contact solicitation ?

[K3NA at aol.com]

   I found an interesting message in my mailbox this morning, which said in
part:

"Eric:  Very disappointed to see your ignorant admonishment.  The non-amateur
means criterion applies only "during the contest period."  You really oughta
double-check the rules before flaming out like that instead of shooting from
the hip . . . you might end up hitting your own foot!"

   So what can I say?  Opps, sorry, and my foot is bleeding.  Anyone have a
bandage?  I think my brains are leaking out...

-- Eric K3NA

k3na at aol.com

>From jesposit at sctcorp.com (Joe Esposito)  Mon Dec 12 13:51:00 1994
From: jesposit at sctcorp.com (Joe Esposito) (Joe Esposito)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 94 08:51 EST
Subject: 10 Meter Contest Score
Message-ID: <m0rHB9d-0003YKC at sctladm.sctcorp.com>

It was a great week-end for us 10 meter enthusiasts.

Score:

       QSOs        QSO Points       Mults     Final Score
     SSB  CW       
---------------------------------------------------------
      34  58         304              28        8,512

Single op, Mixed mode, approx. 18 hours operating hours.

Station:  HR-2510, 25 watts into a Ham-stick mounted on 1990 Olds.

Nota bad way to end the year from here.

73 all,

Joe, K2YJL/M

>From Larry Schimelpfenig <lschim at mailstorm.dot.gov>  Mon Dec 12 12:51:36 1994
From: Larry Schimelpfenig <lschim at mailstorm.dot.gov> (Larry Schimelpfenig)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 07:51:36 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 160 meter DX Window
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9412120734.A26157-d100000 at mailstorm.dot.gov>

Hi Lee:

On Fri, 9 Dec 1994, Lee Hiers wrote:

> 
> Hello All... > > I'm in Maryland on business right now, so I don't have
the rules handy, but > as I recall, they say in effect "the segment from
1830 to 1850 should be > reserved for inter-continental QSOs". > > First,
the word "should" does not equate to the word "must".  As soon as > the
rules _require_ everyone to make only inter-continental QSOs in this >
segment and such a rule is equitably enforced, we will comply.  As it
stands, > we are not in violation.

When I brought up the "window", the point I tried to make was that by
SUGGESTING that a window be observed/reserved, some folks would interpret
it as a mandate while others took it as a recommendation. Regardless of
how it was interpreted, those that abided by the suggestion, helped make
it a great haven for the big guns who could commandeer those frequencies. 
I disagree with the 1830-1850 window the ARRL has specified. The window
in my opinion should be a maximum of 10khz.

 > > We made over 1400 QSOs in the past
ARRL 160 contest, with probably over 90% > of them made in the window. 
Let's say we made around 50 intercontinental > QSOs.  Since we were CQing
most of the time, that means that something over > 1200 NA stations
*called us*.  If you don't like us CQing in the window, don't > reward us
with a QSO!  It takes two to tango...any station that calls us is >
violating the window as much as, if not more than, we are.  And we are
working > more than casual ops on these frequencies, we're working most of
the serious > guys as well. > > We can work DX (and try to - that's one of
the reasons we choose the > frequencies we use) from the beginning of the
contest until after sunrise > the next morning (we made at least one
inter-continental QSO in the first > hour of this past contest). > > Often
during the grayline's morning trek through Europe we call "CQ DX" or > "CQ
EU".  Unfortunately, we usually get a stateside station calling us on top
> of the DX stations.  The most expeditious thing for us to do is to work
the > guy quickly and hope the DX hangs around....fortunately, they often
do. > What is the problem with the stateside guy that calls in such a
situation? > Doesn't hear us call DX?  Doesn't know what DX is?  Can't
copy the code? > Doesn't think DX is calling us because he can't hear? 
Answer:  "yes".

I'm willing to bet a dollar to a donut that if you operated split when 
calling cq dx you wouldn't have nearly so many US stations answering.
Course you would have the same problem as I do when trying to operate
split in that with (whatever) the window (is) filled with big guns calling
cq dx, so you may not copy the dx responding, (even with the super receive
antennas available to you!). I gotta say my heart really bleeds when I
learn that some shmuck local is breaking up your dx run (admittedly in the
window).

 > > 160 is a small band.  20 khz is too large a chunk to
remove from the middle > of it, especially when one considers the narrow
SWR bandwidth of a lot of > antennas on the band.  For the past few years,
we have taken the same > approach as K5NA...we try to avoid calling CQ
from 1830 - 1835.  From the > sound of the band, many others take that
approach as well because there do > seem to be noticeably fewer stateside
stations calling there.  Although, with > increased activity on the band
this year it may not seem so.  (I didn't > personally listen much to this
segment this year, other ops did). > > The object of this contest is to
make as high a score as possible, not to work > DX (although that helps
the score significantly).  If you have trouble working > DX during the
contest now, your chances of doing so will be better if you > improve upon
your station performance (especially RX) rather than having a > small set
of frequencies set aside.

