Hah!
Thanks Doug for "the rest of the story" (with apologies to Paul Harvey...
good day). You certainly brought me up short the first time I heard EE5E
this weekend -- frankly, stopped me cold for a few moments to make dang sure
that I was actually hearing it right -- but it brought a smile to my face
every time I worked you!
I'm just sorry that I don't have a 160 antenna right now, and that 10 never
opened around here (well, maybe it did for those with beams, but not those
of us with verticals, even if they are Butternuts) so I had to settle for
working you only on 4 bands. But it was great!
What was almost as fun was working DD2D during the contest too! (At least I
hope that was his call, he/they were my very last QSO, and you always wonder
if you get punchy on the last few)
Thank you for being inventive and showing a good sense of humor. And
congrats for having the shortest CW call on record, at least until the hams
down in the Cook Islands get someone to issue a special event/contest call:
E5E
73, ron w3wn
-----Original Message-----
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:46:42 -0000
From: "Doug Grant" <k1dg@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Life in the World of Packet
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
N7MAL said:
> I'm really cornfused. I worked ES5E on 40CW. I asked him to repeat his
> call
> several times and almost every time he sent it it was ES5E. I don't use
> packet during the contest but just queried it a minute ago. There was 1
> spot
> for ES5E on 40 all the rest were EE5E on 40-15. There is not 1 ounce of
> doubt I worked ES5E.
Well, Mal - I guess you'll just have to wait until the LCR reports come out
or after you send a QSL to ES5E to find out for sure. As a courtesy to the
station owner (EA5RS), I will be sending out QSLs to every station in the
EE5E log so perhaps you will eventually get a card via the bureau that will
indicate that you did in fact work EE5E and not ES5E. Maybe you worked both.
What is the current price for an ounce of doubt in Bullhead City these days?
There were numerous busted spots for our call, including E5E, EI5E, and
others, so you were certainly not alone if you busted the call. It was
always interesting to see who was watching packet and obediently jumping on
every spot without a sanity-check, since every bad spot led to a flood of
dupes. Nearly all sending (and ALL CQing) was done by computer, so most of
the busted spots were due to receiving errors and not transmitting errors.
When we were callign guys, we were usually careful to send a "DE" before the
call to avoid clipping the first dit. If you answered an EE5E CQ or "TU",
there is absolutely no way the call was sent incorrectly.
W9SZ said:
> Heehee - EE5E was a real callsign. I got a list of expected operations
> before the contest and that one was on the list. We talked about it
> before the contest started and it turned out to be one of the first
> stations we worked. I kind of liked the sound of it on CW!
It was my idea. I knew I would be in Spain on business for the week leading
up to the contest, and when I told EA5RS about it at WRTC in July, I
suggested that callsign (having used ED6B in 2006), and it was approved on
Friday morning before the contest. RS, EA5BY, and EA5FID (the other ops)
thought I was nuts at first, but finally decided that they liked it after
all. Admit it - at some time in your past, you've wondered what the shortest
CW call could be, and it was this one.
W4ZW said:
> If he planned it for a lot of discussion and spotting, it worked!
Yep. And I think it put a lot of smiles on people's faces over the course of
the weekend. Based on the packet spots we saw, mission accomplished.
Hope everyone had as much fun as we did. I still love this game.
73,
Doug K1DG
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|