TRLog
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Trlog] TR and the MN QSO Party

To: <mjwetzel@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Trlog] TR and the MN QSO Party
From: Paul Kirley <pkirley@fuse.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 21:40:29 -0500
List-post: <trlog@contesting.com">mailto:trlog@contesting.com>
At 02:41 PM 2/10/09 -0500, Mike Wetzel W9RE wrote:
>the way the program
>worked in the MN party seemed to be completely different then in others for
>me. 
>In other parties, like FL I always used K1TO/HEN, K1TO/CLR, K1TO/MIAMI (in
>the callsign window) and had no problem so that is what confused me.

You may have a point about a difference between the MN and the FL programming.  

For out-of-state participants, in FCONTEST.PAS I find:
(a) for the MN party
ActiveExchange := NameAndDomesticOrDXQTHExchange;
but 
(b) for the FL party
ActiveExchange := RSTDomesticQTHExchange;
Notice the absence of the DX possibility in the FL exchange.  That may cause 
the difference that you observed.

On the other hand, for in-staters DX is a possibility for both MN and FL--as it 
should be.  So even if the DX possibility were eliminated for out-of-staters, 
in-staters would still need some sort of special county treatment for mobiles.

73, Paul W8TM

_______________________________________________
Trlog mailing list
Trlog@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/trlog

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>