WPX Certificate

Fri Jun 14 21:24:18 EDT 1996

Hi Guys,

Today 13 June 1996, I have received the Certificate for
the IZ4C WPX 90 SSB, still waiting the 1991 Certificate
but now I have some hopes ...

Thank's to the reflector and Steve N8BJQ ......

73 de Fabio Schettino

I4UFH on of IR4T , IG9R     WRTC96 wildcard #4 with I2VXJ

email:  i4ufh at contest.dsnet.it

>From hwardsil at wolfenet.com (Ward Silver)  Fri Jun 14 21:38:11 1996
From: hwardsil at wolfenet.com (Ward Silver) (Ward Silver)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 13:38:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Send Continental Breakdowns
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.93.960614133615.9858B-100000 at gonzo.wolfenet.com>

Hurry, hurry, hurry!  Get it done before the dreaded Field Day monster
trashes your shack as the equipment goes out to the site!

Send me your continental breakdown files (those contain the percentages or
totals of QSO sorted by continent) for inclusion in an article for CQ
Contest.  The more I get, the better the article!  Thanks to everyone
that's sent data so far...but I sure could use some more!

73, Ward N0AX

>From w6go at netcom.com (Jay O'Brien - W6GO)  Fri Jun 14 21:46:28 1996
From: w6go at netcom.com (Jay O'Brien - W6GO) (Jay O'Brien - W6GO)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 13:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Callsigns, gate 1
Message-ID: <199606142046.NAA15064 at netcom11.netcom.com>

A bit off track for the contest reflector, but a response to K6XO's
posting here.  Maybe the vanity callsign process IS a contest?

Alan pointed out an interesting set of vanity callsigns, K7ZZ and 
K7JW.  Apparently some of us didn't read the rules correctly!  I 
thought that club calls issued recently were not eligible for gate 1.  

There must be something I don't understand!  

K7ZZ was issued 6/7/96 to Jeffrey Withers, ex AA7QQ, ex KM6EU.

K7JW was issued 6/10/96 to the DX RADIO CLUB, trustee K7ZZ.

The old call for the DX RADIO CLUB was KC7MZP (AA7QQ trustee) and
was issued on 9/11/95.

Another club call with AA7QQ as trustee is KC7KFO, issued 4/12/95
to the OLYMPIA AMATEUR RADIO SOCIETY.  No vanity call issued to date.

I reviewed my reasonably complete set of callbooks back to 1949, and
I find W7JW and N7JW, but no K7JW.  Maybe it was an unlisted callsign
for the DX RADIO CLUB?

Can someone point me to the gate 1 rule which allowed the FCC to 
issue the K7ZZ callsign?  I am trustee for a club callsign issued in 
1995 for which I want to obtain my Mother's old callsign, W6HTS.  As 
the club didn't hold a callsign before 3/24/95, it was my 
understanding that I would have to wait for gate 2.  It appears that 
I was wrong.

73, Jay
    w6go at netcom.com

>From 0005543629 at mcimail.com (David & Barbara Leeson)  Fri Jun 14 21:46:00 1996
From: 0005543629 at mcimail.com (David & Barbara Leeson) (David & Barbara Leeson)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 96 15:46 EST
Subject: ...level playing field
Message-ID: <93960614204639/0005543629DC1EM at MCIMAIL.COM>

At Dayton this year I was honored to receive a genuine dr. Bafoofnik hat
by kneeling before the good dr. himself!  So I feel qualified to offer
the following suggestion:

Having separate stations in optimum locations could be considered to be
outside the envelope of the contest regulations.  As I recall, all the
property must be contiguous and under single ownership.

When I suggested that this wouldn't rule out the Amtrack Radio Club, I
got the evil eye from both ARRL and CQ contest mavens!  But, hey, every
idea seems nutty before the world is ready for it.

Now, if we can just solve the noise problems in the train stations...

On a more serious note, S = pi[D^4-d^4]/32D = pi D^2t/8 for small t.

I do not claim to be the real dr., but I have be properly deputized.

73 de Dave, W6QHS

>From 0005543629 at mcimail.com (David & Barbara Leeson)  Fri Jun 14 21:59:00 1996
From: 0005543629 at mcimail.com (David & Barbara Leeson) (David & Barbara Leeson)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 96 15:59 EST
Subject: Approx. Oops!
Message-ID: <92960614205929/0005543629DC1EM at MCIMAIL.COM>

Oops, I guess I'll never qualify to hold the real dr. blackboard chalk...

The formula for S is right, but the approximation should be

S = pi[D^4-d^4]/32D = pi D^2t/4 for small t.

Apologies to those offended by this highly technical matter.  May your
masts bend instead.

