No CW????????

w1hij at w1hij at
Thu Dec 5 10:50:12 EST 1996



Not only that but even if someone gets past the 5 WPM test, how are they 
supposed to find enough slow speed cw qso's to get better. I've been haunting 
the 40 m novice band lately just to see what's out there. If I hear three 
stations at once I'm surprised.


I remember back in the "old days" (I got my novice license as WN1HIJ in 1954) 
that one of the ways I got better at CW was participation in the slow speed 
New England tfc net.

How about a "slow speed net" with some real content interest so that people 
have a reason besides "studying" to improve their speed in a real 
environment. For example, after check in, the contents of ZD's story could be 
transmitted or other material of interest. If some of us who have some little 
contest experience and dx'ing experience were willing to share that on the 
air, it would be a great benefit to all and sundry. (Also it would 
demonstrate that the ability to use CW as a communication medium does not 
revolve around answering multiple choice questions).

I sure know that I'd take the trouble to find the net if I thought that I 
might get the opportunity to read the mail or participate in a conversation 
involving the likes of ZD, ZO, LPL, KO(Trey) and so forth.

Anybody interested in helping to organize it and get it on the air??? 

If we want operators we have to train them. Once a year field day isn't 

de Bill, W1HIJ (LA)

>Date:	Thu,  5 Dec 1996 03:50:26, -0500
>From:	HWDX09A at ( ROBERT   REED)
>Sender:	owner-cq-contest at
>To:	cq-contest at, n2uck at JUNO.COM
>Subject:	Re: No CW????????
>We seem free to complain of No-Coders but the fact is amateur radio 
>has changed and we don't offer them  any other real opportunity.
smscompany at

>From aa8u at (AA8U)  Thu Dec  5 19:02:19 1996
From: aa8u at (AA8U) (AA8U)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 14:02:19 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 160M DX window Interpretation
Message-ID: < at>

At 08:29 AM 12/5/96 -0500, you wrote:
>It's really impolite to post personal email on the reflector.
>I think *you* need to get a life (and a clue).

Hello Dave and others reading this,

Dave, you are correct....but at least I identified myself with my callsign
and I am not hiding my opinions behind a cryptic email address. 

I still don't know your callsign, I assume you have one. I question how
deeply you support your self proclaimed "well respected" domestic contester
associates that feel it is permissible to call "cq dx" in the "dx window"
during contests. 
Maybe you just  neglected to include your call, I give you the benefit of
the doubt, but it does make me wonder.  

IF, you are not participating in the sponsored contest, AND don't submit a
log (other than a check log), then this use I could tolerate and maybe
You and others have the "right" to use whatever frequency or mode you
please, within the limits placed by the FCC, regardless of how un-popular
it may be to others. This would include rag chewing in the window, chasing
dx or states, etc.  I would be the last to object to your "rights".
The ARRL published definition of the "DX window", I believe, only covers
contest participants. IF you and your "many well respected" friends feel it
is ok to call "cq dx" in the "DX window" AND participate in the event with
hopes of submitting your score at a competitive level, then this is where
we likely disagree. 

I've received a lot of email in response to my earlier post regarding the
"DX window" on 160. I can tell you the majority of 160 contesters are
strongly opposed to the type of abuse of the "DX window" concept as I have
previously described. Matt, KC1XX, just happens to be the most visible
"offender" of the generally held interpretation of the "DX window".

It seems to me your (as a group) position, as I currently understand it, is
a minority interpretation. Perhaps you and your like-minded-associates
would consider enlightening me, and others via return email, regarding your
interpretation of the ARRL published "DX window" that would justify the way
you use it. Maybe you can convince me. It has been done before. 

Many fellow 160 contesters, myself included, eagerly await hearing an
interpretation that would allow a domestic station, PARTICIPATING in the
sponsored event, to call "cq dx" in the 1830-35 kHz DX window. 

I'm really not that concerned with this issue myself as I can live without
the "DX window" just fine since I installed my new array of Beverages.
Secondly, this is just a hobby to me and not to be taken all that seriously.  

There are many out here in "contest land" that are not as well equipped or
financially committed to contesting as AA8U. They are also
geographaphically disadvantaged in comparison to the east coast. They need
to have a "DX window" free of inconsiderate east coast big guns, and
others, that would abuse this resource, and they have expressed this to me
via email and on the air. 

If all of them were to vote with their vfo's during the contest this
weekend, your private contest window would not be such a good place to
operate. Most won't do this, they will choose instead to go operate
somewhere else, while those "privileged few" abuse the "DX window" at the
expense of everyone else. Their respect for those abusers will, I
guarantee, be diminished in the process. (Maybe that is why you failed to
identify yourself with your callsign in your email about this subject.)

It is only the principal of the issue that I address here. I've got nothing
against you or Matt or whoever, even though we apparently disagree in
principal. I'll even be happy to buy you all a brew at Dayton next year and
we can chat about this at length if you like. 

I only suggest via this email post, that by continuing to abuse the
generally accepted concept of the "DX window" that you will only diminish
the respect most others have for you. 

Hey maybe I'm all wet......convince me. 

I already made the mistake of copying your private email to the reflector,
so by copying this I probably won't get you any more upset with me. 

I invite you and others to reply. Make your opinions known to all. 

aa8u at

cc: contest & topband reflectors

>From snace at (Steven Nace)  Thu Dec  5 19:43:12 1996
From: snace at (Steven Nace) (Steven Nace)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 12:43:12 -0700
Subject: Available callsign source?
Message-ID: <v02120d01aeccd54567ea@[]>

Hello All:

Where can I find an UPDATED list of available 1X2, 2X1 and even 1X3 calls???

I tried the KA9FOX web site and found an excellent list provided by AD8I.
Unfortunately, it has not been updated since gate 2.

Thanks in advance.

de Hose  KN5H

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list