SSTV Window

Keith Morehouse - W9RM blckhole at
Tue Nov 19 11:07:08 EST 1996

AA8U wrote:
> I noticed the usual assortment of anti-contest "turf protectors" this
> weekend during SS SSB.
> This is not news, but I think I found a new "SSTV window" at or about > 3812.

I was tuning around on 75 last night and listened in for quite a while
on 3813 +/-.  Looks like the usual assortment of W5 pig farmers and
hanger-on wanna-be farmers.  One guy was bragging about bypassed TX SSB
filters in his TS-xyz and how he can send an SSTV signal that's over 15
KHz wide.  He was demo'ing it too !

It sounds like they have a beef with the "anti-farmers" on 3815 and with
contesters in general.  I guess they were sending unflattering pix of
both groups to each other.

I don't think we've heard the last of THIS bunch.  What ever happened to
peer pressure ???

Oh, at least they all seem to be pretty puny-weak compared to the REAL
professional QRM'ers from roughly 82 KHz higher...if they trash you,
laugh at 'em and tell 'em to get a signal.

PROBE ELECTRONICS 100 Higgins Road, Park Ridge IL 60068 USA
Keith J. Morehouse /  W9RM  / Society of Midwest Contesters
847-696-2828  FAX: 847-698-2045  e-mail: blckhole at

>From aa9ax at (Steven Sample)  Tue Nov 19 17:22:24 1996
From: aa9ax at (Steven Sample) (Steven Sample)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 12:22:24 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Incomplete exchange
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.961119121317.4398A-100000 at iglou2>

On Mon, 18 Nov 1996 rkaufman at wrote:
> I found most people generally adhered to the "proper excchange" 
> in the "proper order" rule. Before criticizing some of the stuff 
> you heard on the bands, it is important to remember that some 
> stations may omit the call when doing a "fill". 
> eg/ VE4GV to W1ABC
> VE4GV to W1ABC - "You're 456 A VE4GV 72 MB"
> W1ABC to VE4GV - "QRM , all again , please."
> VE4GV to W1ABC - " This is VE4GV, 456 Alpha, Check 72 Mike Bravo"
> W1ABC to VE4GV - "Qsl tnx"


Rob...I have no problem with that either.  We are not talking about
"fills" or "newbies".  We are talking about experienced, seasoned
contesters who omit the call in the exchange
time-after-time-after-time-after-time.............This was not an error. I
(and apparently others) mentioned that the call is a part of the exchange,
but were not graced with a response.  Not seeking a confrontation or
argument on the air, I simply went on.  I heard the same station doing the
same thing several times for good periods of time.  I was just playing
around and teaching others, so I had time to listen.  It was very


Steve / N9FD

> > Personally, I have no problem doing this because I have sent the 
> correct exchange at least once. The rest is fills.  I did also 
> notice that many who did NOT use the proper format had low 
> scores, were newbies or just dabbling. I do agree that NOT 
> sending your call at ANY time in the exchange defeats the purpose 
> of the original intent of the contest. ie/ Message handling. 
> Experienced contesters should not "cut corners".
> As a sidenote: I'd be interested to know how many of us 
> Sweepstakes types actually have handled "traffic " (with a 
> message number) in the last year. I know I haven't. ( Shame on 
> me) While we retain this exchange as a part of the contest, its 
> relevance to its original intent probably has been lost on 
> contest types.


It's a challenging and fun "skill-builder" which sets the tone for the
contest season. It is extremely popular, hence I wonder if it really
needs to have any changes considered.  I think not.                 

Steve / N9FD

> >
> 1505 x 77  SO LP

>From zlau at (Lau, Zack,  W1VT)  Tue Nov 19 17:25:00 1996
From: zlau at (Lau, Zack,  W1VT) (Lau, Zack,  W1VT)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 12:25:00 -0500
Subject: Subj:Re: Are QRP skills transferrabl
Message-ID: <m0vPtxL-000fDAC at>

Steve K7LXC wrote:
>     Class Q ops are used to rejection, Class B ops aren't.   I think the
>list goes on and on.  It might be a good excercise for everyone to try Q
>once.  The lessons might be very interesting.  Hey, anyone can run 1.5KW 
>sit on one frequency for hours, right?  Anyone going to pick up the 
I did that last year with KH6CP/1/QRP and W1AW/QRO.

