N3ADL at aol.com
N3ADL at aol.com
Tue Nov 19 15:34:02 EST 1996
Had this problem several times when running on 14226 or so...intentional
malicious interference...Wonder how much qrm the DVK on repeat mode would
cause on SSTV? ;-) 73 de Doug // N3ADL
>From Fatchett.Mike at tci.com (Fatchett, Mike) Tue Nov 19 20:33:22 1996
From: Fatchett.Mike at tci.com (Fatchett, Mike) (Fatchett, Mike)
Date: 19 Nov 1996 13:33:22 -0700
Subject: Vanity calls
I think this is a smoke screen. There seems to be no way the FCC could
be held responsible for a couriers action.
My gut reaction is that there is something else holding up the issuing of
new calls. Maybe making sure that they issue calls allocated to the
US?????? Looking up the definition of equal and random?
>From k4ro at music-city.tdec.state.tn.us (K4RO - Kirk Pickering) Tue Nov 19 20:56:31 1996
From: k4ro at music-city.tdec.state.tn.us (K4RO - Kirk Pickering) (K4RO - Kirk Pickering)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:56:31 -0600
Subject: 'Shortened' exchange
Message-ID: <9611192056.AA11952 at music-city.tdec.state.tn.us.state.tn.us>
> 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.
Guess this is the same reason why so many people change their name to
"Ed" for the NAQP & Sprints? I guess if your name is "Bartholomew" or
"Englebert" it probably makes a real difference in your score. :-)
-Kirk 4 Radio Operator
>From N6NT at worldnet.att.net (Bruce Sawyer) Tue Nov 19 21:29:41 1996
From: N6NT at worldnet.att.net (Bruce Sawyer) (Bruce Sawyer)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 21:29:41 +0000
Subject: QRP Contesting
Message-ID: <19961119212938.AAA26194 at LOCALNAME>
At 07:23 PM 11/19/96 +0000, you wrote:
>While I'm venting spleen, also don't like practice of
>using own call at some one else's station. Seems like
>taking credit for other's hard work. Operating ability
>is much less important than station in results.
Ummm...I think I need to take strong issue with this last statement. Out
here in California we ran an interesting experiment on this subject this
past July. We went out and dug up 50 very mediocre stations--little
tribanders up about 50' with nothing but inverted V's for 40 meters. In
almost every case, the station owners had never bothered trying to do
contests in a serious way because they knew their stations were so inferior.
In most cases, the station owners aspired to nothing more than DXCC, knowing
they were so limited.
Then we brought top contesters from around the world, 100 of them in all,
and put them into these podunk stations. Did you listen to the results of
that? To put it mildly, the station owners now know they can't blame it on
their stations any more. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I
think the average was about 2200 QSO's in an 18 hour stretch. I doubt there
was a single case among those 50 stations where the station owner thought
his station could possibly do that well. Now that they know what's
possible, I keep hearing some of them trying to replicate the results of
last July...only it doesn't sound quite the same with somebody else at the
Yes, it takes both a great station and a great operator...but I also believe
N5TJ could do better with a HotWater101 and a coat hanger than Joe Average
(even...WayAboveAverage!) could at W5WMU.
Chief Operating Officer of the soon-to-be-defunct WRTC 96, Inc.
>From blunt at arrl.org (Lunt, Billy, KR1R) Tue Nov 19 21:48:00 1996
From: blunt at arrl.org (Lunt, Billy, KR1R) (Lunt, Billy, KR1R)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 16:48:00 -0500
Subject: Rules question
Message-ID: <m0vPy8p-000fDAC at mgate.arrl.org>
The exchange for Sweepstakes is:
"A consecutive serial number, precedence ("A" if you run 150-W output or
less, "B" if more than 150 W, or "Q" if 5-W output or less), YOUR CALL SIGN,
check (last two digits of the year you were first licensed) and your ARRL
For example, WJ1U answers W1AW's call by sending
W1AW NR178 A WJ1U 89 CT
for QSO number 178, less than 150 W, first licensed in 1989 and Connecticut
The contest rules are quite clear as what the exchange is.
Billy Lunt, KR1R
Contest Manager, ARRL
kr1r at arrl.org
blunt at arrl.org
>From: Steven Sample
>Subject: Rules question
>Date: Tuesday, November 19, 1996 3:48PM
>I presume you read the stuff on the CQ-Contest reflector? I guess you
>know the big question right now is the exchange in Sweepstakes.
>The rules say that a valid SS exchange is:
> Serial Number, Precedent, Callsign, Check, and Section.
>If a station sends Serial Number, Precedent, Check, and Section, omitting
>the callsign in the exchange...is it a valid QSO? Be careful, because if
>you get loose on the issue, you may see a new exchange out there. Your
>word is needed!
>Thanks and 73...
>Steve Sample / N9FD (Ex-AA9AX) (Ate dinner with you and Dr. Bafoofnik at
>Dayton last year.
>From mraz at rockdal.aud.alcatel.com (Kris Mraz, N5KM) Tue Nov 19 22:57:23 1996
From: mraz at rockdal.aud.alcatel.com (Kris Mraz, N5KM) (Kris Mraz, N5KM)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 16:57:23 -0600
Subject: QRP Contesting
References: <19961119212938.AAA26194 at LOCALNAME>
Message-ID: <32923B53.707A at aud.alcatel.com>
Bruce Sawyer wrote wrt WRTC 96 competition:
> I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I
> think the average was about 2200 QSO's in an 18 hour stretch.
To put a qualifier on this it has to be stated that the QSO rate
was enhanced a bit due to the pre-contest publicity and the special
awards offered to those who worked the WRTC competitors.
mraz at aud.alcatel.com
More information about the CQ-Contest