Hiya, gang-
After a rough SS SSB this weekend (QRP and wires...Masochism Incarnate),
I've more or less decided that I'm not gonna do SSB QRP anymore (I am a
Cubs fan, though...my battle cry is 'wait till next year!')
Running the weekend back in my mind, I got to thinking about all the S &
P=EDng I did... careful, methodical harvest of each band, and then going =
and
doing it all over again. Call =E9m twice. If you don't get an answer, mov=
e
on.. they'll be around on the next pass.
Not wanting to open a huge can of worms, is it fair to say that the skill=
s
developed by the best QRP=E9rs are radically different than the KW folks,=
or
is it just pileup skills to the n'th degree? With a setup like I had this
past weekend, finding a run freq would be a difficult task (though not
impossible). S & P would be the main way to get Q's. SInce everybody has
to go S& P=EDng at SOME point, I was just curious if folks thought there =
was
a difference in the approach to S & P.
Thanks to all who worked me this weekend.
73,
Sean Kutzko KX9X
Elkhart, IN
>From Tim_Coad@smtp.svl.trw.com (Tim Coad) Mon Nov 18 22:57:58 1996
From: Tim_Coad@smtp.svl.trw.com (Tim Coad) (Tim Coad)
Subject: fast and loose SS excha
Message-ID: <n1363793084.26984@smtp.svl.trw.com>
Reply to: RE>>fast and loose SS exchanges
About 5 or 6 years ago I came across a station running guys like mad in SSB
SS, his exchange went something like this:
CQ SS CQ SS W1xx W1xx SS
me>nu6s
NU6S 1275 BRAVO 55 Ct.
me>Ur # 1200 bravo nu6s 68 scv
Thanks W1xx SS
I thought this to be a little odd since the station's real callsign was W1AW.
Tim - NU6S
----------------
>
> I'm not to sure that you're correct in your assumption that the CALL
> SIGN has to be GIVEN in the exchange and in the exact order.
I've always been of the opinion that the CALLSIGN WAS PART OF THE
EXCHANGE in SS. If you don't send it, you're not playing by the rules.
This is pretty simple - is my opinion CORRECT or INCORRECT ??
---------
>From aa9ax@iglou.com (Steven Sample) Mon Nov 18 23:10:32 1996
From: aa9ax@iglou.com (Steven Sample) (Steven Sample)
Subject: Incomplete Exchange
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.961118180142.19283F-100000@iglou1>
On 18 Nov 1996, Mike Fatchett / W0MU wrote:
<snip>
> If the ARRL wants another piece of information copied they could use your
> name, city, mothers maiden name, and get as much out of the exchange.
>>>Might be interesting!
<snip>
>
> Personally I think the exchange is cumbersome enough and overall scares
> off many would be participants.
>>>>With stations registering QSO numbers above 2000, it would not seem
taht the exchange has driven people away. On the contrary, this seems to
be a very popular contest, and interest abounds. Most contesters seem to
expect the integrity of the test to remain intact.
<snip>
> Nobody wants to look like a fool be asking a ton of questions or feeling
> like they are being grilled by the FBI just for a simple contact.
>
>>>>Here is a case in point for us to help new people become interested in
contesting. Pick a contest you don't expect to (or can't) win, and invite
some locals over to have some fun. It works! Additionally, those
entering the contest might be expected to review the rules like the rest
of us do before each event. And a simple review of the rules, IMHO, does
not constitute an FBI grilling.
<snip>
> Sorry I missed you all in SS :(
>
>>>>Me too! Catch you next time!
Steve / N9FD (Ex-AA9AX)>
>
>
>
>
>From aa8u@voyager.net (AA8U) Mon Nov 18 23:41:36 1996
From: aa8u@voyager.net (AA8U) (AA8U)
Subject: Are QRP skills transferrable?
Message-ID: <199611182341.SAA00581@vixa.voyager.net>
Hello Sean,
I almost always run QRO, out of habit I guess.=20
I've entered SS numerous times both modes, single-op and multi-op. Each time
I continue to be amazed at the number of QRP contacts in my log AND many of
them win out in getting my attention over the top of several A and B power
stations also calling. The obvious talents these operators exhibit is
admirable.=20
Last year I entered part time in Field Day as a QRP station and made a shade
over 200 Q's in the first couple hours. What a suprise. It was a blast too.
I'm convinced that the operator that is proficient at QRP is a better
operator than his QRO peers.=20
Don't get discouraged, keep at it. You should be proud of your
accomplishments in the QRP class. =20
One of these days I'm going to really test myself and enter as a serious QRP
effort. I'm sure I will learn a lot the hard way, but it will no doubt be
much fun!
