Terry 00tlzivney@bsuvc.bsu.edu wrote:
>I have been thinking about constructing a BIP-BOP switch using DPDT
>relays. I notice that in the diagrams published in the mags using
>commercial switch boxes, an extra half-wavelength of coax is switched
>into one of the antenna feeds to provide the out-of-phase signal. I
>do NOT see any where the second antenna's phase is switched by merely
>reversing the center conductor and the shield of one of the antennas
>using another DPTD relay. This appears to be easier and cheaper than
>yet antother piece of coax with all the extra connectors. What am
>I missing???
>I would seem the same idea would be usable for a pair of phased verticals,
>that is, reversing the center and shield on one of the antennas. Again,
>I don't see this mentioned anywhere in print.
I tried this approach on a pair of phased 160 meter inverted L's. I also have
used coax and L/C networks. The reversing of the coax braid approach produced
the poorest results of the three, the best front to side results were with the
L/C
networks. I suspect that there are a number of reasons for all this but rather
than speculate and not having the equipment to do proper maesurements I
could only speculate. I suspect ground loop currents have a lot to do with it
though.
Dave
N0DH/7
n0dh@comtch.iea.com
"If the opposite of "PRO" is "CON"
then doesn't it stand to reason that
the opposite of "PROGRESS" is "CONGRESS"??
>From Assarabowski, Richard" <AssaraR@utrc.utc.com Wed Jul 19 22:00:00 1995
From: Assarabowski, Richard" <AssaraR@utrc.utc.com (Assarabowski, Richard)
Subject: K1CC SquINT results
Message-ID: <300D72AF@msgate.res.utc.com>
Adam did his second SquINT last Sunday, worked 48 stations. He enjoyed
working many of the same stations he did before and recognized most of the
calls. Conditions were pretty horrible, lots of atmospheric noise. Worked
one kid near the beginning, then the OM got hold of the mike (after Adam's
attempt at a short ragchew) and didn't stop talking for about 10 minutes!
Had a strange experience with someone deliberately QRM'ing with
profanities. We got off that frequency fast.
It was a lot of fun, let's get more kids into this!
Oh, and Lindsey at AA5BT -- Adam thinks you look cute in your picture in
NCJ. Talk to you sometime soon again??
-- Rich K1CC
assarar@utrc.utc.com
Adam Jr. op
AdamAce@aol.com
>From aa0ob@skypoint.com (greg fields) Thu Jul 20 00:49:00 1995
From: aa0ob@skypoint.com (greg fields) (greg fields)
Subject: Yaesu 1000D?
Message-ID: <m0sYird-0001daC@skypoint.com>
Hi all,
In the past there have been threads on the reflector on which rig
makes a better contest rig. Since I got back into the hobby
three years ago I have always held the Yaesu 1000D up as my
dream rig. I currently own the FT990 and like it very much.
I find myself in what could be a disappearing window of
opprotunity. (We are trying to have a child and if that happens,
no new rig period!) I (hopefully!) can convince my wife of the
need for a new rig. So here is the question to the contest
community. Is the 1000D all it is cracked up to be? Should
I wait and see what the contest crowd thinks of the new
Icom 775? And will I even notice a diffence between a 990
and a 1000D? (The 990 has a triple-conversion superhet and the
1000 has a quad-conversion superhet.) I especially like the
idea of having the second VFO that I could listen for a break
in a pileup of a rare mult while I continue working others.
I don't think I am up to two radio contesting but, do like
being able to hear both VFO's for contesting and DXing.
Of course, maybe I don't have time to wait for the 775. So,
how about the other big rigs that are out there? Please send
all answers direct to me and if there are enough responses I
will summarize for the reflector.
73
Greg AA0OB (Double incomes, no kids, yet!)
aa0ob@skypoint.com
>From De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> Thu Jul 20 04:12:03 1995
From: De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> (De Syam)
Subject: "Is the frequency in use?" or "QRL?"
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950719230216.14406B-100000@cappuccino.eng.umd.edu>
On Mon, 10 Jul 1995, Tyler Stewart, KF3P, wrote:
> "Did you ever notice that most hams never ask if the frequency is in
use before they start using it?...
> "Remember these phrases: 'Is the frequency in use?' on phone and 'QRL?'
on CW. Use them religiously and, as an 'Elmer', remember to teach them."
Re: "QRL?"
Chalk me up as being against the use of "QRL?" or "Is the frequency
in use?" in contests.
When I started contesting 43 years ago, the procedure was unknown,
and I can't see that anything in the intervening years has made it
any more useful now than it would have been then.
Here are my reasons:
1. IT'S ILLEGAL IN THE USA
Unless the station sending "QRL?" also signs his call immediately,
he has made an illegal transmission. FCC Part 97.119 (a) clearly
says: "Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand
station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting
channel at the end of each communication, and at least every ten
minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making
the source of the transmissions from the station known to those
receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified
communications or signals..."
2. IT PUTS A STATION WHO IS ALREADY USING THE FREQUENCY IN A
DILEMMA:
Take the following example as an illustration of this:
W5XYZ has been running Europeans on the frequency and has just sent
an exchange to PA3ABC, who is in the process of giving his exchange
when W5XYZ hears a loud "QRL?" on the frequency.
