XJ6ITT Final Score 1994 CQ WPX SSB Multi-Single
Band QSOs QSO Pts Pts/Q PXs
160 1 0 0 0
80 191 672 3.5 33
40 611 2616 4.3 148
20 1007 2220 2.2 382
15 897 1788 2.0 143
10 15 44 2.9 9
Totals 2722 7340 2.7 715
Score 5,248,100
Operators: VE6LB, VE6AQ, VE6BIC
>From blunt@arrl.org (Billy Lunt KR1R) Thu Apr 14 20:10:43 1994
From: blunt@arrl.org (Billy Lunt KR1R) (Billy Lunt KR1R)
Subject: June VHF QSO Party Dates
Message-ID: <10413@bl>
Dave Patton asked:
>Hi Billy
>
>Will you post the correct dates for this year's June VHF test to the
>reflector again? There is some confusion, no there is lots of
>confusion, and the dates were not in the April QST.
>
>thanks
>
>Dave Patton
>
>
The dates for the 1994 ARRL June VHF QSO Party are the weekend of
JUNE 4-6, 1994
The dates listed in January 1994 QST are correct. The complete
rules for the contest will be in May 1994 QST.
73,
Billy
+------------------------------+-------------------------------+
| Billy Lunt, KR1R | Voice: 203-666-1541 |
| Contest Manager | FAX: 203-665-7531 |
| American Radio Relay League | ARRL BBS: 203-666-0578 |
| 225 Main Street | BBS Uploads: 203-665-0090 |
| Newington, CT 06111 | Internet: blunt@arrl.org |
+------------------------------+-------------------------------+
| Send ARRL Contest Entries via: contest@arrl.org |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
>From Carmel Bailey <cbailey@calvin.stemnet.nf.ca> Thu Apr 14 20:16:17 1994
From: Carmel Bailey <cbailey@calvin.stemnet.nf.ca> (Carmel Bailey)
Subject: unsubscribe
Message-ID: <Pine.3.05.9404141617.A26143-4100000@calvin.stemnet.nf.ca>
unsubscribe
>From ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.AirTouch.COM (ken silverman) Thu Apr 14
>21:40:28 1994
From: ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.AirTouch.COM (ken silverman) (ken silverman)
Subject: Internet Shuttle Keplarians
Message-ID: <9403147663.AA766352428@atlas.ccmail.airtouch.com>
You're back! Was wondering when you would appear again. So
how was your visit with Mike? He said that you liked the
situation at PJ8H. Can you tell me more? Plans are to
leave for Amsterdam Saturday, but had a bad trip to work
yesterday. Got slammed in the rear, and have stiff neck.
Was at hospital, and x-rays are fine. Still want to get a
clean bill of health twr from my own doctor before I leave.
Will not make it to Visalia, but trying real hard to go to
Dayton (a FB exchange as far as I am concerned!)
Got Mike real psyched up about us going to PJ8H. He
really likes the idea. The kind of field day work we do
is exactly what it takes - he doesnt think a permenant
tower at PJ8H will go well with the neighboring hams...
guess keeping up with the Jones's is tough on this
island. Was also talking to him about HF packet. There is
a high probability to have a "remote" station at one of the
neighboring Hams QTH. Have you given any thought to linking
a remote station via VHF packet? From the packet illerate
side, it doesnt appear that you can get full CT
interactiveness, but maybe send one way spots into the
network. Still don't know if the trouble to do so will be
worth it.
Called Force 12, and will run about 700-800 bucks for a set
of 3 fly-away monobanders. Essentially these are production
monobanders, with resized tubing in 4' lengths. If I make
it to Dayton, will talk t him more abut these. He was
trying to sell me one of his new tribanders that has 3
feedlines. He claims that you can transmit a KW into each
feedline and have no interference (assuming you have a
bandpass filter in line). He has done a lot of M/S
operation, so I pressed him on why I would want one antenna
when I had 3 stations going? My point was that if you are
running EU on one band, but want to work a mult in the
Pacific, you're hosed. His main response was that in a
Field day style operation, less masts are better. Point
well taken, but I responed that to win, I feel you need
individual antennas for maximum flexibility. So the
discussion continues.
