DX (contest) Bash

Wed Jul 24 22:48:41 EDT 1996

Hi,

I just wanted to pass on the info about a neat gathering that
we have each year at the W5KFT ranch.  It is fun - sort of like
a Dayton hospitality suite - but in Texas on the shores of a
beautiful lake.  Anyway - check out the web site.

http://www.applink.net/tejas/w5bash.html

-- 

George Fremin III
Austin, Texas C.K.U.   Sun spots?  I don't need no stinkin' sunspots!
WB5VZL                   Just give me a good Es cloud.
512/416-7010               
geoiii at bga.com

>From kd4d at saltmine.radix.net (Mark Bailey)  Tue Jul 23 21:45:35 1996
From: kd4d at saltmine.radix.net (Mark Bailey) (Mark Bailey)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 16:45:35 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Contest Registry: Update
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960723164346.15421A-100000 at saltmine.radix.net>

What:  WAE CW

Where:  KP2

Who:    KD4D

SOAB.  (As if I had a choice :-) ).

Confirmed.

Thanks for the reminder to send you this.  However, I think the
contest will be over before it gets to NCJ.  Ah well...

Mark
kd4d

>From aa8u at voyager.net (AA8U)  Tue Jul 23 19:25:34 1996
From: aa8u at voyager.net (AA8U) (AA8U)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 14:25:34 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: ZK1AAU on Topband
Message-ID: <199607231825.OAA16737 at vixa.voyager.net>

At 01:57 PM 7/23/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Hello (again), Bruce.
>
>Interesting observations and reading.  I've never been "on the other side,"
>but certainly hope to do it one of these days!
>
>Only comment concerns 160.  I want to thank you for the perserverance for our
>QSO!  I also need to thank everyone who stood by - MUCH to my amazement.  You
>were very good copy here in Colorado, a true 559 at the peak of the qsb, but
>even the valleys were still about a 429.  I am a bit concerned that you may
>have changed the call at the end.  You were having a helluva time getting my
>call, but once you finally sent "N3SL?" I came back with a series of "RRRR"
>and then I thought you sent "N3RR."  When you get to the logs, you'll see an
>80m Q at 1133z on the 18th, then should have 160 around 1151z.  If you have
>N3RR in there, that was just me sending the RRRR after you finally sent
>"N3SL!"
>
>Having read your msg, I know what you were going through on your end.  During
>the time I was trying to get my call thru (which took nearly 4 min), I
>thought I had the band to myself, as nobody else on this end was calling,
>jamming, etc.  When we finally concluded the QSO, the band erupted here!  I
>was totally shocked that that many people had kept quiet for so long -
>especially after I heard some of the calls and knew of their usual operating
>habits!  (HA)
>
>Thanks for sticking with it on 160, Bruce.  The 80 and 160 Qs finish off the
>South Cooks for me.  Will shoot you the sase and a donation.  You've had the
>fun, now comes the QSLing.  Having handled the QSLs for the AH1A expedition,
>I know full well what you're about to go thru.  If nothing else, use the $
>for beer - you'll need it!
>
>73,
>Steve, N3SL
>

Thanks Steve. 
You were logged correctly! I may have hit the F5 key before I had edited
your call... I am very happy to report that and fully agree that the 160
operators were very considerate every time I had to dig one out. This is
truly a gentleman's band no matter what some might think. When the chips are
down this becomes obvious. It is likely some missed a chance at working us
in favor of not interrupting. To those folks I say thank you and I will be
back to the Cooks to give you another chance soon. (North and South with
RTTY too..)

I am copying your reply to the reflector at large as I think others would
benefit from reading your comments. Hope you don't mind. 

I don't collect qsl cards, on purpose, but consider the chore an extension
of the fun of DXpeditoning. You and everyone else that sends an sase or
request via the buereau will receive confirmation as soon as the cards are
printed and processed. Please be patient. As for the donation, it is not
necessary, but it is gratefully accepted. 

Thanks again to you and all the operators that were so very patient with me
while I dug for your call and a few other tough ones as well. 

