CQ WW 160 Contest Log Checking
aa4ga at stc.net
aa4ga at stc.net
Sun Jan 21 04:58:42 EST 1996
On Fri, 19 Jan 1996 19:35:52 -0800 (PST) Joe_Wilkowski at mc.xerox.com wrote:
>I'm sorry, I have to agree with Daves reasoning, statistically
> speaking, he will only eliminate a very few contacts using this
> process, and if you had to be the guy with the legitimate contact that
> no one else heard and stretched reasonability, then its a jungle out
> there, feces occur ........
I should say it does! Why should a station owner put in the effort to build a
first-class station to enable him to work mults/QSOs that others won't get just
to have the contacts removed from the log?
No disrespect to the late N4IN, but just because a log checker has a "feeling"
that a QSO may not be good is no reason to remove it. In Dave's case, there was
QSL proof that the contact was good. Removal of such a QSO is beyond ridiculous.
Talk about "stretched reasonability" Sheesh!
The term "feces" definitely does apply.
73 de Lee
aa4ga at stc.net
>From mihry at ns1.koyote.com (michael ihry) Sun Jan 21 06:16:31 1996
From: mihry at ns1.koyote.com (michael ihry) (michael ihry)
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 00:16:31 -0600
Subject: naqp score
Message-ID: <199601210616.AAA13715 at ns1.koyote.com>
q's points mults=20
160 22 22 12
80 30 30 14
40 11 11 11
20 44 44 20
15 1 1 1
total 108 108 58 score 6,264
>From Danny Eskenazi <k7ss at wolfenet.com> Sun Jan 21 07:17:49 1996
From: Danny Eskenazi <k7ss at wolfenet.com> (Danny Eskenazi)
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 1996 23:17:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: CQ 160 Logchecking
Message-ID: <199601210717.XAA23927 at wolfe.net>
Sounds like its time for the sponsor to step in and decide how they want
THEIR contest logs checked.
Gotta be some consistancy in what counts as a "real" QSO in ALL CQ EVENTS.
Heck, cajoling some non-contest guy to give ya #1 is half the fun!!
He's happy, Your happy .....no reason for the log checker not to be happy!!
PLEASE CQ : SEND OUT A GUIDELINE SHEET TO ALL YOUR LOGCHECKERS THAT IS
THEN PUBLISH IT HERE SO WE CAN KNOW HOW TO PLAY.
thanks, and thanks to all the logcheckers for their tireless efforts over
>From Charles Epps <epps at netcom.com> Sun Jan 21 09:12:32 1996
From: Charles Epps <epps at netcom.com> (Charles Epps)
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 01:12:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: WRTC-96 Update
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9601210119.A23308-0100000 at netcom18>
The World Radiosport Team Championship (WRTC-96) event which will be held
in the San Francisco area July 10-16, 1996 continues to develop nicely.
Many of the teams now are complete and we thought folks might be
interested to see how the competitors are lining up so far. If two calls
are listed, that constitutes a complete team; if only one callsign, then
that Team Leader still has to inform the WRTC Committee who his or her
Partner will be.
USA: TEAM LEADER PARTNER
RRDXC Selecting 2nd Team
EA EA4KR EA1AK
F Awaiting confirmation
G G3OZF GI0NWG
I IT9BLB IT9VDQ
LU Sending a team
LY LY2IJ LY1DS
OH Sending a team
OK OK1CF OK2PAY
ON ON6TT ON4WW
PY PY5CC PY0FF
S5 S59A S56A
SM SM3DMP SM3CER
SP SP6AZT SP9FKQ
UA UA3DPX RZ9UA
UR UT4UZ UT1IA
VE VE7NTT VE7CC
VK VK5GN VK2AYD
YU YU1RL YT1AD
Defending WRTC-90 Champions: K1AR K1DG
JUDGES: K4VX (Chief Judge), G3SXW, I2UIY, JA7RHJ, JE1CKA, K3ZO, K4XU,
K5RC, K6NA, N2AA, N6AA, N6ZZ, OH2BH, OH2MM, OK2FD, ON4UN, PY5EG, S50A,
UA9BA, W0UN, W7RM.
For anyone interested in competing in WRTC-96, there still are a few
wildcard positions open but you much act quickly to apply for them.
Wild-card teams provide an opportunity for contesters who are not
residents of the Invited Countries shown above, and for residents of
Invited Countries who were not otherwise selected, to participate in
WRTC-96. To apply for a Wild-card Team Leader position, send a statement
of your qualifications directly to the WRTC-96 Team Selection Committee
at P. O. Box 1, Los Altos, CA 94023-0001, USA, or via e-mail to
wrtc at maspar.com. There is no "official" application form so put in your
letter whatever information you think would be helpful in leading the
Selection Committee to choose your application over the others.
Wild-card applications must be received by February 1, 1996 and the
Selection Committee intends to announce the Team Leaders by February 15.
By March 1, each Wild-card Team Leader must select a Partner who can
reside anywhere on his or her same continent.
For additional information about WRTC-96, contact Rusty Epps, W6OAT at
651 Handley Trail, Redwood City, CA 94062, USA or via e-mail at
epps at netcom.com.
73 de Rusty, W6OAT for the WRTC-96 Committee
>From w7ni at teleport.com (Stan Griffiths) Sun Jan 21 10:40:46 1996
From: w7ni at teleport.com (Stan Griffiths) (Stan Griffiths)
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 02:40:46 -0800
Subject: Pointing Yagis in the Wind
Message-ID: <199601211040.CAA03721 at desiree.teleport.com>
So after reading a lot of words about this subject, I am still left with
1. Does an antenna, if left to rotate to any position it wants to, rotate
to the position of least wind resistance? Be careful before you say the
answer is an intuitively obvious "yes". Kites don't seem to. They seem to
seek a position that catches maximum wind . . . or at least "balances" the
load about a pivot point.
2. Does maximum antenna windloading occur broadside to the elements or
boom, whichever is greater, or does it occur at some angle in between where
the wind catches some of both areas? As Dave, W6QHS, pointed out, EIA
RS-222C said maximum antenna area was the square root of the sum of the
squares of the elements and the boom and was somewhere around 45 degrees
across the array. But now we also have EIA-222-E and ASCE 74 which are
newer models and tend to indicate the 45 degree angle of the array to the
wind actually catches LESS wind. Dave also points out that the laws of
physics have not changed, only the models have changed. So do the new
models actually come closer to the truth than the old ones?
Dave, W6QHS, do you have any more comments on these two questions?
Even if the calculated answer is different, depending upon the assumptions
of your model, there must be a good way to measure it empirically, like
using a scale miniture Yagi in a wind tunnel and taking actual measurements.
But really, how important is the direction you point your Yagi in a strong
wind? If you are really concerned about your tower or mast failing and you
think the direction the antenna is pointing can make the difference between
tower or mast failing or not failing, your tower or mast are just too light.
If you are trying to protect your rotator, I think Dave, W6QHS, has done an
outstanding job of telling us how to minimize that risk by balancing the torque.
I think of my elements like I think of a fuse in my amplifier. That is the
place I want a failure to occur if something has to fail. I would not
consider wiring across my amplifier fuse if it blew once in awhile. Nor
would I consider beefing up my elements (or orienting them in the wind) so
that the tower, mast, or boom would fail first!
ANYBODY can build a tower or antenna that won't fall down. It takes a REAL
ENGINEER to build one that just barely won't fall down . . .
Stan W7NI at teleport.com
More information about the CQ-Contest