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
>After a rough SS SSB this weekend (QRP and wires...Masochism Incarnate),
>I've more or less decided that I'm not gonna do SSB QRP anymore (I am a
>Cubs fan, though...my battle cry is 'wait till next year!')
>
>is it fair to say that the skills
>developed by the best QRP=E9rs are radically different than the KW folks,=
or
>is it just pileup skills to the n'th degree?
>SInce everybody has
>to go S& P=EDng at SOME point, I was just curious if folks thought there=
was
>a difference in the approach to S & P.
>73,
>
>Sean Kutzko KX9X
>From lenrev@wwa.com (Len Revelle) Mon Nov 18 23:41:58 1996
From: lenrev@wwa.com (Len Revelle) (Len Revelle)
Subject: QSO B4!!!!
References: <961118132007_570782394@emout19.mail.aol.com>
Message-ID: <3292f15a.6398329@sashimi.wwa.com>
On Mon, 18 Nov 1996 13:51:21 -0500, you wrote:
>In a message dated 96-11-18 12:51:01 EST, you write:
>
>>During the CW weekend of SS, particularly the last few hours, I
>>received too many QSO B4 responses. I understand how it can happen but
>>I preface my exchange with the call of the station I'm working.
>>While these Q's are not uniques are there any attempts made to correct
>>for Q's claimed by only one of the operators?
>>
>Hi, Len --
>
> You call me while I'm running, I enter your call and CT pops up =
with
>**DUPE**, I don't work you. If I haven't worked you before, how did =
your
>call get into my computer?
>
> Are you using a computerized logging program? Do you check to see =
if
>you've worked a station before you call them? My biggest gripe is that =
many
>running stations just say "QRZ" at the end of their current contact =
without
>identifying. In that case, it may be a dupe since you haven't been able=
to
>ID the guy first.
>
> Good ops will log you and tell you it's a dupe in a one or two =
seconds
>from their logging program. I would tend to believe them since most of =
them
>are running and just answering stations that are callling them. The =
onus of
>logging is on the calling station as well. Perhaps more so to avoid =
second
>calls and dupes. Check your log before calling. In cases where he's =
not in
>your log, you may be SOL because the station may not want to dupe you or=
give
>you the missing information in your log. This is all part of learning =
how to
>operate SS successfully.
>
>73, Steve K7LXC
>
Hi Steve,
=09
I've been slinging Q's for 30 years but, unfortunately, not as a heavy
hitter, hi... I tend to do more S&P than run and have used CT since =
version 6 so
I check 90% before I call them.=20
What is happening is that with stations grouped tight and the plethora
of tight filters or DSP in use, or in the higher frequencies where two =
close
stations don't hear each other, I can call another station and make an =
exchange
while you only hear me. While I do send the station's call as a leader to=
the
exchange, you may not hear it and log me as a valid QSO.=20
The rub is that when I later call you and your log shows a prior Q, do
you argue when I point out you aren't in my log? The usual response was =
to
ignore me, and I assume, to keep me in the log. I lose time and a Q and =
you have
a questionable log.
Obviously I use the term "you" generically.=20
********************************
| Len Revelle lenrev@wwa.com |
| Illinois CIS 72607,1320 | =20
| KE9YR AMA 60055 |
********************************
>From lenrev@wwa.com (Len Revelle) Mon Nov 18 23:41:50 1996
From: lenrev@wwa.com (Len Revelle) (Len Revelle)
Subject: Incomplete exchange
References: <19961118155536.AAA4010@LOCALNAME>
Message-ID: <3291ec2d.5072612@sashimi.wwa.com>
On Mon, 18 Nov 1996 15:55:38 +0000, you wrote:
>At 02:36 PM 11/18/96 +0000, Hans Brakob wrote:
>
>>You're not missing a point. The SS rules specifically call for 5 =
elements=20
>>in the exchange, and each much be sent in the correct order to =
constitute
>>a valid exchange.
>>
>>I noticed the same practice this weekend, and don't ever recall hearing=
it
>>before. Just a handful of stations were noted doing it, so maybe we =
can
>>nip this thing right at the outset. Those contacts should not count, =
and
>>were purged from my log as incomplete exchanges.
>>
>I'm sorry, but I think this is going to absurd extremes. I had lots of
>people come on during my SS begathon and start off with "I'm not in the
>contest, but you're 5-9 in Wallawulla, Mississippi." Whereupon, and who
>among us hasn't done this, I started the game of 5 questions to pull out=
a
>full exchange. (Probably the funniest moment of the contest for me came
>when one somewhat paranoid individual protested with a tense "Why do you
>need to know?" after I asked what year he first got his license.) Did I=
ask
>my questions in the proper sequence? No. Did I make him repeat his
>callsign when he knew I already had it? No. Am I going to toss these =
Q's
>out of my log becuase they fail the test mentioned above? Not on your =
life!