Who said cw was a dying art???? fooey

73,
Bruce
ZK1AAU 

>From aa8u at voyager.net (AA8U)  Tue Jul 23 18:25:30 1996
From: aa8u at voyager.net (AA8U) (AA8U)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 13:25:30 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: ZK1AAU on Topband
Message-ID: <199607231725.NAA08451 at vixa.voyager.net>

At 05:41 PM 7/23/96 +1000, you wrote:
>>
>>((( Take special note to the following. )))  Many "experienced" low band
>>operators have told me that slow cw is the only way to go on 160. Bull crap!
>>The stations that got through the best, during the times the band was noisy
>>with qsb, were the ones that got all the dits and dahs between the static
>>bursts and repeated enuf to ride the qsb wave. Those others that were
>>sending first my call (I KNOW MY CALL DAMMIT !!!!, I NEED YOURS >>>>> take a
>>hint) and then sending theirs once or twice would often send their call when
>>the qsb faded most or all of their call. Those that sent their call several
>>times, some at varying speed, had a better chance of making their way into
>>my log. I'm not known as a good cw operator, but I am getting better, almost
>>have the whole alphebet down now. Some stations I got the suffix correct and
>>only needed a repeat on the prefix....again, only repeat the missing part.
>>Its comforting to be assured that the suffix is correct,,,,but sending it
>>every time wastes time, especially when the qsb is slow and the prefix only
>>pops up once or twice in a minute, often knocked out at the most critical
>>time by a static crash!! This is just my observation. Some long time top
>>banders are likely to differ with my views.....but then I was there. 
>>
>>My antenna for 160 was an inverted-L, with traps in it for 80cw, 40, and
>>30M. The feedpoint was nearly 10' above ground and the radiator straight
>>vertical to the 80m trap, then straight horizontal to the insulator. The
>>radials, 6 at 133', and 4 at 68' were spread out and elevated to about 20',
>>some a bit taller at the ends. It seemd to work very well on all four bands.
>>We would not have had room to put up mono-band wire antennas there, so the
>>compromise inverted-L was the way to go this time. As far as hearing goes, a
>>longer radiator, with a cap at the feedpoint might have helped. dunno... I
>>am very spoiled at the home qth with eight monster beverages. Sure would
>>like to have had them on Raro!
>>
>>
>>Please, I would much appreciate any and all comments (even negative comments
>>if that is your assessment) you may have regarding what you saw from your end.
>>It will help me to better prepare for the next trip and to gather some
>>fodder for an article I am writing about the trip. Please let me hear from
>>you via email if you heard me, and I didn't get to work you. Note the time
>>if you recall and the band condix on your end. 
>>
>>
>>
>
>Dear Bruce, congratulations on the operation -  you certainly had a good
>signal in VK on CW and I thoroughly agree with you about the speed of CW
>between static crashes.  I have been on 160 for over 25 years and have
>worked all but Nevada on 160  for WAS and have found exactly what you found
>about qsb etc.    Your antenna sounds interesting and provided it is near to
>the water and clear of trees etc. it would always make a good showing on the
>lower bands - not to mention the 2 S point gain of being a DX pedition HI!!!
>
>As you rightly said, the VKs were on 1840 and 1825, but from many years of
>DXing on 160, the range 1830 - 1834 is best for CW to stateside and 1838 -
>1843 best for SSB.
>
>I pity your wife having to put up with the long late night operating but I
>guess she must be used to it by now if you are a regular DXer !!!
>
>One thing I did notice was that your phone signal on 160 lacked any punch
>compared with the CW signal (using the same receive bandwidth for comparison).
>
>It was as if the mike was lacking any bass or there was no speech processing
>and insufficient audio output to drive the rig into ALC.
>
>Yet strangely on the other bands where I heard you it was not evident at all.
>
>I hope you can make it to North Cook sometime in the future as there is
>quite a demand still for that one on the lower bands - seems the recent
>operations from there have been almost exclusively 20 and above.
>
>
>Once again, congratulations and thanks.
>
>
>
>Ciao    Peter Forbes   VK3QI
>>
>>
>
>

