The AM Forum

THE AM BULLETIN BOARD => QSO => Topic started by: k4kyv on October 27, 2009, 02:01:51 PM



Title: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: k4kyv on October 27, 2009, 02:01:51 PM
Should "breakers" always be welcome to join in a QSO regardless, or are
there times when it is best not to interrupt an on-going QSO, and when is it
OK for the participants in a QSO to ignore would-be breakers?

One of things I often find annoying when attempting to carry on a contact
near any of the popular AM operating frequencies is the near impossibility
of avoiding a large, cumbersome roundtable.  The band may be completely
devoid of any AM activity for a half-hour or more, but as soon as one
station starts up a QSO with one other, within minutes you can expect the
inevitable breaker wishing to join the conversation. Then another.  And
another.  The more participants in the QSO, the more frequent the breakers,
until a group has developed with 5, 8 or more stations. If the old buzzard
roundtable procedure is observed with a large group, you can count on at
least one participant getting the sequence wrong, per go-round, and someone
often gets left out for one or more rounds. It goes without saying that one
or more of the breakers will be piss-weak, and the general rule is the weaker
they are the longer they talk. Before long, each member of the roundtable is
waiting 45 minutes between transmissions, which tends to encourage long
old-buzzard transmissions when one finally does get a turn to transmit. It
is virtually impossible to carry on a simple conversation with one other
station on a topic of interest during prime-time operating hours.

Not that I mind joining in a nice chat with a group of AM stations or having
others join in on a relaxed informal conversation, and maybe attracting a
newcomer or two to the mode. But sometimes I find myself engaged in
conversation with another station on a specific topic of particular interest
to both of us, but then the inevitable breakers enter the QSO without
displaying any interest in the topic of discussion, and before long the
whole conversation is redirected off topic and the original discussion
fizzles before it is allowed to reach a conclusion.  I find this highly
annoying to say the least.

What's the best way to handle this situation?  With CW there is a convenient
pro-sign that specifically tells the other station and only that station to
transmit, and that all others should stand  by until the ongoing
communication is finished.  That pro-sign is KN in lieu of a simple K at the
end of a transmission.  But I know of no corresponding pro-sign for use with
phone.  Is it rude to ignore breakers, or must they always be made to feel
welcome to join any conversation regardless?  One technique when everyone in
the QSO has a strong signal, is to overlap the carriers as one station turns
it over to the other so that there is no pause between transmissions. Some
people say they find that rude, but wouldn't it be equally rude to approach
two or more strangers on the street, and to butt into their conversation
without being invited?

I would suggest listening to the content of the conversation in a QSO before
attempting to break in.  If the participants are discussing a specific
topic, do not attempt to interrupt unless you have something to contribute
to the topic at hand.   Listen carefully, and you will likely hear clues to
whether or not they would welcome others to join.  If there is any doubt,
QSY to a nearby frequency and call CQ, or scan the band for another on-going
QSO that would appear to be more welcoming to breakers.

We will generate more AM presence in the bands with several simultaneous
QSO's with 2 or 3 participants each, than with everyone falling into one
large, boring roundtable with 8 or more stations, each taking their turn to
make a 10-20 minute transmission. On 75m, if 3870-90 is fully occupied,
consider moving "down below" to 3600-3750 or thereabouts, or give 160 or 40
a try.





Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WA3VJB on October 27, 2009, 02:55:02 PM
It's natural for people to want to join an AM QSO already underway, I don't know why, but that's what I've found all these years, so it's nothing new.

What seems to help the breaking station, when it looks like they are immediately going off-topic and haven't been paying attention, is to pick it up and ASK them to respond to so-and-so's point that had been made just before they broke in.

If they stammer and don't have a clue, usually they sheepishly give it right back and say they'll listen for a few minutes and come back in  (which is what they should have done in the first place).

You know who you are.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WD8BIL on October 27, 2009, 03:08:26 PM
I think, Don, it would be ok at the end of your transmission to turn it over to the the desired station with an "only" tacked on the end. ie.. .."so over to you Paul. This is K4KYV in a closed qso with WA3VJB only please."

If I heard something like that I'd probably standby just to see what yawl was chatting about. Who knows, I might learn something.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: flintstone mop on October 27, 2009, 03:32:52 PM
YUP,
160M is a pretty big place and pretty quiet above 1940, at times.
I'll have to try that tactic of starting a fresh QSO.
Beyond 4 or 5 ops, it gets hard to listen to long transmissions. I always try to keep it to 3-4 minutes. I have a sheet in front of me of who said what and who I turn it over to.
Old printouts of web pages with useless info make great note paper.
I know really bad English.



Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WBear2GCR on October 27, 2009, 05:10:09 PM

Don,

To quote a recent President: "...I feel your pain..."

But my suggestion is that it is what it is...

Secondly, what I would suggest is that the "window" is viewed as "the public square". I think that is a valid idea. So, if you want a somewhat more limited QSO one idea is to meet in the window and then move OFF to another frequency.

Given that imho too many folks are clustering around 3885 +/- moving off is an excellent idea.

The usual line about "my antenna doesn't tune down there" or "I'd have to retune my tuner" is just lazy BS imo. I routinely operate down on 3725 and I know the match down there is not good, but the rig tunes ok into the higher SWR and my signal report is the same as up on 3885. So, let's QSY??

In the immortal words of Moe Fine (Moe, Larry & Curly?) " SPREAD OUT !! "

                           _-_-bear


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: W1GFH on October 27, 2009, 05:17:19 PM
An AM QSO just naturally attracts breakers, ranging from people who know you and want to say howdy...to SSB ops who want to try out the AM position on their rigs. I think you'd find it hard to have a "KN" type QSO in an "AM" gathering spot in any band. Move away from popular AM frequencies and chances are less a 1000 person round table will develop.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: DMOD on October 27, 2009, 05:55:32 PM
Quote
I think, Don, it would be ok at the end of your transmission to turn it over to the the desired station with an "only" tacked on the end. ie.. .."so over to you Paul. This is K4KYV in a closed qso with WA3VJB only please."

I look at it like a card game, say six players start and stay in until they decide to fold, then start another round with new players.

I have stated at times, "Hi breaker, we were just discussing the quantum theory (or whatever topic) of earthquakes and do you have something to add?"

They will usually 73 and or just monitor after that.

If they say something like, "I heard you discussing the 4-1000A GG circuit and had a question or suggestion," then we may recognize them with a, "standby W0XYZ, that sounds interesting, W4KYZ had a comment as well and after his comment we'll turn it over to you."

Phil - AC0OB


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: KC2IFR on October 27, 2009, 06:57:56 PM
Don,
Good question.
I usually listen to the qso before I break in. If the qso is between 2 stations and I have nothing to add to the topic I will not join it.
But if I feel I can add something, thats different. If I do join an ongoing qso and Im not sure if Im welcome, I will say I was listening and just wanted to say Hi and Ill be on the side listening. If they want me to join, at some point they will turn it over to me.

One thing that REALLY pisses me off is a person that joins a qso that is discussing a topic and the person joining changes the subject completely >:(

Bill


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: N3DRB The Derb on October 27, 2009, 08:20:46 PM
"sorry, I'd really just like to talk to (insert name here) right now.  When our conversation is over, I'll be happy to chat with you."

works off the air and on.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: K5UJ on October 28, 2009, 12:02:22 AM
Oh, I think if I am working someone and the exchange of information is so important to me that it must not be interrupted I'll get a way to contact them via email and use that for the important stuff (I'm thinking of technical topics which might be more accurately transmitted in an email anyway). 

At night in the AM window I assume there will not be a two way QSO.  Trying to preserve one to me is a lost cause.  Also, I think that if I heard a couple of strappers working each other in the window at night and they were making it clear they would not recognize breakers I'd find that kind of off-putting.  Sort of like the first time I ever heard of closed repeaters. 

Tonight we started out with a small group with everyone armchair copy then it grew then it fell apart not because there were a bunch of pw stations but because propagation suddenly tanked.  Anyway, I like two way QSOs a lot but when I want one I fire up the rig at a time when I think I'll be able to get one, usually on 75 that means Saturday or Sunday afternoon or early in the mornings around 5 or 6 a.m.

Rob 


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: k4kyv on October 28, 2009, 01:08:37 AM
To-night about 0300Z I put out several CQ's using my newly acquired 3690 kHz crystal.  No AM response at all.  After several calls I had a slopbucket station in Ontario come back.  We chatted for a few minutes and signed.

I don't usually hang out in a QSO much longer, once the station count passes four.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: wa2dtw on October 28, 2009, 09:06:26 AM
I agree that it is always best to listen to a QSO before breaking in.  Especially outside of the "ghetto". 
But it should be understood that 3885 should probably be fair game for breakers, since it is a calling frequency.   So- QSO's on or around 3886 should be considered "open", and QSO's on the low end of 75 should be considered "closed".


