I would be interested in knowing if other contesters will
be attending the Satellite Communications Users Conference
next week in San Jose, CA . If so, please send a short
response. i will be hiding at the Magnavox exhibit.
73 Phil KT3Y
>From Doug Grant <0006008716@mcimail.com> Fri Apr 1 00:10:00 1994
From: Doug Grant <0006008716@mcimail.com> (Doug Grant)
Subject: Single-multi
Message-ID: <60940401001006/0006008716NA3EM@mcimail.com>
My present station is set up for two-radio operation, with the deliberate
restriction that the switching only allows one radio to transmit at a time.
I don't feel that I occupy double the bandwidth on transmit, but I certainly
double my bandwidth on RECEIVE, which was my intention all along. It adds
about the same receive bandwidth as the packet-spotting network.
The first time I did it was a real challenge, but it got easier. WZ1R has
used my station (including a QRP SS Phone effort last year), and has gotten
pretty proficient at it. After I did it a few times, I did one contest with
just one radio. I found it extremely boring during run-times, since I knew I
was wasting a lot of time between and even during CQs.
Single-multi is cool. It has challenged me as both a station builder and
operator. I've had it planned for a while, and built up the necessary
equipment as I went along (930, 940, 2 x Alpha 76A, copious use of stubs,
filters, relays, etc.). I didn't just decide one day to get serious and go
down to HRO and write a big check for everything in one fell swoop.
The strangest 2-radio operation here was Wiz's QRP phone SS operation last
year; continuous CQ with 5W on one rig at one end of whatever band was open,
yielding 10 Qs per hour, while S&P on the other rig at much higher rates.
And about 3 years ago I retired my trusty D-104 for a Heil boom mike
velcroed to my Beyer headphones. Kinda rickety, but the audio reports were
as good as the D-104 (W6QHS was the first guy I did A/B with...). I got the
Pro-Set last year, and agree that there are problems with breath noises
unless you tilt the mike up a bit. It's more sturdy than my Velcro kludge,
and the headphones are much better than the old Heil walkman-types.
Doug K1DG (k1dg@mcimail.com)
>From Beryl D. Simonson" <KE3GA@delphi.com Fri Apr 1 00:15:47 1994
From: Beryl D. Simonson" <KE3GA@delphi.com (Beryl D. Simonson)
Subject: Single-Multi
Message-ID: <01HAMSOPDJYQ91YV0R@delphi.com>
Dave Hachadorian, K6LL says:
Why don't we all save ourselves a lot of trouble and outlaw single/multi, or
at least the practice of calling CQ on one frequency while involved in a QSO
on another frequency? I think single/multi stacks up as follows:
On the downside:
* Cost of additional radio, amplifier, and antennas.
* Additional station complexity, in a manner that does not contribute
to non-contest mainstream operating, technology or operator skills.
* Additional spectrum utilization, since while one frequency is
occupied with a QSO, another is occupied with an automated CQ.
* Additional handicap to stations with limited real estate, since
physical separation between antennas enhances the ability to receive
on one band while transmitting 1500 Watts on another.
* Discouragement to middle-level contestors who sometimes compete quite
successfully with relatively simple setups, but really don't take it
seriously enough to go to the extremes of single/multi.
On the upside:
* More fun? I doubt it. It's more like hard, nerve-wracking work.
* Higher score? Yes, for the relatively small percentage of contest
participants who are willing and able to make the required
investment. BUT, as more and more people are forced to use these
methods, the scoring advantage will be lost. Why don't we just kill
it now and spare ourselves the agony?
As a mid-level contestor, who intends to get better, I disagree. Although
operating with multiple radios is not currently in my plans, who knows what
the future will bring. It sounds challenging, exciting, and difficult --and
rewarding if you can do it properly.
There are all sorts of things that can be done to move the middle up to the
top (look at the professional sports leagues), but that doesn't make for
better, more innovative technique--just more mediocrity. I'm willing to
learn from those that can come up with better, more challenging methods of
operating (defined as putting more points on the log), and although I may
not be ready to adopt those methods right now, who knows what we all will do
in the future.
Here's to more innovative ways to raise the scores in the future.
73...Beryl
===========================================================================
Beryl D. Simonson Internet KE3GA@DELPHI.COM
Wynnewood, PA 19096 PacketCluster KE3GA@WB2YOF
Frankford Radio Club
===========================================================================
>From geoiii@bga.com (George Fremin III - WB5VZL) Fri Apr 1 01:02:20 1994
From: geoiii@bga.com (George Fremin III - WB5VZL) (george fremin iii)
Subject: EME dates
Message-ID: <199404010102.AA25656@zoom.bga.com>
Billy Lunt KR1R writes:
: Attention EME Enthusiasts,
:
: The dates for the ARRL International EME Competition has been set
: for the weekends of October 29-30 and November 26-27, 1994. The
: complete rules and dates will appear in September QST.
is it just me - or is this *really* dumb?
you have just put the EME contest on the the two
*major* contest weekends of the year. CQ WW SSB and CW.
i would really like to get on in an arrl eme contest once in
my life but i am not going to give up the two biggest hf contests
in order to do it.
this is a *BAD* choice.
George Fremin III
Austin, Texas C.K.U.
