Hill vs. Ocean QTH

K7LXC at aol.com K7LXC at aol.com
Thu Nov 14 08:13:39 EST 1996


In a message dated 96-11-13 23:49:51 EST, you write:

>Those are the notes I have received after posting the Hill vs. Ocean QTH,
>which is better? 

      W7RM maintains that salt water is worth 10dB on HF.  An RCA(?) study
from the 1920's said basically the same thing.

     Probably the best is sitting on top of a high (2,000 feet)
copper-saturated mountain in the middle of the ocean.  I think that NP4A fits
this description.

73,  Steve  K7LXC

>From je1cka at dumpty.nal.go.jp (Takao KUMAGAI)  Thu Nov 14 14:08:57 1996
From: je1cka at dumpty.nal.go.jp (Takao KUMAGAI) (Takao KUMAGAI)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 23:08:57 +0900
Subject: INVITATION to the "contest-rules" Mailing List
Message-ID: <199611141408.XAA27878 at dumpty.nal.go.jp>

Dear Contest sponsors, Contest columnists, Bulletin Editors and Web masters

  I just set-up the new Mailing-List(=reflector) to distribute the complete 
contest rules or results for publication. And I recommend the Contest 
columnists, Bulletin Editors and Web masters to join this reflector to 
exchange the most updated rules or recent results for their publication.

  This "cq-contest" has been too busy for the discussion on the Vanity call 
sign or other technical informations and it may not be the appropriate place 
to post the complete rules or results. 

  This "contest-rules" reflector will have the following advantages both 
to the contest sponsors and editors;

* Contest sponsors do not need to find the editors' email address any more 
  because I'll update their email addresses. Just post the contest rule/
  result to "contest-rules at dumpty.nal.go.jp".
* Editors and Web-masters can get current contest rules/results to subscribe 
  this reflector.

  If you wish to subscribe this mailing list, please send a subscription 
request as follows;
mailto: contest-rules-request at dumpty.nal.go.jp

with your CALLSIGN, EMAIL ADDRESS and what contest/magazine/bulletin/
WWWpage you related in the body of the message.
Subject: line should contain "subscribe contest-rules".

  If you have any email addresses of the contest sponsors, contest managers 
at national radio associations, magazine editors or club bulletin editors, 
they will be greatly appreciated.

Regards
	---------
	Tack Kumagai JE1CKA/KH0AM
	TEL:81-30-066-6408, FAX:81-423-93-4449
	Internet: je1cka at nal.go.jp

>From w0mu at sprynet.com (Mike Fatchett)  Thu Nov 14 14:25:12 1996
From: w0mu at sprynet.com (Mike Fatchett) (Mike Fatchett)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 07:25:12 -0700
Subject: The FCC Lied
Message-ID: <01BBD1FC.FA158A20 at hd14-174.compuserve.com>

Another twist.

Nest time you hear that the FCC promises to not give away 40 meters are =
you going to believe them?  If the hobby is important to you all then =
little things like this vanity issue can gain greater meaning in the big =
picture of what might actually be happening at the FCC

Mike
W0MU

>From w0mu at sprynet.com (Mike Fatchett)  Thu Nov 14 14:19:42 1996
From: w0mu at sprynet.com (Mike Fatchett) (Mike Fatchett)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 07:19:42 -0700
Subject: SS ck, club call??
Message-ID: <01BBD1FC.3586A180 at hd14-174.compuserve.com>

If I remember the rules it is the first year the operator was licensed.

Mike

----------
From: 	Robert Penneys[SMTP:radio at UDel.Edu]
Sent: 	Thursday, November 14, 1996 12:00 AM
To: 	cq-contest at tgv.com
Subject: 	SS ck, club call??


In the spirit of the now threads that will not die...

NY3C wants to use the N.E.R.D.S. new club call, W3TT, on the Sweepstakes.

Does he give the check year for his own license, or the club's? 

I figure the latter.

Tnx, Bob



>From k0wa at southwind.net (Lee Buller)  Thu Nov 14 14:53:58 1996
From: k0wa at southwind.net (Lee Buller) (Lee Buller)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 08:53:58 -0600
Subject: NOALOX and Vanity Calls
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961114145358.006e0500 at southwind.net>

Gentlemen....

