May I be the first to congratulate Randy K5ZD and Billy KR1R for the superb
job they did on the 1993 ARRL Sweepstakes results.
The commentary gave recognition where it was deserved... hey, they actually
printed my NAME in the comments (as opposed to just a call sign - what a
concept!) The regional boxes were also cool!
I'm not totally convinced that I like the raw score listings divided up by
ARRL Divisions instead of ARRL Sections like they always are. If I want to
see how K6LL did in Arizona, I can't just go to ARIZONA... I have to flip to
page 8 and find out what DIVISION Arizona is in. Also, for the guys that won
their Section, there isn't any real recognition like there used to be (For
example, the top Wisconsin low power CW entry was WE9V operated by N0BSH.
He's not listed at the top, because K4XU in Illinois had a better score.)
This is just a minor point and you all might like the score listings this
way... which is OK with me. I am just so pleased with the improvements and I
really think we owe Randy & Billy a BIG THINK YOU! All of you who have
commented about regional reporting here on the reflector also deserve a pat
on the back because I am sure this discussion partially fueled these changes.
73 Scott KA9FOX (W9UP QRP for Sweepstakes)
P.S. Why is K0FRP listed in the regional box scores with a score good enough
for third place QRP CW, but he is listed as a Check Log? Also, why is K0RF
in as a Check Log... another big rumored score! Inquiring minds wanna know!
>From Bruce Herrick <bdh@mixcom.mixcom.com> Thu Apr 21 18:28:33 1994
From: Bruce Herrick <bdh@mixcom.mixcom.com> (Bruce Herrick)
Subject: Internet Badges
Message-ID: <199404211728.MAA13596@mixcom.mixcom.com>
I have reveived several requests from non-members of the Society of Midwest
Contesters regarding the internet email address badges, so I guess the
answer is -- Sure, why not! The more, the merrier! Possibly, the more, the
cheaper even.
The deadline will not change, however. The final order will be delivered to
the badge guy on Saturday morning, and the badges can be picked up and paid
for at the SMC/Internet suite at Stouffer's - room 1201-1203. Cost is not
known, but will probably be 3-4 bucks. He might charge more for those
l-o-n-g email addresses, since the badge would be longer. Nominal size is
1X3, white, with blue lettering. The badge was designed by Trey and was in
evidence at Visalia.
I'll log on just before I leave for the engraver Saturday morning - if I
don't have your order (with your internet address) at that time, you're SOL.
73, Bruce WW1M
--
Bruce D. Herrick bdh@mixcom.com Home: 414.462.1270
Pryon Corporation Office: 414.253.5678
N93 W14575 Whittaker Way Fax: 414.253.2772
Menomonee Falls, WI 53051 PacketCluster: WW1M > NB9C
>From Sean Kutzko <kutzko@eagle.sangamon.edu> Thu Apr 21 20:01:11 1994
From: Sean Kutzko <kutzko@eagle.sangamon.edu> (Sean Kutzko)
Subject: Sweepstakes results?
Have the results for Sweeps '93 come ut yet? Curious as to how I placed
QRP.
73 Sean KF9PL
>From tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) Thu Apr 21 18:23:17 1994
From: tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Subject: New reflector
Message-ID: <9404211723.AA25681@cmicro.com>
There is a new thread that has just started that will be transferred to
a new reflector. The thread is anything to do with when your QST
either arrived or didn't yet arrive.
To send a posting to this reflector, send you message to:
NCJ-QST-ARRIVAL@cmicro.com
All messages will be handled promptly.
Please DO NOT post such messages to CQ-CONTEST. The amount of bytes used
to discuss when the NCJ arrived exceeded the number of bytes in the NCJ
itself and I am sure glad I didn't have to pay by the byte for them.
Thanks in advance for your restraint!!
tree@cmicro.com
PS: This is not intended to squelch discussion of the results or the format
of the results.
>From J.P. Kleinhaus" <kleinhaj@iia.org Thu Apr 21 20:37:53 1994
From: J.P. Kleinhaus" <kleinhaj@iia.org (J.P. Kleinhaus)
Subject: QST Sweepstakes write-up awesome!
Message-ID: <199404211937.AA06614@iia.org>
Hi Scott, I haven't seen the listings yet but was aware of the format
that was going to be used. As the old saying goes...you can't get
something for nothing! The regional reporting clamor was serious
enough to merit a redesign of the results reporting *but* at the
expense of Section winners being listed etc. I think this is a good
compromise for all concerned...especially the propogationally dis-
advantaged on the Left Coast. It is my understanding that the DX Contest
results will follow the same format.
73 de J.P. AA2DU
ARRL Hudson Div. CAC Rep.
>From Jim Reisert AD1C 21-Apr-1994 1632 <reisert@wrksys.enet.dec.com> Thu Apr
>21 21:29:17 1994
From: Jim Reisert AD1C 21-Apr-1994 1632 <reisert@wrksys.enet.dec.com> (Jim
Reisert AD1C 21-Apr-1994 1632)
Subject: need a few logs from last year's IARU HF Championship
Message-ID: <9404212029.AA17232@us4rmc.pko.dec.com>
I want a couple of logs to check some new zone recognition code in CT
version 9. I remember that a VE was collecting logs, but can't remember who
it is.
