Other SOTA sites: SOTAwatch | SOTA Home | Database | Video | Photos | Shop | Mapping | FAQs | Facebook | Contact SOTA

18MHz CW freq for SOTA

Can anybody please suggest a good frequency for SOTA on 18MHz QRP CW?

I have built a rig using 18.086 crystals, but I am able to move this frequency a few kHz.

Does anyone see a problem with 18.085 or 18.084 MHz? My frequency will be a set and forget type affair - no control on front panel to QSY.

There doesn’t seem to be much information on 17m band usage. (I do have the latest RadConm with bandplan, but this only tells you what is permissable where.) I’m looking for the gentlemen’s agreement type stuff.

73
Colin
M0CGH

In reply to M0CGH:

The regular used SOTA spot is 18.086 MHz which will be monitored by chasers.

73
Roy G4SSH

In reply to G4SSH:

Thank you Roy.

I will be running mW’s but I wondered whether chasers not running QRP would upset the QRP folks being right on the COA frequency.

73
Colin
M0CGH

In reply to M0CGH:

18.086 MHz is so rarely used for SOTA (about once per week) that you are not going to find many SOTA activations causing QRM.

As long as you can alert in advance, or self spot, then it matters not where you choose to transmit, but calling anywhere else but 18086 on this band without a spot will greatly reduce your chances of being found by a chaser.

73
Roy G4SSH

In reply to M0CGH:
Don’t forget that the HF Pack CW channel is 18.0815!

73

Brian G8ADD

In reply to G8ADD:

OK Roy, thanks I take your point.

Brian - yeah, this is the stuff I would like to know. Somebody needs to compile some frequency listings for 17m, like they do for other bands, or at least tell me where to find such a list!

I know that the FISTS frequency is 18.085 and down.

I don’t think my crude VXO will go down as far as 18.0815! I have yet to explore the limits.

73
Colin
M0CGH

In reply to M0CGH:

or at least tell me where to find such a list!

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=17m+bandplan

8th one down is what you want.

:wink:

Andy
MM0FMF

In reply to MM0FMF:

Yes, I’ve looked at all the obvious stuff Andy, I’m talking about frequencies used by certain groups.

I spent the day ‘Googling’ so no need for you to do it for me! Hence my question on this thread!

73
Colin
M0CGH

In reply to M0CGH:

This one is useful: http://hfpack.com/

73

Brian G8ADD

In reply to M0CGH:

So you didn’t look at the 8th entry then, the one that lists all the spot frequencies?

18068-18100 CW CW
18080 Radio Scout Frequency CW http://home.tiscali.nl/worldscout/Jota/frequencies.htm
18081.5 HFPACK CW HF Portable CW Calling Frequency - Pedestrian Mobile - Backpack Portable - Bike Mobile - HFpack http://hfpack.com
18085 FISTS CW http://www.fists.org
18091.5 County Hunting Net CW http://ch.w6rk.com/
18096 QRP CW
18097.5 W1AW CW http://www.arrl.org/w1aw.html
18098 IOTA CW http://www.rsgbiota.org/
18100-18105 BPSK31 Digital
18100-18110 RTTY Digital

and on and on and on…

Andy
MM0FMF

In reply to MM0FMF:

So you didn’t look at the 8th entry then, the one that lists all the
spot frequencies?

Hmmm… The 8th entry on the list I got was http://www.northwest-arc.org.uk/band-plans.htm which doesn’t list any spot frequencies. Clearly, sometimes Google messes with its results… :wink:

In reply to MM0FMF:

Thanks Andy, you obviously have a different Google to me because the 8th one down on my list is Northwest Amateur Radio Club who just list the bandplan stuff.

Any way, we got there in the end, I found the site you quote further down the list. Thanks. It would have been much easier to paste the link.

http://bandplans.com/

My IT teacher once said - the Internet is like the biggest library you can imagine… with all the books dumped on the floor!

Brian, that site looks interesting - I’ll have a good look later on.

73
Colin
M0CGH

In reply to M0CGH:

(Off-topic, and long but useful I hope…)

easier to paste the link

Well there was purpose in not doing so. It follows on from the other discussions about Facebook elsewhere and the product being you. Search engines provide you a free search and they try to fund this from adverts. You search for X and adverts for X appear along with links to websites about X. (Actually adverts don’t appear on my browser, they are all choked off.) If the advert appeals you click. The advert costs money to show and as long enough people click the ad and buy something everyone is happy, advertising budget well spent etc.

The search engine companies want you to use them not anyone else. If they can target the right ads at the user you are more likely to click and someone gets a sale. So targeting is king. The problem is how to target based on the search criteria. If I search for Ford Mondeo am I looking to buy on new or secondhand or look for reviews or technical specs etc. So the search companies collect info on each user and see what they search for and what they click on. They get the info on what you click on from things like Google Analytics which loads of websites use. (Here Google gives them free analysis of where their web traffic comes from etc. of course Google get to see who clicks on the links their search provides.) So they know what you search for and what you click on and hence can better serve you ads and results. They need to know who you are and if you use Google+ or MSN live etc. then they can use those cookies when you search to know who you are. Next time you visit you provide cookies the search engine has seen before and they can continue to refine their profile on you. If you don’t use Google+ etc. you still provide sufficient info on every click to identify almost the specific browser installation. (Not IE or Firefox, but Firefox with a certain combination of plugins on a certain patch level of Windows with certain search bars installed and the fonts on your PC, enough to identify you even if your IP address changes!)

It ends up with the search results you get being different to me, something termed the search bubble. My bubble is not your bubble. Which renders searching useless because the search engines serve the links they think you want not what you may want. i.e. the links you are unlikely to click on are many pages back from the front page. There is no point sending you links you wont click on the front page and research shows most people only consider the 1st 10 or 5 links, everything else is ignored. No problem till what you want is 10 pages back and you lose the will to live in clicking through 9 pages of irrelevant junk.

Nothing exemplifies this mining the user for personal information (directly or indirectly) than two people entering the same search criteria and get different ordering in the results. Google does it, Bing does it and Facebook does it using info you have given it and the interests of your “friends” and results from all the web pages you’ve viewed that have a F icon on them. All that info about your political viewpoint, sexual viewpoint, where you spend money, what news you read, who is in your social grouping. It’s all collected and used to sell your profile to advertisers who hope you will buy from them.

You can disable the bubble on Google, there is a “VERBATIM” button which gives old style search results, not ones based on your bubble. Of course that is less useful to Google, your profile becomes worth less. Don’t forget, the search results are paid for by Google or whoever selling you to advertisers. See if you can find this button. Then click it and see how the results for searches are different.

Very long and off topic, but as I said, it shows how we are the product. It should be in the Facebook thread.

bandplans.com is the place Colin.

[gets off soapbox]

Andy
MM0FMF

In reply to MM0FMF:

Yeah, I understand that search results are served differently to different people, but that is not my point - my point being it would have been easier to share the link!

73
Colin
M0CGH