KP4UY writes:
> At present the CQ WPX Contest rules say that
> a MultiOperator Single Transmitter Contest
> Station needs to be physically connected to
> the antenna...
> the implication here is that the receivers do
> not have to be physically connected to the
> antenna..
Really? I have no way of knowing, but I doubt that is what CQ was implying
when the rule was written. I'm all for stretching technology to the limits
UP TO THE SPIRIT OF THE RULES. But a Multi/Single with operators spread out
all over the world is NOT within the spirit, in MY opinion. I would hate to
see a 'normal' multi-single operation that kicked butt in WPX, only to get
beat by such a world-wide contraption.
I hope the CQ contest directors 'tweak' the rules as Ward N0AX stated:
> amend the physically-located rule to state
> "All operators and equipment must be
> contained within a 1000-meter radius circle
> or within the property limits."
On the flip side, what I think you are contemplating here stretches current
technology, which can only lead to good things. I, by no means, wish to
discourage such an experiment, but I don't think it should qualify as a valid
entry. Maybe we need ANOTHER category... Multi-operator, Multi-location,
Single-xmtr :-)
73 Scott KA9FOX
ka9fox@aol.com
>From Hal Blegen" <halb@comtch.iea.com Wed May 11 22:56:47 1994
From: Hal Blegen" <halb@comtch.iea.com (Hal Blegen)
Subject: Checking traps with dip meter.
Message-ID: <m0q1MGl-0001LUC@comtch.iea.com>
>
>
> Take the trap out of the element. Shove the dip meter coil up the pipe,
> against the fibre glass rod that carries the coil. If the rod is short
> .....
Testing the trap with a dipper doesn't seem to address the fact that
the debris caused by chitineous creatures doesn't break down until you
put smoke to the antenna and develop some voltage across compoenents inside
the trap. I'd put the antenna together, clamp it off on the side of the
tower at 6 feet and see if it loaded. Less than 2:1 on the appropriate
frequencies probably means you're okay.
Unfortunately, this STILL doesn't address the problem --garbage inside
the trap which may break down on the first rainy day that you run your
amp. Tape over the holes when you store the antenna is probably only
the practical solution that I have heard so far.
-Hal WA7EGA
-Halb@comtch.iea.com
>
>From Dave Pascoe <pascoe@MathWorks.Com> Wed May 11 23:31:09 1994
From: Dave Pascoe <pascoe@MathWorks.Com> (Dave Pascoe)
Subject: K1TR/3 looking for VHF/UHF skeds
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9405111812.S13036-0100000@zippy>
I guess it's that time again...................so I'll throw my group
into the hopper too.....
K1TR/3 (FN20) looking for skeds on 144-432 MHz from eastern
Pennsylvania. We'll run with you for either tropo or meteor scatter
skeds.
Tropo range is several hundred miles so if you think there's even a
small chance of making it, then let's try.....nothing to lose especially
in the wee hours of Sunday morning!
-----
Dave Pascoe KM3T
The MathWorks, Inc. E-mail: pascoe@mathworks.com
24 Prime Park Way WWW: http://www.mathworks.com
Natick, MA 01760 USA Phone: (508) 653-1415 (508-65-pi)
For info on MATLAB, send e-mail to info@mathworks.com
>From Hal Blegen" <halb@comtch.iea.com Wed May 11 23:36:47 1994
From: Hal Blegen" <halb@comtch.iea.com (Hal Blegen)
Subject: CQ WPX Remote CNTL MultiOP/SingleXmtr Contest Station Idea-Interest?
Message-ID: <m0q1MtU-0001LMC@comtch.iea.com>
>
> At present the CQ WPX Contest rules say that a MultiOperator Single
> Transmitter
> Contest Station needs to be physically connected to the antenna.. the
> implication here is that the receivers do not have to be physically connected
> to
> the antenna.. if this rule is not changed due to this post
Boy !! I would have missed that interpretation completely. Why bother
to make a rule that means only the final RF output stage needs to be
hooked to the antenna?? -- How else would you deliver the required
1500 watts? I made the rash assumption that the rule was trying to
address remote site operation.
-Hal WA7EGA
-halb@comtch.iea.com
>From jholly@hposl42.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback) Wed May 11 23:41:03 1994
From: jholly@hposl42.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback) (Jim Hollenback)
Subject: Checking traps with dip meter.
References: <m0q1MGl-0001LUC@comtch.iea.com>
Message-ID: <9405111541.ZM24563@hpwsmjh.cup.hp.com>
On May 11, 2:56pm, Hal Blegen wrote:
> Subject: Re: Checking traps with dip meter.