Please contact me directly via EMAIL, not via the reflector.
73 - Jim AD1C
reisert@mlo.dec.com
>From Bruce B. Sawyer" <zf8bs@twg.com Thu Apr 21 22:00:32 1994
From: Bruce B. Sawyer" <zf8bs@twg.com (Bruce B. Sawyer)
Subject: QST Sweepstakes write-up
Message-ID: <9404212100.AA01309@eco.twg.com>
KA9FOX sez...
>I'm not totally convinced that I like the raw score listings divided up by
>ARRL Divisions instead of ARRL Sections like they always are.
Well, I definitely do NOT like the scores all lumped together this way.
With
the baby antenna system my city council allows me to put up, I will never
EVER have any hope of doing any better than a section win. Even there, with
N6TV and W6QHS as SCV competitors, it's a rare day when I'm the section
leader (although there have been a few such rare days). But starting with
the 160m contest, even that tiny bit of glory is relegated to obscurity.
Interestingly enough, the new format does not take less page space in QST. I
compared inches of type in last year's and this year's 160m results, and they
were the same. I haven't seen the SS results, but I'll bet the same is true
there. Now I not only have to beat W6QHS, I have to outdo K6LL in order to
make a place in the standings! And what's the advantage of this format? It'
s enuff to drive us little guns out of the country!
CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ de Bruce/AA6KX
>From H. L. Serra" <hlserra@teetot.acusd.edu Thu Apr 21 22:18:46 1994
From: H. L. Serra" <hlserra@teetot.acusd.edu (H. L. Serra)
Subject: Schematic for Tram PWR/SWR Meter
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9404211446.C15968-8100000@teetot.acusd.edu>
Forwarded from N6KI:
>
>Wanted - Schematic for TRAM ASM-1 Automatic Power/SWR Meter with remote
>Sensor Unit. Send E-mail to T_Dennis@Qualcomm.com or N6KI CallBook Address.
>
>Thanks, Dennis N6KI
>
>From Bill H Parry <bill@tenet.edu> Fri Apr 22 02:28:18 1994
From: Bill H Parry <bill@tenet.edu> (Bill H Parry)
Subject: "Enchanted Sweepstakes"
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9404211952.B10950-0100000@Joyce-Perkins.tenet.edu>
The new format for Sweepstakes seems fine and Randy and Billy are to
be congratulated on following the wishes of the contesters that asked for
a change. But... I was most impressed by the accompanying article by
Chip. It was refreshing to read an article by someone who can (a)
still clearly enjoy contesting because it is FUN (b) do very well without
a $100,000 station and (c) keep his ego in check long enough to write an
interesting article. My complements to Chip for his fine score and for
the excellent article.
Bill W5VX
bill@tenet.edu
>From DKMC" <dkmc@chevron.com Fri Apr 22 14:11:08 1994
From: DKMC" <dkmc@chevron.com (DKMC)
Subject: SS Results
Message-ID: <199404221312.AA17869@portal.chevron.com>
From: McCarty, DK 'David'
To: OPEN ADDRESSING SERVI-OPENADDR
Subject: RE: SS Results
Priority:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open note to Randy and Billy:
The 1993 SS results are EXCELLENT. Real improvement in nearly all areas,
and I'm proud to see the responsiveness of the organization to the needs of
this group.
My one complaint has already been registered by Bruce, AA6KX, in the
combining of the section listings into division listings. Please, please
return to section listings. Group the sections by division, fine, but go
back to individual sections. Local competition is as important as
regional--sections have always been the basis for that competition (and what
all these listings boil down to is, " Who's on top of the list?")
Again, WAY TO GO.
73,
Dave
David K. McCarty, K5GN
dkmc@chevron.com
>From Jay Kesterson K0GU x6826 <jayk@bits.fc.hp.com> Fri Apr 22 16:10:00 1994
From: Jay Kesterson K0GU x6826 <jayk@bits.fc.hp.com> (Jay Kesterson K0GU x6826)
Subject: SS Results
Message-ID: <9404221510.AA24180@bits.fc.hp.com>
> The 1993 SS results are EXCELLENT.
> My one complaint has already been registered by Bruce, AA6KX, in the
> combining of the section listings into division listings.
> David K. McCarty, K5GN
I agree totally. I like the write up and top five region boxes but please
go back to listing scores by section. Some of the section scores seem to
get lost in the noise level of the division listings.
73, Jay K0GU
P.S. Those poor guys! We ask them to change the contest reporting then
bitch at them for doing it..... HI
>From gag@suned1.Nswses.Navy.Mil (Paul D Gagnon) Fri Apr 22 16:53:45 1994
From: gag@suned1.Nswses.Navy.Mil (Paul D Gagnon) (Paul D Gagnon)
Subject: handicapping
Message-ID: <9404221553.AA07344@suned1.Nswses.Navy.Mil>
The subject of handicapping has been beat around for years. There are
pros and cons to the idea.
Every golfer I know is different but they are all able to compete for the
prize because of the handicap.
I have to believe participation would increase with such a system.
