Submission of Sprint Logs
Gerard Jendraszkiewicz
jend at midway.uchicago.edu
Tue Sep 27 00:00:16 EDT 1994
Does anyone know the e-mail address to send the Sprint Logs ?? Both SSB and
CW ! Don't want to wait untill the last minute again !! (getting close )
73 Jerry, KE9I
jend at midway.uchicago.edu
>From jholly at hposl42.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback) Mon Sep 26 20:48:20 1994
From: jholly at hposl42.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback) (Jim Hollenback)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:48:20 -0700
Subject: CQ WW RTTY score
Message-ID: <9409261248.ZM1324 at hpwsmjh.cup.hp.com>
Call used: WA6SDM
Location: CA
Entry Class: Single Op, All Band, High Power
Band QSOs Pts QTH DX Zones
80 30 38 20 4 5
40 154 252 40 15 14
20 349 642 50 56 25
15 68 104 21 17 14
10 2 3 1 2 2
--------------------------------------
Total 603 1039 132 94 60
Score: 297154
--------------------------------------
Had a good time. Beat my score last year by 2.4 times. Going the right way.
Still have a way to go to catch up.
Excuses: *#(&)@^!
* using one radio is still challenging.
# 80m antenna still is a good dummy load.
( low trap dipole on 40 sucks big time.
& I think I missed some good time on 15m
) Had a hard time waking up from the Sunday morning nap
@ Had to fix my own meals
^ needed to use the rest room several times. (unassisted, so catagory is right)
! The female in the house complained I was spending to much time
on the radio and not enough with her. She would not let me alone
Friday and Saturday nights, insisting I give her attention. Being
very practical she settled for a full food dish. Some times cats
can be a real pain.
>From McCarty, DK 'Dav" <DKMC at chevron.com Mon Sep 26 22:51:24 1994
From: McCarty, DK 'Dav" <DKMC at chevron.com (McCarty, DK 'Dav)
Date: 26 Sep 94 14:51:24 PDT
Subject: CQWW M/S rules
Message-ID: <199409262151.AA40882 at portal.chevron.com>
From: McCarty, DK 'David'
To: OPEN ADDRESSING SERVI-OPENADDR
Subject: RE: CQWW M/S rules
Date: 1994-09-26 15:44
Priority:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed, WA2SRQ, writes:
>Rather than just complain to K3EST and create more work for a guy who
>already has a huge job to do, why don't we get come consensus on the
>reflector as to what we'd like to see. I'll take a stab at it to get
>things started...
Great idea, Ed. Perhaps then 'EST and the committee can pass judgment on
the final statement, in time for the end of October.
An important point to me is that THE CLARIFICATION OF THE RULE SHOULD AVOID
CHANGING THE CURRENT INTERPRETATION. (So that scores remain comparable to
old records.)
Here's a hypothetical log segment of operation by a Texas M.O.S.T just
before sunrise in CQ WW CW, and the ten-minute rule decision narrative that
goes with it, based on my understanding of the way the rule has been applied
in the past. The segment contains most of the potential rule questions in
one short period.
Look it over as food for thought while you are considering Ed's proposed
wording.
Notes:
-The log segment below is parsed by activity ("run band/station" and "mult
band/station") for clarity--actually you would just have the band logs for
analysis.
-The time to the next allowable band change is noted at the time of the band
change for clarity.
-This segment could be produced by three separate rigs (40,80,160) with the
"run" or "mult" station duty passed between them or a nimble single
transmitter with packet and outboard receivers.
-The question asked by N2IC is touched upon in the multiplier band changes
to 40 and back to 80.
Narrative:
1220Z running JAs on 40, working mults on 80.
1236Z find a ZL on 160: OK to work him?
YES, it has been more than ten minutes since 80 became the
mult band; work him on the mult station.
1239Z lose frequency on 40: OK to go to 80?
YES, it has been more than ten minutes since 40 became the
run band; go to 80 and work more Q's.
1241Z nothing left on 160, found a VS6 on 40: OK to work him?
NO, must wait until 1244, ten minutes after the time of the
last QSO on the previous mult band (80), which is the
earliest we could have gone to 160 to break the pileup for
the ZL.
1245Z get through the pileup to the VS6, moving the mult station to 40.
1246Z 80 is too slow for rate, now s/p, OK to go back to 40?
NO, must wait until 1249Z, ten minutes after the first run
band QSO on 80.
1247Z can't find any more new mults on 40, OK to go back to 80?
NO, not until 1254, ten minutes after the time of the start
of the 40M ten minutes, which was defined by the last QSO on
the band before that...
1248Z work a JA on 40, moving the run station back to 40.
NOTE: the mult station is now idled until 1254, because it is
stuck on 40, and the one-signal rule prevents it from
continuing to make contacts on 40.
1254Z work a mult on 80, moving the mult station back to 80.
