Send me VHF Results

Mon Jan 24 15:33:00 EST 1994

Pse send me your results from the VHF SS.  I will post a summary by 
week's end.

                                    Ed, K1TR
                                    es at mvuss.att.com

>From barry at w2up.wells.com (Barry Kutner)  Mon Jan 24 22:07:57 1994
From: barry at w2up.wells.com (Barry Kutner) (Barry Kutner)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 94 22:07:57 GMT
Subject: FT1000 Rx Antenna?
Message-ID: <yNgogc1w165w at w2up.wells.com>

In getting ready for 160 test, I took advantage of today's warm
wx and put up a Beverage, for first time. My FT1000 has me confused.
How do I configure it so that when I push the Rx Ant button, the Beverage
is used for receive? The manual is confusing here - it says default
config has the Rx Ant switch hooked up thru the RCA jack labelled Rx Ant
on back. But, seems like it is hooked up thru BPF cuz when I hit Rx Ant
button with no Rx Antenna attached, the Sub rcvr gets quiet, but 
nothing happens to main rcvr.
Do I need to flip S1001 as they talk about in the manual? and then
I hook up Beverage to RCA jack, and not SO-239 on BPF-1? If so,
what happens to receive in the sub-rcvr?
Any help appreciated. 73 Barry

Barry N. Kutner, W2UP       Usenet/Internet: barry at w2up.wells.com
Newtown, PA                 Packet Radio: W2UP @ WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA.NA
                            Packet Cluster: W2UP >K2TW (FRC)
.......................................................................

>From Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon at unbc.edu>  Mon Jan 24 22:58:50 1994
From: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon at unbc.edu> (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 1994 14:58:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: NCJ editorial, etc. (fwd)
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9401241449.A5744-0100000 at unbc.edu>

On Mon, 24 Jan 1994, Jim Hollenback wrote:

>    2) spend hours writing software to reformat the log

This is something that only has to be done once, though, assuming the 
reformatter achieves wide distribution.

>    4) write WF1B a letter pleading for an output format that allows
>       me to become a competitor, but in the mean time be satisfied 
>       with participant status

This is the ultimate solution. 2) above would get us through until 4) 
happens.

--lyndon

>From tree at cmicro.com (Larry Tyree)  Mon Jan 24 22:55:54 1994
From: tree at cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 94 14:55:54 PST
Subject: Free logging software
Message-ID: <9401242255.AA22777 at cmicro.com>

I have decided to make Version 4.05 of the N6TR Logging Software public
domain.  You can download it from the BBS at (503) 658-6116.  You will also
find documentation in ASCII and Word for Windows format.  This version of
the software is only one rev old and was used by half of the top six
stations in the 1993 CQ WW CW contest.

Of course, if you like the software you will be encouraged to purchase the
current version which supports the .CTY files.  More info on this via
direct response.

Tree N6TR
tree at cmicro.com

>From rklein at lobo.rmh.pr1.k12.co.us (Ronald D. Klein)  Tue Jan 25 01:48:56 1994
From: rklein at lobo.rmh.pr1.k12.co.us (Ronald D. Klein) (Ronald D. Klein)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 94 18:48:56 MST
Subject: NCJ editorial, etc. (fwd)
Message-ID: <9401250148.AA27769 at lobo.rmh.pr1.k12.co.us>

> 
> While I have your attention, I have a comment to make about the
> low power category for ARRL-sponsored contests.  I feel that the
> power limit for this category should be 100W, not 150W as it
> presently is (or is my memory failing again?).  Almost all
> commercial transceivers only output 100W, the execptions being
> the 2 top of the line models in the $4000 class. 

  ... stuff deleted
> 
> 73,
> 
> Ed Gilbert, WA2SRQ
> eyg at hpnjlc.njd.hp.com

Actually, there are probably a lot of tube PA type rigs still in use which 
output more than 100 watts. For example... my TS830S  and I suspect that one 
would be surprised how many contesters (probably not the big guys however) 
still use rigs of comparable type for which the 100 watt output limit would be 
inconvenient to deal with.

It seems to me the intent here is to operate barefoot... I'd suggest we not 
draw the power line at too restrictive a level for the low power category. The 
ones it might hit the hardest could be the new contester... could be a lot of 
such folks are somewhat new to the hobby and are likely to be using the older 
rigs.... then there are those of us who refuse to pay more for a radio then 
their last car purchase (my last one was $3300 and my 17 year old drives it, I 
drive the $2300 one ;)

73, Ron - W0OSK

>From MSgt Bob Smith/SCSMH <smithb at GF-WAN.af.mil>  Tue Jan 25 02:35:49 1994
From: MSgt Bob Smith/SCSMH <smithb at GF-WAN.af.mil> (MSgt Bob Smith/SCSMH)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 94 20:35:49 CST
Subject: Internet Access
Message-ID: <9401250235.AA02555 at GF-WAN.af.mil>

I have in my mailbox the PDIAL information file.  PDIAL stands
of Public Dialup Intenet Access List.  (or something like that)
This file is about 68k, so will not be transmitting to the 
reflector.  Send me a request and I will forward to your box.
I'm still reviewing it for info myself.

