[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] KP5 Call

To: "Jim Reisert AD1C" <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] KP5 Call
From: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:07:40 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
OK, I was misinformed about the assignment of the Desecheo call. It just
happens that the first person that responded to me said it was assigned,
or at least I read it that way.

There's no "big deal" about using a 1x1 call, it's more about tradition.

Working a KP5 felt exciting, while working a K5 and calling it Desecheo
"feels" odd and I imagined looking at K5D on the wall would have the
same effect.

So much for tradition, no one cares anymore.

David ~ KY1V

> Thanks for your answer. Someone else just informed me they were
> that call and didn't specifically request it.

I doubt that's the case.  1x1 calls are requested from the NCVEC, not
assigned by the FCC.  AC8G applied for the special call when they
thought their group would win the "bid".  Seems they were able to
transfer the call to K4UEE''s group.

Remember AH1A? That call was used from Baker/Howland, but the mailing
address at the time belonged to Bill K1MM if I recall correctly.  So
your argument about KP5 not having a mailing address doesn't hold

I don't see what is the big deal over using a 1x1 call for a special
event like this.  It's been done many times in the past, i.e. K4M,
K7K, K8O, K8T, K7C, etc.

73 - Jim AD1C

CQ-Contest mailing list

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