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WB2CAU on October 28, 2009, 09:06:54 AM
Don, I agree completely with your observation.  But there is another spin to this topic, and that's where the original 2 participants are excluded from the QSO because of a line of breakers that have no idea who was there in the beginning and breaker #4 wants to carry on with breaker #3, etc.  This has happened to me numerous times.  I call it "QSO hijacking".

And then you have breaker #5 come in and decide that "we're changing the round-table to break-in" operation.  Personally, I believe that's a decision to be made by the originals, not the later joiners.

I believe this to happen more up here in the Northeast because of the heavy concentration of AMers on 75m.  

This is one of the reasons that I spend far more time SWLing than talking.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WBear2GCR on October 28, 2009, 10:06:13 AM


Don,

Only the Extreee class guys can go down to 3690, so that dilutes the pool of potential responses...

But, ya know, with so many ops "unable" to operate their stations more than +/- 25kHz off their maximally peaked and tuned for 3885 antennas, you'll have much more quiet and serenity if you (and others) do the "let's slide off to ...".

Of course ymmv...

Btw, meant to ask, are there a bunch of daytime AM 75m ops on down there in the south??

                       _-_-bear


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: K1JJ on October 28, 2009, 10:42:10 AM
That's a tough issue to solve...

When it comes to AM, I think the 3870- 3890 area is something like a party line area. To axe stations not to break in would require changing the spirit of the existing "structure."   I'm thinking many people would be offended by this, especially ones who don't frequent this B-board.

When I truly want to have a so-called private conversation, I'll meet someone on ssb way down the band. OR, get on AM way down the band. (3700 kc area)  I've had conversations down there with no breakers for as long as an hour or so. Or, even make a telephone call.

But when I'm operating up in the 3870-3890 area, there's no way I expect a conversation will stay between two people for long. It's just been that way forever and would be hard to change now.

I think the best rule stated many times here is, "If you want to break into a QSO, be sure what you have to say is on the exisiting subject(s) and will add to the QSO.  And defer control to the original starters of the QSO.  ie, We are the guests of the originators until they leave and should follow their general lead of operations whether it be OB roundtable xmissions, breakin, etc and stick with their subjects until they are played out before allowing a new subject to be introduced."

To exclude new break-ins in the 3870-3890 area may start to sound like the "no kids, no lids" rap of W2OY of yesteryear.

And the last rule - use common sense. If the QSO already has four or more stations making OB xmissions, start another QSO elsewhere or just listen in. If it's a free-for-all break-in QSO, then there's really no practical limit to the number of participants - so go at it.  (personally, I love break-in QSOs, though participate in OB xmissions too)

T



Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: K5UJ on October 28, 2009, 10:52:22 AM
WB2CAU you make some good points which which I agree.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WD8BIL on October 28, 2009, 10:52:25 AM
Quote
To exclude new break-ins in the 3870-3890 area may start to sound like the "no kids, no lids" rap of W2OY of yesteryear.

Point well made. Within the generally accepted meeting areas a one on one qso is an unreasonable expectation.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: Steve - WB3HUZ on October 28, 2009, 10:57:57 AM
When I want a truly private conversation, I call the other person on the phone, or even better, speak with them in person.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: k4kyv on October 28, 2009, 11:19:07 AM
For those with only a General class licence, why not try somewhere in the vicinity of 3825?  Before the phone band expansion I used to hear a  lot of AM activity down there and the band was a lot more crowded than it is now.

And what about the "forgotten" frequencies above 3900?  I think the reason there is virtually no AM activity up there is a holdover from the old pre-incentive licensing days when the "gentlemen's agreement" was for SSB to operate above 3900 and AM below. A lot of SSB regulars formed what eventually turned into dead-air groups on 3900-4000, and it has been that way for decades.  Most of the activity I hear up there seems to be from old-time slopbucketeers.  But their ranks are thinning and now I hear open spaces up there every evening even during prime operating hours and low QRN, particularly above about 3920 or so.  Maybe it's time for a little AM presence in that part of the band, too.




Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: flintstone mop on October 28, 2009, 11:38:11 AM
Bear brought up some good points. There will be antenna issues with folks not being able to QSY to far from the design freq. and then another problem arises when the group is too big and someone breaks away to start a new QSO 3kc away and there's the familiar hetrodyne whistle and the beautiful sound of A.M. needs to be resrticted to SSB BW.
That was a long thought

Fred


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: Jim KF2SY on October 28, 2009, 12:11:35 PM

......."Yeah thanks Ron, or was it Don for letting me in here.  Heard you guys on here and just wanted to
say hello...and wonderin how your hearin'  this pile of junk...~~~~static crash~~~~~you guys are strappin
....anyway don't know who to turn it too, put me in the rotation...."


