With Field Day just around the corner, our group is starting to think about
high-gain antennas for 40 meters. The idea of a 3 element wire beam came up and
I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with them? Being in the
Northeast, we don't really have to worry about turning it, so it seems like an
ideal solution. Any comments? Any other ideas that we should consider?
Thanks for the input... Kevin N1EPU [WEBSTER_KER@CCSU.CTSTATEU.EDU]
>From Fred Cady ieefc@msu.oscs.montana.edu" <fred_c@ece.ee.montana.edu Thu May
> 5 12:34:55 1994
From: Fred Cady ieefc@msu.oscs.montana.edu" <fred_c@ece.ee.montana.edu (Fred
Cady ieefc@msu.oscs.montana.edu)
Subject: To subsubscribers and unsubscribers
Message-ID: <0097DF71.B58379A0.3@ece.ee.montana.edu>
Hey you guys trying to subscribe or unsubscribe. Don't you ever
listen in the pile-up? This isn't a "when last heard you were
2x2 rifleshot, last two letters of your call only, net!"
Everything is Q5 unless you have QRM between
your ears. LISTEN UP! DON'T send your subscribe or unsubscribe
messages to the reflector. It doesn't work that way and it doesn't
work. DON'T send your subscription request to cq-contest@tgv.com.
DO send it to cq-contest-REQUEST@tgv.com. The other reflectors work
the same way, too. And read the "Frequently Asked Questions", or
FAQ, messages that come from the system operator. And don't
keep calling in the pile-up when the dx is coming back to a partial
call that isn't even close to yours.
73, de Fred, KE7X (a grumpy old professor at the end of a long term where
the students don't listen either!)
P.S. Still looking for hams/contesters at NASA/Langley.
>From Trey Garlough <GARLOUGH@TGV.COM> Thu May 5 15:48:44 1994
From: Trey Garlough <GARLOUGH@TGV.COM> (Trey Garlough)
Subject: Sweepstakes Log Checking
Message-ID: <768149324.561527.GARLOUGH@TGV.COM>
> Log Checking
> in the
> ARRL Contest Branch
This is terrific, and no one doubts the League is more even-handed in
log checking nowadays than it was in, say, 1988. And no one doubts
that the League uses computers as a tool for log checking. Great!
What your missive does not address is KM9P's issue, which is that some
of the League's tools have known and correctable defects, and that these
defects have been observed by the contesting community since 1991. The
question I believe Bill wanted you to address is "What *action* are you
taking to remedy this particular known problem?"
--Trey, WN4KKN/6
>From we9v@thetech.com (Chad Kurszewski) Thu May 5 16:00:12 1994
From: we9v@thetech.com (Chad Kurszewski) (Chad Kurszewski)
Subject: Sweepstakes Log Checking
Message-ID: <27XuLc2w165w@thetech.com>
k2mm@MasPar.COM (John Zapisek) writes:
> Bill/KM9P noted a problem with the ARRL's SS log checking:
>
> > one of two things are happening...
> >
> > #1: The guy sent in his check sheet with the incorrect information
> > or sent the incorrect information during the contest.
> >
> Problem #1 is also addressed (though not _solved_). Busted QSOs are
> deducted from both the TX and RX stations' scores. This provides strong
> incentive for an operator to accurately log exactly what's been sent.
>
Reducing the RX as well as the TX station score for a busted exchange is
definitely a step in the right direction. BUT, for the casual guy who
gets on an makes a few QSO's, he really could care less if his reported
score is reduced in the standings. He probably doesn't even notice the
reduction in his printed score. He doesn't write the ARRL and ask for a
analysis of busted QSO's.
Therefore, the guy probably doesn't care if he sends the incorrect
information (poor fist), and _if_ he notices he sent the wrong exchange,
he probably doesn't care to correct you.
Oh well, what's a contestor to do?
Chad WE9V we9v@thetech.com
--
we9v@thetech.com (Chad Kurszewski)
The Tech BBS (408) 279-7199 San Jose, CA
>From blunt@arrl.org (Billy Lunt KR1R) Thu May 5 21:28:00 1994
From: blunt@arrl.org (Billy Lunt KR1R) (Billy Lunt KR1R)
Subject: Sweepstakes Log Checking
Message-ID: <17277@bl>
Trey Garlough wrote:
>>
>> Log Checking
>> in the
>> ARRL Contest Branch
>>
>>This is terrific, and no one doubts the League is more even-handed in
>>log checking nowadays than it was in, say, 1988. And no one doubts
>>that the League uses computers as a tool for log checking. Great!
>>
>>What your missive does not address is KM9P's issue, which is that some
>>of the League's tools have known and correctable defects, and that these
>>defects have been observed by the contesting community since 1991. The
>>question I believe Bill wanted you to address is "What *action* are you
>>taking to remedy this particular known problem?"
>>
>>--Trey, WN4KKN/6
>>
What specific known and correctable defects are you refering to?
If I knew what you were refering to, it would be easier to address.