>
>There were a very few people "in" the contest who weren't repeating =
their
>call as part of the exchange. But it was clear to me that they were
>neophytes and did not have decent scores going for themselves. They'll
>catch on soon enough if they want to get their totals off the ground. I
>think what we want to do for these people is encourage them, not punish =
them.
>
>Bruce, N6NT =20
>
>
Han's removing Q's from his log from clearly incomplete exchanges is no
more absurd than if I had added all those who told me, "QSO B4," to mine!=
His
sense of fair play may just be different from many "competitors".
I heard one station, with high numbers, make many Q's without bothering
to ID much less use his call in the exchange. Unfortunately all those who=
I
heard using abbreviated exchanges clearly fell in the serious competitor
category if S-units and Q's are an indication.
Those that are "in" have a responsibility to play by the rules so us
that "aren't in" have something to aspire to.
********************************
| Len Revelle lenrev@wwa.com |
| Illinois CIS 72607,1320 | =20
| KE9YR AMA 60055 |
********************************
>From foggie@dtx.net (foggie) Mon Nov 18 23:40:55 1996
From: foggie@dtx.net (foggie) (foggie)
Subject: SSTV Window
Message-ID: <XFMail.961118174928.foggie@dtx.net>
On 18-Nov-96 aa8u@voyager.net wrote:
>>The first attempt to post this bounced, if this is a dupe you all have my
>sincere apology.
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>Hello Fellow Contesters,
>
>I noticed the usual assortment of anti-contest "turf protectors" this
>weekend during SS SSB.
>
>This is not news, but I think I found a new "SSTV window" at or about 3812.
>Maybe there is a legitimate band plan allocation there for SSTV, if so I was
>not aware of it. Even if there is, the deliberate QRM and maliciously
>comments, one of the milder ones: "I'm sick of hearing you! Move your
>f...... contest" etc. This verbal abuse was followed by hours of sporadic
>SSTV transmissions, timed to try and cover up the stations I was working.
there is a band plan for SSTV around 3812. (3810-3815 I think...) Howeer this
does
not excuse the behavior you have rightly noticed.
I was an avid SSTV'er for a while, and still have many friends in that mode.
Most of them are a great bunch of guys. I have seen this behavior before though.
And I would say 99% of the time during contests. I don't understand it. The
nature of SSTV being that a very sharp filter will take care of the QRM, as I
have rarely if ever noticed a contester intentionally QRMing SSTV. This is part
of the reason I have not been on SSTV in a while.
I really have no advice. I give them their gap, as I guess 5khz isn't much. :)
Of course thats at least 4 stations worth of contesters :) I politely appologize
and move on if I unintentionally stumble on some freq that is used by SSTV
just as I would if I unintentionally stepped on your freq during a test.
(Although us contesters would probably skip the apology as it takes too
much time. )
73,
Al - kk5zx
One of these days I'll actually have time to do another contest.
------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: foggie <foggie@dtx.net>
Time: 17:40:57
-----------------------------------------------------------
Geek Code: GAT d H-- s:+ g+ p2 au+ a w+ v+ C++++ UL++++ P+
L++++ 3- E--- N++ K W--- M-- po Y+ t+ 5++ j R-
G' tv b++ D+ B--- e+ u+ h--- f r+++ n- z+++
-----------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent by XF-Mail, and is totally M$ Free
-----------------------------------------------------------
>From kg5u@hal-pc.org (Dale Martin) Tue Nov 19 00:00:38 1996
From: kg5u@hal-pc.org (Dale Martin) (Dale Martin)
Subject: Start the bullets flyi
Message-ID: <01BBD57A.6D2CCE80@pm9-175.hal-pc.org>
It seems to me that in the interests of efficiency and getting on to the =
next QSO as soon as possible, that it only injects confusion into a =
crazy and busy situation to omit the callsign or change the sequence of =
the exchange. It does nothing but cause momentary confusion for the =
receiving operator, even possibly causing a repeat to be requested, =
thereby causing delay for both ops. I speak from experience. I start =
hitting all kinds of keys to get the cursor in the right place.
Once I've typed in the other op's prec, I hit space bar and my cursor is =
at the callsign field ready to verify that I copied his call sign =
correctly the first time. If he jumps to the CK, then I am momentarily =
thrown and have to play catchup. =20
The SS announcement says in the text:=20
"You exchange a serial number (starting with 1), precedence (A for low =
power, B for high power, and Q for QRP), your call sign, check (the last =
two digits of the year you were first licensed) and your ARRL/RAC =
section."
Seems clear to me. =20
I found no problem using it on CW or on SSB (wish I could have used it =
much, much more!!).
