as W7ZVY making 265 contacts

[Trigley at wport.com]

now that I am the old geezer, I look at my best years as a contester,
like 1959 as W7ZVY making 265 contacts in SS, with the same globe chief
I still use to day (as my exciter)

this CQWW will be interesting, as each contact takes a bit out of me. I
only worked about 80 in the calif contest and SS not because my arc 5
and 40 watts had ran its course or the 6AB7/6SN7 xtal controlled
converter couldn't hear any more stations, it just seemed like a hot
shower and a warm snuggle with the xyl was more inviting than calling
one more 40 wpm station with my J38.

as I lug my 57 pounds of equipment out to the airport next tue and I am
fantisizing about making 265 contacts..........

mike W7DRA


>From HWDX09A at prodigy.com ( ROBERT   REED)  Tue Nov 19 18:35:34 1996
From: HWDX09A at prodigy.com ( ROBERT   REED) ( ROBERT   REED)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 13:35:34, -0500
Subject: Subj:Re: Are QRP skills transferrable?
Message-ID: <199611191835.NAA24008 at mime4.prodigy.com>

Having moved this summer I found myself about to operate in a greatly 
reduced fashion. I was leaving a TH6DXX and KW amp sitting 200 feet 
overlooking the Atlantic Ocean for a ground mounted vertical in the 
woods at a mobile home park. Just the antenna change alone would 
frustrate many. Take away the amplifier and it gets worse. Living in 
SNJ section where FRC members with huge arrays dominate the area I 
opted to go QRP for the SS. After all I've done it on 160 the last 
few years and tested some fine receiving setups on the band.

Well, to say the least, the results were very interesting. I only 
operate about 12-14 hours usually due to a bad heart. The old station 
was good as I could easily find a run frequency on any band in all 
but the first hour or so of the SS. Tuning for mults in S&P was great 
as usually only 1 call was ever needed. Operating QRP was sort of 
foolish and I probably will opt to guest elsewhere in the future. 
Talk about not being heard in the QRM. One QSO that stood out was 
trying to work KQ2M on 75M. Bob was 40 over to me but took me 15+ 
minutes to finally snag CT for the mult. Unfortunately many close in 
Q's were hard. Strangely as the bands kengthened out the QRP didn't 
seem so bad with the vertical. KS7T sat talking after my QSO with him 
about the amazment of a QRP signal from the east Coast on 75M. About 
the only time I felt any sort of competitivness was 06-0800Z on some 
longer propagation type QSO's. 

Certainly a dipole for 75 would have helped me work many of the close 
in stations easily but in this new QTH it's operate what you can. 
Fortunately the owner of the place liked the vertical and clearing in 
the woods so well he's offered to have his guys scoop out a hole and 
pour a base for a 40-50 foot tower next spring. Starting slowly has 
its benefits I guess. 

Some former QRP'ers told me I needed to "run" rather than S&P which I 
tried but not very succesfully.

About all I can feel happy about was working 74 sections QRP with a 
vertical. Only working 220 Q's showed I spent more time looking for 
those mults rather than anything else. 

Obviously a station with quality antennas still can do well QRP. I 
can think of 2 local stations with stacks and monos on all bands that 
would have done impressively BUT unless you have access to that sort 
of hardware QRP is not for the SS with huge stateside signal 
strengths even at 100 watts and a dipole.

____

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

>From n5ul at wtaccess.com (Charles Shaw)  Tue Nov 19 22:18:52 1996
From: n5ul at wtaccess.com (Charles Shaw) (Charles Shaw)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:18:52 -0800
Subject: Two Points
Message-ID: <199611192218.OAA27527 at wta.wtaccess.com>

Hi Lee:

At 09:56 11/19/96 -0600, you wrote:

>As for the two points...if my memory serves me right (and it might not
>here)...years ago you got a point for sending the exchange, but could not
>claim credit for receiving the exchange if the band changed or the signal
>you were copying was clobbered and you lost the station.

My memory is the same.  Don't think we are both wrong do you?  HI.

73,   Charles - N5UL - New Mexico


>From aa8u at voyager.net (AA8U)  Tue Nov 19 19:44:27 1996
From: aa8u at voyager.net (AA8U) (AA8U)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:44:27 -0500 (EST)
Subject: QRP or QRO, who is better???
Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961119144541.22370bdc at voyager.net>


>        The top QRO operators are superior operators, and to
>        state that "proficient QRP" operators are better than
>        their QRO counterparts, in general, is not provable
>        and is not true.
>
>        73
>        Dale K5MM 

Ok, your point(s) are well taken and likely valid. I yeild..... :')
73,
Bruce AA8U


>From jjr at databook.com (Jim Reisert)  Tue Nov 19 20:09:51 1996
From: jjr at databook.com (Jim Reisert) (Jim Reisert)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 15:09:51 -0500
Subject: Callsign in SS exchange, vanity calls
Message-ID: <9611192009.AA07028 at sttng.databook.com>

It seems ironic to me that people would have applied for a vanity callsign, 
presumably because it's easier to say than their old call, yet don't or won't 
use their new callsign as part of the SS exachange.  Maybe they should have 
saved the $30 and let someone else have the call who would use it in the 
exchange per the rules.

