This reminds me of a recent 160 test where after sunrise I went outside
the shack to stretch a bit and clearly heard
cq test de NW6N coming from an old mulberry tree behind the shack. Upon
examination I found a mockingbird up there merrily chirping away... I
wonder if that made me a M/M?
73 all! de Bob NW6N
>From km9p@contesting.com (Bill Fisher KM9P) Mon Oct 14 18:44:50 1996
From: km9p@contesting.com (Bill Fisher KM9P) (Bill Fisher KM9P)
Subject: Need 3CX1200A7 - Eimac shortage?
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.95.961014134345.13650A-100000@paris.akorn.net>
I called RF Parts & Henry today and neither have any tubes. Something
about Eimac moving a plant or something.
Anyone know where I can buy some tubes? 3cx1200a7 specifiically.
Bill
>From n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith) Mon Oct 14 18:42:06 1996
From: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith) (Pete Smith)
Subject: TS-930 fan (summary)
Message-ID: <199610141742.KAA28916@dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com>
Thanks to the many who responded. Before calling Kenwood for a replacement
fan unit (abt $25 I'm told) I tried a drop or two of sewing machine oil.
There is no oil hole
on mine so I gravity fed the stuff down the shaft (sic). Whatever ... it
works and is
quiet, at least for the moment.
Thanks to several for clearing up the mystery of the little brass widgit
that rubs on the motor shaft. My 930 is a very late model - S/N 8M plus -
and had the device already
installed. for those who haven't run into this, it appears the motor needs
a sideways
load to run quietly (they were designed to run a load via a belt and
pulleys) and the spring provides that. Part or all of my noise may, in fact
have been due to the fan brushing the spring, because when I first
reinstalled it, the fan was rubbing really badly - I discovered that by
sliding it out the shaft a little bit the interference was removed and
everything sounds fine now.
73, Pete Smith N4ZR
n4zr@contesting.com
... and not changing!
>From george@epix.net (George C. Cook) Mon Oct 14 18:31:20 1996
From: george@epix.net (George C. Cook) (George C. Cook)
Subject: Keyer
Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19961014133256.28877720@epix.net>
I am CCing this to the reflector!
God Bless you!!!
Same Keyer same fix!
If we meet in Dayton or Rochester or what ever remind me I owe you a lunch OK?
George
At 11:58 AM 10/14/96 -0500, you wrote:
>George-
>My MFJ-492 Memory Driven Keyer is always dead. But I've found that
>pressing the menu button while it is powering up revives it. The only
>other complaint I got with it is that it abreviates the numbers (ie 0=t,
>9=n). Drives me nuts. I got a couple of older MFJ memory keyers that are
>sure a lot easier to use. Curious to see what everyone recommends. GL.
>73 de KM0L Steve in KC
>
>On Mon, 14 Oct 1996, George C. Cook wrote:
>
>> Durring the set up for the PA QSO party my MFJ memory keyer
>> took a major league dump just dead and no revival. Not too surprising I
>> guess since I never did
>> own anything made by MFJ that ever did work.
>>
>> Any way since I need a new keyer now for my 930 what do you fellows recoment?
>>
>> gc
>> *********************************************
>> *George Cook.....AA3JU.....AKA "The Ratman" *
>> *george@epix.net.....AA3JU@W3PYF *
>> *http://www.epix.net/~george *
>> * *
>> *Proudly Frankford Radio Club......... *
>> *.......Proficiency Through Competiton. *
>> *"Not just words but a way of life" *
>> *********************************************
>>
>>
>
>
*********************************************
*George Cook.....AA3JU.....AKA "The Ratman" *
*george@epix.net.....AA3JU@W3PYF *
*http://www.epix.net/~george *
* *
*Proudly Frankford Radio Club......... *
*.......Proficiency Through Competiton. *
*"Not just words but a way of life" *
*********************************************
>From hwardsil@wolfenet.com (Ward Silver) Mon Oct 14 18:54:57 1996
From: hwardsil@wolfenet.com (Ward Silver) (Ward Silver)
Subject: Post-Packet Era
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.95.961014102849.18864C-100000@gonzo.wolfenet.com>
The concerns about the "appropriateness" of packet spotting during
contests reminds me very strongly of the debate when I entered engineering
school as to calculators. (I'm carbon-dating myself, here...)
