[CQ-Contest] WPX CW

Dale Putnam daleputnam at hotmail.com
Thu May 30 09:05:14 EDT 2013 

So.. is that deliberate interference? Created, designed and accomplished by the operator?

Have a great day, 
 
 
--...   ...--
Dale - WC7S in Wy
 
 

 
> From: dj7ww at t-online.de
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 13:40:55 +0200
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX CW
> 
> It always happens when multiple antenna directions are used by the big gun
> stations on tx and a single antenna direction on rx.
> 
> 73
> Peter 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Mats Strandberg
> Sent: Donnerstag, 30. Mai 2013 06:08
> To: k5zd at charter.net
> Cc: Steve Bookout; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX CW
> 
> This is a very important point.
> 
> I am myself not better than others. I was "jumped on" by a few Aligator big
> guns, with signal strenghts of around 559-579 on 20 meters. I do not think
> they intentionally wanted to steaa my frequency (20 meter CW, me using 800
> W), but more a simple issue that the difference in power  between us made
> them not hear my 800 W "QRP" signals...
> 
> I feel tempted to address this openly on the forum with call signs, because
> this is a SYSTEM more than an unlucky coincidence.I now begin to understand
> which stations run more and which run less than Full Legal Limit. Anyone
> else noticed ths same phenomena?
> 
> But still I am gathering "courage" and as close to 100% statistical evidence
> that my assumptions are correct.
> 
> The same intereting issue is that some stations seem to have extremely
> "noicy" RX conditions - always. With such signal strenghts as described
> above, I still always (no exceptions) need to repeat my call and serial
> numbers many times, while this is not the case when calling weak US big guns
> during poor conditions when signal strengths are 519-539.
> 
> In 95% of the cases, US and Canadian stations are still able to get both my
> call and serial numbers just sent one.
> 
> Interesting difference between US and European (and other) big guns...
> 
> 
> 73 de RM2D (Mats)
> 
> 
> 2013/5/30 Randy Thompson K5ZD <k5zd at charter.net>
> 
> > They will be "held accountable" when people are willing to name calls 
> > in these public complaints...
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On 
> > > Behalf Of Steve Bookout
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:29 PM
> > > To: Cqtestk4xs at aol.com
> > > Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> > > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX CW
> > >
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > As we know, sometimes 'stuff' happens when changing rcvr filters, 
> > > RIT or changing antennas.  These bad situations shouldn't really 
> > > last longer than it takes to flip a switch or spin the dial.  
> > > Sometimes neither station feels THEY should be the one to move.  Like I
> said 'stuff'
> > > happens and this is contesting.
> > >
> > > This becomes a problem, WHEN THE SAME STATION, time after time, 
> > > contest after contest, drops on top of you and starts CQ'ing.
> > >
> > > People, +\- 100 Hz is not a clear frequency!
> > >
> > > There are a couple of stations that are infamous for this. When will 
> > > they be held accountable for their arrogance and poor operating ethics?
> > >
> > > 73 de Steve, NR4M
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On May 29, 2013, at 7:28, Cqtestk4xs at aol.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > My favorite is a certain zone 8 station that called me on my 
> > > > frequency and then after he worked me, began to call CQ 100Hz away 
> > > > from my run freq. It took a  couple of minutes to pry him off me.
> > > >
> > > > Bill K4XS/KH7XS
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In a message dated 5/29/2013 10:48:23 A.M. Coordinated Universal 
> > > > Tim, g4odv at yahoo.co.uk writes:
> > > >
> > > > Hello  Jesus,
> > > >
> > > > I am truly sorry to have caused you this concern, I should have  
> > > > said that it was a remarkable  coincidence that you landed on my 
> > > > qrg, which did happen 3 or 4 times . I really should have put that 
> > > > in a better way  or preferably not mentioned it at all. Please 
> > > > accept my
> > > public  apologies..
> > > >
> > > > 73  Bria
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: EC1KR Jesus  <ec1kr at ec1kr.com>
> > > > To: g4odv at yahoo.co.uk
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, 28 May  2013, 17:24
> > > > Subject: WPX CW
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi Brian.
> > > >
> > > > Just  read your comments at 3830scores  about
> > > > us:
> > > >
> > > > -------------------------
> > > > On the other hand it  was remarkable the number of times ED1R 
> > > > chose to land on my qrg. He was  weak and I am not saying he was 
> > > > hearing me but I was hearing his callers  who were busting up the 
> > > > esp numbers I was trying to  get..
> > > > --------------------------
> > > >
> > > > If we were weak there perhaps  we did not hear you at all as you 
> > > > are off the back or off the side of our  beams. Also we set very 
> > > > narrow filtering. Elementary it is not our  intention to make 
> > > > delibetate QRM and we always play within the contest  rules. 
> > > > Nevertheless we apologize for the trouble. Next time please do not  
> > > > hesitate to turn your antenna and ask for QSY.
> > > >
> > > > We do not seek  controversy, but understands that is a Contest 
> > > > with a very bad propagation  conditions where punishment not we 
> > > > heard each other.
> > > >
> > > > A  greeting.
> > > >
> > > > 73 de Jesus EC1KR / ED1R
> > > > Blog.    www.ec1kr.com
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > CQ-Contest  mailing  list
> > > > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > > > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list