73 de Bob

smithb at gf-wan.af.mil

>From XMSJ29A at prodigy.com (MR JAMES A WHITE)  Tue Jan 25 03:40:58 1994
From: XMSJ29A at prodigy.com (MR JAMES A WHITE) (MR JAMES A WHITE)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 1994 22:40:58 EST
Subject: Contest Reporting
Message-ID: <025.00254101.XMSJ29A at prodigy.com>

W0CP-vy fb job keeping contesting community appraised on CAC-I have seen
more about current stuff from you in the past two months than I saw from
the SE Div memebrs in the years I was serving as their rep on the CAC!

Add hours operated: YES

Require disks/data be sent in: YES

Greater recognition of significant achievements by other than the top-ten
overall scores: YES

Seperate competitor/participant categories: NO
                                            --
                                            --

        Adding hours into reporting will allow those looking to compare
performance per hour the opporttunity to do so. If current software does
not calculate hours, and does not output data in a manor acceptable to the
sponsor it is lacking-it would be a selling feature for the software that
does..."both ARRL and CQ accepted formats"...make notice to the community
that as of say 1/1/95 it will be a requirement.
        There have always been and will always will be achievements that go
un-noticed in a writeup...at present the outstanding performances will
hopefully be brought out in the results via the lead editorial.
        Trying to let the numbers do the talking is great-as long as that
particularly important achievement has a box that shows it...just like the
writeup may not mention that killer multiplier on 80 meters by the station
in the Black Hole...a box probably will never be instated that shows record
breaking CW scores that were made on rigs without a CW filter.
        Do not seperate submissions in any way that allows one guys score
to "matter" more than anothers-the arguement can be made someday that only
full line scores of the competitors need be listed, and just the calls of
the other guys "will do"...remember your first contest entries-yeah you
weren't at the top of your section/call area-but you were there, with a
whole 300 QSOs to show for a weekends work-how did the other guy end up
with 4 times as many contacts as you did when both of you were on the air
all weekend long???????? Finding your call in a writeup is very important
to a lot of guys-as KM9P once put it, it gives some a "warm fuzzy feeling"
seeing their call-or something like that. Oh yeah...after all if the other
guys scores can be dropped-why not drop something else.
        A sad reality for those afflicted with the same disease I have is
that contesting is a very small percentage of the whole hamming scene which
means that lengthy writeups in magazines are disproportionate in their
space requirements. I would absolutely love to see by band breakdowns, and
regionalized top fives-the reality is it ain't a likely thang. I saw hours
of work in preparing multiplier by band breakdowns for the ARRL DX done by
WA1QNF (you oldies know he is now K1TO) never published-due to space
requirement restrictions...this was 20 years ago...I think that with the
current crossection of hams now the amateur environment today is not one
more pro-contest writeups.
        Excuse my longwindedness-main point-thanks for keeping us informed,
Walt.

Jim, K1ZX

...re: rotor cables-thanx mni responses/went with housewiring 14-2 w/ground
paired with 12-2 w/ground = six connectors...mounted motor cap @ rotor end
netting eight...works good without a load...another week or two we'll see
how it turns the yagi! Contesters are OK - about 20 responses rcvd...VFB!

>From DKMC" <dkmc at chevron.com  Tue Jan 25 05:09:00 1994
From: DKMC" <dkmc at chevron.com (DKMC)
Date: 24 Jan 94 21:09:00 PST
Subject: What the West REALLY Needs
Message-ID: <CPLAN065.DKMC.3536.1994 0124 21 0521 05>

 Microsoft Mail v3.0 IPM.Microsoft Mail.Note
 From: McCarty, DK 'David'
 To:  OPEN ADDRESSING SERVI-OPENADDR
 Subject:  What the West REALLY Needs
 Date: 1994-01-24 22:56
 Priority:
 Message ID: 619387D1
 Conversation ID: 619387D1

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 You know, in the 70's and early 80's JA participation was so good that a top
 ten finish was in the realm of possibility for a W5 or farther west in just
 about every work-the-world contest.  Much of what we are hearing is perhaps
 really just a lament over the balkanization of Europe (more and more country
 multipliers) and the loss of the big JA runs.

 If we could just get JE1CKA to foment something and get a good civil war
 going on between all the different prefectures...or get BY/BV/YB/DU to get
 with the program and get a lot of 40 watters going like the Soviet Union and
 all the Eastern bloc did years ago, maybe none of this discussion would have
 any reason to take place.  :-)

 73

 David K. McCarty, K5GN
 dkmc at chevron.com

>From DKMC" <dkmc at chevron.com  Tue Jan 25 05:09:01 1994
From: DKMC" <dkmc at chevron.com (DKMC)
Date: 24 Jan 94 21:09:01 PST
Subject: shunt fed tower RF
Message-ID: <CPLAN065.DKMC.3537.1994 0124 21 0521 05>

 Microsoft Mail v3.0 IPM.Microsoft Mail.Note
 From: McCarty, DK 'David'
 To:  OPEN ADDRESSING SERVI-OPENADDR
 Subject:  RE: shunt fed tower RF
 Date: 1994-01-24 23:00
 Priority:
 Message ID: 522BBD29
 Conversation ID: 522BBD29

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Eric NV6O writes:
 >Anyone have experience with damaged rotator control cable when the tower
 >is loaded for 160 or 80?

 No experience with this here, but I've heard about the advantages of putting
 the cable inside the tower.  This makes sense as most of the RF energy is
 traveling on the outer surfaces due to skin effect.  Has anyone got a
 response to this as a relatively simple fix?

 73

 David K. McCarty, K5GN
 dkmc at chevron.com