>I recall this 'problem' being limited to an early serial number, like
>everything up to 3M or 5M numbers, but I'm pulling this
>from memory. Anyone have the details on this 'range'.
I believe the range was pre-3-million S/N. I know that they came
out with a new RF board starting with 3 million, and I believe
they also fixed the plated-thru hole problem at the same time.
The problem was prevalent enough that Tech Support in JA (I believe
it was JA anyway) came out with a list of digital board-related
problems and which of the plated thru holes you had to re-solder
to fix that particular problem. I've had to use the list to fix
930's of friends and so far, the list works. I usually try to
re-solder as many of the holes as I can easily access when I'm in
there.
My '930 was bought about 15 or so years ago and it's still working
like a champ today... albeit with many plated thru holes resoldered.
73 - Tom Hammond N0SS
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>From John Loftus" <John_Loftus@vettweb.net.au Sat May 23 01:55:34 1998
From: John Loftus" <John_Loftus@vettweb.net.au (John Loftus)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Invitation to VK4EMM contest site
Message-ID: <000901bd85e5$8687e5a0$b4f065cb@zzpwetzi>
www.uq.net.au/radiosport/
Sender: owner-cq-contest@contesting.com
Precedence: bulk
X-List-Info: http://www.contesting.com/cq-contest-faq.html
X-Sponsor: W4AN, KM3T, N5KO & AD1C
One of the attractions is the unique presentation of propagation =
forecasts from VK4
for the next CQ WW WPX CW contest.
You will also find a range of contest hints and free contest software.
Regards
John Loftus VK4EMM
email: John_Loftus@vettweb.net.au
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>From Charles Fulp" <k3ww@fast.net Sat May 23 10:50:28 1998
From: Charles Fulp" <k3ww@fast.net (Charles Fulp)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Packet and SweepStakes
Message-ID: <01bd8630$379b03a0$5e5678cc@k3ww.fast.net>
I had a few discussions with KR2Q at Dayton. My feelings were that I don't
see single ops using packet in the
CQWW. There may be some around here, but if so, they are very careful about
not showing up in the pileups.
On the other hand I have had the feeling that I see more packet activity
than Multi Op listings in QST for SS.
I don't save the old packet logs that far back, so never tried a check such
as published here the other day.
Obviously a bunch of guys don't even send in their logs, so that cuts things
down somewhat.
There is a simple rules change that would make casual packet cheating easier
to monitor and make peer
pressure easier to apply. If either the Precedence or Check were
distinctive for Multi Op SS stations, we would know who was a single op, and
could watch packet, and behavior on the air and immediately confront
the packet users.
My first choice would be for Multi Ops (including all packet users, except
those sending and not receiving) to
send a precedence of C or M . This would also make it easier to spot
Multi Ops in the published listings.
They are at the bottom of the list now, but sometimes there are not entrants
in all 4 Classes so if in my section
there were no B class entrants and I was a multi running high power, you
could read the list see me there and
not know I was a multi (unless there was an Op list or +NET after my call,
and many Multi Ops did not have that
this year).
The other option would be the AA trick, Instead of year licensed for CHECK,
Multi Ops would send 00. That
would also solve the revolving Check problem that some Multi Ops have
trouble with.
At least this would have minimal impact on the running of the contest,
except for guys that would have a
slightly better real time view of who their competition was. (like the Q and
A class guys do now)
73 Chas K3WW
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|