Considering my personal situation concerning the SS CW contest,
I heavily considered operating from either KP4 or KP2 this year. I
went as far as asking around for suggestions etc. I received several
leads and then.....stopped.
I felt it would be too easy for me to go down to KP4/KP2 and win the
contest rather than attempting to win from where I have made plans to
go. I decided it would be more gratifying to win from the continental 48.
My consideration in going to KP4/KP2 was merely emotional in order to
slap my former station owner in the face.
I agree with most that SS is a continental 48 playground.
73,
Mr. Bill K5GA ( NOT W5WMU this year)
>From kaul@ix.netcom.com (Alan Kaul ) Mon Sep 25 20:47:17 1995
From: kaul@ix.netcom.com (Alan Kaul ) (Alan Kaul )
Subject: Uniques
Message-ID: <199509251947.MAA14636@ix4.ix.netcom.com>
I am not a top contester, but I am an avid contester. I'll probably
never finish in the TOP-10-USA but I might have a short at the top
3-places in my call area, or ARRL section. I usually work 300-600
QSO's per contest during the CQWW and ARRL DX tests on both SSB and CW.
I think what's missing from this discussion is what ''uniques'' rate
might say about the contest station. At the very minimum it might
raise the ''caution'' flag about some winner's claimed scores.
I believe it is time for the contest sponsors to publish the ''unique''
rates along with the scores. Then we can all make up our own minds
about the contester's claimed score. I'd be real skeptical of the
results if a winner had a 10% ''unique'' rate and the runner up trailed
by a few total QSO's but had only a 1-or-2% ''unique'' rate. In the
hard-fought, highly-competetive categories, I don't have much trouble
with a future requirement which might state: "...the winner's score,
reduced by his ''unique'' rate should be higher than the runner-up's
score reduced by the runner-up's ''unique'' rate...."
MOST contesters strive hard to make certain every call in their logs is
accurate. But by publishing ''unique'' rates in CQ along with the
scores, the sponsors would send the message that accuracy ought to be
a priority for ALL contesters.
It may also be time to create a new award category: single op, lowest
unique rate (regardless of power!)!!!
73, de alan, W6RCL
>From Brian McGinness <CARL02@MACCVM.CORP.MOT.COM> Mon Sep 25 20:54:16 1995
From: Brian McGinness <CARL02@MACCVM.CORP.MOT.COM> (Brian McGinness)
Subject: WA3WJD CQWW RTTY Single-op hi-pwr
Message-ID: <"CARL02 95/09/25 19:54:16.778506"@MACCVM.CORP.MOT.COM>
Band QSOs Pts QTH DX Zones
80 117 173 38 18 9
40 136 199 35 23 12
20 216 460 38 54 19
15 63 137 17 24 15
10 9 17 5 6 6
-----------------------------------------
Total 541 986 133 125 61
Score: 314,534
Category - Single op high power all band (no packet)
Club Affiliation: Potomac Valley Radio Club
Wow! My first RTTY contest, and I sure had a lot of fun, although
I slept too much. I was using a PK-232 wired for direct FSK of the rig,
and a Timewave DSP-9 on the receive side. The combination seemed to
work well, I was able to work stations on 10 and 15 that were not moving
the S-meter.
I was pleased to work VS6BG and TY8G, and about 50 other "new ones"
on RTTY.
One strange thing that happened is that I answered an OT5T
20 meter CQ, and was told "this is the multiplier station and I
can only work new ones. QRZ de OT5T". I never had this happen before,
to work through a small pile-up only to be turned away... I suppose
it's not a big deal, but it was rude at best.
The heavy duty cycle of RTTY sure tests out the equipment.
Things held pretty well, although I did burn out the 20 meter traps
on the tribander and had to take it down and put in spare traps.
Also, the linear fuses blew a couple times so I had to back down
the power a bit...
See you in Oct/Nov!