Dave, W6QHS

>From ki4hn at nando.net (ki4hn)  Fri Jun 14 22:11:41 1996
From: ki4hn at nando.net (ki4hn) (ki4hn)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 17:11:41 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Callsigns
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960614165612.19165A-100000 at parsifal.nando.net>

Like KM9P, I don't like what this guy did, but I investigated the data, and
it appears that my program is working OK in this case.  Here's what I 
believe happened:

- AA7QQ applied for K7ZZ as his individual call and he also applied for
  K7JW for the DX Radio Club for which he is the trustee.
- On Friday, June 7, the FCC issued K7ZZ and on Monday, June 10,
  the FCC issued K7JW.  By June 10, the trustee of K7JW was K7ZZ.
- If the FCC would have issued the calls in reverse order, the trustee
  would have shown as AA7QQ.

While on the subject, if you see some data that looks wrong or just funny
please let me know so I can investigate to see if it is caused by a bug
in my program.

Somewhat surprisingly nobody has commented on AA8FW having a blank OLD CALL,
but this is correct.  For some unknown reason the old call field for him is
blank in the FCC's database.

73,
Jim Stevens KI4HN
http://www.webbuild.com/~ki4hn -> Vanity Call Info

On Fri, 14 Jun 1996, Alan Brubaker wrote:

> If you want to see something interesting, take a look at these two
> calls:
> 
> K7JW
> K7ZZ
> 
> Alan, K6XO
> 
> alan at es.com
> 

>From k7fd at teleport.com (John Nicholson)  Fri Jun 14 22:12:18 1996
From: k7fd at teleport.com (John Nicholson) (John Nicholson)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 14:12:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Callsigns - K7JW / K7ZZ
Message-ID: <199606142112.OAA11212 at desiree.teleport.com>

>On Fri, 14 Jun 1996, Alan Brubaker wrote:
>
>> If you want to see something interesting, take a look at these two
>> calls:
>> 
>> K7JW
>> K7ZZ
>> 
>> Alan, K6XO
>> 
>> alan at es.com

>Bill KM9P says:

>Excuse my French... but this is a bunch of crap.  IMO, there is no reason 
>for anyone to pig short callsigns like this guy has done.  I have 
>applied for a club callsign and after all of the gates are done I will 
>see what is available and make my choice.  Probably a 1X3.  
>
>There is no excuse for this over indulgence.
>
>73
>
>Bill 

        You're excused! That's a real shocker when you look up those
        calls in the database, isn't it? 

        John K7FD

>From mraz at rockdal.aud.alcatel.com (Kris Mraz AA5UO)  Fri Jun 14 22:55:03 1996
From: mraz at rockdal.aud.alcatel.com (Kris Mraz AA5UO) (Kris Mraz AA5UO)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 16:55:03 -0500
Subject: Callsigns
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960614165612.19165A-100000 at parsifal.nando.net>
Message-ID: <31C1DFB7.ABD322C at aud.alcatel.com>

> While on the subject, if you see some data that looks wrong or just funny
> please let me know so I can investigate to see if it is caused by a bug
> in my program.

I've noticed some "Extra" callsigns, such as AA7QQ, are listed as "Advanced".
I assume this is just an FCC database error.

-- 

73
Kris AA5UO
mraz at aud.alcatel.com

>From mraz at rockdal.aud.alcatel.com (Kris Mraz AA5UO)  Fri Jun 14 23:01:05 1996
From: mraz at rockdal.aud.alcatel.com (Kris Mraz AA5UO) (Kris Mraz AA5UO)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 17:01:05 -0500
Subject: Callsigns, gate 1
References: <199606142046.NAA15064 at netcom11.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <31C1E121.31DFF4F5 at aud.alcatel.com>

W6GO said:

> Can someone point me to the gate 1 rule which allowed the FCC to
> issue the K7ZZ callsign?  I am trustee for a club callsign issued in
> 1995 for which I want to obtain my Mother's old callsign, W6HTS.  As
> the club didn't hold a callsign before 3/24/95, it was my
> understanding that I would have to wait for gate 2.  It appears that
> I was wrong.

I interpret the rules the same as you, Jay. The FCC has made a hugh mistake
on this one based on the evidence you've presented. 

