>>I can't see why there can't be QRP, Low Power and Hi Power divisions
>>in MO and MS catagories.
>>
>> Paul Knupke, Jr. / Pinellas County ARES Asst. EC
>I have been campaigning for such catagories now for almost 5 years.
>No one takes the idea seriously. I have talked with the MidWest rep
>from the Contest Advisory Board to no avail. I think it is a swell
>idea way past its time.
>
>k0wa@southwind.net
I agree. I've been to V3 twice to do the ARRL DX contest, each time
doing a 1-radio M/S using low power and just having a couple of other
guys take turns with the radio to keep it on all the time...basically
a 1A field-day-like operation. There's no way we can compete with
the likes of AI7V who goes to his vacation home at P4 and does a M/S
with his towers and amplifiers. There are always a number of suitcase
dx-peditions in contests such as that one (and the SS as well with
people going to KP2, KP4 and other rare sections) and it doesn't seem
fair to penalize them by making them run with the "big boys". If they
have different power levels for single ops already I think they should
do likewise for the multi-ops esp. multi/single...it's not like we're
breaking totally new ground here, the precedent already exists.
73 - Alan NS0B
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Alan Braun MD, NS0B/V31EV *Internet: albraun@socketis.net *
* Jefferson City, MO *Packet: NS0B@N0LBA.#cemo.mo.usa.noam *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>From n9itx@tein.net (Mike Coolidge) Tue Nov 19 20:32:51 1996
From: n9itx@tein.net (Mike Coolidge) (Mike Coolidge)
Subject: 40 meters and SS SSB
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19961119133158.0068c8d4@tein.net>
At 02:00 PM 11/18/96 -0600, you wrote:
>
>What are people's experience with 40 meters this weekend? I am interested
>in comments as to band conditions on 20-40-and-80. Any 160 meter activity?
>
>Seven-trees
>
>Lee
>k0wa@southwind.net
>
It was interesting for me to note that last year I had 130 qsos on 160, 287
qsos on 80 and over 400 on 40. This year was completely opposite for me.
First night I had tremendous qrn on the low bands, sometimes crashing to 40
over on 80 and 160 yet the signals I heard on 160 were good. 160 I
consider one of my better bands but only managed 16 qsos on this band this
year. The only reason for that I think is because nobody was on (too much
noise this year maybe?) 80 was not much better.
Last year I relied on the low bands for the bulk of my qsos but this year
15 and 20 accounted for about 1170 430 of those on 15. I guess that shows
you have to stay on the band where the rate is, regardless if its 160 or
15. In retrospect I probably should have spent more time on 20 and 15
instead of trying to make something happen on 80 or 160. Oh well I learn
something new every year I run sweepstakes!
It was also interesting to note the low qso totals on 15 on the east coast
when it was really productive for me in that direction. (at least from the
summary sheets I've seen so far.)
Mike Coolidge N9ITX
Lewistown, Montana
|