RUN ACTIVITY LOG MULT ACTIVITY LOG
=============================== ===============================
7.0 1220 JA... 3.5 1220 KH0... (MULT)
3.5 1221 KH6... (MULT)
7.0 1222 JA...
7.0 1223 JA...
7.0 1224 JA...
7.0 1225 JA... 3.5 1225 HL9... (MULT)
7.0 1226 JA...
3.5 1228 KH0... (MULT)
7.0 1229 JA...
7.0 1230 JA...
7.0 1231 JA...
7.0 1232 JA...
3.5 1233 VS6... (MULT)
7.0 1234 JA...
7.0 1236 JA... *1.8 1236 ZL3... (MULT) (next chg 1244)
7.0 1237 JA...
1.8 1238 JA1... (MULT)
*3.5 1239 JA... (next chg 1248)
3.5 1240 JA...
3.5 1241 JA...
3.5 1242 JA...
3.5 1243 JA...
3.5 1244 DU2... (MULT) *7.0 1245 VS6... (MULT) (next chg 1254)
3.5 1247 JA...
*7.0 1248 JA... (next chg 1258)
7.0 1249 JA...
7.0 1250 JA...
7.0 1251 JA...
7.0 1253 JA...
7.0 1254 JA... *3.5 1254 KH2... (MULT) (next chg 1304)
7.0 1255 JA...
7.0 1256 JA...
7.0 1258 JA... 3.5 1258 XE2... (MULT)
7.0 1259 JA...
and the beat goes on...
73,
Dave
David K. McCarty, K5GN
dkmc at chevron.com
"Texas Radio and the Big Beat:
Soft, driven, slow and mad, like some new language"
Morrison
>From debry at iris1.sb.fsu.edu (Ron Debry) Tue Sep 27 01:12:21 1994
From: debry at iris1.sb.fsu.edu (Ron Debry) (Ron Debry)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 20:12:21 -0400
Subject: multi-single...new approach
Message-ID: <9409270012.AA10293 at iris1.sb.fsu.edu>
Doug KR2Q made a very interesting proposal for the CQWW M/S rules.
<snip>
So how about this: Change the 10 minute rule to apply to only the RUN
station. This would allow ONLY MULTS to be picked up anywhere, anytime,
as they are available. Since many m/s guys run some sort of spotting,
you would have the ability to zip around anywhere. Assuming state of
the art rigs, a two transmitter m/s would be about as competitive as
a 3, 4 or 5 rig m/s. But the RUN station would have to stay put for
10 minutes. This is the ONLY way to separate m/s from m/m, if the "new"
set of rules were implemented.
<snip>
I think this is a great idea. As the rules stand, the major effect of
the 10 minute rule for the mult station is to keep you sitting on
your hands for 7, 8, 9 minutes while the HS on 40 fades down to
nothing.
I don't see much danger of a "multiplier octopus". Maybe at the very
start of the contest, but usually you can keep pretty busy making 10
minute sweeps of the bands anyway, so I don't see any great
change coming from the new rule at the start. It might give some
more advantage to stations with 5 rigs and 5 ops over the 2 station,
2 op types, but the 5 rig station already has the advantage of an op
listening for 10-20 minutes, making a list of mults. With packet,
that advantage is lessened anyway.
I see this idea as making M/S more fun, by increasing your flexibility
during the relatively slow times. And more fun is what it should
be all about.
73, Ron WA6DGX
debry at bio.fsu.edu
>From Mr. Brett Graham" <bagraham at HK.Super.NET Tue Sep 27 01:37:56 1994
From: Mr. Brett Graham" <bagraham at HK.Super.NET (Mr. Brett Graham)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 08:37:56 +0800
Subject: VS6BG CQ WW TTY score
Message-ID: <199409270037.AA25798 at hk.super.net>
Category: single-op all-band
Band Qs Zs Cs Ss
80 15 3 3 0
40 59 9 9 1
20 229 16 28 32
15 215 17 37 4
10 8 2 2 0
Total: 526 47 79 37
Score: 204.5K (estimated)
Provided your rate isn't all that hot, you can do the CQ WW RTTY with CT & a
terminal program to talk to the TNC under DESQview. Then open another window
so you can keep resetting the computer clock as CT slowly looses sync with
reality. As the cycle continues to auger, it would be nice to have a
DESQview-aware CT so the op can multi-task when the rates are low (Ken, are
you watching? Yes, it would screw up CW keying, but as a commnand line
switch, one could choose to do so or not).
Speaking of hot, my 8xMRF458 amp kept kicking out due to over temp, despite
being throttled back 25% from our legal limit (read: 300W out). Annoying as
hell to hear & not be heard... Those 2-point JAs were enough to keep me from
the beach, though it was a struggle at times (31C, low humidity & plenty of
potential new babes about - with no KA9FOX for competition). Congrats to
those of you who printed me!
