[CQ-Contest] Be careful what you wish for

[John Geiger]

You had me beat there. I didn't hear any VE4s the entire contest.  Only
worked MAR, ONS, GTA, ONE, and BC from Canada, which is really surprising.
I didn't operate on 20 meters at all, though, so I am sure that had
something to do with it.

One more rule change that might increase activity a little on Sunday is to
eliminate the off time rule and let everyone operate the entire 30 hours.



73 John AF5CC

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 6:14 AM, N4ZR <n4zr at comcast.net> wrote:

> I was pleasantly surprised by the lack of clicks this year - maybe it's
> just that the noise level had my AGC depressed, but I only heard one bad
> clicker - a VE4 (no, not you, Kelly).  I need to try to find him and tell
> him just how bad it was.
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
> at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now
> spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
> For spots, please use your favorite
> "retail" DX cluster.
>
> On 11/6/2017 9:17 PM, sbloom at acsalaska.net wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> I was gonna say, I heard a little bit of everything in this one. 
>> Automatic CQ loops with bug exchanges.  Slow but perfect straight key
>> exchanges with (by our standards, meaning a CK in this century), and even a
>> couple of "circa WB2EUF" chirpy signals that drifted through then out of my
>> passband during the exchange.  Sometimes it doesn't seem like it, but
>> the CWops and SKCC orgs are turning out a fair number of competent cw
>> operators.
>>
>> It was interesting how many of the folks would resend the entire
>> exchange, no matter what I asked for in a repeat.  I guess not
>> everybody recognizes the NTS Radiogram format anymore :(
>>
>> 73
>> Steve KL7SB
>>
>>  
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 12:07:14 -0800, "Eric Gruff"  wrote:
>>
>> I agree with the part about it being easier to find open spots on the
>> bandmap to run. It’s also a function of having panadapters that let you
>> just point and click to the empty spots.
>>
>>
>> However, there was no shortage of bug and straight key (or maybe they
>> just soldered a phone plug onto a piece of zip cord and touched the wires
>> together to send?) users who adopted the “a dash should be about 1.2 times
>> longer than a dot” when sending exchanges. I had one fellow who was S9+,
>> but decided to send serial number 9 as “009” with his straight key, and it
>> took about five repeats to figure it out. I sent “nr 9?”, and he sent “009”
>> over and over, which also could have been “090”, “099”, “090”, etc. This
>> was hours into the contest, so I couldn’t rule out anything. I sure won’t
>> be surprised if the contact comes up busted.
>>
>>
>>
>> Then there were folks who when asked to repeat “PREC”, sent everything
>> but that. I got the entire exchange again twice, callsigns, “?” (probably a
>> lot of folks who don’t know what precedence is), and silence. I guess
>> that’s why SS is so challenging.
>>
>>
>>
>> I still had a lot of fun. I could have won the whole thing if the sun
>> hadn’t gotten into my eyes. 😉
>>
>>
>>
>> Eric NC6K
>>
>>
>>
>> Message: 3
>>
>> Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2017 18:23:32 -0500
>>
>> From: "Randy Thompson K5ZD"  >
>>
>> To: 'Radio K?HB'  >, "'CQ-Contest'"
>>
>>   >
>>
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Be careful what you wish for
>>
>> Message-ID: <008501d3568d$18529880$48f7c980$@charter.net  >
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>
>>
>>
>> I was thinking the same thing. The bands just don't sound as crowded as I
>> remember them 20+ years ago. We sure miss all those 1x3 calls that used
>> bugs and had been doing SS forever.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Randy, K5ZD
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>>
>> > From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On
>> Behalf
>>
>> > Of Radio K?HB
>>
>> > Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2017 4:39 PM
>>
>> > To: CQ-Contest
>>
>> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] Be careful what you wish for
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Do you remember when you wished that it was easy to find a good clear
>>
>> > QRG to run in SSCW?
>>
>> >
>>
>> > 73, de Hans, K?HB
>>
>> > "Just a boy and his radio"?
>>
>> >
>>
>> > _______________________________________________
>>
>> > 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
>