If you are refering to:
KM9P wrote:
>>One suggestion that has some merit is to note how often a
>>single callsign is removed from logs. If one call is removed
>>from more than a few it should set a warning flag.
>>I would propose that the ARRL adopt a check in their software to flag
>>potential problems. It would be immediately obvious if the computer found
>>that W4NT was taken out of 250 logs because they all copied AL instead of GA.
This is already in practice and has been for some time. This is
one of the things we were concerned with when the log checking
software was writtenin 1988, so provisions for such things were
incorporated in the software.
If a pattern of similar errors arises (either call sign errors
or exchange info) during the cross checking procedure, we give
you the benefit of the doubt, and do not take those QSOs away.
I quote from my previous posting:
>>In the League's log checking software, before QSO credits are
>>taken away for any reason--and claimed scores are reduced, there
>>is human intervention. The program requires us to manually check
>>any QSO before credit is removed. We have the option of taking
>>away or giving back credit for any QSO the computer flags. This
>>prohibits computers from reducing scores automatically and
>>unchecked by human supervision. This was one of our major
>>concerns when the software was written, so safeguards were
>>inserted into the programs to prohibit such things. This also
>>allows us to double check for inconsistencies or recurring
>>patterns. If an inconsistency or recurring pattern develops, we
>>give the entrant, who's log is being checked, the benifit of the
>>doubt, and do not remove QSO or multiplier credit.
>From Ron Rueter <rdrueter@hebron.connected.com> Fri May 6 05:38:33 1994
From: Ron Rueter <rdrueter@hebron.connected.com> (Ron Rueter)
Subject: Wire Beams (fwd)
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9405052138.A14746-0100000@hebron.connected.com>
On Thu, 5 May 1994 WEBSTER_KER@CSUSYS.CTSTATEU.EDU wrote:
> With Field Day just around the corner, our group is starting to think about
> high-gain antennas for 40 meters. The idea of a 3 element wire beam came up
> and
> I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with them? Being in the
> Northeast, we don't really have to worry about turning it, so it seems like
> an
> ideal solution. Any comments? Any other ideas that we should consider?
>
> Thanks for the input... Kevin N1EPU [WEBSTER_KER@CCSU.CTSTATEU.EDU]
>
>
I've used a couple of different types with great success when I lived in
6 land. I used a 3 element wire beam in an inverted V configuration for
several years
Then I tried a Vee beam, each side about 2 wavelenghts long shaped in a V
with the open side towards the east coast. That worked even better than
the 3 element vee beam.
Have fun and good luck.
73 NV6Z rdrueter@hebron.connected.com
>From Ron Rueter <rdrueter@hebron.connected.com> Fri May 6 05:39:50 1994
From: Ron Rueter <rdrueter@hebron.connected.com> (Ron Rueter)
Subject: To subsubscribers and unsubscribers (fwd)
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9405052105.A14746-0100000@hebron.connected.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ron Rueter <rdrueter@hebron.connected.com>
To: "Fred Cady ieefc@msu.oscs.montana.edu" <fred_c@ece.ee.montana.edu>
Subject: Re: To subsubscribers and unsubscribers
Hear Hear, I like what I read (see below). Just goes to show ya that to
many hams put there mouth and/or fingers in gear before turning on brain.
Remember fellow hams ENGAGE your BRAIN first, otherwise use 11 meters!!
73 de NV6Z rdrueter@hebron.connected.com
On Thu, 5 May 1994, Fred Cady ieefc@msu.oscs.montana.edu wrote:
> Hey you guys trying to subscribe or unsubscribe. Don't you ever
> listen in the pile-up? This isn't a "when last heard you were
> 2x2 rifleshot, last two letters of your call only, net!"
> Everything is Q5 unless you have QRM between
> your ears. LISTEN UP! DON'T send your subscribe or unsubscribe
> messages to the reflector. It doesn't work that way and it doesn't
> work. DON'T send your subscription request to cq-contest@tgv.com.
> DO send it to cq-contest-REQUEST@tgv.com. The other reflectors work
> the same way, too. And read the "Frequently Asked Questions", or
> FAQ, messages that come from the system operator. And don't
> keep calling in the pile-up when the dx is coming back to a partial
> call that isn't even close to yours.
>
> 73, de Fred, KE7X (a grumpy old professor at the end of a long term where
> the students don't listen either!)
>
> P.S. Still looking for hams/contesters at NASA/Langley.
>
>
>
>From fax%sparc4@Olivetti.Com (Marco Fassiotto) Fri May 6 07:27:18 1994
From: fax%sparc4@Olivetti.Com (Marco Fassiotto) (Marco Fassiotto)
Subject: ARI International DX test
Message-ID: <9405060627.AA09145@sparc4.ICO.OLIVETTI.COM>
I'm passing to the reflector the rules of the A.R.I (Associazione Radioamatori
Italiani) international DX contest edited in electronic format by Mauro, I1JQJ.
Since this is a late posting there is no time left to ask for the related sw
but if someone is interested in post-contest data entry, Let me know and
I'll try to send it via e-mail next week.
Hope to work you all next week end!