73, VS6BrettGraham aka VR2BG bagraham at hk.super.net
>From Randy A Thompson <K5ZD at world.std.com> Mon Sep 26 22:12:35 1994
From: Randy A Thompson <K5ZD at world.std.com> (Randy A Thompson)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 22:11:35 +0059 (EDT)
Subject: CQ WW Team Competition
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9409262259.E11566-0100000 at world.std.com>
Last year I "organized" two YCCC teams for the CQ WW Team Competition.
We even "won" for SSB and came in second on CW. Not sure what we won,
but it was fun to know you were on a team and others were depending on
your score.
I would be willing to organize some other teams for this year's contest.
In memory of the baseball owners, this will not be a democratic process.
If you would like to be on a team for CQ WW Phone (you must be single op,
not assisted), please send me your call, the call you will be using in
the contest, the category (all band, single band, high or low power), your
name, and your internet address. Indicate if you want to be considered
as a "Barbarian" (hard core, serious), "Player" (serious but not full
time), or "Doer" (one who does, i.e. one who will be on and having fun). Do
this by October 15, 1994.
I will "draft" teams that will provide some interesting competition
(whether on a regional basis or category basis). Should be fun.
Everyone will know what team they are on before the contest.
73,
Randy
k5zd at world.std.com
>From Hodge Thorgerson David Cameron-INBA <hodge at redvax1.dgsca.unam.mx> Tue Sep 27 04:34:11 1994
From: Hodge Thorgerson David Cameron-INBA <hodge at redvax1.dgsca.unam.mx> (Hodge Thorgerson David Cameron-INBA)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 21:34:11 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Cheating & "s/o unassisted"
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.90.940926205807.3384E-100000 at redvax1.dgsca.unam.mx>
I simply want to enter my vote for maintaining the separation of "assisted"
and "unassisted" categories.
Please don't force me to use a technology I CHOOSE NOT to use in order to
police those who want to improve their single op scores illicitly. Lets
work instead on educating the contesting population of said rules violation,
find ways of exposing those bending the rules, and let peer pressure take
its course.
I have used packet in contests from KY1H, KP2A, W6UE in multi situations
so I am not ignorant to the possibilities/liabilities such technology
presents. But there are still lots of places on this shrinking globe of ours
where packet is not very useful or has yet to make an appearance.
For those who want to use packet, by all means, do so!! It is great for
upping the club aggregate, etc. For those who want extra ears, go for it!
But please don't force me to be a "single op" while "listening
through other people's receivers."
With apologies to Anacin,
"I'd rather tune for multipliers myself!"
David Hodge XE1/AA6RX hodge at redvax1.dgsca.unam.mx
>From fish at crl.com (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.) Tue Sep 27 13:38:01 1994
From: fish at crl.com (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.) (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 05:38:01 -0700
Subject: Stacking question
Message-ID: <199409271238.AA17949 at mail.crl.com>
Hello guys!
I have a 205CA (20m yagi) on the top of a mast. The mast is only about 6
feet out of the top of the tower. Am I OK to stack a 6 element DXE 15m
below it? If not, what about a 6 element KLM 10? I guess this could be
modeled, but I don't have the software to do it right now.
Thanks
---
Bill Fisher, KM9P
Concentric Systems, Inc. (CSI)
404-442-5821 Fax 404-667-1975
>From Jean-Pierre Frossard" <FROSSARD.J at calc.vet.uga.edu Tue Sep 27 15:04:42 1994
From: Jean-Pierre Frossard" <FROSSARD.J at calc.vet.uga.edu (Jean-Pierre Frossard)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 09:04:42 EST
Subject: RTTY Scores
Message-ID: <10804E0231FB at calc.vet.uga.edu>
Here are a few scores from georgia:
K4JPD Single Op High Power Unassisted
998 QSO's 167 St/Pr 219 Cty's 91 Zns = 961,155 pts
N4ONI Single Op High Power Assisted
Band Qso's Pts St/Pr Cty Zns
80 30 33 24 3 4
40 133 198 37 21 9
20 278 606 42 67 24
15 153 391 19 59 20
10 7 13 2 5 4
_____________________________________
601 1241 124 155 61 = 421,940
KB4GID Single Op High Power Assisted (or was it hindered?!?)
Band Qso's Pts St/Pr Cty Zns
80 112 137 43 11 6
40 151 226 42 30 14
20 205 419 37 45 20
15 121 296 14 53 19
10 5 8 1 3 3
_____________________________________
594 1086 137 142 62 = 370,326
There seemed to be lots of activity from Georgia this time! Plenty
of packet pileups too, which meant that I usually lost my CQ
frequency trying to work the new mults after they were spotted
(especially since I was usually the last one to get through with my
300 watts and low tribander....) Anyway, lots of fun, and I did pick
up a few new ones (Thanks VS6BG!!)
73, see you next time! John - KB4GID
(FROSSARD.J at CALC.VET.UGA.EDU)
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list