My first semester followed the introduction by HP of the HP-35; the first
handheld scientific calculator. There was a huge uproar about whether
they would be allowed in class and for tests. Not everyone could afford
them ($400) and most of us had slide rules. Later, the HP-45 came out,
raising the capability of the calculators considerably. Neither of these
had programming capability. For a while, no calculators were allowed
during tests. Prices started dropping a bit and soon just about everyone
had some form of calculator. I paid $75 for a TI SR-10 because it had the
1/x and square-root capability!! It also spelled "SHELL OIL" upside down,
but that's another story. Soon calculators were allowed in the classroom.
The next brouhaha erupted over programmable calculators. It seemed that
one could enter most of the applicable formulas from the current chapter
and only had to remember which one was appropriate, not memorize the whole
thing. The programs in the calculators were not in permanent memory. I
remember one guy who never came to class, but aced every test. On a
subsequent test, the prof came over and said, "Nice calculator!", picked
it up and cycled power. The guy turned as white as a sheet and flunked
big-time ;-) However, soon, the HP-41 prices came down and that issue,
too, became moot.
What is the point of this nostalgia? The point is that teaching and
learning changed as a response to an environmental change; the calculator.
The calculator freed students from rote memorization, and simultaneously
freed the teacher from testing calculation skills. Testing is now much
more involved with understanding the theory involved and not so much an
exercise in juggling a slip stick's cursor. Technical training is the
better for it, except for student's having to learn and re-learn that
"Just because the calculator said it, doesn't mean it's so."
The situation in contesting with respect to packet is at the same stage as
for the introduction of programmable calculators. Yes, packet spotting
(and the ability to cheat with it) is changing the nature of the game.
Yet we can not go back to the old days and old ways, no matter how much we
admire the successes and techniques of yore. To be sure, it is not the
operating skill requirements that have diminished, just as the student
that understood the theory would succeed with bamboo or silicon
calculating instruments. Rather, additional skills will be required to
succeed in the next era of contesting.
I am not Cassandra and cannot foresee the future of contesting. However,
if history is to be a guide, I am sure that a structural change is upon us
from which many paths can be taken. Contesting at the peak of the
upcoming cycle will still require rate and propagation savvy. Using
multiple radios and computers will be more and more important as the
technology allows the operator to be assisted in more than just logging;
finding multipliers, making QSOs, determining optimum band-changes, etc.
will all be computer-driven very shortly.
The successful contester will be one that understands more of the
"gestalt" of the contest. Perhaps contest scoring will evolve from the
"Q-times-M" model to one including accuracy, efficiency, and dare I say
style? "N6AA received 5.8 on that last band-change from the Finnish
judge, yet the French only gave him a 5.5, dropping him into a tie for
second with CT1BOH." Levity aside, we are about to be freed from the
tyranny of the limitations of the basic radio. What will we do with that
freedom?
73, Ward N0AX
>From nt5c@easy.com (John Warren) Mon Oct 14 19:44:53 1996
From: nt5c@easy.com (John Warren) (John Warren)
Subject: Too Much CW?
Message-ID: <1366821774-138901417@BANJO.EASY.COM>
Bob N4BP wrote:
|Deep into one of the contests (I forget which one), my XYL came into the
|shack and told me she was hearing Morse Code from the toilet...
It's basically a novel modulator to convert CW to WC.
The possibilities for increasing available code practice time are
impressive. Perhaps it should be PATTENted?
John, NT5C
>From 71111.260@CompuServe.COM (Hans Brakob) Mon Oct 14 20:05:48 1996
From: 71111.260@CompuServe.COM (Hans Brakob) (Hans Brakob)
Subject: Too Much CW?
Message-ID: <961014190548_71111.260_EHM61-1@CompuServe.COM>
>>It's amazing to me that the toilet could respond that well to 25-30 wpm!<<
I've heard of crappy receivers before, but that one *really* stinks! <groan>
de Hans, K0HB
>From seay@alaska.net (Del Seay) Mon Oct 14 19:16:28 1996
From: seay@alaska.net (Del Seay) (Del Seay)
Subject: Too Much CW?
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.961014131115.22062B-100000@hyper>
<19961014.163306.4999.0.NW6N@juno.com>
Message-ID: <3262837C.2725@alaska.net>
nw6n@juno.com wrote:
>
> This reminds me of a recent 160 test where after sunrise I went outside
> the shack to stretch a bit and clearly heard
> cq test de NW6N coming from an old mulberry tree behind the shack. Upon
> examination I found a mockingbird up there merrily chirping away... I
> wonder if that made me a M/M?
> 73 all! de Bob NW6N
The first liar has no chance!
|