> I'd put the antenna together, clamp it off on the side of the
> tower at 6 feet and see if it loaded. Less than 2:1 on the appropriate
> frequencies probably means you're okay.
or stand it up, reflector down about 2 feet off the ground.
Jim, WA6SDM
jholly@cup.hp.com
>From Daniel R. Violette" <Daniel_R._Violette@smtpgty.anatcp.rockwell.com Thu
>May 12 01:42:50 1994
From: Daniel R. Violette" <Daniel_R._Violette@smtpgty.anatcp.rockwell.com
(Daniel R. Violette)
Subject: More Checking Traps of Yagi
Message-ID: <9404117686.AA768699770@smtpgty.anatcp.rockwell.com>
I have fed each half of each element as a quarter wave vertical
mounted next to and counterpoised to my ground rod also. I have done
this for a bad tap on the driven but can be done for the director and
reflector also, noting the resonant point as approx. 5% higher or
lower in freq.
Dan KI6X
Daniel_R._Violette@ccmail.anatcp.rockwell.com
>From Randy A Thompson <K5ZD@world.std.com> Thu May 12 00:43:50 1994
From: Randy A Thompson <K5ZD@world.std.com> (Randy A Thompson)
Subject: CQ WPX Remote CNTL MultiOP/SingleXmtr Contest Station Idea-Interest?
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9405111901.A9125-0100000@world.std.com>
My first reaction to this whole message was to tell the writer to go get
a life! But, technology breeds best far from the main stream.
CQ WPX Multi-single has a straight 10 minute rule for band changes. I
must assume that KP4UY intends to use all of this switching technology to
completely cover one band at a time with multiple CQ frequencies. As
upset as people get with the idea of a single op CQing on two bands at
the same time, I don't think this is going to be very popular.
Not to mention the incredible dupe rate this is sure to generate as
people tune up the band calling KP4UY, and again KP4UY, and again KP4UY,
and again...
-
If you really want to develop useful technology, get the computer to tune
multiple receivers, do some interpretation on what is being heard, and
alert the operator.
Randy, K5ZD
>From Eugene Walsh <0004504465@mcimail.com> Thu May 12 04:48:00 1994
From: Eugene Walsh <0004504465@mcimail.com> (Eugene Walsh)
Subject: Idea-Interest????
Message-ID: <22940512034822/0004504465PK4EM@mcimail.com>
Gentlemen:
I say again; The rules state that transmitters and receivers
must be physically connected to the antennas.
If this changes, kiss multi-op contesting goodbye.
73 N2AA
>From D. Leeson" <0005543629@mcimail.com Thu May 12 07:36:00 1994
From: D. Leeson" <0005543629@mcimail.com (D. Leeson)
Subject: Checking Tribander
Message-ID: <00940512063600/0005543629NA2EM@mcimail.com>
I had some problems with a very ancient TH6/7, and fixed them as follows:
1. Ohm-meter or continuity tester (beep) across each trap and across
each element joint...found two bad joints that looked fine, and one open
trap.
2. Then set up antenna at, say, 6 feet...connect MFJ SWR meter or SWR
bridge with low-power drive to feed point (balun)...then run your hands
along each element, starting in the center, and look for expected response
from SWR meter (goes up as you reach higher-impedance part of each element...
you will see effect of traps on 10 and 15 (no rf beyond trap if good)...this
procedure found trap with open (corroded) ground where trap can is screwed
to element, fixed with WD-40 and retightened.
This is a good procedure with questionable antenna of any type, although
SWR reading is not accurate picture of what will happen at full height, it
sure finds problems quickly. Traps can be blown out with air (watch your
eyes!) or even water (let them dry a while before proceeding). Typical
problems in addition to spiders are broken wire on coils from flexing, and
open ground to trap can. I use cloth over the drain holes to keep down the
whistling in light winds, and it seems to keep out bugs as well.
Hope this helps...73 de Dave, W6QHS
>From Eugene Walsh <0004504465@mcimail.com> Thu May 12 08:18:00 1994
From: Eugene Walsh <0004504465@mcimail.com> (Eugene Walsh)
Subject: Multi op Multi QTH
Message-ID: <80940512071808/0004504465PK3EM@mcimail.com>
Hello;
I particularly like Dave's (NG0X) suggestion about
rule changes requiring use of the same bathroom by
operators of a multi effort. The boys at N2RM are
indeed in agreement. In fact, we would propose
that the use of the bathroom should be within a
specified radius of, say, 500 meters; and should
include use of the same shovel.
73 Gene N2AA
>From Field, Don" <field@btq2ec.igw.bt.co.uk Thu May 12 16:47:00 1994
From: Field, Don" <field@btq2ec.igw.bt.co.uk (Field, Don)
Subject: What is multi-op, & more on traps
Message-ID: <2DD24F50@smtpgate.agw.bt.co.uk>
The debate on KP4UY's suggestion seems to be losing sight of a few issues.