I don't agree that 160 is a small band. During a contest you probably find
the lower 30 to 50% of the band in use by contesters, then for the next
20khz or so you will find the rag chewers, and dispersed between 1920 and
2000 there may be a few more rag chewers. In terms of usuable antenna
bandwidth, it is pretty narrow for many users. There is some dichotomy in
your comments, as at one point you were complaining about yanks responding
to your dx cq's, while later on you state the object is to make as high a
score as possible, not to work DX. I really don't have a lot of trouble
hearing the dx. My short beverages are probably not nearly as good as
Ron's, and my antiquated R4C with Sherwood filters etc. may not be state
of the art, but I do hear well. My problem is finding a place in the band
where the dx can transmit that I can respond to his cq's. I had a good
feeling for where Eur could transmit before I made my first comments on
the reflector concerning the window, and the response I have gotter from
Eur confirms that. If I try to answer a dx station calling cq in the
limited space he has available, I get squished by the big gun just above
or below him telling he the frequency is in use. The signal to qrm ration
on higher bands is considerably better than on top band. The dx can go
pretty much anywhere that I can go on the higher bands. That's not the
case on 160. 

 > > There is never going to be parity in a
contest; we've discussed this many > times.  Not everyone gets to operate
DX contests from the NE or SS from > Texas.  Not everyone gets to hold a
frequency like 14.001.  Not everyone has > antennas that hear DX on 160. 
What you must do is meet the challenges that > exist and modify whatever
is under your control to best enhance your score. > > The bottom line is: 
If my competition uses these frequencies and I determine > that my use of
 these frequencies will result in a better score, then I _will_ > use them.

I have seen about 25 comments on the window between the reflector and the
NorthEast packet cluster. The attitude of several big guns such as
yourself and Bill KM9P is that it's a non problem. The attitude of the
majority is that as long as it's a recommendation and is not enforced, the
big guns who take over whatever the window is have an unfair advantage
over everyone else. I have several options. 1) Don't participate 2) Build
up a station that is competitive with the big guns and vie with them for
the preferred slot 3) Use existing resources and vie with the big guns
for the preferred slots 

> > I'm sorry if you disagree with this position; it's just a statement of
fact. > > 73 de Lee AA4GA (operator @ AB4RU) > aa4ga at mcimail.com

All I,d like to see is 1830-1835khz observed as a window for working
dx. I've gotten awful sick of people within and without the hobby
who in thier efforts to be "winners" have reduced lifes pleasures for
the majority. I trust that those of you that are part of the "me first"
generation get great satisfaction from large scores regardless of what you
do to achieve them. Don't worry about the little pistols, for sooner or
later they will become discouaged enough by a minority of the big guns
that they will find something much more rewarding to do in life than
contesting. 

  

73 de Larry K7SV (operator @ K7SV in Virginia) lschim at mailstorm.dot.gov
 




>From Brooke Allen" <ballen at morgan.com  Mon Dec 12 14:39:10 1994
From: Brooke Allen" <ballen at morgan.com (Brooke Allen)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 09:39:10 -0500
Subject: What's a valid QSO?
References: <4F53wc3w165w at w2up.wells.com>
Message-ID: <9412120939.ZM2967 at morgan.com>

My question regarding this issue:

If FO0BAR tells me I'm a dupe and I don't have him in my log, what happens
if I now log him anyway? N2BA is in his log and FO0BAR is in mine. The
only problem is that the times may be hours apart.

The QSO has to be completed 2 way to count, but is there a problem if the
first half is done on Friday night and the second half Sunday morning? What is
the official line on this? If he tells me I'm in his log at 1122Z, so he
won't work me now, can I log him at 1122Z?

As a practical matter, when I'm on the DX side, I work all dupes, and generally
don't mention it unless I've been called so many times I feel harassed.
Pointing out dupedness takes longer than working em.

I can certainly empathize with K2WK re N2WK. While I've run into K2BA, W2BA,
and
KE2BA(?) in contests, I'm sure sure glad N2AA is operating at N2RM!

73s, N2BA, Brooke ... ballen at morgan.com


>From fish at crl.com (Bill Fisher, KM9P  Concentric Systems, Inc.)  Mon Dec 12 14:52:31 1994
From: fish at crl.com (Bill Fisher, KM9P  Concentric Systems, Inc.) (Bill Fisher, KM9P  Concentric Systems, Inc.)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 06:52:31 -0800
Subject: HDR-300 problems
Message-ID: <199412121452.AA23202 at mail.crl.com>

W3ZZ points out a couple of problems with the HDR-300.  Let me point out
another...

The HDR-300 has a shaft that sticks through the center hold of the rotor
plate.  You mount a plate on this shaft after mounting the rotor to the
rotor plate.  If you don't grease the shaft, the shaft WILL rust-weld
it'self to the plate.  When this happens, you WILL NEVER get the plate off
the shaft.  Try and get an HDR-300 out of Rohn-45 with a rotor plate on it!
It can be done, but you will have bloody knuckles for your troubles.

Nowhere in the manual does it indicate that this shaft should be greased.
When I called Hygain about this many years ago the guy acted like I was an
idiot for not doing so...  The conversation was not a long one.

As far as the rotor is concerned...  Mine hasn't failed.  N4RJ has one
turning a full sized 3 element 40 and has been doing so for about 3 or 4
years.  Every now and then it gets stuck because it goes through the stop
and won't turn back through it.  A pain, but fixable.

73

---
Bill Fisher, KM9P   -    Concentric Systems, Inc.