SSB ops clear down to 7000 kHz on 40m, Grrrr

[van lincoln]

I guess what I am saying Glen, is it sure would be nice to have
a segregated band segment for cw only, just like the old days, however
one that is world-wide.  Just a small sliver.
Then, a full digital only segment, and an AM/SSB segment.
But that's just wishful thinking.  I miss using my HR-10/DX-40 combo.
Too much noise for the cerebral filter to handle.

(but i do have a 250KHz filter on my FT-1000, so I'm not missing
too much of the action)

Only my .02 cents USD, for what it's worth from an old man, 
and not meant in any disrespect of any other operator or station.

Van wd8aam

At 08:35 AM 1/20/2006 -0800, Glen Zook wrote:
>I don't use an 80 Hz filter.  My 75S-3A has a 200 Hz
>filter and one of my 75S-1 receivers has a 500 Hz
>mechanical.  My Heath SB-301 has a 400 Hz filter and
>my Heath Mohawk has a 500 Hz filter.  My Collins 75A2
>and 75A3 have crystal filters than go down to well
>under 500 Hz and my RME-6900 has a filter that also
>goes well under 500 Hz.  My Hammarlund HQ-140X can go
>pretty narrow as well as does my National NC-2-40DT.
>
>Now I don't normally try copying CW through SSB using
>my Hallicrafters S-19R, S-20R, S-85, or even SX-100
>although it is possible using my cebreal filter.  The
>same thing with my BC-348 or Heath HR-10.  My
>Hallicrafters S-107 is even wider.  But, it is
>possible to copy CW through SSB even with the wider
>bandwidth receivers although it certainly is not as
>comfortable to as when the narrow filters are used.
>
>None of my receivers are newer than the early 1960s,
>and several date from the late 1930s to 1950s.
>
>I stand on my statement that it is definitely possible
>to copy CW through an SSB signal.  The narrower the
>filter the easier it is to do.  But, it is most
>certainly possible even without a narrow filter.
>
>No where did I say anything about purchasing newer
>equipment or that only those who use "modern"
>equipment should be allowed to operate.  I think that
>you need to take a look at the K9STH website the URL
>of which is listed at the end of this message.  The
>shack photos are towards the bottom of the list of
>links.  Then come back with your "modern" equipment
>comments.
>
>Glen, K9STH
>
>
>--- van lincoln <vlincoln at EARTHLINK.NET> wrote:
>
>two things working against your statement are:
> 
>1.  80 hz filter.  most old receivers drift just a
>little <chuckle>, and a 80 hz passband cw tone is here
>one second and gone the next.  how do you work this
>out?  you don't except open up the passband and hear
>all the noise and hope that the cw signal drift is
>stable enough to stay in the larger passband. (did I
>hear you say "buy a NEW receiver"? not an option for
>many old timers.)
> 
>2.  to me you are saying " only us modern folks should
>have rights ", and you old timers that like tube junk
>that drifts should get real (read spend money for
>state of the art ) and get rid of your antiques.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Glen, K9STH
>
>Web sites
>
>http://home.comcast.net/~k9sth
>http://home.comcast.net/~zcomco
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
>http://mail.yahoo.com 
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>This list is a public service of the City of Tempe, Arizona
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subscription control -
http://www.tempe.gov/lists/control.asp?list=BOATANCHORS
>To post - BOATANCHORS at LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV
>Archives - http://listserv.tempe.gov/archives/BOATANCHORS.html
>

-----------------------------------------------------------
This list is a public service of the City of Tempe, Arizona
-----------------------------------------------------------

Subscription control - http://www.tempe.gov/lists/control.asp?list=BOATANCHORS
To post - BOATANCHORS at LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV
Archives - http://listserv.tempe.gov/archives/BOATANCHORS.html