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: Pete, WA2CWA on October 28, 2009, 01:38:01 PM
And what about the "forgotten" frequencies above 3900?  I think the reason there is virtually no AM activity up there is a holdover from the old pre-incentive licensing days when the "gentlemen's agreement" was for SSB to operate above 3900 and AM below. A lot of SSB regulars formed what eventually turned into dead-air groups on 3900-4000, and it has been that way for decades.  Most of the activity I hear up there seems to be from old-time slopbucketeers.  But their ranks are thinning and now I hear open spaces up there every evening even during prime operating hours and low QRN, particularly above about 3920 or so.  Maybe it's time for a little AM presence in that part of the band, too.

Yep! Many say move down in frequency yet, as you pointed out, there are lots of vacant frequencies above 3900 kHz both day and night. And Generals, Advanced, and Extra can operate there. Years ago, there was an "old buzzard" net that met daily on 3945. Not sure if it's still around or even if many of the participants are still around.

Like Don, big roundtables generally turn me off. The only time I find it tolerable is when we're using fast break-in, no order, and just general AM anarchy. QSO's that develop into big roundtables with old buzzard, long-winded transmissions, with sometimes generally incoherent ramblings, bore the heck out of me, and I generally either sign or get up and find something to do in the shack until it's my turn to transmit my own ramblings.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: Ed/KB1HYS on October 28, 2009, 02:22:10 PM
I generally don't like the round table format, unless it's limited to 3 or maybe 4 stations. Anything more than that and the conversation devolves into a series of slightly related monologues.  Plus the time between transmissions becomes excessive.

For all round fun and entertainment, a "Break-in" session is tough to beat, and mimics a real conversation in style and understandability.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: K1JJ on October 28, 2009, 02:50:38 PM

Pete said:

"The only time I find it tolerable is when we're using fast break-in, no order, and just general AM anarchy."


That's quite a message... ;D  I guess those with the biggest mawls become the chairmen-of-the-board break-in anarchists... ;)

T


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: k4kyv on October 28, 2009, 05:35:22 PM
Like Don, big roundtables generally turn me off. The only time I find it tolerable is when we're using fast break-in, no order, and just general AM anarchy. QSO's that develop into big roundtables with old buzzard, long-winded transmissions, with sometimes generally incoherent ramblings, bore the heck out of me, and I generally either sign or get up and find something to do in the shack until it's my turn to transmit my own ramblings.

But all it takes is one person to turn a fast break-in QSO into on old buzzard style roundtable. After a single lengthy transmission, others tend to fall in line


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: K5UJ on October 28, 2009, 06:10:41 PM
the thing that comes to mind here is that if OB transmissions are frowned upon, why am I doing all kinds of work to have a station that can let me hang a 350 w. carrier with no time limit?  I thought all this maulish broadcast gear with everything screaming continuous duty was the ne plus ultra of AM.

I like OB transmissions, especially if the guy I'm working is strapping in here with big beautiful full audio.  I'll crank up my EA-2 amp and go puttering around the house.  All I ask is a 2 minute warning before he signs back to me.   With that, he can buzzard for half an hour if he wants.   If I ever work you Don, be sure to have plenty to say.  ;D

p.s.  The K1JJ 5 hurdles article is a great thing for noobs to read.  Helps me.  still working on the recording playback hurdle.

re QSY  Hate to say it but I suffer from inertia.  If everything is all tuned up for 3880 I'll try to get something going there because moving is a 15 minute operation what with tuning the tuner, tuning the rig, tuning the noise null box...getting the  noise phase cancellation box right can take a few minutes.   The appliance RFI at night is so bad I can't call CQ without the RFI nulled out or I won't hear anyone calling me except the strongest stations.

Rob


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: KF1Z on October 28, 2009, 06:16:03 PM
Years ago, there was an "old buzzard" net that met daily on 3945. Not sure if it's still around or even if many of the participants are still around.


Yup, still there at 3945kc.
I think 10:30 am


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: W1AEX on October 28, 2009, 07:22:21 PM
Don,

My favorite thing to do is to call CQ on an open frequency. If someone comes back, I tell them the frequency is in use, and then keep calling CQ. Works every time and keeps the group size down to just one.

Rob W1AEX

(Just kidding Don.)


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: Steve - WB3HUZ on October 28, 2009, 07:25:41 PM
It's best to call Charlie Queen.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: ke7trp on October 28, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
Whats even more frusterating is when I cant hear all the stations in the big Roundtable.  

If its a net, we should all check in, say a few words, Then pass it on. Once everyone is checked in, the net should be over. Then, you can key up and ask another person to meet at a different open freq to chat.  