Why would one one remote sites for a multi-single?
1. For the "run" station. But only one transmitted signal is allowed, and the
10-minute rule applies. In any case there is no benefit in having remote
operators calling CQ via a landline to P40V (for argument's sake). These days
it is rare that an operator is even required to call CQ - the DVP or memory
keyer does the job. So the remote op. is presumably there to hear, work and
log the weaker replies? These, surely, must be a very small percentage of the
total callers. A good op at P40V will hear and work them anyway.
2. For the "multiplier" station. Well, folks, we already have remote spotting
for multipliers. Over here we have them in maybe 15 countries across Europe,
all diligently sending us spots over a packet link. Yes, you've got it, it's
called PacketCluster. Should it be outlawed? Well, this discussions has
already been the rounds, so I won't enter it again. But it does mean that we
can, legitimately, brief any number of friends to spend the weekend spotting
for us. Presumably we could also send out messages from time to time telling
them which multipliers we are still looking for, as the rules only outlaw
"non-radio means" for helping things along during the contest. Or maybe
putting out rf on 2m packet is simultaneous transmission on another band and
against the rules?
The above comments apply to CQWW. In CQ WPX there is no separate "multiplier
station" in any case - multi-single is literally multi-op one tx (and almost
every QSO is a new multiplier these days in any case, so multiplier hunting
is no big deal).
Just a comment on the debate about testing traps. We have successfully tested
traps by putting a high-impedance voltmeter across them while they are in
use. If the trap is working OK there will be plenty of volts at the "inboard"
end and very little at the other end.
Finally, received May/June issue of NCJ yesterday. Hope all of you in the US
have yours .....
73 Don, G3XTT
(field@btq2ec.igw.bt.co.uk)
>From Willy Umanets <uw9ar@chal.chel.su> Thu May 12 19:01:44 1994
From: Willy Umanets <uw9ar@chal.chel.su> (Willy Umanets)
Subject: WELCOME TO CQ-M'94
Message-ID: <AA8ycqj0K2@chal.chel.su>
Hi all,
here's a ruff extract fm CQ-M '94 rules.
DATE: - 14.05.94 2100Z till 15.05.94 2100Z.
MODES: - CW, SSB, CW/SSB, SATTELITE COMMUNICATION.
BANDS: - 10m thru 160m, WARC bands excluded.
CATEGORIES: - SOSB,SOAB,MOAB one TX, SWL, VETERANS (WW II).
EXCHANGE: - RS/RST + serial N of Q.
QSO POINTS: - Q's within own CTY (only R-150-S listing is aplicable)
are worth 1 point,
- Q's outsude own CTY within OWN continent are 2 points,
- Q's outside own continent are 3 points.
MULTIPLIER: - sum of R-150-S CTY's on each band + sattelite mults irrespective
of the ones used count as one sepp. band.
DUPLICATES: - dupes are only on different bands I.E. one can't work
same stn on one band on both CW & SSB.
BAND QSY: - irrespective of category stn can change bands once in 10 minutes.
LOGS: - logs must be sent to P.O.BOX 88 MOSCOW, RUSSIA.
DEADLINE: - 15.07.94.
WELCOME TO CQ-M!
BTY my new C/S is UA9BA CU in CQ-M
---
73, Willy, UW9AR
----------------------------------------------------------
JV "Challenger Ltd" phone : 351-260-0190
Internet : uw9ar@chal.chel.su fax : 351-237-1756
>From David Robbins (KY1H) 413-494-6955(w) 413-655-2714(h)
><robbins@guid2.dnet.ge.com> Thu May 12 12:05:07 1994
From: David Robbins (KY1H) 413-494-6955(w) 413-655-2714(h)
<robbins@guid2.dnet.ge.com> (David Robbins 413-494-6955 413-655-2714 (KY1H w h))
Subject: multi qth contest
Message-ID: <9405121057.AA02799@thomas.ge.com>
if they change the rules to require all operators to use the same bathroom
they better put in a multi-bathroom class for stations like mine that have
2 bathrooms. then we have to be sure they can both be in use at the same
time. of course we could also have remote bathrooms and just wire in remote
controls to make sure only one of them flushed at a time. but how do we
get users on the cluster to spot bathroom multipliers?
73, dave
>From Ronald D. Rossi" <rrossi@VNET.IBM.COM Thu May 12 14:31:31 1994
From: Ronald D. Rossi" <rrossi@VNET.IBM.COM (Ronald D. Rossi)
Subject: bathrooms...
What would be the classification if remote operators were all wearing
urethral catheters and disposed of the urine in the same toilet at a
later time?
