[Top] [All Lists]

no mail

Subject: no mail
From: rbellas@xenon.che.ilstu.edu (rbellas@xenon.che.ilstu.edu)
Date: Tue Aug 1 14:35:13 1995
set no mail

>From ni6t@ix.netcom.com (Garry Shapiro )  Tue Aug  1 20:41:17 1995
From: ni6t@ix.netcom.com (Garry Shapiro ) (Garry Shapiro )
Subject: Good callsigns
Message-ID: <199508011941.MAA24691@ix7.ix.netcom.com>

You wrote: 
>Tree- Trey's is good, but for pure contest key-down time, I always 
>thought it was: 
>                       JJ1JJJ
>73, Larry N6AZE
Naaaah! For sheer abominable confusion and guaranteed catastrophe, this 
one was actually QRV a couple of years ago:


Yes, that's right: a stuttering burst of 19--count 'em--dits.

Garry, NI6T

>From jreid@aloha.net (Jim Reid)  Tue Aug  1 20:43:26 1995
From: jreid@aloha.net (Jim Reid) (Jim Reid)
Subject: Tribanders--Mosley?
Message-ID: <199508011941.JAA12243@hookomo.aloha.net>

So far the thread  has not mentioned the beam I put
up following hurricane Iniki whcih zapped Kauai nearly
three years ago.  My big quad was pretzel'd by Iniki;
I  asked  many mainland guys ( via a simple 20 meter
loop after the storm) about replacment beams for this
very windy place. (Almost constant trade winds here.) 

I was told several times that the Mosley line was the strongest
antenna, using the heavy  walled tubing.  So I bought their
TA-34-XL.  A 21 foot boom  job with four elements.  Each element
has one large trap near each end.  Set up as reflector,  driven
element and two directors.  Somehow with only one trap/ ele end,
they get 20,15 and 10 meter 4 element beam performance on 
each of these bands.  I judge that it works pretty  well,  as I have
been told by many mainland operators,  that even running 125 watts,
I have one of the strongest signals on the band!  Also got DXCC with
it out here since Iniki, a nd an endorsement,  tho maybe thats not
such a big deal  if the programs going to be stopped by the ARRL.

After reaading all the comments re the C-3,  was thinking of replacing
the TA-34;  but now that it has been shown that the C-3 is really
only a trap-free 2 element/band beam,  guess I'll stay with the
strong TA-34,  at least until I learn more about the 30 foot boom
Force 12 heavy duty C-4XL,  assume it is more than 2 el/band. plus
has 2 el on 40;  that would be nice to have out here.   High f/b is of
no consequence out here;  nver much " behind"  to worry about,
so gain and bandwidth would be the optimum element spacing
goals,  if there were someway to predict how to do that for these
antennas,  I would make such adjustment on the boom.

Anyway,  thought I would toss in the Mosley for consideration.

Aloha and 73,

Jim, AH6NB

>From beaton@wintermute.co.uk (Alastair Beaton)  Tue Aug  1 21:41:45 1995
From: beaton@wintermute.co.uk (Alastair Beaton) (Alastair Beaton)
Subject: Trivia 2 - U.K. calls
Message-ID: <199508012041.VAA15691@oberon.wintermute.co.uk>

Hello All,


Here in the UK, if you wish to handle 3rd-party traffic, you must change
your prefix for the occasion (makes WPX a scream, and plays havoc with old
CT lists):
GX - England    GT - Isle of Man
GS - Scotland   GN - N. Ireland
GC - Wales      GH - Jersey
GP - Guernsey

There's also the new Novice license system. Novice "A" license (inc. 5wpm
Morse test) for HF  and VHF privileges, Novice "B" licence for 50MHz and
above. Novices run 5W and are restricted to certain band segments. Calls are
(2?0 for "A", 2?1 for "B"):
2E - England    2D - Isle of Man
2M - Scotland   2I - N. Ireland
2W - Wales      2J - Jersey
2U - Guernsey

If you edit your own CTY files, these "alternative" prefixes are useful.

Ian, VE7FTP asks; 
>Does a licencee's call change should the operator earn HF qualifications?

Yes, it does. You can hold an "Full A"-class call (for HF & VHF), and your
old "Full B"-class call (only for above 50MHz) simultaneously, providing you
pay for both (15 UK pounds each, annually). You can never use a VHF callsign
on HF. 
Dave, WX3N asks;
>So what is coming next after the 0s?  Will the 5s be revisited?  Or maybe a
new prefix in the M block or more of the 2s??

We're told that the VHF-only guys, currently Hoovering up the G7s, will get
G5 calls next. As for the HF/VHF "Full A"s, it's said that they'll get an
all new prefix, starting with "M". If so, I guess MM0MMM would make an
"interesting" one. 

DTI inspector - "You realise, sir, that UK licence power is 400W?"
CQ-WW-SSB op  - "But we only use this 8877 PA as a shack lighting modulator"

|                               |
|     Alastair J.S. Beaton      |
|     Tel: +44 1463 231197      |
|     Fax: +44 1463 717854      |
|E-mail: beaton@wintermute.co.uk|

>From jbl@levin.mv.com (Joel B Levin)  Tue Aug  1 13:57:39 1995
From: jbl@levin.mv.com (Joel B Levin) (Joel B Levin)
Subject: Good callsigns
Message-ID: <199508012059.QAA25931@granite.mv.net>

At 14:33 8/1/95 +0700, Jumsai Janhom-HS1NIV/5 wrote:
>Hi Guy,
>        As well as  HS5HSH  is ok. :-)
>> Tree- Trey's is good, but for pure contest key-down time, I always 
>> thought it was: 
>>                      JJ1JJJ
>> 73, Larry N6AZE

My suggested best contest call sign:


        /JBL  KD1ON

>From H. Ward Silver" <hwardsil@seattleu.edu  Tue Aug  1 23:09:13 1995
From: H. Ward Silver" <hwardsil@seattleu.edu (H. Ward Silver)
Subject: Good callsigns
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9508011559.B11005-7100000@bach.seattleu.edu>

If a bunch of these calls show up on 1 April 1996, I'll know who to suspect!

Aside from me, that is...

73, Ward N0AX

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • no mail, rbellas@xenon.che.ilstu.edu <=