20M split .. more

Zack Widup w9sz at prairienet.org
Tue Oct 29 08:44:03 EST 1996

>On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Bob Furzer wrote:
>> Y'all wrote blah, blah ...
>> Here we have a different interpretation of 20M split during the contests -
>> We split the power between the two 20M aerial systems.  The Stack continues
>> to point toward the DX location we're interested in, and the low (preferably
>> 35 ft) tri-bander is pointed toward the source of the domestic QRM.
>> This year we successfully improved the well tried (as described above) 20M
>> split.  Rather than dividing the power equally between the aerial systems,
>> we used separate transceivers (kind of like a variation of the Multi single
>> category - see note below) and amplifiers to each of the aerial systems.
>> Experimentation showed that setting the two transmitters somewhere between
>                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Oh, nice to see that you are admitting to breaking the contest rules by
>using two transmitters simultaneously on the same band.  I hope that the
>CQ log checkers DQ your entry right away.
>Besides the above admission, what you are flapping your lips about in your
>post boils down to unsportsmanlike conduct and causing intentional
>interference.  Additionally, I would bet that your signal sounded like
>crap. This is ***JUST*** the kind of ammunition that the anti-contesting
>crowd needs.
>Gary K9GS 
>   __________________

You have to get to know Bob's sense of humor. That posting was so 
obviously tongue-in-cheek that I didn't think it needed any explanation.

I don't think Bob would really do that in a CONTEST ... or otherwise!

73, Zack W9SZ


More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list