HAMS, CONTESTS, POWER, ...

Thu Mar 28 18:38:51 EST 1996

Message-Id: <323_migate>
From: i4jmy at n8it.#nwmi.mi.usa.noam 
To: cq-contest at tgv.com

    Radio Amateurs have to pass an examination to get their licence
  That's including mostly radio-electronics, rules, CW tests on TX
  and RX.

    If the only game would consist in a PTT pressure and shouting
  in a microphone no one would ask us anything than money. Ours
  would be a sort of (expensive) CB.

    Ham-Radio then is a technological "hobby". Operator's skill is
  only an important aspect of the hobby, not the only one.
  There are receivers, transmitters, antennas, amplifiers, lines and
  gains, losses, arrays ,waves, sunspots, propagation etc etc.

    The partecipation in a contest, is a competition were the best
  combination between operator's SKILLNESS and KNOWDLEDGE has to
  match for having result.

    Who is thinking to standardize stations to check only operator's
  ability is making a mistake and showing his technical limits.

    First of all because making all sites equal is a (silly) utopy.
  How could you make antennas height from ground all the same ?
  Cutting taller towers ? Bringing antennas down from mountains ?
  Shortening (or pulling) buildings ? And the latitude ? The effect
  of very peculiar locations (sea) ?

    Second because even if the above was reached (as an absurd), all
  the technical experiences we have made would be meaningless and
  only time lost.

    To check pure operators ability there are existing PEDS and VPEDS
  computer programs, to organize a WRTC there is need of placing
  similar stations in a very limited area.

    Contests are for RADIO AMATEURS, who are operating a station
  that's a complex combination of human and technical features.

  73

>From Bill Fisher, KM9P" <km9p at akorn.net  Thu Mar 28 23:56:58 1996
From: Bill Fisher, KM9P" <km9p at akorn.net (Bill Fisher, KM9P)
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 18:56:58 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Stub - de W0UN
Message-ID: <199603282356.SAA06200 at paris.akorn.net>

There is a great rewritten message on the contesting.com WWW page that W0UN
wrote.  If you are interested in info on stubs, go to
http://www.contesting.com//km9p/w0un1.html.

73

Bill, KM9P
 ---------------------------------------------
| Contesting Online... The ultimate           |
| source of ham radio contest information     |       
| http://www.contesting.com                   |
 --------------------------------------------- 

>From David Robbins <robbins at berkshire.net>  Fri Mar 29 08:03:00 1996
From: David Robbins <robbins at berkshire.net> (David Robbins)
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 00:03:00 -0800
Subject: VK4MZ - CQ WPX SSB
References: <199603272121.QAA13956 at borg.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <315B9934.788 at berkshire.net>

David L. Thompson wrote:
> 
> At 01:10 PM 3/27/96 UT, you wrote:
> >Message inserted on behalf of Kerry VK4MZ ....
> >
> >Due the band plan in effect in VK land, please note that VK4MZ will be working
> >3690-3695, ... listening up 3785-3795 for the duration of the CQ WPX SSB
> >Contest.
> >
> >Thanks,  Peter VK4TPW
> >
> 
> Sorry that you guys are back to 3695 again as I have worked VK's on 3795 in
> recent years.  I remember the bigs sigs on 3695 from VK3BM, VK6HD,
> VK2APK...See you on 80.
> 
> Dave K4JRB
> 
> >

glad to see more of you guys below 3700.  is great to work new mults on 
first call working split while there are huge pileups yelling on 
3795.  

good luck, we'll be looking for you as wz1r from here.

73, dave

-- 
ky1h at berkshire.net   or   robbins at berkshire.net
http://www.berkshire.net/~robbins/ky1h.html
WWW Page now has New England Flea Market list from W1GSL

>From James Hurt <jhurt at freenet.columbus.oh.us>  Fri Mar 29 00:01:01 1996
From: James Hurt <jhurt at freenet.columbus.oh.us> (James Hurt)
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 19:01:01 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Power
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9603281958.A12958-b100000 at acme>

I will concede to being in Ohio, but deny the rest.
Bruce has never (not that he isn't welcome) visited my station.
Whomever he is describing, I wish to make it clear, IT IS NOT ME!

73, Jim
KC8MK

On Thu, 28 Mar 1996, Bruce Lallathin wrote:

> At 09:19 AM 3/28/96 -0800, you wrote:
> >
> >Bruce, Bruce, Bruce...
> >
> >W4QRO was a spoof...trust me, because that's ME in the photo.  There is 
> >no W4QRO, nor an LA1ON (Lay One On...get it?)  The author's name, Olof 
> >Lirpa, is easily rearranged into a major clue.
> >
> >The whole idea was to tweak the QRO crowd and let them know that we 
> >know.  Subtle peer pressure will often accomplish much more than direct 
> >confrontation and moralizing.
> >
> >If it bugs you that some of the guys run smoke (and they surely do), then 
> >I suggest 100W and QRP contesting...there is more honor than glory in 
> >these categories, but I find it extra-satisfactory!
> >
> >73, Ward N0AX
> >NCJ Profile Columnist
> >
> Tnx Ward,
> I see now, should have seen it then. I really don't concern myself much with
> how well others do as I judge results at this end in comparison with my/our
> previous entries. I figure we are our best competition! It is a shame that
> some resort to 5+kw, but so be it. When we out-do them it feels all that
> much better. HI
> One station in Ohio is famous for running very much in excess of legal power
> routinely on 160M. I have seen his station, it is impressive. I just put up
> better antennas and evened the playing field. Don't have to worry about
> burning anything up either. Legal power is plenty anyway.
> 
> I worked a PY0 at the mult station during cqww last fall, didn't realize the
> drive was turned all the way down and the amp was in stby....did it q5 with
> only 20 watts out to the droopy dipole. What a surprise and on 160M!!!
> 
> In the final analysis, this is a hobby...........
> 
> 73,
> Bruce
> 
> cu in wpx!
> 