John,
It seems that the 160 contest was super well attended by SECC. Is this one
a favorite, or is the activity on the rise?
Mike, NE4S
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-secc@contesting.com [mailto:owner-secc@contesting.com]On
Behalf Of John T. Laney, III
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 2:53 PM
To: secc@contesting.com; sedxc@contesting.com
Subject: [SECC] CQ 160 CW
Thanks for a reminder from K4SB. I seem to have left his call and maybe
some others off the list of SECC/SEDXC members worked last weekend. I
don't have a copy of that message. Just in case I left someone else
out, here is the group that included Ed's call. I am virtually sure I
remember typing W4DD, but am not sure about the others.
WZ4F, N8LM, W4DD, K2UFT, K4AAA (W4AN, op), K4SB. Sorry for leaving
anyone else out. I tried to extract the calls when I reviewed the logs
and may have missed a few others. The point is that the area guys
turned out well and that is important for a contest that really favors
more local QSOs over much of the time period.
73,
John, K4BAI.
--
SECC on the Web: http://secc.contesting.com/
Submissions: secc@contesting.com
Administrative requests: secc-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-secc@contesting.com
--
SECC on the Web: http://secc.contesting.com/
Submissions: secc@contesting.com
Administrative requests: secc-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-secc@contesting.com
|