I had no trouble running stations on 20 meter SSB from the HQ club
station with the little tribander and a kW.  Much easier than working
guys on 75M with the QRP station.  Even picked up a couple
tough mults on scatter--so I even tried for the sweep...  despite
not having the 40/80 meter antennas available.

20 meters was a lot of fun with QRP this year--even worked
VY1JA, who did a great job of controlling the pileup.  I seemed
to work everyone I heard!  The challenge was deciding whether
to work on the sweep or pile on the points.  Normally, by Sunday
morning some 7 or 9 lander has already blown me away, but this
year I didn't find any QRPers with huge numbers to automatically
decide the issue.

Since I'm usually competing against guest ops at
N6BV, K1EA, K1DG, K1VR, or some other big station,  this
year I used the club station's tribander for 6 hrs  instead
of the usual wire out the apartment window.

Just 7 months till I get to try out the call in June VHF test from
Vermont--Zack W1VT.  346 x 74 (no AK, KH6, SB, KY)

>From becker at SPRINTMAIL.COM (Tony and Celia Becker)  Tue Nov 19 16:31:58 1996
From: becker at SPRINTMAIL.COM (Tony and Celia Becker) (Tony and Celia Becker)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 09:31:58 -0700
Subject: W6BIP turned 85 / FLA CQWW op. available
Message-ID: < at>

Hi All!

I am indebted (as are many Bay Area hams over the past several decades) to Wilbur (Bip) Bachman for much useful advice on reducing RFI and neighbor relations obtained two weeks ago during the SS CW M/S operation at W6BIP in San Francisco.  My job was to listen to Bip lecture on technical topics while Scott, N1EE, passed out the SF multiplier for the CW faithful.  Bip has not been well with a back problem and so was only able to operate for a few of those famous side-swiper CW QSOs.  The hospitality was superb for the entire weekend, ending with a concert by YF Elsie, who plays a mean set of 88 keys too.  

Lets all remember to say a loud THANK YOU to Bip and wish him a HAPPY BIRTHDAY as Bip turned 85 last Saturday, the 16th, then overcame these obstacles last Sunday morning to pass out the SF multiplier on SSB!  

Wilbur E. (Bip) Bachman
880 Dartmouth Street
San Francsico, CA  94134-1828

TEL:    408-808-2200

CQWW CW: I will be arriving at the Tampa Bay airport on Saturday afternoon, and can make time to relieve the weary revelers before joining YF and her parents for the holiday in Sarasota.  Please email me if interested.
AE0M, Tony Becker - becker at - Silicon Valley, U.S.A.

>From k5na at (Richard L. King)  Tue Nov 19 17:39:52 1996
From: k5na at (Richard L. King) (Richard L. King)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 11:39:52 -0600
Subject: Incomplete exchange
Message-ID: <199611191739.LAA14801 at>

Some SS operators have always done things to the SS exchange to speed it up
and enhance their final score.

Back in the days when the Sweepstakes covered two weekends of operating the
same mode, the date was a part of the exchange. For example, if the SS
started at 2100Z on Saturday - November 2th, you would send send "Nov 2" at
the end of the exchange. At 0000Z, you would switch to sending "Nov 3", and
so forth. 

Then some rule-twister got the bright idea of just sending "DATE" on all
three different days of the SS. This reduced the sending station's paperwork
(remember it was paper logs back then) and put the burden of filling in the
date on the receiving station. This practice caught on to the point where
almost everyone was just sending "DATE".

Then the ARRL tried to correct this practice by changing the date to be sent
from the current date to the operator's birthday. This eliminated the
practice of just sending "DATE" in the exchange because the date became a
variable and you heard all kinds of dates being sent. Years later I was
talking with a well-known SS contester in Houston and he made a comment that
today was his "SS Birthday". I asked, "What do you mean?" He replied that he
had never used his real birthday because he didn't like sending it on CW and
had chosen a birthday more suited to keeping his rate up in the SS contest.

I guess I was naive because I had never thought about the possiblitiy of
doing this and had never heard of anyone doing it before. But from my
conversation with him, I deduced that it was a fairly commonplace occurance.
I'm sure that's one of the reasons that the ARRL eventually dropped sending
the date in the SS exchange.

