006 PQP SSB/CW/RTTY/PSK M/M entrant


An excerpt from Mike's email showing PSK frequencies is listed below.

1838.15
3580.15
7035.15 and 7080.15
14070.15
21080.15 and 21070.15
28120.15

1.)      I have looked over the three major domestic RTTY contest rules
(ARRL RTTY RU, CQ WW WPX RTTY, CQ WW DX RTTY).  None of them condones 160m
operation.  So throw out 160m.

2.)      Throw out the PSK DX window on 7035, which will be unusable in PA
anyway.

3.)      I consider the 15m listing close enough to be the same.

 

Here is what remains:

3580.15
7080.15
14070.15
21070.15
28120.15

 If a gentlemen's agreement is established that no CW is condoned above
these frequencies and no RTTY is condoned below these frequencies; please
explain how there can be interference?

 

 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: paqso-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:paqso-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
> On Behalf Of Bob Nygren
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 09:30 PM
> To: PAQSO at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [PaQSO] RTTY Roundup
> 
> During the recent debate about the appropriateness of RTTY in the QSO
> Party, there were statements such as,
> 	"besides that the lies and excuses about RTTY operators
> 	having no reguard for CW and other opertions is very untrue.
> 	unless you have worked and operated a digital only contest
> 	you will find that digital contesters are more kind and courtious
operators."
> 
> 	And,
> 	"besides there should be no reason to dip below 7.070 for
> 	digital operations on 40 because the PAQSO is not a big DX contest."
> 
> So I made some notes this past weekend during the RTTY Roundup.
> 
> 9AM Local, Sunday I found 15 stateside stations in the CQ mode
> between 7.030 and 7.050 mHz.
> 	Between the frequencies of 7.080 - 7.100 mHz (RTTY Bandplan), only
2.
> 
> 10AM Local, Sunday, 10 stateside stations below 7.050 mHz, only 1
> above 7.080 mHz.
> 
> Later in the day, around 3PM, I worked 5 US and 1 VE below 7.050 and
> 6 stations above 7.080 mHz.
> 
> During the Roundup I copied one Pennsylvania station CQing on 7.032
> mHz, (a station I have worked in the Party).
> Another time, a PA station was observed operating on 7.036 mHz.
> 
> So much for "Courteous" operators who will abide by the bandplan. My
> trepidation regarding the addition of RTTY
> to the Party has only increased.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bob
> N3RN
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PaQSO mailing list
> PaQSO at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/paqso