[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ Zone 16/17 - a clarification

To: "Art RX9TX" <rx9tx@esoo.ru>,"Tim Makins, EI8IC" <contesting@eircom.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ Zone 16/17 - a clarification
From: "Stuart Santelmann KC1F" <kc1f@adelphia.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 16:20:26 -0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> As  you can see UA9T is not mentioned at all. As long as we use to say
> we  (UA9S,T,W)  are in zone 17, and logger developers agree with that,
> CQ WAZ awards sponsors should take it and correct the zones boundaries
> ASAP :)


    I think I may know what the problem is:  "9T" callsigns may not have
been assigned until relatively recently, like after CQ made the listing
referred to.  I don't have any in my logging program until 1992, and I'll
bet that's after the CQ listing was made.  I have a CQ-U R-100-O map of
"ex-Soviet" prefixes, and UA9S and UA9W are clearly shown to the west of the
Ural River and in zone 16.  UA9T is not listed, as it apparently was not
used until later, but if 9T is in that same area, then that's clearly also
CQ zone 16.  CQ, contest logging programs, and DXlogging programs should
apparently be updated to show "9T" as being in zone 16, I guess.
    Art, does this mean that UA9TK, UA9TQ, and UA9TS etc are all CQ zone 16

    Spasibo    !            Stu        KC1F

CQ-Contest mailing list

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