73,
Brian
WA3WJD
carl02@maccvm.corp.mot.com
>From Chad Kurszewski" <kurscj@OAMPC12.csg.mot.com Mon Sep 25 22:15:44 1995
From: Chad Kurszewski" <kurscj@OAMPC12.csg.mot.com (Chad Kurszewski)
Subject: WE9V CQWW RTTY 1995 Score
References: <199509241427.KAA16421@larry.infi.net>
Message-ID: <9509251615.ZM15911@WE9V>
CQ WW RTTY Contest 1995
Call used: WE9V
Station used: KS9K
Operator: WE9V
Location: WI
Hours Operated: About 34 (LOTS of sleep)
Entry Class: Single Op, Unassisted, All Band, High Power
Band QSOs Pts QTH DX Zones
80 111 135 40 8 7
40 310 465 49 38 18
20 555 1189 46 69 25
15 89 147 23 23 14
10 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------
Total 1066 1937 159 139 65
Score: 703131
Station (KS9K):
Two Icom 765s Two PK-232s Two Computers
Five homebrew monoband 8877 amplifiers 1.5KW continous
(I'll put one of these up to an Alpha for key-down time any day!)
80M Sloper
40M Fullsize 3/3 @ 84/168'
20M 5/5/5/5 on 168' rotating tower
15M 5/5/5/5 on 135' rotating tower
10M 5/5/5 up to 100'
Highlights:
More Q's than last year.
Having VK9LZ and TY8G call me on 20 in the first hour.
Having VK9LZ, 4X6ZK, and T77T call me on 40.
Thinking that OT5T calling me on 40 at 5:30pm local was EARLY...then
having EA1AVN call me 4:50pm the next day!
Lowlights:
Much less DX this year, especially on 15.
YU7GMN gets the award for trying to steal my frequency the most often.
Random comments:
1000 QSOs and still less than the "old 36" hours operated....FUN!!
If anyone experienced longer than normal delays in me coming back to
you it wasn't because I'm slow on the keys. I was busy doing something
silly like observing the rules :-). I used the "single op, multi radio"
setup all weekend and was making sure I wasn't transmitting on two freqs
at once. Using this multi-radio setup is the ONLY way to go on RTTY,
especially during these low sunspot times.
DEFINITELY a fun contest....and as Frank, W3LPL, says, it wrings out the
problems for WW SSB. (None were found!!)
at
--
Chad Kurszewski, WE9V e-mail: Chad_Kurszewski@csg.mot.com
Sultans of Shwing Loud is Cool....yeah, heh, heh, heh, LOUD IS COOL!!!
The Official Sultans Web Site: http://www.infoanalytic.com/ka9fox/sos
>From km9p@is.net (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.) Mon Sep 25
>22:31:09 1995
From: km9p@is.net (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.) (Bill Fisher,
KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.)
Subject: Uniques
Message-ID: <199509252131.RAA10222@mail1.is.net>
>I believe it is time for the contest sponsors to publish the ''unique''
>rates along with the scores. Then we can all make up our own minds
>about the contester's claimed score. I'd be real skeptical of the
>results if a winner had a 10% ''unique'' rate and the runner up trailed
>by a few total QSO's but had only a 1-or-2% ''unique'' rate. In the
>hard-fought, highly-competetive categories, I don't have much trouble
>with a future requirement which might state: "...the winner's score,
>reduced by his ''unique'' rate should be higher than the runner-up's
>score reduced by the runner-up's ''unique'' rate...."
Here here...
The best thing that ever happened to me in contesting was getting DQed in
both modes of the Sprint the same month of the same year. It was one of
those times in my life when I didn't have time to check for obvious mistakes
and I was just plain sloppy. If that hadn't happened, I wouldn't have known
how sloppy I was at copying information. My hearty thanks to K7GM and
W6OAT. I sure gave them a hard time when it happened. The taste of Nike is
still in my mouth!
Sure you can ask K3EST to send you your unique analysis, but do most of you
know that you can? Do most of you go to the trouble? Printing the uniques
won't change your score... they still check them against other logs. IMHO,
it's a good idea.
73
---
Bill Fisher, KM9P - Concentric Systems, Inc.
>From Greg Becker <gb546@bard.edu> Mon Sep 25 22:02:25 1995
From: Greg Becker <gb546@bard.edu> (Greg Becker)
Subject: 2 radio computer switching
Message-ID: <Pine.A32.3.91.950925165938.63451A-100000@core.bard.edu>
I know someone asked a while ago, but I can't find the responses.
Forgive me...
I'm looking for a schematic for a switchbox to connect to LPT2 (or
wherever is appropriate) to switch the DVP, keyer, etc. from Radio1 to
Radio2 when the computer switches. Help.
Thanks & 73, Greg
Greg Becker NA2N
gb546@bard.edu
|