[Top] [All Lists]


From: RKILE@delphi.com (RKILE@delphi.com)
Date: Sat Jul 16 21:25:16 1994
        Real Gas, Nitro, Smoke, Soup and other descriptions of microphonic
                        and telegraphic Power

    Wow! What a thread. Some of the best humor and best lies in Amateur
radio! 80 postings in 3 days is almost as good as CQWW.

    My curiosity had me do a inventory check of Bird 5000H elements sold so
far this year at AES. To date some 35 total all locations. I would say the
rate has been somewhat constant over the years indicating about 50-60 per
year. Multiply that by some 70 or so different vendors add those from
business or contract origin and the number gets to the 1000 range quite
easily. Who's blowing smoke?
    W0UN, NI6T have suggested disqualification for flagrant rules
violations. Why not? It would be a real pleasure to compete on a even
playing field based on skill, knowledge, and just plain persistance.
All other sanctioned sports have measures implimented. The cost is part of
the privilege of competition. Administration and enforcement probably will
never happen. Without certification of compliance where would NASCAR or SCCA
be today? Worthless, meaningless, records and events.
    Take for instance a CLASS A COMPETITION CERTIFICATE. Mandatory station
inspection to insure compliance. CT or N6TR interface cards with packet
cluster lockout code in single op category. Along with time and date stamped
power measurements imbedded into contest logs. Hummm....

73 de Bob, KG7D
via internet"rkile@delphi.com"
CQ CQ TEST........


>From Douglas S. Zwiebel" <0006489207@mcimail.com  Sun Jul 17 01:49:00 1994
From: Douglas S. Zwiebel" <0006489207@mcimail.com (Douglas S. Zwiebel)
Subject: SOUP II (3 cents)
Message-ID: <75940717004957/0006489207PK2EM@mcimail.com>

I must say that I have been amazed by the number of responses
I've gotten.  I'll try to do the trivial stuff first.  As far as
SOUP goes, I've just always heard it called SOUP.  I've also heard
of SOUPING UP your car, or a really SOUPED UP whatever.  Perhaps
that is where RUNNING SOUP came from.  Any Wm Safires out there?
As for SMOKE, yes, I've heard of LOAD FOR SMOKE (this not uncommonly
used with respect to running a 30L1 at the 2kw pep level, ala XV5
during the late 60's, and most likely elsewhere earlier than that).
As mentioned by K1DG, many of you replied (direct and not via
the reflector) that I can't comment until I've been west of the
East Coast.  The further West, the bigger the need.  Yes, I must
admit that I have NEVER contested from anywhere except the East
Coast.  But I was really surprised by the number commenting on
how SUCCESSFUL the use of SOUP can be.  NOBODY said that their
info was firsthand, but nobody really made any comment on HOW
they had gleaned their knowledge on this topic....hmmmm?
I was especially surprised by the comments "in favor" of SOUP coming
from East Coast types!  By "in favor" I mean those commenting
on the positive aspects of running more than legal power: easier
to keep the run frequency, punches a HOLE in the band, generates
bigger pileups, etc.  Sure SOUNDS like firsthand knowledge, or are
these just good guesses at what MIGHT happen?  All comments just
mentioned were also given MANY TIMES by non-East Coasters.
When the SFI is in the 80's and the K=5, E-mail sure is nice!
de Doug/KR2Q

>From John W. Brosnahan" <broz@csn.org  Sun Jul 17 05:08:12 1994
From: John W. Brosnahan" <broz@csn.org (John W. Brosnahan)
Subject: Setting the Record Straight as well as A Modest Proposal
Message-ID: <199407170408.AA01155@teal.csn.org>

>    W0UN, NI6T have suggested disqualification for flagrant rules
>violations. Why not? It would be a real pleasure to compete on a even
>73 de Bob, KG7D
>via internet"rkile@delphi.com"
Bob, just to keep the record straight, although I have already done more than 
my fair share of postings on this topic, I have never suggested disqualifica-
tion for flagrant rules violations.  Not that I necessarily disagree, I just 
haven't made that statement.  But what I do know is that there have been
disqualifications in the past of people who I know well and I believed them
when they said that they were never told why and were never given the 
opportunity to defend themselves and that they believed themselves to be 
totally innocent.  So they not only never got the opportunity to defend
themselves, they also never found out what the problem was so that they could 
learn from their experiences.
What my position is, again, is that it is impossible to determine for 
absolute certainty whether someone is running excessive power unless 
1) you are personally there or 2) the FCC issues a citation.  You can't 
even be sure if someone else says he was there and saw it, because you don't 
know if that someone else might not not have some kind of grudge and is not 
being truthful. So in a country where one is presumed innocent until proven 
guilty, I think it is a bad idea to accuse anyone in public or private based 
on hearsay or strength of the signal.
(Rather than disqualification, maybe we should just adopt the Colombian rules
and EXECUTE anyone who screws up!  Scoring a goal for the other team, 
running excessive power, or just missing a mult, what's the difference?) 
(make your own appropriate smiley face here)
73  John  W0UN  broz@csn.org

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • GASEOUS EJECTUS, RKILE@delphi.com <=