[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] March/April QEX issue

Subject: [CQ-Contest] March/April QEX issue
From: K4tmc@aol.com (K4tmc@aol.com)
Date: Sat Mar 10 14:45:16 2001
Is the reflector in use?....
IS the reflector IN USE!??.....

We interupt this discussion of clicks and frequency battles to bring you news
of something more objective...antennas.

Just got the March/April issue of QEX (& Communications Quarterly).  For
those who may be thinking of what to do about new antennas this Summer, there
are a few things in this issue that may be of interest.

  First, there is "The Rectangle Family of Antennas, Part 1, The Not-So-Simple
Rectangle", a discussion of 4-sided loops, considering their resistance,
gain, and bandwidth relative to frequency, shape, and conductors.

Second, there is "The Quad Antenna Revisited, Part 4, Effects of Ground on
Quad Loops", a discussion of how high it must be to provide the desired DX

And third, the RF column has two items: Making Off-Center Fed Dipoles Work
and Homebrew 1:1 and 4:1 Isolators.

And, if you are wondering what else is inside....
The ATR-2000, a Homemade High-Performance HF Transceiver, Part 3
PTC, Perceptual Transform Coding for Bandwidth Reduction of Speech in the
Analog Domain, Part 2
Beyond Fractional-N, Part 1
A Compensated, Modualr RF Voltmeter

OK, now back to the discussions....(of which I have enjoyed greatly)

73 & High Rates,
Henry Pollock - K4TMC
Raleigh, NC 

CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com

>From Leigh S. Jones" <kr6x@kr6x.com  Sat Mar 10 22:03:21 2001
From: Leigh S. Jones" <kr6x@kr6x.com (Leigh S. Jones)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Get that rate up !! Use "eatep" !
References: <>
Message-ID: <04a101c0a9ad$eceaefb0$ede3c23f@kr6x.org>

Bob -

Nice try, but the FCC no longer requires us to change callsigns when
moving from call area to call area, so numerous 5's operate outside of
5-land -- for instance, K5ZD is a 1, N5KO is a 6, and N6ZZ is a 5.
Now I'm not pretending you don't know this -- you're a fully aware
active ham and contester, of course.  signal reports like "five nine
Mass" and "five nine Cal" in the ARRL are indeed holdovers from the
days when there was less ambiguity associated with callsigns.  So,
"five nine tango" could mean, for example, Tennessee.

In truth, I often am amazed by how much familiarity with American
culture and geography, with the English language, with FCC rules and
regulations, etc., is required of DX hams in order to take part in the
DX contests on phone these days.  Everything is made quite easy for
those of us here in America.  Once, several years ago, I heard a West
Coast station working a station in India during a CQ Phone Contest,
trying to get him to send an exchange that included a zone number.
The Indian station was telling him something to the effect of "No,
sir, my zone is Madras!", and after another transmission from this
end, he was saying something like "I know perfectly well what 'zone'
means, sir, I clearly speak English quite a bit better than you!"
And, he did.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob, N5RP" <N5RP@pdq.net>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 11:45 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Get that rate up !! Use "eatep" !

 > I was really in no position to spend very much time operating during
 > most recent ARRL SSB test(s) so I decided to try implementing an
 > optimization process that might shorten the amount of time necessary
for my
 > required information exchange and resultant QSO bookings.
 > Now then, ..............
 > We all know that an "N" means a 9.
 > and
 > We all know that an "A" means 1.
 > and
 > We all know that "E" means 5.
 > and
 > We all know that "K" means "KW" means "Kilowatt".
 > and
 > We all know that "Cowel" means "Cal" means "California".
 > There are other shortcuts, but hopefully my just mentioning the
above list
 > will  convey the idea that I am trying to get to across.
 > OK,
 > We all know these things, because:
 > We know "when" these abbreviations are implemented,
 > "where" they are implemented,
 > and this results in a logic chain of "what" the abbreviations meant,
 > and makes the abbreviations "understood" to mean that which they
would not
 > normally mean on face value.
 > I suppose what I have been missing all these years is the
 > that it is possible to pass along, via assumption, that, which it is
 > "understood", and takes too long to properly implement in a QSO
 > format.
 > So I got to thinkin' ............
 > Since I am a five, and since Texas is the only state in 5 Land that
 > with "T",
 > I could rightfully shorten my CW exchange to ENN T.
 > Similarly, in ARRL SSB, I could just go to "59 Tango".
 > That derned "X" and that derned "exas" can be just as easily assumed
 > "W", "owatt" or "ifornia".
 > I made some quick "assumptions" on these "assumptions", and I
"assume" that
 > by my eliminating that unnecessary junk from my exchange, my overall
 > rate might be increased by a substantial margin.
 > Problem is, I don't know by just "how much".
 > Can somebody out there in high rate land please send me the URL
 > where I might find the algorithm that will allow me to calculate
 > I can't wait to see what my new "exchange assumption technology
 > protocol" (eatep) might generate in the way of hard numbers on the
 > calculations.
 > ..
 > Bob Perring
 > ...........................................
 > Amateur Radio Station  N5RP
 > mailto:N5RP@pdq.net
 > N5RP Station Page: http://freeweb.pdq.net/perring/station.html
 > --
 > CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
 > Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com

CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>