Well, gotta run. Gonna try and make it to a meeting.
Cheers, Ken
>From Peter Hardie <hardie@herald.usask.ca> Thu Apr 14 23:38:44 1994
From: Peter Hardie <hardie@herald.usask.ca> (Peter Hardie)
Subject: Internet Shuttle Keplarians
Message-ID: <Pine.3.88.9404141620.A1584-0100000@herald.usask.ca>
Hi Fred: Send a subscribe message to elements-request@alsys.com and then
new element sets will be mailed to you as they are produced.
FYI: Here's the most recent one I've received, in 2-line and Keplerian form.
STS-59
1 23042U 94020A 94103.46920386 +.00019237 11073-4 10308-4 0 176
2 23042 56.9910 244.5721 0009190 287.2891 72.7194 16.21326949 669
Satellite: STS-59
Catalog number: 23042
Epoch time: 94103.46920386 (13 APR 94 11:15:39.21 UTC)
Element set: GSFC-017
Inclination: 56.9910 deg
RA of node: 244.5721 deg Space Shuttle Flight STS-59
Eccentricity: 0.0009190 Keplerian Elements
Arg of perigee: 287.2891 deg
Mean anomaly: 72.7194 deg
Mean motion: 16.21326949 rev/day Semi-major Axis: 6594.0838 Km
Decay rate: 0.19E-03 rev/day*2 Apogee Alt: 221.76 Km
Epoch rev: 66 Perigee Alt: 209.64 Km
73 de Pete
ve5va.qrp@usask.ca
>From Mr. Brett Graham" <bagraham@HK.Super.NET Fri Apr 15 00:24:08 1994
From: Mr. Brett Graham" <bagraham@HK.Super.NET (Mr. Brett Graham)
Subject: The Great Radio Computer Control Debate
Message-ID: <199404142324.AA05947@hk.super.net>
I couldn't help but chip in my thoughts, after reading comments by VE5VA,
AA6KX, W5XD, etc.
ICOM's bussed system is very good - especially when you consider how scarce a
commodity COM ports are - even more so when COM ports that you can _use_ are a
pain, judging from previous comments here. I wrote some simple ICOM control
software yonks ago when I was running an HF packet BBS - I believe it is still
in use by BBSs in the region who auto-QSY for forwarding. The problem is that
ICOM has only a limited number of functions that are controllable. ICOM also
scores a point for sticking to this system & even making interfaces for older
equipment to support it (like the 751).
Ten-Tec uses the ICOM method, plus some extra commands of their own. That's
nice, but the OMNI VI was a dog & while I can't fault Ten-Tec's customer
support, I wasn't impressed at their preference to refund my money rather than
deal with the problems I found in the radio. The RS-232 port (rather than TTL
level) was nice, but Ten-Tec's short cuts on by-passing meant that this
spiquet, like everything else on the rig was just another antenna for RF
ingress. Enough of that...
Yaesu seems to think that since it's computer control, it's okay that it takes
a while for some things to be done - such as the case with the 990/1000. Not
impressive. Also, the command set is limited, like ICOMs. But this doesn't
matter if you can't talk to it. Software will always work, though as the
saying goes - software isn't bug free until you stop using it. But software
that works on some hardware & not on others isn't right... hardware works or
it doesn't & isn't supposed to be wishy-washy.
While I don't have a Kenwood myself, it looks like I will soon. Kenwood's
comprehensive command set - including things like PBT & the like - is what
computer control should be all about. Too bad it's 4800 baud & not bussed
like ICOM.
73, VS6BrettGraham aka VR2BG
>From Mr. Brett Graham" <bagraham@HK.Super.NET Fri Apr 15 00:24:22 1994
From: Mr. Brett Graham" <bagraham@HK.Super.NET (Mr. Brett Graham)
Subject: JA DX CW
Message-ID: <199404142324.AA05951@hk.super.net>
Tack, I was on for the recent JA DX CW. I missed the low bands section as I
had just moved house before the weekend & didn't have any antennas up.
