Why RTTY on the QRP calling freq?
 

Just was starting to get interested in QRP. Been making many contacts
with 1/2 watt on 7040 KHz. But lately it has been worthless due to all
the QRM from RTTY stations operating very close to 7040. Why? Why are
all the RTTY people meeting so close to 7040 when there is so much free
space in around 7090 area?

George - KI4FIA
http://www.MilAirComms.com

Because 7040 kHz is the "RTTY DX" frequency in the ARRL bandplan.

http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/reg...dplan.html#40m

Whoever designated 7040 kHz as a QRP frequency didn't look at the ARRL band
plan.

Have heard suggestions to move the QRP Calling frequency to 7030 kHz -- but
that probably has a lot of data stuff too
But suspect the QRP Amateur Radio Club International should do that URL:
http://www.qrparci.org/



--
Caveat Lector (Reader Beware)
Help The New Hams
Someone Helped You
Or did You Forget That ?



"GeorgeF" wrote in message
nk.net...
Just was starting to get interested in QRP. Been making many contacts
with 1/2 watt on 7040 KHz. But lately it has been worthless due to all
the QRM from RTTY stations operating very close to 7040. Why? Why are
all the RTTY people meeting so close to 7040 when there is so much free
space in around 7090 area?

George - KI4FIA
http://www.MilAirComms.com

Caveat Lector wrote:

Because 7040 kHz is the "RTTY DX" frequency in the ARRL bandplan.

http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/reg...dplan.html#40m

Whoever designated 7040 kHz as a QRP frequency didn't look at the ARRL band
plan.


Actually I thought 7040 was a QRP freq before RTTY ever came
around....could be wrong but thought 7040 was QRP for a LOOONG time...
George

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out

--
Caveat Lector (Reader Beware)
Help The New Hams
Someone Helped You
Or did You Forget That ?



"GeorgeF" wrote in message
nk.net...
Caveat Lector wrote:

Because 7040 kHz is the "RTTY DX" frequency in the ARRL bandplan.

http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/reg...dplan.html#40m

Whoever designated 7040 kHz as a QRP frequency didn't look at the ARRL
band plan.


Actually I thought 7040 was a QRP freq before RTTY ever came
around....could be wrong but thought 7040 was QRP for a LOOONG time...
George

Caveat Lector wrote:

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out


Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40 has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's had
RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the freq
was already in use (ya right!)

George

GeorgeF wrote:
Caveat Lector wrote:

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out


Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40 has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's had

RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the freq

was already in use (ya right!)

In the "Olde Days" a person operating ANY Amateur mode on that
frequeny would have been proficient in Morse Code to at least 13WPM,
the speed at which one reaches true "literacy" in Morse. (Able to
understand what was being sent without having to write down everything
to get it)

Incursions like this will continue, expecially with the spectre of
a true no code Amateur license looming close.

73 and didididadidah

Steve, K4YZ

"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

GeorgeF wrote:
Caveat Lector wrote:

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out


Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40 has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's had

RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the freq

was already in use (ya right!)

In the "Olde Days" a person operating ANY Amateur mode on that
frequeny would have been proficient in Morse Code to at least 13WPM,
the speed at which one reaches true "literacy" in Morse. (Able to
understand what was being sent without having to write down everything
to get it)

Incursions like this will continue, expecially with the spectre of
a true no code Amateur license looming close.

73 and didididadidah

Steve, K4YZ

Exactly...not to mention the fact that IMHO most of the RTTY contesters just
don't give a damn who they clobber.

Tonight is the CW Sprint. 40 will be a total wipe out. However I will have
my RTTY program loaded. And the tape running. One way or another they will
know who they stepped on.

Dan/W4NTI

"Dan" wrote in message
link.net...

"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

GeorgeF wrote:
Caveat Lector wrote:

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out


Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40 has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's had

RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the freq

was already in use (ya right!)

In the "Olde Days" a person operating ANY Amateur mode on that
frequeny would have been proficient in Morse Code to at least 13WPM,
the speed at which one reaches true "literacy" in Morse. (Able to
understand what was being sent without having to write down everything
to get it)

Incursions like this will continue, expecially with the spectre of
a true no code Amateur license looming close.

73 and didididadidah

Steve, K4YZ

Exactly...not to mention the fact that IMHO most of the RTTY contesters
just
don't give a damn who they clobber.

Tonight is the CW Sprint. 40 will be a total wipe out. However I will
have
my RTTY program loaded. And the tape running. One way or another they
will
know who they stepped on.

