CQ WW CW Results ZS6EZ

Sat Dec 2 05:30:45 EST 1995

From:          "Chris R. Burger" <CRB at knersus.nanoteq.co.za>

ZS6EZ Single Op All Band Medium Power (more than 100 W, though)

      BAND     QSO   QSO PTS  PTS/QSO   ZONES COUNTRIES
      160       17       46     2.61      8      12
       80       78      204     2.62     21      47
       40      546     1612     2.95     33      79
       20      889     2634     2.96     34      93
       15     1180     3486     2.95     34     116
       10      513     1493     2.91     26      91
     ---------------------------------------------------
     Totals   3221     9475     2.94    156     438  =>  5,628,150

Soapbox: 10 m was the worst I've ever heard it.  I hope this is
         the bottom of the cycle!  Terrible thunderstorm QRN marred
         the low bands.  Pretty pleased with the mult, but obviously
         didn't spend enough time actually making QSOs.

>From Jim Stevens <ki4hn at nando.net>  Sat Dec  2 04:32:43 1995
From: Jim Stevens <ki4hn at nando.net> (Jim Stevens)
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 23:32:43 -0500
Subject: JA's on 160 in CQWW CW?
Message-ID: <01BAC047.263AAAE0 at grail912.nando.net>

At N4ZC, I worked JA3ONB at 1220Z on 25-Nov-95.  We used an Inverted Vee =
at 120 feet, a North 500' beverage, TS-930, and Drake L4B.  First JA I =
have worked on 160!

73,
Jim, KI4HN
ki4hn at nando.net

----------
From: 	Assarabowski, Richard[SMTP:AssaraR at utrc.utc.com]
Sent: 	Thursday, November 30, 1995 8:17 AM
To: 	Contest reflector (to send); Topband
Subject: 	JA's on 160 in CQWW CW?

Anyone on the East Coast work any JA's on 160??  Here's my list of JA's=20
heard -- unfortunately none of them were worked.  The only East Coast=20
station I heard working one was W1OO.

     JA0MVW    1907.77
     JA7VW          no freq
     JA7NI          1910.5
     JA7BXS         1908.24
     JA3ONB    1909.75
     JA1YDU    1909.52
     JA8CDT    1909.7   =20
     JR1CWU    1912.0
     JA8CDT    1909.7

>From n3rr at cais.cais.com (Bill Hider)  Sat Dec  2 05:17:34 1995
From: n3rr at cais.cais.com (Bill Hider) (Bill Hider)
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 00:17:34 -0500
Subject: UNconf. calls & piggy-back assist.
Message-ID: <199512020517.AAA18375 at cais.cais.com>

It's simple....He's using information available on HF and is the only one
performing all of the operating/logging functions.  His equipment utilizes
the information received off the HF "air" and processes it into another
usable fashion.   He's a Single OP!

Bill, N3RR

At 11:31 AM 12/1/95, Marijan Miletic wrote:
>Hi Contesters, having read W2UP note about 17 lost QSO bcz of HIS signal being
>miscopied, I wonder how much I loose with my richly doted callsign!  Due to
>programing error, my contest program was not abreviating 1 to A in the 59915
>report when sent alone.  I often used another function key which initiated
>partners callsign together with 599A5 and I felt I was doing the right thing.
>
>During the CQ WW CW contest, I had a feeling my good nearby friend was using
>DX Cluster secretly as he was often chassing multipliers I just picked from
>the screen.  He was actually looking at IC-781 panoramic display and whenever
>BIG SIG appeared, he would move mults station to that freq.  As I was S&P 99%
>of the time, he was VERY, VERY lucky.  It did cost him a lunch but I feel the
>SOP UNass. were NOT broken as HF contest radio was used to the full advantage.
>
>Any comment on this greyish matter?
>
>73 de Mario, S56A, N1YU.
>

>From David & Barbara Leeson <0005543629 at mcimail.com>  Sat Dec  2 05:35:00 1995
From: David & Barbara Leeson <0005543629 at mcimail.com> (David & Barbara Leeson)
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 95 00:35 EST
Subject: W6QHS CQWW CW
Message-ID: <23951202053532/0005543629NA2EM at MCIMAIL.COM>

W6QHS CQWW CW    18 hours    440Q    116Z     273C  =>  465,633  
SO/HP/PACKET ASSISTED

Soap:  Thursday and Friday, offering some over-the-air computer and 
generator help to pals at HC8N (couldn't go this year, but there in spirit).  
Station here seems to be all together, so think I'll give it a part-time 
whirl.  Friday, crank-up tower relay sticks when it's down at 30', so I get 
miffed and figure it's not going to be my weekend.  Kids visiting all week 
and Sat. (we're goin' to be grandparents soon), Sat. also big garden honey-do 
day, so not on much, but I got excited when I noticed I had a shot at a 
unique feature of CQWW, 40 zones, on both 40 and 20!  

Band condx were fabulous, 20 interesting at night (SU2MT, HZ1AB, A71CW, etc) 
and 40 open all day here.  Went to bed with 37z/40 and 38z/20, needed 29 and 
37 for 20.  With 4S7, SU and JT's all over the place, at least 22, 34 and 23 
are in the bag, and 26 was unusually active, too.  Slept quite a bit Sunday 
morning to be sharp for afternoon 20m VK6 LP and AF openings.  Tried hard to 
get 7Q7A to QSY from 15 to 20, but didn't want to be a pain in a pileup (I 
guess W6 doesn't have the mult appeal of HC8).  In last hour, found PY0FF on 
40 for 38z/40 and VK9XH on 20 for 39z/20.

Not bad for 18 hours 95% S&P, and I have renewed admiration for those who 
get a sweep (is there a CQWW word for 40z?), even with packet help.  Never 
heard zones 12, 22 on 40, and didn't hear zone 37 on 20 when I was on.

These were indeed 3-sigma conditions and activity levels, so I'm sorry I 
wasn't in a position to give it a 48-hour go, but it was fun concentrating on 
a CQWW-unique aspect of the contest even if did I fall one or two short.

It's a great contest, even part time!  73 de Dave, W6QHS

>From w7ni at teleport.com (Stan Griffiths)  Sat Dec  2 10:38:12 1995
From: w7ni at teleport.com (Stan Griffiths) (Stan Griffiths)
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 1995 02:38:12 -0800
Subject: UNconfirmed calls
Message-ID: <199512021038.CAA06521 at desiree.teleport.com>

Hi Uli,

>>This last part looks like an attempt to get you to check your log and fix it
>>if you didn't get DL2HBX's call right.  I question the ethics of this.  If
>>they didn't get your call during the QSO, it is a busted contact and you
>>should not try to fix it after the contest.
>
>Ooops, I didn't think of this possible interpretation...
>However, I won't display all misinterpreted derivates of my call again to
>avoid allegations like these that to my mind are baseless.

Only you know what your motivation was when you published your post.  You
have explained it now and apparently I have misinterpreted what you were
trying to do. I apologize and accept your explanation.

73,

Stan  W7NI at teleport.com