I cant stand the boredom of a 20 person net that turns into a huge chat room.  I cant sit for 45 minutes before someone says " oh.. We forgot about TRP"..  I check in and move on.  Whats the point of getting up at 5am to key down once and then listen for an hour while others talk out of turn?  I want to Talk on my radio.. Not listen for hours on end.

Some of my Best AM has been a one on one QSO.  Monday I had a nice chat with a guy in Colorado...I forgot the call and I am away from my log but the last part was HG of his call.  We talked for a nice hour with no interuptions abbout 304 tubes and other AM related subject matter.  

Clark


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: K6IC on October 28, 2009, 09:08:00 PM
Clark wrote,  ... " Monday I had a nice chat with a guy in Colorado...I forgot the call and I am away from my log but the last part was HG of his call.  We talked for a nice hour with no interuptions abbout 304 tubes and other AM related subject matter. 


That had to be Bill,  KD0HG,  who IS here ... His avatar once was a blushing 304 (final),  ...

OOOOPPPPSSSSSSSSSSS ... Some PWer has just Hi-Jacked this thread with a not-too-quick post-in ...

Don,  great-sounding strapping signals invite breakers.  I mostly listen.   Think that others have covered the methods.  Large RTs and Nets can be a bit tedious,  but,  as was  mentioned,  doing something else in the shack while listening can work for me.

73,  and have heard you well here in CA in the past six weeks,  but I'm too PW to get UR attention unless you are already on  the correct Beverage. (whoops,  another off-topic post -- Imma Lid !)  CU on AM  Vic


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: ke7trp on October 29, 2009, 01:02:23 AM
That was him.. Bill.. Nice guy.   Nice sounding rig!

I am on 3885 here at 10pm AZ time.  Timtron is on...  Keyed down for over 10 minutes.. Cant hear the other guy. I chose not to break in :)

C


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: The Slab Bacon on October 29, 2009, 08:51:56 AM
But all it takes is one person to turn a fast break-in QSO into on old buzzard style roundtable. After a single lengthy transmission, others tend to fall in line


Or fall asleep! !  ;D  ;D  ;D


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WA3VJB on October 29, 2009, 08:53:20 AM
Rob, I hope you're doing all that because YOU will enjoy it, not because you want to meet expectations of people on the receiving end. Those expectations vary all over the place, and that's a good thing.

This person's opinion, that which is mine, is you indeed will be setting up  ne plus ultra, çertainlement !

the thing that comes to mind here is that if OB transmissions are frowned upon, why am I doing all kinds of work to have a station that can let me hang a 350 w. carrier with no time limit?  I thought all this maulish broadcast gear with everything screaming continuous duty was the ne plus ultra of AM.
Rob


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: The Slab Bacon on October 29, 2009, 10:43:31 AM
the discussion here old buzznard vs break-in has been a long ongoing debate for years. (Ford vs Chebby thing) With my own personal preference being break in.
Being able to get a comment in in a fast paced break-in session was my incentive to build a high powered rig.

The wild and wooly fast action break in sessions are just too much fun to pass up on. they are never stodgy or stuffy like some of the "old buzzard" roundtables. With 5 or 6 long winded old buzzards making 20 minute monologues each transmission, you have enough time to catch a good nights sleep between this and your next transmission.

I dont mind doing roundtables when the group is small and somewhat orderly, butt.............. I will keep a scratch pad to try to keep track of the order of rotation, but most of the rest of the group is "rotationally challenged" and wont write down at least the one they have been handing it to. Or............you wait a hour for it to come back to you to make a comment and get skipped over because someone was "rotationally challenged" ::)  >:(

2 of the worst of the long-winded old buzzards (No offense intended, Don) is the one who started this thread, and 51-watt Fred. Although as long as I am not part of the QSO (listening only) I could listen to Don talking about transformers all night.

However I think it's time to learn how to hook up relays and how to run PTT :o  ;D

                                                   The Slab Bacon


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: W3RSW on October 29, 2009, 11:39:40 AM
.... and with the onset of dusk, of evening's coming repast, a mild imbibement or two, the roundtable qso becomes ever more mellow....

-a mild burp or two...  the gentle admonishment suffered...

Even the pw's are tolerated.  It's amazing how stuporous filters cut the haze of static and nebulous gab.

Hence we understand all; make appropriate responses so even the weak feel strong.  -Responses taylored to the half understood, but so fine tuned that we hear the intertwining of carriers as information... the hum and gyre of each's individual signal.

Then in the nick of time a strapesecent signal warps the weft, cleaves the waves and all are happy again.