Dan/W4NTI



heh heh. Yeppers. That'll learn 'em. Of course, nothing more would be
expected from ya there, Dan.

Kim W5TIT

GeorgeF wrote:
Caveat Lector wrote:

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out


Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40 has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's had

RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the freq

was already in use (ya right!)

George

They don't call it QRP for nothing.

Did it occur to you that you and the other QRP ops might be in the
noise?

Kim wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
link.net...

"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

GeorgeF wrote:
Caveat Lector wrote:

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it
out


Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40
has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different
QSO's had

RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the
freq

was already in use (ya right!)

In the "Olde Days" a person operating ANY Amateur mode on
that
frequeny would have been proficient in Morse Code to at least
13WPM,
the speed at which one reaches true "literacy" in Morse. (Able
to
understand what was being sent without having to write down
everything
to get it)

Incursions like this will continue, expecially with the
spectre of
a true no code Amateur license looming close.

73 and didididadidah

Steve, K4YZ

Exactly...not to mention the fact that IMHO most of the RTTY
contesters
just
don't give a damn who they clobber.

Tonight is the CW Sprint. 40 will be a total wipe out. However I
will
have
my RTTY program loaded. And the tape running. One way or another
they
will
know who they stepped on.

Dan/W4NTI

heh heh. Yeppers. That'll learn 'em. Of course, nothing more would
be
expected from ya there, Dan.

Kim W5TIT

He'll send Bruce over.

Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40 has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's had
RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the freq
was already in use (ya right!)


The RTTY people may not have the receiver audio playing in the
shack, but just looking at the computer monitor for decoded RTTY
messages. SO they may not realize that there's some code coming
in on freq. Changing band conditions and such.

"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
news:ZPdPd.30559$xt.18447@fed1read07...
RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out

Good grief! I got the Extra before incentive licensing created sub-bands,
just so I didn't have to keep track of anything more than CW and phone
bands. Now we have to worry about every bandplan mode allocation? Either the
frequency is in use or not in use. (That's for everyone, except K1MAN of
course.) If it's not in use, it's free game. For those who don't believe in
first-come, first-serve - I have a big amplifier I can turn on as the
minimal power needed to complete the contact. ak

p.s. OK - I do try to stay away from the low power PSK frequencies, if I'm
not running PSK, and keep my power to under 200 watts in Novice sections and
on 30 meters.

GeorgeF wrote:
Caveat Lector wrote:

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out

Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40 has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's had

RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the freq

was already in use (ya right!)

Some kind of RTTY contest going on.

Remember too that 40 meters is only 7000-7100 outside of IARU Region 2.

That will change in the next few years but right now a lot of DX is
allowed above 7100. And as we head towards sunspot minimum, folks who
were spread all over the bands above 10 MHz are being pushed lower in
frequency due to lack of propagation. Happens every cycle.

The best solution would be for the bottom 50-75 kc\Hz of each band to
be
made CW-only - by law.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
GeorgeF wrote:
Caveat Lector wrote:

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out

Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40
has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's
had

RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the
freq

was already in use (ya right!)

Some kind of RTTY contest going on.

Remember too that 40 meters is only 7000-7100 outside of IARU Region
2.

That will change in the next few years but right now a lot of DX is
allowed above 7100.

Even more is allowed below 7100, from where we sit.

And as we head towards sunspot minimum, folks who
were spread all over the bands above 10 MHz are being pushed lower in
frequency due to lack of propagation. Happens every cycle.

Good point.

The best solution would be for the bottom 50-75 kc\Hz of each band to
be
made CW-only - by law.

Ooops. You just blew it. You were passing out relatively accurate
info up to this point. Your Morsentricity is showing.

bb wrote:
wrote:

The best solution would be for the bottom 50-75 kc\Hz of each band
to
be
made CW-only - by law.

Ooops. You just blew it. You were passing out relatively accurate
info up to this point. Your Morsentricity is showing.

How did he "blow it"...?!?!

He made a suggestion...Not a statement of fact.

The FACT is that despite similarities of various narrow band
modes, many just don't work well in close proximity to each other.
Mode specific subbands would tend to reduce those occurences of
dissimilar mode QRM.

73

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:

The FACT is that despite similarities of various narrow band
modes, many just don't work well in close proximity to each other.
Mode specific subbands would tend to reduce those occurences of
dissimilar mode QRM.

Forgot to add:

This is not a prctical option, though. What is an "adequate"
amount of bandwidth for a mode today will, undoubtedly be way too much
or way to little tomorrow.