I am interested in hearing your ideas.
-Paul
N6MA
--
>From we9v@thetech.com (Chad Kurszewski) Fri Apr 22 17:01:23 1994
From: we9v@thetech.com (Chad Kurszewski) (Chad Kurszewski)
Subject: SS Results
Message-ID: <1cy7kc1w165w@thetech.com>
Jay Kesterson K0GU x6826 <jayk@bits.fc.hp.com> writes:
> > The 1993 SS results are EXCELLENT.
> > My one complaint has already been registered by Bruce, AA6KX, in the
> > combining of the section listings into division listings.
> > David K. McCarty, K5GN
>
> I agree totally. I like the write up and top five region boxes but please
> go back to listing scores by section. Some of the section scores seem to
> get lost in the noise level of the division listings.
>
> 73, Jay K0GU
>
> P.S. Those poor guys! We ask them to change the contest reporting then
> bitch at them for doing it..... HI
I agree whole heartedly. The Top 5 Region boxes are GREAT! But another
thing wrong with the division listings is not only you being lumped in
with tons of other scores not in your section, but it's VERY difficult to
find a friend's score if you don't have all the divisions memorized!
What division was that again?
Which way did he go George, Which way did he go?
Very Confusing,
Chad, WE9V
--
we9v@thetech.com (Chad Kurszewski)
The Tech BBS (408) 279-7199 San Jose, CA
>From Steve Kelly <srkelly@agora.rdrop.com> Fri Apr 22 18:20:49 1994
From: Steve Kelly <srkelly@agora.rdrop.com> (Steve Kelly)
Subject: Kenwood TS-950SDX vs. Yaesu FT-1000D
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9404221049.A17462-0100000@agora.rdrop.com>
Hello All...
I am shopping around for a major rig upgrade for my station. I am
currently using a Kenwood TS-940S which as I write is vacationing in
Long Beach, CA. :-(
I would like to hear from those of you who have had the opportunity to
use the Kenwood TS-950SDX and the Yaesu FT-1000D side by side (or even at
different times) under the rigors of the contest environment. (Phone & CW)
I have been following the Yaesu audio thread with great interest.
If you feel both radios perform equally well in each category place an
"X" under both.
950SDX 1000D
1. Preferred phone rig?
2. Preferred cw rig?
3. Excellent on both modes?
4. Which has the quietest rcvr?
5. Which has the best selectivity (SSB)?
6. " " (CW)?
7. Which handles loud adjacent signals better?
8. Which has the best sub receiver?
9. If you use/d the optional DVK unit available
for each radio which one do you prefer?
If you have used both and don't like either one, what do you prefer?
Other comments or pet peeves?
Please email me directly.
Thanks in advance for your response.
KC7EM
Steve Kelly
srkelly@agora.rdrop.com
>From gswanson@arrl.org (Glenn Swanson) Thu Apr 21 22:56:41 1994
From: gswanson@arrl.org (Glenn Swanson) (Glenn Swanson)
Subject: HELVETIA 'TEST RULES (long)
Message-ID: <313@gs>
This is all known info, Per: HB9DDZ
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ cut here_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
HELVETA CONTEST 1994
DATE/TIME 23 April 1994 1300 UTC to
24 April 1994 1300 UTC
MODES CW/SSB
BANDS CW: 1.8, 3.5, 7, 14, 21, 28 MHz
SSB: 3.5, 7, 14, 21, 28 MHz
FREQUENCIES: CW SSB
1810 - 1840
3500 - 3560 3600 - 3650
3700 - 3800
7000 - 7030 7050 - 7100
14000 - 14060 14125 - 14300
21000 - 21125 21200 - 21350
28000 - 28150 28300 - 29000
Categories Mixed Mode Only
- Single Op
- Multi Ops, single TX
- SWL
Exchange RS(T) report plus serial number
starting with 001 (e.g. 579001)
-Swiss stations will send an
additional two-letter designation
of their canton, (AG, AI, AR, BE,
BL, BS, FR, GE, GL, GR, JU, LU,
NE, NW, OW, SG, SH, SO, SZ, TG,
TI, UR, VD, VS, ZG, ZH).
Points 3 points for each contact
A station can be worked only
once per band, either CW or SSB
Multipliers 1 point per canton on each band
Scoring Total of contacts times three
multiplied by the total of multipliers
Contest Award Will be given to the highest entries
of each country. USA AND CANADA CALL
AREAS ARE CONSIDERED AS SEPARATE COUNTRIES.
Log Instructions -Use separate log-sheets for each band
-Stations with more than one percent of
duplicate contacts will be disqualified
-Each entry must be accompanied by a
summary sheet, listing the total contacts
and cantons worked on each band, the category
of competition and the contestants name and
mailing address
-Submit a signed declaration that all rules
have been observed
PC Log If you work with a PC and you have the log
in your PC, you can send a alphabetic log
over all contacts. (ASCII Log I assume?)
Deadline 1 June 1994
Mailing Address Nick Zinsstag, HB9DDZ
Postfach 651
CH - 4147 Aesch / Switzerland
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ cut here _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
73, de Glenn KB1GW
|