FINAL TUBES = ?
ames at force.DECNET.LOCKHEED.COM
ames at force.DECNET.LOCKHEED.COM
Thu Aug 11 11:55:05 EDT 1994
The implications here are giving me some "gas". Lately, I've been working
some of the RTTY contests with the awesome power of a TS830. Normally, in
CW and Phone with 200 Watts Input we get 100 watts output, but in RTTY I've
been advised by several source not to push it past 50 watts. Since power
is not always a factor in operator category in RTTY, running QRP seems
really dumb. But causing lots of TVI for my neighbors is also dumb, thus
having a "clean" output is important of course. So, do I get a class C amp
with a high Q output stage, or a low efficency class A amp with a low Q
output stage? For contesting, the answer is clear. As to "guessing" one's
output from FINAL TUBES, the answer is not quite so clear. The FCC used to
be quite good at figuring these things out, maybe we should leave it to them?
73 de N2ALE/6, alan
aka ames at force.DECNET.LOCKHEED.COM
>From Jay Kesterson K0GU x6826 <jayk at bits.fc.hp.com> Thu Aug 11 19:30:41 1994
From: Jay Kesterson K0GU x6826 <jayk at bits.fc.hp.com> (Jay Kesterson K0GU x6826)
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 94 12:30:41 MDT
Subject: More TS-930 Stuff
Message-ID: <9408111830.AA16896 at bits.fc.hp.com>
> I bought a '930 10 years ago and considered it to be the best rig I ever
> owned (my previous rig was a Drake "C" line). It was an order of magnitude
> better than the Drake.
> I replaced the '930 a couple of years ago with an FT-1000 and consider it
> to be an order of magnitude better than the '930, especially the receiver.
I also have all these rigs and agree totally.
> Not to mention that after 5 years the '930 seemed to self-destruct with
> a string of weird display problems and loss of output etc. due to flakey
> plated thru holes.
> 73 de Bill, N6CQ/3 (n6cq at paonline.com)
I bought my TS-930 new in about 1984. I had two or three bad solder joints
in all that time. Both were on the same connector on a board. The 930 PC
boards leave a lot to be desired. If you have never worked on one use a
VERY small wattage soldering iron. Except for that its been a solid radio
(did I forget to mention those damn soldered in S-meter light bulbs).
My 930 has only been used for HF cluster backbone duty since I got the
FT-1000. Its about to go back into service as I construct a two radio
control box (along with the other 107 of you who requested the info :-) ).
Now the frequency sometimes doesn't change as I turn the main knob slowly.
I'm hoping this is just something loose on the shaft??
73, Jay K0GU jayk at fc.hp.com
>From oo7 at astro.as.utexas.edu (Derek Wills) Thu Aug 11 19:44:53 1994
From: oo7 at astro.as.utexas.edu (Derek Wills) (Derek Wills)
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 94 13:44:53 CDT
Subject: score challenge
Message-ID: <9408111844.AA14217 at astro.as.utexas.edu>
>>Well, I guess the delay for Internet SprINT certificates
>>*is* still very very long! --John/K2MM
Hey, that's right, the scores are in within 3 days, then John and
Tree produce the results and analysis shortly afterwards, and we
never even get an e-mail certificate.
I mean to say, what? I came #5 World-Wide in the last one! There's
no other contest where I have a hope of making the Top Ten. I suppose
we just have to be content with the admiration, envy and hatred of our
Derek AA5BT, G3NMX
oo7 at astro.as.utexas.edu
>From fish at crl.com (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.) Thu Aug 11 22:53:48 1994
From: fish at crl.com (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.) (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.)
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 1994 14:53:48 -0700
Subject: WRTC 95 comments
Message-ID: <199408112153.AA09368 at mail.crl.com>
Well I've gone over the WRTC #1 announcement and I don't relish the job of
assigning points to operators for 1990-1994 efforts.
First of all there is ABSOLUTELY no fair way to assign points to operators
of a multi operation of any kind. How do you compare a guy that helped
operate at M/M with a guy that did single-op all band in CQWW? You can't!
But, since you must...
Single-op is the most difficult and most competitive of all categories. It
should be weighted as such. Single-op Assisted should be somewhat less
since the competition isn't as great. Op's at M/S, M2, M/M or single bands
should be considerably down from both. So....
If K1AR wins the CQWW SSB contest he gets say 100 points.
N6BV gets 10th and has half the score of K1AR. He is then assigned 50 points.
Ops at a multi operation can receive 75% of the best S/O score. So, lets
say K1DG is operating at KC1XX and they win M/S. The ops at KC1XX would
split the 75 points that they get for winning. The more ops, the less
points. There is no way to objectively assign points any other way. Even
if K1DG operated 95% of the time while the others slept, he still gets the
same as everyone else. Other multi-singles would get points based on a
percentage of the KC1XX score depending on how far down they were.
Single band winners should be able to receive 20% of the top single-op
score. This is probably being overly generous. It doens't take alot of
savvy to call CQ all weekend on one band.
The guys getting jammed in this deal? N3RS and N3RD! These guys are the
best multi-single team in the country. But, comparing them with K1AR or
KR0Y is very difficult if not impossible when they don't enter the same
category and nobody knows who's doing the operating. What makes it even
more difficult is that they never operate as single-ops.
Conclusion: The guys that make the teams should be guys that can be
evaluated fairly against each other. If you only operate in a multi
enviroment you shouldn't be able to accumulate enough points to make the
team. Kind of ironic since we are assigning operators to a multi-single team!
Do us all a favor... Before you get hot and bothered and want to post a
reply to this message... Think about it! Think if YOU were the guy that
had to assign the points to all of the guys submitting applications... What
would you do? What would be the best way to get the best op's from each zone?
Bill Fisher, KM9P
Concentric Systems, Inc. (CSI)
404-442-5821 Fax 404-667-1975
More information about the CQ-Contest