I guess the moral of the story is that some contesters will ALWAYS look for

73, Richard

>From rlboyd at (Rich L. Boyd)  Tue Nov 19 17:57:09 1996
From: rlboyd at (Rich L. Boyd) (Rich L. Boyd)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 12:57:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject: call in SS exchange
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91-FP.961119125245.973J-100000 at>

The other side of giving the call as part of the exchange is that it may 
eliminate the need to give the call after the QSO.  If you've just given 
your call 5 seconds earlier in the exchange, when the other stations QSLs 
you can come back with "QRZ?"  If anyone says "Call?" which they 
occasionally do, those who came upon your frequency in that last 5 
seconds or somehow couldn't pick it out from the chaff of the rest of the 
exchange, you give your call, no problem.

The best thing about giving the call as part of the exchange is that it 
keeps the rhythm, which is very helpful to people logging.  The call is 
a part that definitely needs a fill anyway, and even if you don't need a 
fill, hearing it again to confirm you got it right doesn't hurt.  
Sending the entire exchange in the order it's expected and that all the 
logging programs are set up for definitely helps keep the guy on the other 
side on track.  If you keep it all standard you can rip it off quicker 
too.  Otherwise you may have to slow the whole thing down.  73 - Rich Boyd, 

>From tree at (Larry Tyree)  Tue Nov 19 18:02:25 1996
From: tree at (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 10:02:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Omitting callsigns
Message-ID: <199611191802.KAA16206 at>

K0WA noted:

> Thanks for the "nice" response.  I'm sure glad that we did the "right" way
> for 99.999999 percent of all contacts.  In the late 70s....almost all the
> top gun contesters were omitting the call...saying, "455 B 12 Ohio"  I
> really didn't hear very much of this on the air this weekend.  But, we have
> to have someting to talk about here on the reflector.

Yes, I can remember some people doing this.  However, it seems most
people have come to realize it makes sense and do it.

I think a larger percentage of the QSOs where all the information isn't
sent at one time are the QSOs with people who are not in the contest.

Are the following two cases really any different?

roger 37 B 67 oregon
Thanks K7RAT contest


what do you need for the contest?
4000 watts

I doubt anyone has a problem with the second example being a 
valid two way QSO.  

I argue that in both cases, all the information that was necessary
to count the QSO was exchanged.  I don't believe the rules are trying
to tell you the information has to be exchanged in one transmission.

While I am not trying to suggest not saying your call is a good idea
(I think it is what people are expecting and is a good idea), but
I think that pretending these QSOs are "illegal" and should be removed
from your log is going too far.

On a different note, concerning working dupes - ALL of the top 
contenders don't work dupes if we don't have to.  It takes less time.  
On CW, I think there was a total of three logged dupe QSOs amongst 
the top three stations.  These typically occur when a callsign was 
copied wrong at the start of the QSO and after correcting it (because 
the guy sent his call during his exchange) it becomes a dupe.  I 
had two of them, Gator had one and Todd had zero.

I take great care to make sure people are calling me, and not someone
next to me.  If I suspect this might be happening, I will ask for a fill
even if I already know it just to make sure (the best one to ask for is the
number as it is less confused than check/section/prec).

The date for the next SprINT has been picked.  It will be on Saturday night
(USA local time) on December 21st - probably at 02Z on 40/80 meters.  Complain
to N5KO who was in charge of picking the date this time.  Whoever complains 
the loudest gets to pick the next date.  I continue to work on K2MM to get
the results out from the last one (so we can find out who came in second),
but so far, to no avail.  This advanced information is your reward for 
reading to the end of this message!

73 Tree N6TR
The ham previous known as WB6ZVC
The ham sometimes masquerading as K7RAT
The ham not known as N7TR 
tree at

>From jjr at (Jim Reisert)  Tue Nov 19 18:09:53 1996
From: jjr at (Jim Reisert) (Jim Reisert)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 13:09:53 -0500
Subject: QSO B4!!
Message-ID: <9611191809.AA06456 at>

On Tue, 19 Nov 1996 10:33:13 CST, Scott Ellington K9MA wrote:

> Just work the dupes, claim zero points, and get on with the 
> contest!

Besides, it keeps the rate meter up!