73 de N1PBT...ron
Ron Rossi
/====================================================================/
/ IBM Microelectronics Internet: rrossi@vnet.ibm.com /
/ H/P ASIC SRAM Design VNET: RROSSI at BTVLABVM /
/ Dept N93 Bldg 861-2 Voice: 802/769-7477 /
/ 1000 River Road RF: N1PBT/AE /
/ Essex Junction, VT 05452-4299 /
/ /
/ "I work for IBM, I don't represent its views!" /
/ /
/====================================================================/
>From n4hy@ccr-p.ida.org (Bob McGwier) Thu May 12 16:26:24 1994
From: n4hy@ccr-p.ida.org (Bob McGwier) (Bob McGwier)
Subject: Multi op Multi QTH
Message-ID: <9405121526.AA01532@ccr-p.ida.org>
Oh come Gene. Bob has provided us with a chemical toilet every year at
N2RM. Now we will say nothing about the fact that the chemicals have not
been changed in three years ;-).
Bob
Robert W. McGwier | n4hy@ccr-p.ida.org Interests: ham radio,
Center for Communications Research | scouts, astronomy, golf (o yea, & math!)
Princeton, N.J. 08520 | ASM Troop 5700, ACM Pack 53 Hightstown
(609)-279-6240(v) (609)-924-3061(f)| I used to be a Buffalo . . . NE III-120
>From D. Leeson" <0005543629@mcimail.com Thu May 12 17:35:00 1994
From: D. Leeson" <0005543629@mcimail.com (D. Leeson)
Subject: Multi-QTH
Message-ID: <35940512163553/0005543629NA1EM@mcimail.com>
Not to beat a dead horse, but I rely on the single property rule to get my
antennas fit around the hilltop without ruining the view here.
I have been offering the related idea of a multi-multi, on contiguous
property under single ownership, of "The AMTRACK Radio Club" which would
locate in appropriate train stations around the US. Obviously, there are
some minor technical problems with the octopus, but you get the idea.
This idea has, for some reason, not been amusing to contest committee
members. Our lawyers are now working on the questin of whether leased
rather than owned contiguous property qualifies under the rules, which
will open this category to communications common carriers and pipeline
company radio clubs as well.
On the other hand, the winners always seem to be the guys who just pitch
in under the spirit of the rules and run rate for 48 hours...but it's
always fun to daydream...73 de Dave, W6QHS
>From tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) Thu May 12 17:21:45 1994
From: tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Subject: Multi-single bathrooms
Message-ID: <9405121621.AA19597@cmicro.com>
There better be a ten minute rule when using a single bathroom with
multi-operators... unless you have a good exhaust fan that is.
Tree N6TR
tree@cmicro.com
PS: What started this again? Oh yeah, 28,800 QSOs in 48 hours. There
aren't enough good ops out there to work to make this dream happen, even
if you could create a system to make it possible in a laboratory environment.
When they start sending the last two letters of their call on CW, I will
quit this sport and take up bridge.
>From jholly@hposl42.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback) Thu May 12 20:09:34 1994
From: jholly@hposl42.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback) (Jim Hollenback)
Subject: Multi-single bathrooms
References: <9405121621.AA19597@cmicro.com>
Message-ID: <9405121209.ZM24917@hpwsmjh.cup.hp.com>
On May 12, 9:21am, Larry Tyree wrote:
> Subject: Multi-single bathrooms
>
>
> When they start sending the last two letters of their call on CW, I will
> quit this sport and take up bridge.
for a non-cw op, that is about enough to get me to enter the next sprINT.
Hope you like bridge :-)
Jim, ..DM
>From H. Ward Silver" <hwardsil@seattleu.edu Thu May 12 20:43:17 1994
From: H. Ward Silver" <hwardsil@seattleu.edu (H. Ward Silver)
Subject: multi qth contest
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9405121213.C13247-9100000@bach>
> "...but how do we get cluster users to spot bathroom openings?"
If a coke machine at MIT can be put on Internet, then surely bathroom
status can be put on packet:
SH/BATH K1AR
BATH-1 K1AR IN-USE, 5:14, KA1NCN, SEAT-DOWN, ETD 00:50
BATH-2 K1AR AVAIL., 0:00, ------, SEAT-UP, AIR QUAL DANGEROUS
Should be simple for AK1A to add, eh wot?
73, N0AX
>From Susan M. King (8-695-3688)" <ku2q@VNET.IBM.COM Thu May 12 21:11:15 1994
From: Susan M. King (8-695-3688)" <ku2q@VNET.IBM.COM (Susan M. King
(8-695-3688))
Subject: bathroom humor
OK, guys, stop pulling my chain.
Susan - ku2q
|