I understand the angst of what has happened in Washington, but the flames
are counter productive to amateur radio.  Lets give it some time for the FCC
to sort out the mess.  I didn't have to worry about the mess 'cause I got my
vanity call in 1977...but...I remember how on edge I was about the call.

Yes, and I have trouble with those "Extras" who have those old quaint calls
that really don't deserve the whole concept of "old-timer and learned
fellow."   Some of these guys copied 20 wpm once and guessed on the test and
were lucky.  There is a big difference between an a 1970 Extra and a 1996
Extra.   There are some people out there who are quite undeserving of what
they have...and the greed is rather apparent.

Maybe, we need to spread some NOALOX on some egos...to insure the current
flows where it is suppose to.

Best Regards to all....

Lee Buller
k0wa at southwind.net

PS.  By the way...it is clear from the messages that NOALOX and PENTROX are
like Ford and Chevy...dirve the one you like"


>From James_E_Brown at smtp.ord.usace.army.mil (James E Brown)  Thu Nov 14 15:18:14 1996
From: James_E_Brown at smtp.ord.usace.army.mil (James E Brown) (James E Brown)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 10:18:14 -0500
Subject: The FCC Lied -Reply
Message-ID: <s28af229.015 at smtp.ord.usace.army.mil>

Agree with Mike on this issue.  Contacting your congressional
representatives to have them make inquiries of the FCC would probably
be the most effective route.  Polictical appointees and subordinates do
respond to congressional inquiries in a hurry.  Appears that if the
Electronic filings were not processed with the rest in a "random"
manner, then the whole process is invalid, since many outcomes would
change.  IMHO, this is a valid topic for this reflector since calls are, of
course, of interest to all and vital in contests.  Naturally, it appears from
reading comments here, that those that got vanities do not want it to be
re-done.  But those that didnt may have a different perspective.

AE4EY

>>> Mike Fatchett <w0mu at sprynet.com> 11/14/96 09:25am >>>
Another twist.

Nest time you hear that the FCC promises to not give away 40 meters
are = you going to believe them?  If the hobby is important to you all then
= little things like this vanity issue can gain greater meaning in the big =
picture of what might actually be happening at the FCC

Mike
W0MU



>From jbmitch at vt.edu (John Mitchell)  Thu Nov 14 16:02:07 1996
From: jbmitch at vt.edu (John Mitchell) (John Mitchell)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 11:02:07 -0500
Subject: The FCC Lied -Reply
Message-ID: <199611141602.LAA08832 at sable.cc.vt.edu>

At 10:18 AM 11/14/96 -0500, James E Brown wrote:
...
> IMHO, this is a valid topic for this reflector since calls are, of
>course, of interest to all and vital in contests.

I think it has gone way over the top, and needs to be moved to
REC.RADIO.AMATEUR.MISC or POLICY

  Naturally, it appears from
>reading comments here, that those that got vanities do not want it to be
>re-done.  But those that didnt may have a different perspective.

So what else is new?  But if I got none of my 25 choices, I would not be
small- minded enough to ask thousands of luckier hams than myself to turn in
their calls.  I am quite surprised to see the avarice shown by both those
who requested dozens of calls, and those who now want to turn over the whole
game so they can have a second chance.  Grow up people.  You are supposed to
be contesters; that means you are competitive, but you are also "good sports".  

Will the administrator please close out this thread?  It is taking up an
amazing amount of bandwidth to go over the same ground over and over again.
Poor sports always cry "I was robbed!".  If anyone profited from advanced
knowledge, got preferential treatment, etc., then those individuals can be
handled on a case by case basis, as the FCC has done in the past.

Grow up, folks.

Last word from me on this,

Lottery winner,

John K4IQ (ninth choice and still happy!)





>From ac1o at gate.net (Walter Deemer)  Thu Nov 14 16:17:14 1996
From: ac1o at gate.net (Walter Deemer) (Walter Deemer)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 11:17:14 -0500
Subject: QRP Question (humor)
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19961114161714.00d0d5b8 at pop.gate.net>

If a QRP station's power output is more than five watts, is he running broth?

;o) de KN4T (hey -- at least I didn't mention the "V" word!)





More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list