And  all in hi-fi AM

Like slow roasted coffee beans we're a close tribe of fellows...


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: KM1H on October 29, 2009, 12:18:58 PM
If I have to wait 10 minutes for it to get around I can usually be found in a 1x1 QSO on a nearby frequency :o. Ive better things to do with my time and I left the hurry up and wait nonsense behind when I left the Navy.

Carl
KM1H



Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: K5UJ on October 29, 2009, 01:09:41 PM
W3RSW that was very poetic. 

Paul, building up the maulish stuff is mostly for my own education.  There are daytime QSO opportunities where I can hang 300 w. for 15 minutes.  Last time I did that I stuck a thermometer right outside the expansion steel next to the 3-500ZGs where the air was getting exhausted and measured the temp at 115 degrees.  Plates had been orange for 10 or 15 minutes so I was expecting it to be hotter than that.    115 didn't seem too bad to me.  Be nice in January when the shack temp gets down to 50 degrees.

Rob


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: W3RSW on October 29, 2009, 06:59:34 PM
Quote
W3RSW that was very poetic. 

Thank yuh,
thank yuh very much.

T'was an Ode to the After Dinner Net (3733)
brought on by Slab's thoughts.

Most all are welcome at the witchin' hour.
And as they say in WVa land...
  "We were all once PW'ers, hicks and juggers."

Then we have to yield to the Canadian fellows at 6:30 pm local.
   By that time most all have wandered off in the fog of hunger anyway.  ;D


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WBear2GCR on October 29, 2009, 07:49:04 PM


I think the correct and proper term for walking away from the mic to tune your rig is called pulling an EYE ENN ARR .

Glad I could clear that up...


                _-_-bear


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: W3RSW on October 29, 2009, 09:17:21 PM
...and , oh yes, he's good at it, inbetween crap-outs, that is. ;D

Say, where IS he lately anyway?


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: KX5JT on October 29, 2009, 10:17:30 PM
There is quite a crew that uses 3.880 AM daily here in 5-land. 

QSO's often occuring between 4pm and 7pm Central time and also in the mornings.

WA5KGZ      Perry                        Beaumount (Bevil Oaks), TX
K5SPE         Scotty                       Ozona, TX (yep, that's right)
K5SEE          John                          Houston , TX               
KA5HRF      Butch (Hot Rod Ford)  Lexington, TX
W5DPP       Sammy                       Bryan, TX
W5DWP       Wayne                       Vidor (Snuff Gulley), TX
W5OMR      Geoff                          San Antonio, TX (although often heard mobile)
KA5RHK     Ken                              DeQueen, AR
K5LAR        Larry                            Salado, TX

These are just some I can recall but there are others of course... W5JO Jim in Sulphur, OK visits from time to time....

3.880 AM is alive and well and somewhat buzzardly even! 


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: k4kyv on October 30, 2009, 12:30:44 AM
I still need to call an electrician out to wire up the 220VAC line to the bonus room where everything is located and on a separate breaker.

Why not just go to Home Cheapo or Lowe's and pick up a breaker, some romex and outlet fixtures and install it yourself?  If you have any knowledge about house wiring at all, that's the way to make sure it's done the way you want it, and the installation can be done on your schedule.  If you are not sure how to do house wiring to code specifications, check out some web sites.  There are loads of sites that explain everything in detail very clearly.

I ran the underground wiring to my shack myself.  Rented a small ditch digger, a friend who works at the electric co. gave me some direct burial 200A drop cable, and I repurposed an existing unused 40 amp electric stove circuit, since I had replaced the electric stove with a propane one.  I ran the direct burial cable in plastic conduit, because I always seem to be digging holes round the place and I was afraid I might accidentally dig into it if I just laid the bare cable in the ditch.  I don't have much voltage drop out there.   :)

The only thing that isn't overkill is the 40 amp service branch, but I have manage to run all my stuff off it for almost 20 years now, and never have tripped the breaker.

Quote
Are any of the guys still operating on 3880? Ozona Bob started that AM frequency hangout spot back in the 1980's because the guys up in the northeast were just too far away during the early evening hours and they would usually ignore stations down south. I haven’t heard anyone on 3880 from here in CA, but I occasionally hear the guys on 3885. As a mater of fact there is an AMer just a few blocks away who runs a solid-state amplifier (he sounds just like a CBer with fuzzy audio) on 3885. I heard him last night.