- Jim AD1C

Jim Reisert <AD1C at>

>From lenrev at (Len Revelle)  Tue Nov 19 18:20:18 1996
From: lenrev at (Len Revelle) (Len Revelle)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 18:20:18 GMT
Subject: 40 meters and SS SSB
References: < at>
Message-ID: <3290fce3.9351349 at>

On Mon, 18 Nov 1996 14:00:38 -0600, you wrote:

>Ladies........and Gentlemen
>What are people's experience with 40 meters this weekend?  I am =
>in comments as to band conditions on 20-40-and-80.  Any 160 meter =
activity? =20
>k0wa at
	Checked 160 during both sessions and never heard any SS traffic.

| Len Revelle   lenrev at |
| Illinois      CIS 72607,1320 |    =20
|  KE9YR        AMA 60055      |

>From n4to at (Victor A. Dubois)  Tue Nov 19 18:41:02 1996
From: n4to at (Victor A. Dubois) (Victor A. Dubois)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 13:41:02 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Harbach Electronics
Message-ID: < at>

Contesters and DXers may want to check out the new web page from Harbach
Electronics. You will find info on the popular SB220 and SB200 upgrades, as
well as some neat stainless antenna hardware including great boom to mast
brackets and element to boom saddles, etc., for those that like to "roll
their own".

The e-mail address is:

For the record, I have no connection to Harbach Electronics, other than
that of a very satisfied customer.


Vic   N4TO
n4to at

>From Bill.Gallier.KQ4GC at (Billy R. Gallier)  Tue Nov 19 18:55:08 1996
From: Bill.Gallier.KQ4GC at (Billy R. Gallier) (Billy R. Gallier)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 18:55:08 +0000
Subject: Vanity calls
Message-ID: <19961119185506.AAA21875 at LOCALNAME>

Called FCC today and was advised that all applications received after
day one of Gate 2 are being held.  It is understood that a couple hams
have filed litigation claiming their courier delivered their applications
prior to gate 2 opening.

Now, I am one of the few hundred that did not get a vanity call.  None of
my choices were available when my application came up.  I re-submitted on
the 7th of November with another 25 choices.  My first application was there
at 0001 on the 23rd.  I just was not lucky in the lottery!

It is not my fault that someone picked a courier that delivered their
application too soon or to late!  It is not the fault of the FCC.
Thousands of calls have been issued and
hundreds of others are patiently waiting in hopes of a new call.  

Your help is needed!  Let us not have to wait any longer for something
that we have already waited too long for.  A couple of cry babies and sore
losers  shouldn't be allowed to hold up gate 2 any longer. Your swift and
timely action is required. 

de KQ4GC  ARRL member!!
Bill Gallier
bill.gallier.kq4gc at

>From HWDX09A at ( ROBERT   REED)  Tue Nov 19 18:13:20 1996
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 13:13:20, -0500
Subject: SSTV Window
Message-ID: <199611191813.NAA26628 at>

Isn't it wonderful that an SSTV'r could come on, warn you, then take 
over the frequency.

With everything else, times and technology change. SSTV is in the 
phone portion only because of the bandwidth it occupies. As a 
functional item it should be relegated to a seperate area such as 
RTTY, Packet and Amtor.

SSTV operators have for many years shown a lack of respect for Part 
97 by starting up transmissions as QRM to SSB signals. To expect 
respect from an SSTV operator is a joke.

I wonder the responce at the FCC to a proposal to restrict SSTV to 
the higher less active bands especially VHF. We now have almost 
double the amateur population from when SSTV started. Some form of 
control is needed as respect obvisouly doesn't work.

I've often thought of buying SSTV gear just to create a closed loop 
tape telling SSTV'rs just my opinion of their actions. 


 73,   Bob Reed,  W2CE,  ex WB2DIN
       1991 Route 37 West - Lot 109
       Toms River, New Jersey  08757

>From oo7 at (Derek Wills)  Tue Nov 19 19:12:47 1996
From: oo7 at (Derek Wills) (Derek Wills)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 13:12:47 -0600
Subject: Subj:Re: Are QRP skills transferrable?

I can just imagine the pile-ups, with people shouting "QRO STATION!!  

I'd have a lot more respect for QRP ops if they didn't do their "QRP 
station!!!" thing.   I realize they don't all do it, but enough of 
them do that it annoys me.   If I am QRP, the most I'll do is thank 
someone with a 72 rather than a 73.

They say Englishmen never boast, so long as they can make it quite
clear what it is they are not boasting about.

Derek G3NMX, AA5BT (ex-AA5BT)
oo7 at

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list