WB5VZL
512/416-0140
geoiii@bga.com
>From Walton L. Stinson" <wstinson@csn.org Fri Apr 1 01:04:26 1994
From: Walton L. Stinson" <wstinson@csn.org (Walton L. Stinson)
Subject: Heil bypass cap correction
Message-ID: <Pine.3.05.9403311826.B29075-8100000@teal>
Per the Heil bulletin that I just pulled out of my files, the
correct value for the bypass capacitor on icom radios is
.47mfd or greater, not .01mfd as i originally stated.
73, walt, w0cp
>From Randy A Thompson <K5ZD@world.std.com> Fri Apr 1 02:16:16 1994
From: Randy A Thompson <K5ZD@world.std.com> (Randy A Thompson)
Subject: EME dates
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9403312157.A4554-0100000@world.std.com>
I am not a VHF or EME guy, but there's more to the story here.
The key to the EME contest is selecting weekends where the moon is in
the best part of the sky for the most people (ask an EME guy what that
means). There is also VERY LITTLE overlap in the populations of the
CQ WW and EME worlds (the two contests have coincided before).
So... this is not really *dumb* as you suggest.
Randy, K5ZD
On Thu, 31 Mar 1994, george fremin iii wrote:
> Billy Lunt KR1R writes:
> : Attention EME Enthusiasts,
> :
> : The dates for the ARRL International EME Competition has been set
> : for the weekends of October 29-30 and November 26-27, 1994. The
> : complete rules and dates will appear in September QST.
>
> is it just me - or is this *really* dumb?
> you have just put the EME contest on the the two
> *major* contest weekends of the year. CQ WW SSB and CW.
> i would really like to get on in an arrl eme contest once in
> my life but i am not going to give up the two biggest hf contests
> in order to do it.
>
> this is a *BAD* choice.
>
>
> George Fremin III
> Austin, Texas C.K.U.
> WB5VZL
> 512/416-0140
> geoiii@bga.com
>
>From Randy A Thompson <K5ZD@world.std.com> Fri Apr 1 02:31:06 1994
From: Randy A Thompson <K5ZD@world.std.com> (Randy A Thompson)
Subject: Future of Single Op?
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9403312111.A4554-0100000@world.std.com>
I can't believe the amount of discussion on the single-multi issue.
Seems pretty simple to me (having been doing this for 17 years now).
Contesting is a techno-sport. It requires humans and technology interacting.
Why would you complain about a guy being able to keep up with two radios
to improve his score but not a guy who buys more towers and antennas?
Investment in hardware is investment in hardware. Now the skill to
take full advantage of the technology is where it gets fun!
A more interesting area to me is the eventual demise of single operator
unassisted (i.e. the no-packet category of single op).
The number of "serious" single op unassisted entries is going down with
each year. Many of them are escaping to the arguably more enjoyable
category of s/o assisted (+ packet). I see the not to distant future where
major DX contests have a small handful of hardcore single ops and that's it!
No competition after the first 2 or 3 spots.
Given that the top single-ops are often beating (and certainly
competitive) with the assisted guys, why do we need two categories?
Separate categories were originally proposed due to fear of the unknown.
Now that we KNOW that packet is not that significant of an advantage, why
not combine the two single op categories back into one?
Single operator would be defined as "One person doing all operating,
logging, and maintenance functions at a station for the contest period."
No other rules or limitations.
What do you think? Let's bring competition back to contesting by making
less categories instead of more!
73,
Randy, K5ZD
>From Rick Zabrodski <zabrodsk@med.ucalgary.ca> Fri Apr 1 02:38:50 1994
From: Rick Zabrodski <zabrodsk@med.ucalgary.ca> (Rick Zabrodski)
Subject: Heil/Icom
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9403311905.A12532-0100000@ume>
I think the value reccomended in .47 ....works on my 751a
rick ve6gk
On Thu, 31 Mar 1994, George Cutsogeorge wrote:
> I had similar low audio problems with the Heil mike and my IC-765. The
> VOX was intermittent and the mike gain had to be way up. I solved the
> problem by building a one transistor amplifier inside the 8 pin mike
> plug. It requires one capacitor, one resistor and one high beta transistor.
> Now it acts the same as my old D-104 did.
>
> Incidently, the suggestion of using a 0.01 capacitor will not work with
> a low impedance mike because the input resistance of the Icom radios
> is 1.5K and the low frequency cut off will be above 10Khz. I would
> suggest no less than 1 microfarad.
>
> George, W2VJN
>
>From John W. Brosnahan" <broz@csn.org Fri Apr 1 02:47:32 1994
From: John W. Brosnahan" <broz@csn.org (John W. Brosnahan)
Subject: final Heil tidbit
Message-ID: <199404010247.AA09132@teal.csn.org>
I forgot a couple of things on my Heil discussion.
1) I used a 1uF tantalum with proper polarity in my old Heil mics.
2) The headphone drivers are held in with rubber cement. They should just
pop out quite easily when you want to replace them.
3) Heil really does does believe that ICOM has problems with low gain and
gain variability from rig to rig in the lower end and older radios. But
the 781s seem to be fine. I have a very early one and a pretty late one
and according to ICOM there have been NO mods or service bulletins for
the 781. One built today is just like the first one, at least that is
what they told me.
gl es 73 John W0UN
|