- Jim AD1C

-- 
Jim Reisert <AD1C at tiac.net>
http://www.tiac.net/users/ad1c/



>From kg5u at hal-pc.org (Dale Martin)  Tue Nov 19 17:59:52 1996
From: kg5u at hal-pc.org (Dale Martin) (Dale Martin)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 11:59:52 -0600
Subject: QSO B4!!!!
Message-ID: <01BBD624.76BBB380 at pm2-118.hal-pc.org>

On Monday, November 18, 1996 21:16 PM, K7LXC at aol.com wrote:
>   I'm not trying to pick on you, Steve, but if I don't get a QSL, I =
don't
>log it. =20

I erased a couple of QSO's from my log because of exactly that, Steve.  =
One guy who used my call to begin his exchange didn't give so much as a =
"Roger" when I finished giving my exchange (also preceded by his call).  =
When he used the same number on the next QSO, I had to erase him. =20

Another guy who didn't ack my exchange proceded to call CQ and used the =
next number for the next QSO.  I tried to get an acknowledgement from =
him, but he wasn't hearing or listening to me--I figure he though I was =
calling someone else who was sharing or on an adjacent freq.  I had to =
remove him from the log.  =20

Frustrating....

>I get the call
>wrong, I send the corrected call (or ck or serial number) as part of my =
TU to
>let the station know I corrected it. Am I that naive?

Nope.  I think that's the right thing to do.  When someone comes back to =
my call with my call wrong, on SSB I use a full callsign exchange (his =
call, my call, the exchange).  Hopefully, he will return with my call =
and his exchange.  If he doesn't I try to ensure he got my call =
correctly.=20


I am especially upset at the three stations who just gave up on me.  I =
was running QRP and I know that puts a burden on the running stations.  =
Especially when I call during a big run and he has to ask for repeats.  =
Oh well....  =20

However, to just start calling CQ without so much as "lets try it later" =
or " I cannot copy you at all" or anything, really hurts.  On the other =
hand, there were more people who hung in there with me (and I with them) =
and I thank them for their perserverence and stick-to-itiveness.  It =
means a lot.  The most fun one was when I worked another QRP station.  =
We must have exchanged exchange elements about a dozen times.  But we =
finally got them.  That was almost better than a mult!

And yes, operating QRP does sharpen your operating skills, techniques, =
strategies, and timing.

73,



Dale Martin, KG5U
kg5u at hal-pc.org
http://www.hal-pc.org/~kg5u


>From kg5u at hal-pc.org (Dale Martin)  Tue Nov 19 18:14:51 1996
From: kg5u at hal-pc.org (Dale Martin) (Dale Martin)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 12:14:51 -0600
Subject: Incomplete exchange
Message-ID: <01BBD624.78701A40 at pm2-118.hal-pc.org>

On Monday, November 18, 1996 23:39 PM, Derek =
Wills[SMTP:oo7 at astro.as.utexas.edu] wrote:
>	>As a sidenote: I'd be interested to know how many of us=20
>	>Sweepstakes types actually have handled "traffic " (with a=20
>	>message number) in the last year. I know I haven't. ( Shame on=20
>	>me) While we retain this exchange as a part of the contest, its=20
>	>relevance to its original intent probably has been lost on=20
>	>contest types.         Rob VE4GV
>
>In the same vein, I had to ask a while ago on this reflector why all=20
>QSOs in SS count 2 points, instead of just 1 (or 17, or 42).  I guess=20
>it's like women's clothes buttoning in the opposite direction to males' =

>clothes - the original reason became irrelevant a long time ago but we=20
>still do it.
>
>Derek AA5BT, G3NMX
>oo7 at astro.as.utexas.edu
>
>

If I recall correctly (and I am sure someone will steer me right) from =
my NTS days in SoCal, when handling traffic, you get one point towards =
BPL (Brass Pounder's League) for receiving a message and one point for =
transmitting it. Thus, you get 2 points for the QSO which contains the =
transmission of one exchange and the receipt of another.=20

73,


=20

=20
Dale Martin, KG5U
kg5u at hal-pc.org
http://www.hal-pc.org/~kg5u