-- 

73
Kris AA5UO
mraz at aud.alcatel.com

>From mraz at rockdal.aud.alcatel.com (Kris Mraz AA5UO)  Fri Jun 14 23:15:18 1996
From: mraz at rockdal.aud.alcatel.com (Kris Mraz AA5UO) (Kris Mraz AA5UO)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 17:15:18 -0500
Subject: SS Cups Received
Message-ID: <31C1E476.2F1CF0FB at aud.alcatel.com>

I emailed to Billy again today re: my missing SS Cup. I received
a prompt response. He said the original cup had been UPS'ed
on April 16. He is now sending another. Thanks to all.
-- 

73
Kris AA5UO
mraz at aud.alcatel.com

>From HWDX09A at prodigy.com ( ROBERT   REED)  Fri Jun 14 23:58:19 1996
From: HWDX09A at prodigy.com ( ROBERT   REED) ( ROBERT   REED)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 17:58:19, -0500
Subject: ...level playing field
Message-ID: <199606142158.RAA17798 at mime4.prodigy.com>

The level playing field has been a question since the 2nd year that I 
requested use of the W1AW site for the IARU. Everyone involved had 
already experienced IARU #2 and knew we had a bad situation at the HQ 
station. The interference was terrible. The antenna layout was just 
too dedicated to a broadcasting bulletins design to allow multiple 
band operations. Since no one wanted to opt for a low power entry we 
had to do the best possible. The guys who did come to Newington for 
several years did very well at just shy of 6,000 Q's considering the 
conditions.

Stations such as W3LPL and N2RM had been talked about by the ops 
every evening. Last year was the first attempt at moving away from 
the HQ site and it turned out to be a real eyeopener as the Q's 
jumped to a leadership position.

The idea of breaking up the station as the HA's are reported to do IS 
NOT what has been the thinking of most of the W1AW operators even 
though the idea has been discussed. If it ever did happen I think it 
would be a loacl regional area and not the changing of sites as 
propagation changes across the country. 

I have volunteered to assist at W3LPL and I hope others will also. In 
a 24 hour contest there may not be enough slots for everyone but help 
I'm sure will be appreciated. The main thing to think of is a 
respectable showing for the USA in this event.

____

 73,  Bob Reed, WB2DIN 
      538 Brewers Bridge Road
      Jackson, New Jersey 08527

      Internet : hwdx09a at prodigy.com
      Packet   : wb2din at wt3v.nj

>From georgec at techline.com (george claussen)  Sat Jun 15 07:03:24 1996
From: georgec at techline.com (george claussen) (george claussen)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 23:03:24 -0700
Subject: A Lil Pistol's Plea
Message-ID: <199606142222.PAA13453 at wishkah.techline.com>

Lately a frequent thread has been about attracting newcomers to contesting. This
msg however is about attracting you experienced contesters to RTTY contesting!
Now why would "World-Class" CW/SSB contesters ever want to enter a RTTY test? I 
will offer several reasons, which I hope will picque your interest.For starters,
a RTTY test is by comparison to a CW/SSB melee quite soothing so it gives the
experienced CW/SSB operator the opportunity to "field-test" this contest-seasons
strategy plan. Are you sure that you have that new propagation software properly
configured? Wouldn't it be nice to smoke-test it before the "Really Big Show"?
(The great thing about RTTY contesting is that we let the hardware/spongeware do
the hard work so we can sit back and actually think....). Do you run a two-radio
setup? Satisfied with your skill and the set-up itself? Wanna test it without 
having to worry about which ear that weak CW mult is fading from? Hey, how about
the hardware itself? Any doubts as to it's ability to hold-up to a serious 48
hour effort? Believe me, a RTTY test will answer that question! (Ever set
fire to a trapped vertical while running only 500 watts? Ever burn your
fingers on a
coax-switch case? Ever triple fracture a balun core? Any station  which can
make it through a serious RTTY test will last the SSB/CW contest season....)
There must be other reasons, but I will finish by simply saying, the best is..
      For the fun of it.
May I suggest you all consider entering the North American RTTY QSO Party?
To be held July 20/21, with rules nearly identical to those you are familiar
with from the SSB/CW Q-parties. (Detailed rules in May/June NCJ). I for one 
would sure like to see on my screen those calls of champions, about whom I have
read so much but know so little.  73 es dit dit    de George K7WUW 

Oh by the way, did I mention that a first place placque or certificate from a
RTTY contest will impress a visitor just as much as a CW/SSB item?
george claussen  --- A Subscriber at Techline 

>From tree at lady.blindchicken.com (Larry Tyree)  Sat Jun 15 00:18:19 1996
From: tree at lady.blindchicken.com (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 16:18:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: KV4AA contest
Message-ID: <199606142318.QAA24250 at lady.blindchicken.com>

> **********************************************************************
>
>              "Announcing the KV4AA Perpetual Memorial contest"
>
> 1. Starting time: July 1, 1996
> 2. Finishing time: When the Leo's take over 
> 3. Exchange: 5NN 73  QRZ
> 4. Suggested Freq: 14025 khz
> 5. Prizes: A video cassette of "On The Beach"
>
> **********************************************************************

Bzzzt.  The frequency is wrong.  

Used to be you could get the KV4 mult in the CD parties if you would
QSY to 14080 and call KV4AA blind.

Tree N6TR