While conditions really stunk this time, the JA DX CW seems to suffer from a
serious lack of activity. The whole weekend reminds me of Sundays back "home"
in the CW SS. Lotsa CQing & few nibbles. But above 050 there were plenty of
JAs calling CQ TEST, but for some domestic contest & couldn't be bothered to
work anybody in the JA DX.
I've worked just about every JA DX contest, both modes, since the beginning.
I enjoy the contest because it's the only one where VS6 has an advantage over
everybody else, the rates (at least on SSB) keep me awake & I think it's high
time that there's a contest where JAs are important, instead of being a
commodity... but it's getting a bit difficult to get excited about getting on
for CW anymore do to the activity. Something needs to be done to get more JAs
on!
I have been too busy to go through my log, but will post my score rumor here
in a few days. Wonder if anyone knows how RA0FW or anyone else on all bands
did? I'm afraid that he or somebody else did better!
73, VS6BrettGraham aka VR2BG
>From ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.AirTouch.COM (ken silverman) Fri Apr 15
>02:16:25 1994
From: ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.AirTouch.COM (ken silverman) (ken silverman)
Subject: Ooops
Message-ID: <9403147663.AA766368985@atlas.ccmail.airtouch.com>
Sorry that you all had to read a personal message that I
forgot to delete the cq-contest address from.
Best Regards, Ken WM2C
>From patd@isumataq.eskimo.com (Patrick Dayshaw) Fri Apr 15 03:11:11 1994
From: patd@isumataq.eskimo.com (Patrick Dayshaw) (Patrick Dayshaw)
Subject: Results Single Op? Assisted
Message-ID: <199404150211.AA27634@isumataq.eskimo.com>
This reflector is just great! After I posted the outrageous
suggestion that Packet assisted operating should be considered part of
Multi Op there were nearly a dozen well reasoned responses that
showed up in my mail.
Several just acknowledged that they too didn't use Packet and
gave their reasons and stated why. The balance really touched
on the point that I hoped the discussion would return to, that
being "The definiton of "Single Op".
I think Barry, W2UP captured the essence of all those who responded
in that category when he wrote:
>... Is single-op really single-op? I know the rules address
>only certain aspects of it, but how do you differentiate
>someone cooking your meals and bringing you drinks from the guy
>who does it himself? How about the guest op who has his
>"sponsor" running in and out of the shack all weekend attending
>to minor station problems that might arise, rather than the true
>single op who has to get off the air and fix whatever is wrong?
Yes I agree that is the issue... Defining Single-Op. Seems to me
that anything that is directly associated with the radio and its
operation should be covered by the defintion. Food, while it
may be required for long-term survival isn't essential to the radio
directly. Some how though spotting stations to work as muli's
seems like a pretty direct connection to me. Maybe we will see
a shift as in some of the European contests. Guess it requires
as many inputs from the contest community as possible.
One especially empassioned reply deserves a more detailed response.
J.P., AA2DU provided rationale for it not being considered Multi Op as
follows:
>I sit in the shack for 42 to 45 hrs of the 48. I have no other ops
>spell me for a 30 minute nap...if I sleep, I fall farther behind.
>I switch antennas, tune up amplifiers, tune radios (2 at a time)
>and make my own decisions about which bands to be on. If I go
>to the bathroom for 10 minutes, I just lost 20 QSO's. If I spend too
>in a multiplier pile-up I lost more ground.
Well J.P. you dohave me beat... I usually only spend 36 to 40 hours out
of the 48. Not because of determination but that what we get for a
usable propagation window here in the Northwest. I run low power so
don't have to hassle with the amp's which I know can be a bear and I
only have one rotator and two wire ant's with their associated tuners to
deal with. When I take a 10 minute pit stop I only lose 2 or 3 Q's. I
even have that same problem with the Multi pile-ups. I'd bet it takes
me a lot longer to get through than you.
>No one else can win or lose this contest for me. The packet station
>can sometimes be a distraction but more often than not, it is a way
>to comminicate with others and to collect more information to help
>in the formation of my strategy.
>Where are the other ops?? Are they working those mults for me??
>Are they calling CQ on the other bands that are open?? Are
>they perhaps holding the run frequency so I can take a quick shower
>and have a bite to eat??