Thanks for your kind words and advice Peter. I find your input helpful. Look
for the N. Cook trip late next year of year after. 160 will be a top
priority on that trip. I've copied this to the reflector at large as I think
others need to read your comments...
73,
Bruce
ZK1AAU

>From harpole at pegasus.cc.ucf.edu (Charles H. Harpole)  Thu Jul 25 05:30:28 1996
From: harpole at pegasus.cc.ucf.edu (Charles H. Harpole) (Charles H. Harpole)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 00:30:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Yagi tuning and MFJ meter
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.93.960725002628.21409A-100000 at Pegasus>

I have the biggest HF MFJ antenna meter referenced in this thread.  In a
very high RF environment, it will give screwy results (big surprize!).
Our university club is about 500 feet from the campus radio FM xmitter and
antenna.  Virually no reading on MFJ is reliable in this setting as found
by direct experience.  So, maybe some other RF is getting to the others
cited on this thread but in these other cases perhaps on only one freq. or
another?  BTW, I really like the MFJ meter out here in the boondocks.
de K4VUD

>From harpole at pegasus.cc.ucf.edu (Charles H. Harpole)  Thu Jul 25 05:35:14 1996
From: harpole at pegasus.cc.ucf.edu (Charles H. Harpole) (Charles H. Harpole)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 00:35:14 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: How Much does a DB Cost?
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.93.960725003057.21409B-100000 at Pegasus>

DBs costs relate to the weather.  EVERYBODY knows that antennas worked
on in a snowstorm (etc., you name the weather, like 30 below) produce more
gain than those assembled in nice weather.  I am now assembling a HyTower
in 110 degree plus effective temp. here in sunny Fla. and place all
readers on alert to the killer signal it will output.  de K4VUD

>From wb7dhc at nwlink.com (Jim Aguirre)  Thu Jul 25 06:07:58 1996
From: wb7dhc at nwlink.com (Jim Aguirre) (Jim Aguirre)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 22:07:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: WRTC '96 Awards
Message-ID: <199607250507.WAA02902 at montana.nwlink.com>

What a class operation! Just a week after sending in my request, I got my
deck of WRTC cards and the letter opener I qualified for. Wow!!! I expected
it to take several weeks at least. Heck, QSLs from down the road take a
week! That's incredible service.

Once again, hats off to all involved in WRTC '96...this was a class
operation from start to finish. Thanks folks!

>From harpole at pegasus.cc.ucf.edu (Charles H. Harpole)  Thu Jul 25 06:06:12 1996
From: harpole at pegasus.cc.ucf.edu (Charles H. Harpole) (Charles H. Harpole)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 01:06:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: VP2EE adr?
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.93.960725010522.21409K-100000 at Pegasus>

Sent Dorthea VP2EE a congrats e-mail but her adr. no good.  Anyone have a
new e-adr. for her?  de K4VUD

>From 101332.232 at CompuServe.COM (Dave Lawley)  Thu Jul 25 08:29:35 1996
From: 101332.232 at CompuServe.COM (Dave Lawley) (Dave Lawley)
Date: 25 Jul 96 03:29:35 EDT
Subject: IOTA Rules - correction
Message-ID: <960725072934_101332.232_GHW61-3 at CompuServe.COM>

I posted the IOTA contest rules a couple of days ago and have had
two queries regarding the multi-single rules. Something very strange 
has happened: the rules I posted are the same as the rules which I originally
posted in February this year. They were sent to me on disk before being
published in Radio Communication magazine. However, when I look in 
the magazine (the official rules) there is a change to rule 4. All other rules
are exactly the same. Maybe someone realised before publication that
rule 4 needed to be worded differently.

Here is the published text of rule 4(c) "Multi-operator single transmitter,
mixed mode, with only one transmission permitted at one time. NB: this
category is open to Island Sections only."

Therefore this is a 'single signal' rule like that which applies to the ARRL DX
contest, and not like the CQWW rule. Please accept my apologies for 
the confusion.

Dave G4BUO
101332.232 at compuserve.com