I'm looking forward to the next SS, already!!
73,
Dale Martin, KG5U
kg5u@hal-pc.org
http://www.hal-pc.org/~kg5u
>From Joe_Wilkowski@mc.xerox.com (Wilkowski,Joe) Mon Nov 18 20:29:54 1996
From: Joe_Wilkowski@mc.xerox.com (Wilkowski,Joe) (Wilkowski,Joe)
Subject: Incomplete exchange
Message-ID: <"<3DC9903281B7677C>3DC9903281B7677C@X-MC-0819-MS2.XEROX"@-SMF->
I have to agree with Bruce on this subject. I worked a number of
folks this past weekend who were not familiar with the contest and
some were a little put off because of the mass hysteria that had taken
over their combatively normal band haunts. I see absolutely nothing
wrong in stopping to take the time to explain the contest and at the
same time asking for the required information. By doing this, you
have given the recipient all the information he needs to understand
what is going on and maybe even foster a little good will because of
the time you have taken to explain. I know this is true because the
majority of the folks I did this with thanked me and moved on
hopefully to have fun with the rest of the nuts. So its a win win scenario.
Its real easy to get myopic during the contest because your so focused
on your goals but remember, other folks use the same spectrum and it
is more than inconvenient to try to carry on a qso with a zillion
folks calling and answering "SS" cq's. I worked quite a few dx
contacts who were hearing all the activity but were not familiar with
the contest. For the most part they wanted to be helpful and maybe
provide a point or two if they could. Taking the time to be
pro-active and explain what is going on can only serve to impart warm
fuzzies to the non-participants.
/joe k8fc
joe_wilkowski@mc.xerox.com
----------
>>From: owner-cq-contest@tgv.com
>>To: cq-contest@tgv.com
>>Cc: Bruce Sawyer
>>Subject: Re: Incomplete exchange
>>
>>At 02:36 PM 11/18/96 +0000, Hans Brakob wrote:
>>
>>>You're not missing a point. The SS rules specifically call for 5 elements
>>>in the exchange, and each much be sent in the correct order to constitute
>>>a valid exchange.
>>>
>>>I noticed the same practice this weekend, and don't ever recall hearing it
>>>before. Just a handful of stations were noted doing it, so maybe we can
>>>nip this thing right at the outset. Those contacts should not count, and
>>>were purged from my log as incomplete exchanges.
>>>
>>I'm sorry, but I think this is going to absurd extremes. I had lots of
>>people come on during my SS begathon and start off with "I'm not in the
>>contest, but you're 5-9 in Wallawulla, Mississippi." Whereupon, and who
>>among us hasn't done this, I started the game of 5 questions to pull out a
>>full exchange. (Probably the funniest moment of the contest for me came
>>when one somewhat paranoid individual protested with a tense "Why do you
>>need to know?" after I asked what year he first got his license.) Did I ask
>>my questions in the proper sequence? No. Did I make him repeat his
>>callsign when he knew I already had it? No. Am I going to toss these Q's
>>out of my log becuase they fail the test mentioned above? Not on your life!
>>
>>There were a very few people "in" the contest who weren't repeating their
>>call as part of the exchange. But it was clear to me that they were
>>neophytes and did not have decent scores going for themselves. They'll
>>catch on soon enough if they want to get their totals off the ground. I
>>think what we want to do for these people is encourage them, not punish them.
>>
>>Bruce, N6NT
>>
>>
>From kg5u@hal-pc.org (Dale Martin) Tue Nov 19 00:07:03 1996
From: kg5u@hal-pc.org (Dale Martin) (Dale Martin)
Subject: Incomplete exchange
Message-ID: <01BBD57B.4EDFBCC0@pm9-175.hal-pc.org>
On Monday, November 18, 1996 9:55 AM, Bruce =
Sawyer[SMTP:N6NT@worldnet.att.net] wrote:
>I had lots of
>people come on during my SS begathon and start off with "I'm not in the
>contest, but you're 5-9 in Wallawulla, Mississippi." Whereupon, and =
who
>among us hasn't done this, I started the game of 5 questions to pull =
out a
>full exchange. (Probably the funniest moment of the contest for me =
came
>when one somewhat paranoid individual protested with a tense "Why do =
you
>need to know?" after I asked what year he first got his license.) =20
I had one guy start off with "I'm not in the contest, but....", so I =
stepped through the routine with him. I ended with "I'm your number 1, =
right?" He responded with "no. You are my number 4. I gave a point to =
three others so far." !!!??? Why did he have me step through the =
exchange? Did he do this to others AFTER our QSO? =20
Dale Martin, KG5U
kg5u@hal-pc.org
http://www.hal-pc.org/~kg5u
|