Skilled operators observing "Gentleman's Band Plans" remains the
prefered methodology for this.

73

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
wrote:

The best solution would be for the bottom 50-75 kc\Hz of each
band
to
be
made CW-only - by law.

Ooops. You just blew it. You were passing out relatively accurate
info up to this point. Your Morsentricity is showing.

How did he "blow it"...?!?!

He made a suggestion...Not a statement of fact.

The FACT is that despite similarities of various narrow band
modes, many just don't work well in close proximity to each other.
Mode specific subbands would tend to reduce those occurences of
dissimilar mode QRM.

73

Steve, K4YZ

The fact is that he's got all of the Novice subbands to go play in.

K4YZ wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

The FACT is that despite similarities of various narrow band
modes, many just don't work well in close proximity to each other.
Mode specific subbands would tend to reduce those occurences of
dissimilar mode QRM.

Forgot to add:

This is not a prctical option, though. What is an "adequate"
amount of bandwidth for a mode today will, undoubtedly be way too
much
or way to little tomorrow.

Skilled operators observing "Gentleman's Band Plans" remains the
prefered methodology for this.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Now you've got the idea.

robert casey wrote:
wrote:

GeorgeF wrote:

Caveat Lector wrote:


RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out

Exactly. Maybe the RTTY was operating QRP?



Remember too that 40 meters is only 7000-7100 outside of IARU
Region 2.

That will change in the next few years but right now a lot of DX is
allowed above 7100. And as we head towards sunspot minimum, folks
who
were spread all over the bands above 10 MHz are being pushed lower
in
frequency due to lack of propagation. Happens every cycle.

The best solution would be for the bottom 50-75 kc\Hz of each band
to
be
made CW-only - by law.

The FCC doesn't want to end up doing this sort of micro-
management. It's better if hams decide (via ARRL or such
group) what subbands are where. And if something needs to
change it doesn't take years to do it. The FCC acknowledges
such as "good amateur practice".

Riley says that "Good Amateur Practice" is enforceable.

No one here believes it, though.

bb wrote:
robert casey wrote:

The FCC doesn't want to end up doing this sort of micro-
management. It's better if hams decide (via ARRL or such
group) what subbands are where. And if something needs to
change it doesn't take years to do it. The FCC acknowledges
such as "good amateur practice".

Riley says that "Good Amateur Practice" is enforceable.

No one here believes it, though.

Who doesn't believe it, Brain?

Quotes? Posts?

I know for a fact that Dave Heil, Jim Miccolis and myself have all
stated that FCC policy has been to minimize enforcement action in lieu
of self-policing, but has and will continue to issue citations to those
who violate established band plans, etc, when required to do so.

Now...WHO doesn't believe that "Good Amateur Practice" isn't
enforceable?

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
robert casey wrote:

The FCC doesn't want to end up doing this sort of micro-
management. It's better if hams decide (via ARRL or such
group) what subbands are where. And if something needs to
change it doesn't take years to do it. The FCC acknowledges
such as "good amateur practice".

Riley says that "Good Amateur Practice" is enforceable.

No one here believes it, though.

Who doesn't believe it, Brain?

Quotes? Posts?

I know for a fact that Dave Heil, Jim Miccolis and myself have
all
stated that FCC policy has been to minimize enforcement action in
lieu
of self-policing, but has and will continue to issue citations to
those
who violate established band plans, etc, when required to do so.

Now...WHO doesn't believe that "Good Amateur Practice" isn't
enforceable?

Steve, K4YZ

Simple. All those who think that communicating with out of band
frenchmen is good amateur practice.

King Zulu wrote:
"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
news:ZPdPd.30559$xt.18447@fed1read07...
RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out

Good grief! I got the Extra before incentive licensing created
sub-bands,
just so I didn't have to keep track of anything more than CW and
phone
bands. Now we have to worry about every bandplan mode allocation?

Relax. You've just heard from the nannerheads that think the
government is supposed to supervise every aspect of a citizen's life.
They rest of us aren't buying into it.

Either the
frequency is in use or not in use.

Ayup.

bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
robert casey wrote:

The FCC doesn't want to end up doing this sort of micro-
management. It's better if hams decide (via ARRL or such
group) what subbands are where. And if something needs to
change it doesn't take years to do it. The FCC acknowledges
such as "good amateur practice".

Riley says that "Good Amateur Practice" is enforceable.

No one here believes it, though.

Who doesn't believe it, Brain?

Quotes? Posts?