73, marco i1iiy/aa1iu, CW op at IK1JUL/1 multi-single
enjoy....
------------------ cut here --------------------------------------------------
The 1994 ARI INTERNATIONAL DX CONTEST
----------------------------------------
(Rules for foreign participants)
PLEASE NOTE THE NEW RTTY CATEGORY AND THE FREE SOFTWARE OFFERED TO MANAGE
THE CONTEST !!
Aim: it's a world wide competition: everybody can work everybody.
Date and time: every first full week-end of May from 2000z Saturday till
2000z Sunday. In 1994 it will be on May 7/8.
Classes:
1) Single Operator - CW
2) Single Operator - SSB
3) Single Operator - Mixed
4) Single Operator - RTTY
5) Multi Operators - Single TX - Mixed
6) SWL - Single Operator - Mixed
Bands: 10m thru 160m (no WARC bands). Band and mode can be changed only
after 10 minutes you have been on it.
Exchange: Italian stations will send RST + two letters to identify their
province. Other stations will send RST + a serial number from 001.
QSO/Points:
a) QSO/HRD with own country counts 0 point but is good for the
multipliers' credit.
b) QSO/HRD with own continent counts 1 point,
c) QSO/HRD with different continent counts 3 points,
d) QSO/HRD with any Italian (I & IS0) station counts 10 points.
The same station can be contacted on the same band once on SSB, once on
CW and once on RTTY but only the first QSO is good for multipliers' credit.
Multipliers:
a) all Italian provinces (103) count 1 multiplier,
b) all DXCC countries (except I & IS0) count 1 multiplier.
The same multiplier (country/province) can be counted once for band.
The 103 Italian provinces are:
I1: AL, AT, BI, CN, GE, IM, NO, SP, SV, TO, VB, VC.
IX1: AO.
I2: BG, BS, CO, CR, LC, LO, MI, MN, PV, SO, VA.
I3: BL, PD, RO, TV, VE, VR, VI.
IN3: BZ, TN.
IV3: GO, PN, TS, UD.
I4: BO, FE, FO, MO, PR, PC, RA, RE, RN.
I5: AR, FI, GR, LI, LU, MS, PI, PO, PT, SI.
I6: AN, AP, AQ, CH, MC, PS, PE, TE.
I7: BA, BR, FG, LE, MT, TA.
I8: AV, BN, CB, CE, CZ, CS, IS, KR, NA, PZ, RC, SA, VV.
IT9: CL, CT, EN, ME, PA, RG, SR, TP, AG.
I0: FR, LT, PG, RI, ROMA (or RM), TR, VT.
IS0: CA, NU, SS, OR.
Final score: the sum of QSO/points from all bands times the sum of
multipliers from all bands.
SWL: have the same rules of OM. The same station cannot appear more than
3 times on every band as a correspondent.
Logs: separate logs are necessary for each band. A separate summary
sheet is required. Computerized logs on diskette are welcome only in ARI
Contest format. You can apply for free software to the Contest Manager.
Logs must be mailed within 30 days from the end of the contest and
addressed to: ARI Contest Manager, I2UIY Paolo Cortese, P. O. Box 14, 27043
Broni (PV) Italy.
FREE SOFTWARE: An IBM-compatible software to administrate this contest
is available FREE of cost. It can be used on real-time or either after the
contest. It calculates points, multipliers and score, you have just to type
the callsign and the received report. It prints logs, summary and dupe
sheets as well as QSL labels. It has PacketCluster capability. The new 1994
version is now available, revised and modified. It can manage: ARI DX
Contest, UBA Contests and WWDX Contests. The software can be received by
sending 5 US Dollars or 10 IRCs to cover the diskette/postage expenses to
the Contest Manager.
Awards: a plaque with a certificate will be awarded to the top scoring
station in each class. A certificate will be awarded to No. 2,3,4,5 top
scoring stations in each class as well as to the top scoring stations in
each country in each class.
SPECIAL PRIZE: a POCKET CALCULATOR will be awarded FREE to ALL those
stations that will work at least 100 Italian stations (for DX stns) or 250
Italian stations (for European stns). A separate list of the I-stns worked
is REQUIRED.
--------------------------- cut here -------------------------------------
--
Marco Fassiotto, i1iiy/aa1iu
Internet : fax@sparc4.ico.olivetti.com
AX25 : aa1iu@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na
>From Eugene Walsh <0004504465@mcimail.com> Fri May 6 07:49:00 1994
From: Eugene Walsh <0004504465@mcimail.com> (Eugene Walsh)
Subject: Repeating Messages
Message-ID: <33940506064933/0004504465PK4EM@mcimail.com>
I think it is wonderful that some folks repeat entire
big long messages and then say at the end that they
agree with these big long messages.
That way, these big long messages, which everyone
has read before, will never die.
It never occurred to me that anyone would care if
I agreed with some of these big long messages which
are often repeated on this forum. I usually don't
save too many of these but I will research this and
maybe repeat some of these big long messages and
then say at the end, in one line, that I agree
with them. Will that be ok?
Lets have a little common sense.
Ciaio N2AA
|