I often hear activity from the west coast on 3870.  Is there regular activity there every night?  Sometimes the stations come in here pretty well when there is no eastern slopbucket on the frequency.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: ke7trp on October 30, 2009, 12:46:49 AM
3870 is monday and wednesday nights for the AMI nets.  Lots of folks on.  Should hear them nice.  The band is long in AZ.  Timtron and others start comming up around 9:30 PM my time.. Fade out for an hour and come back strong from 10:30PM on. 

Clark


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: The Slab Bacon on October 30, 2009, 09:54:36 AM
Here’s what you do to weed out all of the lightweights and fast break AM QSO's.

1. Break in with you callsign.

2. When it’s finally your turn throw the plate switch.

3. While your plate switch is thrown do the following, but don’t stop transmitting.

a. Tune your transmitter some more.

b. Say just a minute and go to the kitchen and make a pot of coffee.

c. When you come back tune the transmitter some more.

d. If it’s been longer than 10 minutes repeat your call sign, but keep transmitting.

e. Take a few sips of coffee.

f. After the final(s) are good a hot start talking until you get tired.

4. Let off of the plate switch and repeat steps 1 thru 3 until everything slows down to a good old fashioned enjoyable slow old buzzard QSO ;)

P.S. I am assuming of course that your transmitter is capable of at least 400 watts to 500 watts of carrier power and is of the robust tube-type design ;D

good luck tryin that with the northeast group. You would just get "squashed like a bug" and the qso would just keep moving along. You would just be doing us a favor by quieting down some of the background static crashes for us.

"slow old buzzard qso" hmmmm.......................... do you have a slow old buzzard mind??

                                                                the Slab Bacon

P.S. it is always permissable to tune up on top of an AM qso, as long as you are going to join that qso.  ;D  ;D


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: k7yoo on October 30, 2009, 10:34:11 AM
Great topic Don--I am glad you brought it up.  What I see from all of the responses is that we (AMForum) are generally a considerate & thoughtful group. Now that I know you have a 3690 xtal I will start listening down there. I tend toward the premise that the "window" is a calling area and trying to close up the QSO would be swimming upstream. Like many, I get irritated with the guys that get on with a TS 940 and "discover" the AM switch position at 9pm on Sat nite while trolling across 3885. I guess the rules (if there are any) might be:
      know how to use the radio before hitting the PTT switch
      have something meaningful & intelligent to add to the EXISTING conversation
      don't be PW (see rule 1 again)
      don't let ego overcome common sense--if you make a quick break to say howdy and aren't invited
      into the QSO don't get hurt feelings--just move to another frequency. Demanding a slot in the lineup
      is no different than trying to break into a conversation at any other venue--not always welcomed or
      appropriate. Too many people take it personally, which is totally ridiculous

           
If the above rules seem unreasonable enjoy being an SWLer



Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: k4kyv on October 30, 2009, 10:40:36 AM
There is a pretty good AM group on 3870 Saturday mornings here. I also hear them sometimes during the evening, but there is another guy just a few blocks away who moves around quite a bit on AM with a SS amp. I swear, he sounds just like a CBer with fuzzy and distorted audio. Its obviously a SS linear choked up all the way.

Last time I spent any considerable amount of time in CA was in the mid 60's.  Back then there was still plenty of AM activity in the eastern part of the country on 75; AM hadn't "died" yet.  I listened a few times from the west coast, and there was practically zero AM to be  heard day or night.

But after incentive licensing went into effect, AM practically disappeared in this part of the country, too. I think it reached its low point in 1970-72, then began to "come back" in about 1973-4.  AM has been coming back for decades now, for many more years than it was ever "dead".

Kinda makes me chuckle when I hear someone like W8-NoBalls running off at the mouth about how outmoded AM is and that it ought to be banned.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: pe1mph on October 30, 2009, 10:50:52 AM
Don!

You may use more 3705!
All AM lovers are welcome...

We take our time to talk with AM stations!


Greetings,

PE1MPH
The Netherlands


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: k4kyv on October 30, 2009, 11:18:40 AM
I listened on 3705 last night about 0430Z but there was slopbucket activity about 2 kHz away.  So I tried out my new 3735 xtal, called CQ, and worked two AM stations.

I normally operate VFO control, but it's fun to run rockbound from time to time.  Just picked up some old-buzzard style xtals for 3685, 3690, 3725 and 3735.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WA3VJB on October 30, 2009, 02:33:51 PM
I hope it's not THAT quiet, wow.
Aren't we coming into prime time winter radio season ?

Then again, I'm only on 40m right now myself, cough cough


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: Steve - WB3HUZ on October 30, 2009, 02:40:15 PM
Quote
It’s really quite out here.


Quite what?


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WA3VJB on October 30, 2009, 02:43:46 PM
Quote
It’s really quite out here.


