The AM Forum

Every year we do the 1929 QSO party and the Linc Cundall old time CW contests with with the Hartley and 1930's rigs and of course there are blurps, blips, buzzes, chirping and various other unstable rigs being used to make QSO's. Of course there are frantic calls from hams who have to tell you that your rig is doing something and you had better send it back to Icom. Also some wallpaper inevitably shows up with an "official" report of the strange signal. Now I am sure that some of the more interesting AM rigs have teased these out as well. So when I got an OO report a couple of weeks ago I was not surprised. But then I read it!

Well that is very nice! Kind of like when a cop pulls you over to tell you what a fine job your doing driving. I don't see myself ever getting either award :o :o I guess I just don't have a lot of respect for OO's or cops who tell you that your a fine fellow!

Were you running the Command Set transmitter? As I recall, it sounded pretty good on Old Mil Rad CW net the last time you had it on.

I got one of those a few years ago congratulating me on my good-sounding, clean, AM signal.

I also got an OO report, maybe 35 years ago, saying that my SSB signal had too much carrier, therefore was in violation of Part 97. Don't recall whether or not I ever replied to tell him I was running AM.

I received another one, probably 20 years ago, as a result of a frequency-ownership issue with some slopbucketeers who had settled in on 1888 kc/s over the summer, and began to whine when the usual AM activity started up on 1885 as the static began to subside for the season. The stations were in AL and GA, and while the other AM signals over the country didn't bother them too much, apparently my signal with the 1/4λ vertical was blowing them away.  The OO was apparently a personal friend of one or more of the slopbucketeers, and the "violation" he accused me of was "operating like a CB'er", but no specific rules infraction.  I forwarded a copy to ARRL Headquarters, and got an apologetic letter back from them, informing me that the OO had been reprimanded and directed to write me a letter of apology, which he did.  Then I got a follow-up latter asking if I had  received the apology, and if it was satisfactory.  I responded and told them it was.

A few days later I monitored that group P&M'ing about the situation and the letter, and soon they decided to move operation lower in the band where there was no conflict with established band usage.

Of course, this is not to imply that anyone "owns" 1885 either; all frequencies are available on a first-come first-served basis, but that group was getting bent out of shape and heckling us even though the AM activity had started up on 1885 earlier in the evening, well before they came on.

From the beginning hams have been self regulating. OOs are just part of that. I would rather have them send me a bogus letter than have non-ham radio monitors from the gov-a-ment listening in and trying to justify their paycheck.

Nice letter WU2D hope you get many more of them.

73

Eric

I got a good op report recently in the mail. It was on 20 meter AM. I was using the Globe king 500. Its nice to get a good report.

C

I remember hearing some hams I knew in Ohio laughing about that, about that long ago. You were famous even back then, Don. :-)

Any QSO that is interesting to listen to that draws you into it and is not just a 599 TNX OM and is covering some interesting technical topic is naturally going to draw in the listener. That is why AM and AM'ers are finally being respected as a vital part of the hobby. Old fashioned CW is making a comeback too.