Multi - Single Op / Single Band ??

[JBaumgarte at aol.com]

Jon,

Several years ago Mike, N0BSH and I did, as you say, a multi/single op /
single band CQWW from W0AIH.  Mike did 10 and I did 15.   The contest folks
said no!  Mike's score was in the top 3 or so, mine was less, so my 15 log
disappeared!

Things may have changed, but as I understand it--you can't do it!

Good luck.

John N0IJ (formerly K0IJL)

>From sma at servimail.ari.es (Sergio Manrique Almeida)  Tue Nov 12 16:25:18 1996
From: sma at servimail.ari.es (Sergio Manrique Almeida) (Sergio Manrique Almeida)
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 17:25:18 +0100
Subject: cqww log via email
References: <32885F28.30EF at WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Message-ID: <3288A4EE.3506 at senda.ari.es>

Thomas Thibault wrote:

> Several have asked what to send to cq when submitting logs
> via email. For ct it's the bin file it must be named with
> the call used in the contest ( ww1e.bin ).  Thats all they
> need. It's the same as sending it on 3.5 disk.
> 
> Thankyou Bob I appreciate the help.
> 
> Thomas Thibault
> Packet @ WW1E @ kc1xx
> Email @  WW1E at WORLDNET.ATT.COM
> 

EA3DU writes:

According to Bob Cox's posting to this reflector, also a plain-text
ASCII summary sheet must be included.

73
Sergio EA3DU
sma at senda.ari.es


>From morel at shani.net (morel grunberg)  Tue Nov 12 17:24:39 1996
From: morel at shani.net (morel grunberg) (morel grunberg)
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 19:24:39 +0200
Subject: New ICOM 1kw solid state amplifier
Message-ID: <9611121724.AA25080 at shani.net>

Hello,

I'm looking for preliminary technical specs for the new ICOM solid state
1kw remote controlled amplifier for 1.8-54MHz model " IC-PW-1 ". No info
available on ICOM web sites ( UK, USA or Japan ).

Thank you in advance 

73 de Morel, 4X1AD

Reply to:  morel at shani.net

 


>From ocker at chasind.com (Charlie Ocker)  Tue Nov 12 17:19:01 1996
From: ocker at chasind.com (Charlie Ocker) (Charlie Ocker)
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 11:19:01 -0600
Subject: TS930 to SB220 T/R relay problem?
Message-ID: <9611121719.AA04218 at chasind.com>

Greetings,

I have use of a freind's SB220 for the upcoming CQWW cw event.  Was warned by a 
local that the '220 has a t/r relay whose coil (voltage? current?) will smoke 
the t/r relay in the TS930.

Dunno about this, as have used a '940 directly to a SB220 before, but not sure 
on the '930.  Thought I'd ask and check it out before hand.

So, whatsay you '930 owners out there?  Any truth to this warning?

Please reply directly to both conserve reflector bandwidth and minimize 
potential flamage....

73,
Charlie  N9CO	ocker at chasind.com

>From jbmitch at vt.edu (John Mitchell)  Tue Nov 12 18:04:02 1996
From: jbmitch at vt.edu (John Mitchell) (John Mitchell)
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 13:04:02 -0500
Subject: NA, SS and New Section
Message-ID: <199611121804.NAA15153 at sable.cc.vt.edu>

At 11:07 AM 11/12/96 -0500, k4mw at esinet.net wrote:
>Hi, 
>        gearing up for SSB SS here this weekend and I understand that there
>is a new section (MAB? I think).  Question 1:  exactly what and where is the
>new section ?  Question 2: how do I get NA to take the new section
>abbreviation as a valid section?  Is it as simple as modifying the
>multiplier abbreviation list to include the new section?  Please reply
>direct so as to minimize reflector-clutter.
>
>tnx de K4MW / Pete

Hi Pete,

NA has instructions in the manual about this in Appendix A.  There is a .mlt
file to be edited, using an ASCII editor, which can be found in DOS.  If you
still have trouble, write me back and I'll walk you through it.

BTW, the new section is NNY.

73,
John K4IQ


>From k7fr at ncw.net (Gary Nieborsky)  Tue Nov 12 17:26:34 1996
From: k7fr at ncw.net (Gary Nieborsky) (Gary Nieborsky)
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 09:26:34 -0800
Subject: OO summary
Message-ID: <199611121726.JAA14660 at bing.ncw.net>

Who says evolution doesn't exist?

My original intent of the "oh-oh an OO" post was to see if one of the rights
of ascension to Upper Middle Class Gun status was the obligatory OO report.
I did not intend it to evolve (devolve?) into a discussion of band edge
bandits or a general diatribe on "extra class operators should know better
than get within 2.9723494 kHz of the band edge".  I confess that at least
one of the infractions was due to shear unadulterated stupidity regarding
which end of the band allocation I could snuggle up against on USB.  I will
remove that mult from my log.  I hope others will do likewise....though I
doubt it.

The summary is this:

17 responded that they had gotten at least one from this contest.

This is more than I thought would confess. Calls were those of peer group or
better so I don't feel so bad.

As for self DQ-ing my log......I don't think so.  I have a list of stations
I heard working stations  below the SSB allocation on 40 and will look
carefully at the listings next year to see which of those submitted logs.
Snuggling up too close to the band edge is a far cry from  willfully working
a station at 7061...simplex.

I don my Nomex suit.......

Gary K7FR

PS I did get a Good Guy report for clean audio and working an XE in spanish.