Quite what?

C'mon Steve, basic typo, give the guy a break.

Even if you changed your avatar to no longer say The Disruptor, people don't always get when you're not serious. It took me years to tell the difference with you.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: Steve - WB3HUZ on October 30, 2009, 02:45:28 PM
You still don't know, obviously.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: Steve - WB3HUZ on October 30, 2009, 05:25:06 PM
Except my avatar never did say Disruptor. You dummies need to learn how to read.   ;D  The definition of avatar is: an electronic image that represents and is manipulated by a computer user. Further, only Ralph, W3GL can call me the Disrputor.


All kidding or otherwise aside, the times I was in CA, I found 75 meters to be way less crowded than it is on the east coast. My guess is that despite the huge ham population, many are not on the lower HF bands due to the lack of real estate (too expensive).

Will we hear you this winter?


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: Steve - WB3HUZ on October 30, 2009, 07:35:32 PM
I did some business with SRI International in Menlo Park in the late 80's. The house prices were high even then. SRI was having problems hiring and retaining people. They just couldn't pay them enough to live there.

If I lived in Malibu or Santa Monica, I'd probably spend less time on the radio.  ;)


Several of us out here on the East Coast make a concerted effort to work some of the West Coast AM stations during the winter months. You will usually see a post here announcing the time and frequency. Hopefully, we can hear you this winter.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: W2VW on October 30, 2009, 09:20:14 PM
Quote
It’s really quite out here.


Quite what?

Remembrance of Ozona Bob.


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: k4kyv on October 31, 2009, 02:21:41 AM
Real estate out here is way too freaking expensive. When you find out that a 1200 to 1500 sq' home cost a minimum of 500K+ no mater where you are its hard to believe at first. As time goes on though the shock wears off and it becomes common place.

So where do the barfburger flippers, nurses aides and waitresses live?


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: pe1mph on October 31, 2009, 05:56:42 AM
I listened on 3705 last night about 0430Z but there was slopbucket activity about 2 kHz away.  So I tried out my new 3735 xtal, called CQ, and worked two AM stations.

I normally operate VFO control, but it's fun to run rockbound from time to time.  Just picked up some old-buzzard style xtals for 3685, 3690, 3725 and 3735.

Around 06.00 (London GMT Time) hours I worked on 3705:
F6DVD, with super signal and audio, S9 +25
See: http://www.on4ldl.be/pages/f6dvd.htm
F6AQK, with good signal, S9 +10
PA1SBV, with fair signal, S7
9H1ES, I could only hear some words.

Because during our qso, ssb-stations awake! ;D
Often happening that....
When we starting qso round on 3705 freq. is clean...
But after a little time, it is over with our fun!

This morning totaly nothing around 3885!
But on mw USA broadcast on 1510 and 1390 khz fair signals....

Good DX,

Henk
PE1MPH


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: WA1GFZ on October 31, 2009, 11:44:08 AM
at the beach the only time I turn the RX on is when I've had too much sun or it is raining outside. When I was in Ca. the line noise was so darn high you could not work the low bands even if you could get an antenna up across the neighborhood.
Even up in Palmdale the houses are on top of each other.
although there are a few strappers out there


Title: Re: Open vs Closed QSOs
Post by: k4kyv on October 31, 2009, 12:03:49 PM
P.S. Most nurses out here make $30 per hour minimum.

Actually, I think the term now is medical assistant instead of nurses aide.  Unlike just a few years ago, registered nurses are paid pretty well.  So are teachers.  But the pay scales for RN's and teachers are still near the bottom, compared to other professions that require the same level of education.

Medical assistants are often right out of high school with maybe a few months of vocational training, and start out just above minimum wage.

But even at $60K/year,  real estate prices like that would be hard to handle.  No wonder so many people took out mortgages they couldn't afford.  In some areas, that would include just about everybody.  The house of cards inevitably collapsed.

There are some advantages to living way back in the hinterlands.  Move some of those $1 million estates here, and the whole thing would go for about $250K or even less.  Typical real estate taxes in CA are probably more than what you would pay to rent decent living quarters here.

I own 100 acres and a 3000 ft² house, plus outbuildings.  When we first moved here in 1979, the annual tax bill was a whopping $99/year!  It's now about $1500/year (no 15-fold increase in county services, however), still far less than what my in-laws are gouged for, for their tiny cottage and postage stamp size lot on Cape Cod.

But if we didn't have that damned summer humidity, I'd bet this place would be like California.
AMfone - Dedicated to Amplitude Modulation on the Amateur Radio Bands