I know for a fact that Dave Heil, Jim Miccolis and myself have
all
stated that FCC policy has been to minimize enforcement action in
lieu
of self-policing, but has and will continue to issue citations to
those
who violate established band plans, etc, when required to do so.

Now...WHO doesn't believe that "Good Amateur Practice" isn't
enforceable?

Steve, K4YZ

Simple. All those who think that communicating with out of band
frenchmen is good amateur practice.

You've not answered my question, Brian.

Who doesn't believe that "Good Amateur Practice" isn't
enforceable?

Was the person you allege to have made this transgression
operating his station within the parameters of his license?
(Remember...only TRANSMITTING is regulated by the license...NOT
receiving).

Was the person obligated by law to know the bandplans of the
French (or any foreign) operators?

Do YOU know the bandplans of all the foreign stations YOU "work"?


Can you attest to the 100% legality of any contacts you have made
based upon any out-of-band operation by the foreign operator?

Come on, Brian...You're insinuating you have some inside knowldege
on foreign operating, here...Strut your stuff.

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
robert casey wrote:

The FCC doesn't want to end up doing this sort of micro-
management. It's better if hams decide (via ARRL or such
group) what subbands are where. And if something needs to
change it doesn't take years to do it. The FCC acknowledges
such as "good amateur practice".

Riley says that "Good Amateur Practice" is enforceable.

No one here believes it, though.

Who doesn't believe it, Brain?

Quotes? Posts?

I know for a fact that Dave Heil, Jim Miccolis and myself
have
all
stated that FCC policy has been to minimize enforcement action in
lieu
of self-policing, but has and will continue to issue citations to
those
who violate established band plans, etc, when required to do so.

Now...WHO doesn't believe that "Good Amateur Practice" isn't
enforceable?

Steve, K4YZ

Simple. All those who think that communicating with out of band
frenchmen is good amateur practice.

You've not answered my question, Brian.

I did, even though I'm not required to.

"Kim" wrote in message
. com...
"Dan" wrote in message
link.net...

"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

GeorgeF wrote:
Caveat Lector wrote:

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out


Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40 has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's had

RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the freq

was already in use (ya right!)

In the "Olde Days" a person operating ANY Amateur mode on that
frequeny would have been proficient in Morse Code to at least 13WPM,
the speed at which one reaches true "literacy" in Morse. (Able to
understand what was being sent without having to write down everything
to get it)

Incursions like this will continue, expecially with the spectre of
a true no code Amateur license looming close.

73 and didididadidah

Steve, K4YZ

Exactly...not to mention the fact that IMHO most of the RTTY contesters
just
don't give a damn who they clobber.

Tonight is the CW Sprint. 40 will be a total wipe out. However I will
have
my RTTY program loaded. And the tape running. One way or another they
will
know who they stepped on.

Dan/W4NTI



heh heh. Yeppers. That'll learn 'em. Of course, nothing more would be
expected from ya there, Dan.

Kim W5TIT


Hey Kim ....stick to what you know....Nothing.

Dan/W4NTI

"Vince Fiscus, KB7ADL" wrote in message
k.net...
GeorgeF wrote in
ink.net:

Caveat Lector wrote:

RTTY ers don't usually read the QRP pages for frequency useage
They probably read the ARRL pages for this

It is a conflict and the two entities ought to straighten it out


Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40 has
been a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's had
RTTY coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the freq
was already in use (ya right!)

George



Thanks to hard work and efforts of the ARRL, new Ham's don't have to know
CW anymore. So these RTTY OM's probably didn't know they were QRM'ing
anyone. These new ARRL approved "CB'er type Ham's", are good at jamming
and causing all sorts of problems on the bands just like you can hear on
11
meters.

The ARRL does have a plan to help solve conflicts like this to reduce
future problems, but it hasn't been proposed to the FCC yet:

Anyone caught showing any sign of inteligence, using CW, or not acting
like
an all around dumb ass, should be fined and have their license revoked.


KB7ADL


I think you have a handle on the situation.

Dan/W4NTI

"robert casey" wrote in message
.net...

Its to the point where the last few days even operating CW on 40 has been
a waste. Twice tonight 20+ minutes into two different QSO's had RTTY
coming right on top..... Guess they couldn't hear that the freq was
already in use (ya right!)


The RTTY people may not have the receiver audio playing in the
shack, but just looking at the computer monitor for decoded RTTY
messages. SO they may not realize that there's some code coming
in on freq. Changing band conditions and such.

Just one more reason to call them LIDS.

Dan/W4NTI