Thanks to all for your comments. The overwhelming consensus was "don't
bother" with 160 in WPX. Only one comment even suggested trying.
The most telling note was from Trey, WN4KKN, who paraphrased K5ZD as saying,
"If you're on 160 in CW WPX, then you are losing the contest."
73. Ken, AB6FO, KWIDELITZ@DELPHI.COM
>From email@example.com (Walter Deemer) Tue May 21 21:09:45 1996
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Walter Deemer) (Walter Deemer)
Subject: QRV in WPX: Me, Me, Me!! (Bitter, sarcastic humor)
Adding to the deluge of recent -- and totally unnecessary -- postings:
I, too, plan to be QRV in the WPX. I will be using either the special call
AC1O/P5 or AC1O/A51 (if either QTH becomes available).
If not; well, it'll have to be just plain old AC1O.
But fear not -- even AC1O will QSL 100% via the bureau (to those who enclose
two dollars with their QSL. Otherwise, the response rate will be
73, Walt (If you're there, you're there; if you're not, you're not...)
>From email@example.com (Larry Tyree) Tue May 21 21:11:12 1996
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Subject: SU2MT contest QSLs
I recently became aware of a situation that I feel obligated to comment
on (read: I need a real job).
Evidently, there has been some talk on some of the reflectors about
the lack of QSLs from SU2MT when W6NV and K6NA were operating there.
I even had someone ask me to add a new feature to my program so they
could preload the dupesheet with these callsigns, so they wouldn't work
them in the contests!
I asked Glenn about this and received the following response:
> ... the fact is I am bound by the wishes of the station owner who
> at present requires his QSLs direct only.
Glenn notes that he and Oli have never been advertised as QSL managers
for this station. He is hopeful that this situation will change and
they will be able to QSL 100 percent via the bureau.
I think some people owe Glenn and Oli an apology.
73 Tree N6TR
>From email@example.com (Steven Sample) Tue May 21 21:56:36 1996
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Steven Sample) (Steven Sample)
Subject: 160 in CW WPX - Consensus - Don't Bother
Well...that's bad news for those who spend most of their time on 160. If
things are O.K., a guy can pick up some quick mults and get out of Dodge.
If not, he can get out of Dodge before he tires.
Either way, many of us would appreciate a visit if you're in the area.
Just don't close your mind to 160 before even looking (listening)!!!
73... Steve (Slim) / AA9AX
On Tue, 21 May 1996 KWIDELITZ@delphi.com wrote:
> Thanks to all for your comments. The overwhelming consensus was "don't
> bother" with 160 in WPX. Only one comment even suggested trying.
> The most telling note was from Trey, WN4KKN, who paraphrased K5ZD as saying,
> "If you're on 160 in CW WPX, then you are losing the contest."
> 73. Ken, AB6FO, KWIDELITZ@DELPHI.COM
>From ToddD@dci.state.sd.us (Dravland, Todd) Wed May 22 00:45:00 1996
From: ToddD@dci.state.sd.us (Dravland, Todd) (Dravland, Todd)
Subject: 204BA vs. 204CA dimensions
I am looking to find out the element and spacing changes made from the 204BA
to the 204CA and what parameters were modified by these changes (e.g. F/B,
gain, SWR, etc..), if any. Thanks for the help and 73.