QRP Question (humor)
w9sz at prairienet.org
Sat Nov 16 09:08:14 EST 1996
>>If a QRP station's power output is more than five watts, is he running broth?
>Broth? Broth is good only if maked with meat!
>One other question: is more qrp one station who run with 5 watt output into
>10 element monoband at 70 ft. or one station who run with 100 w output into
>low placed dipole?
>;-) '73 from George I0YQV.
Aha! The antenna is the thing!
I well remember the ARRL DX contest CW 1993 when Ken V73C was over S9
here on 40 ALL NIGHT ... and he was sending "005" as his power. I asked
him later and he was using a (3 el?) beam. Guess the salt water helps too.
Quite a few EU stations over the pole in that contest (Russians in
particular) had huge signals and were giving powers under 25 watts.
CU in SS ...
73, Zack W9SZ
>From floydjr at Interpath.com (Jimmy R. Floyd) Sat Nov 16 15:37:02 1996
From: floydjr at Interpath.com (Jimmy R. Floyd) (Jimmy R. Floyd)
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 11:37:02 -0400
Subject: SS SSB Scores
Message-ID: <18.104.22.16861116153702.195f846a at interpath.com>
I am sorry that I forgot to post this earlier but just thought everyone
knew I would be doing this since I did do CW scores. I will be doing the
SSB also. Follow the same format as in CW:
CALL SECTION SCORE QSO'S MULTIS HRS
MAKE SURE YOU MARK IN THE SUBJECT LINE IF IT IS A SSB SCORE OR A CW
SCORE. I AM DOING BOTH AT THIS TIME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
REMEMBER TO PUT YOUR CLASS ON YOUR SCORES. ALL SCORES WITHOUT CLASSES
GO INTO THE HIGH POWER OR "B" CLASS!!!!!!!!!!!
ALSO NO ATTACHMENTS !!!!! THEY WILL NOT BE POSTED !!!!!!
DO NOT POST ANY SCORES TO THIS REFLECTOR!!! Send to myself or on the
Good Luck to everyone and hope to work all of you!
0001 A WA4ZXA 76 NC
* Jimmy R. Floyd (Jim) Thomasville, NC *
* Amateur Call: >> WA4ZXA << *
* Packet Node: >> N4ZC << *
* Internet Address: >> floydjr at interpath.com << *
>From ppvvpp at mixcom.com (Gary Sutcliffe) Sat Nov 16 16:26:58 1996
From: ppvvpp at mixcom.com (Gary Sutcliffe) (Gary Sutcliffe)
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 10:26:58 -0600
Subject: SO 2 radio backlash?
Message-ID: <199611161626.KAA26081 at mixcom.mixcom.com>
Single Op - 2 radio contesting is getting more and more popular and is
responsible for bigger scores, but is the technique generating some negative
I have been planning on going to this technique and have been talking to
other contesters about it. Now I am hearing some resentment to the techinique.
Here is the beef:
1. A couple of contesters said they resent answering a CQ and being ignored
while the other station is obviously working someone else on the second
radio. One guy said he actually blacklisted a couple of the top scoring
stations during SS CW when this happened to him. I was only on a few hours
that weekend, but in a couple of cases I moved on when this happened to me.
I don't remember if I worked them later, but suspect I didn't considering
the short time I was on.
2. Is it fair for a single operator to tie up more than one frequency? I
don't have a problem with using a single CQ frequency and S&Ping on a second
frequency. On the other hand, one guy questioned if it is fair to tie up a
CQ frequency if you are only making one QSO every 5 minutes or so.
I do have a problem with the dueling CQs, alternating CQs on separate bands.
With conditions the way they are now, is it fair to tie up two frequencies
when only a couple of bands are open? Especially on phone where there is not
much space. One guy who uses this technique said that they are not "really"
using two frequencies since they are only transmitting on one frequency at a
time. Would they give up the frequency if someone asked if it was in use
while they were not transmitting on it? If not, then are they really using
only one frequency? On the other hand, how hard is it to hold two CQ
frequencies on crowded bands?
My question to the group: Is the resentment I have uncovered to these
operating techiniques more widespread, or is my (small) sample statisically
73 - Gary
Gary Sutcliffe, W9XT Unified Microsystems
ppvvpp at mixcom.com PO Box 133 Slinger, WI 53086
>From k8dd at contesting.com (Hank Kohl) Sat Nov 16 16:31:18 1996
From: k8dd at contesting.com (Hank Kohl) (Hank Kohl)
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 16:31:18 +0000
Subject: Callsign Litigation?!!?
Message-ID: <22.214.171.12461116163118.006f2eac at tir.com>
At 08:11 11/14/96 -0500, you wrote:
>-- [ From: Barry Martz * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --
>Come on, litigation over a callsign? Is it really that important? This
>gives amateur radio a real good name, fighting over a call.
If I remember right, the reason the FCC quit the 2-letter call program before
about 1976 was from the letters to their congressmen and representatives after
a bunch of us got 2-letter calls, after a heck of a longer wait than the Day
One calls. Mine took several months. And now you don't have to have your
Extra for 25 years, or endure any of the Time-In-Grade cuts.
Besides, I'd probably go back to WN4KKN before most of the 2-letter calls!
73 Hank K8DD
>From k8dd at contesting.com (Hank Kohl) Sat Nov 16 16:31:19 1996
From: k8dd at contesting.com (Hank Kohl) (Hank Kohl)
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 16:31:19 +0000
Subject: Does anyone really know what time it is?
Message-ID: <126.96.36.19961116163119.006f7574 at tir.com>
At 15:36 11/13/96 -0800, you wrote:
>> "... considering the way Windows 95 handles the Daylight Savings
>> Time clock reset. If on that Sunday a few weeks ago [CQWW SSB] you
>> had been working at your computer at the stroke of 2 A.M., Windows
>> turned back the clock an hour, restting the time to 1 A.M. Now if
>> an hour later you were still working away, Windows again set the
>> clock back 1 hour."
>> That probably explains why a few logs were scrambled!
And Daylight Savings Time disabled!
("Automatically adjust clock for daylight savings changes" not!)
More information about the CQ-Contest