Just like you no one can win or lose a contest for me. But it seems
that given how much of a competitor you are you wouldn't use it if you
didn't think that it gave you an advantage in the long run.
If you use Packet the other Ops aren't in the shack but they are
spotting Mult's and band opening sfor you no the less. I can't comment
on the run freq much since for me just establishing one for 10 minutes
is a big deal so loosing it after 10 isn't much of a shock.
>I'm afraid you are really deluded if you want to call me a Mulit-Op!!
>Nothing can be farther from the truth! I am proud to be a top-5
>finisher in Single/Assisted and won't have some bozo like you tell me
>that what I do is a multiple operator effort when you obviously
>know nothing about it!
Well you can and should be justifiably proud of your efforts J.P. I
have noticed your call showing up at the top of the listings many times.
I can't help but wonder though if you are equating lack of hardware with
lack of dedication. Here I happen to be located in a narrow valley with
several of this areas top contest stations within a couple of miles of
me and on the hills above me. Several have been surprised that I work
so hard at contesting given my situation. Well J.P. I do it because I
JUST LOVE IT!!! I may not know what its like to win, but I do know
what its like to compete. Lots of us little guys put in the same level
of effort on a personal level as you do but due to other factors won't
ever make it into the winners circle. I usually finish between 5th and
8th in my section with an occasioanl anomaly like the 93 ARRL 160 Low
Power where I managed a 2nd.
I can't help but wonder if another difference between you and I is that
I'm still having fun... just doing it for the fun.
73 Good Contesting. Ill look for you in the pile-up's. You will be
able to recognize me by my ear-to-ear smile.
Patrick WA7VNI patd@eskimo.com
>From XMSJ29A@prodigy.com (MR JAMES A WHITE) Fri Apr 15 03:01:57 1994
From: XMSJ29A@prodigy.com (MR JAMES A WHITE) (MR JAMES A WHITE)
Subject: New E-Mail Address !
Message-ID: <013.00595930.XMSJ29A@prodigy.com>
QSY QSY QSY
New E-Mail Address For K1ZX...I will try AOL for the month of free air
time-it has to beat the $.10 a msg that Prodigy charges! Dunno if will
stick w/AOL or not...thanks tip KA9FOX.
New Address:
K1ZX@AOL.COM
>From ki4hn@Cybernetics.NET (Jim Stevens) Fri Apr 15 04:32:44 1994
From: ki4hn@Cybernetics.NET (Jim Stevens) (Jim Stevens)
Subject: Prefix for WPX?
Message-ID: <9404150332.AA29066@Cybernetics.NET>
In WPX are VP2EC and VP2VF two different prefixes (multipliers)? I think
not, but if I look at the DXCC list Anguilla's prefix is listed as VP2E
and the British Virgin Islands' prefix is listed at VP2V. I guess this
same question would apply to Montserrat (VP2M) and other non-VP2 calls.
TIA es 73, Jim, KI4HN
ki4hn@cybernetics.net
>From barry@w2up.wells.com (Barry Kutner) Fri Apr 15 01:59:54 1994
From: barry@w2up.wells.com (Barry Kutner) (Barry Kutner)
Subject: Summary - TIC cable
Message-ID: <J7qskc1w165w@w2up.wells.com>
Tnx for the many replies on cabling the TIC ring rotor. The majority
of replies used some form of Romex (or equiv) such as 2 runs of 14-2, or
one run 12-2 and another of 14-2, for a total of six available wires.
A few others used a control cable with 2-14 and 6-18 in it, available
from the Wireman and other sources.
Just for the hell of it, I called Todd at TIC today and asked what he
recommended - he said the info on the spec sheet is inaccurate, and up to
400 feet 5 - 18 gauge wires are sufficient when running one motor, and if
using two motors, then should have 2 - 16 gauge wires and 3 - 18s.
Again, thanks for the replies. 73 Barry
Barry N. Kutner, W2UP Usenet/Internet: barry@w2up.wells.com
Newtown, PA Packet Radio: W2UP @ WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA.NA
Packet Cluster: W2UP >K2TW (FRC)
.......................................................................
|