If W5XYZ replies with "R" or "YES" he misses part of PA3ABC's
exchange and will need to ask for a repeat.
If W5XYZ says nothing in order to continue copying PA3ABC's
exchange, he has, according to one point of view, implicitly
assented to the station asking "QRL?" taking over "his" frequency.
According to this theory, if a station has not specifically replied
to the "QRL?" indicating that the frequency is in use, the newcomer
has a clear "right" to take it over, and is clearly resentful when
W5XYZ, who was there all the while, attempts to continue to use it.
3. THE PROCEDURE IS USED AS A CRUTCH BY OPERATORS WHO ARE NOT
SKILLED IN OPERATING IN "HEAVY TRAFFIC."
Contests, especially the popular ones like CQWW and CQWPX, and, for
American hams, the ARRL DX and ARRL SS, are noted for the way they
fill up the bands, or at least those portions of the bands
generally used in contests. In my humble opinion, anyone who
considers himself a good contest operator should be willing to put
up with a fair amount of QRM without complaint. Yet I have noticed
that, particularly on SSB, stations more than one KHz. away will
move to zero-beat with me to tell me that the "frequency is in
use". My reply, well-practiced by now, is "If you had to move the
dial to tell me, then it wasn't in use."
My good friend Jim Talens, N3JT, has argued this point with me,
saying that it's not fair that I, with high power, land near some
QRP'ers frequency and proceed to take it over; that I will
obviously bother him a lot more than he will bother me. This is a
dilemma that is insoluble, in my opinion. If indeed I had asked
"QRL?" at first, I might not have heard the QRP'ers reply anyway.
I feel that for years I did my penance in contests with 100 watts
and a trap dipole without complaint, and I don't think I should
have to apologize for using the maximum power permitted now. I
paid my dues. I still follow the adage of my late, irreplaceable
and sorely missed mentor, Len Chertok, W3GRF, who always said:
"It's a copying contest as well as a sending contest."
And how do I find a clear frequency? I tune carefully, and when I
think I have found one I listen for several seconds before starting
to use it. If what I hear after I stand by the first time clearly
indicates that someone else had been using it all along, I move.
What happens if I am using a frequency and someone says "QRL?" on
it? If I am copying someone else's exchange at the time, I don't
answer, preferring to copy the exchange rather than feeling forced
to answer. If I am trying to copy a caller I may or may not answer
"R", depending on how loud the caller is. If I happen to be doing
nothing at the moment, I reply "R" or "Yes". For example, if I had
just finished CQ'ing and could hear no replies.
Am I happy that someone asks "QRL?" before starting up? No, I
would rather they just start up by calling "CQ TEST". That way I
am not faced with the dilemma I described above. My attitude about
this is "May the better man win." Contesting is, to a certain
extent, war. I have a well-honed bag of tricks for making it
excruciatingly difficult for someone who has landed on the same
frequency I am using to stay there. (Note: I didn't say "my
frequency". I will not say "QRL" to him; I will not ask him to
move. If my rate meter stays too far down for too long, I will
move without bitterness or resentment.)
I remember particularly admiring WB2K on 75 meters in one Phone SS.
I moved in near him and he was loud, very loud, and I suppose I was
the same to him. But he sat there for a couple of hours and
continued to operate and knock them off without complaint, and in
the end it was finally I who moved. And I went away thinking: "Now
THERE is a real contester."
Very 73,
Fred Laun, K3ZO
>From James Brooks <0005851359@mcimail.com> Thu Jul 20 12:16:00 1995
From: James Brooks <0005851359@mcimail.com> (James Brooks)
Subject: AP Sprint scores II
Message-ID: <22950720111622/0005851359NA4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
AP Sprint Claimed (Emailed) scores/logs posted:
Asia
-------------------------
VS6BG 62 x 45 2790
JH4NMT 49 x 31 1519
JE1JKL 48 x 34 1488
9V1YC 41 x 26 1066
JL1ZAZ 40 x 24 960
JH0KHR 38 x 21 798
JE1CKA 34 x 19 646
JF1SQC 25 x 21 525
JL1CLE/1 27 x 19 513
NA
-------------------------
N6ZZ 18 x 14 252
K6XO 16 x 11 176 (no log yet)
N4TQO 17 x 7 119
N2AA 12 x 9 108
KE9A 10 x 10 100
AA5UO 5 x 5 25
K5ZD 11 x 9 99 (checklog)
EU
-------------------------
CT1BOH 2 x 2 4
Any more logs PLEASE submit ASAP. Even if you only made a few Q's.
73's
James 9V1YC
--------------------------
All E-mail: 9V1YC@mcimail.com
Post (non JA): James Brooks
15 Balmoral Road, #03-08
Singapore 1025, SINGAPORE
Post (JA only): Tack Kumagai, P O BOX 22,
Mitaka, Tokyo 181, JAPAN
>From TINE S50A <Tine.Brajnik@guest.arnes.si> Thu Jul 20 15:09:00 1995
From: TINE S50A <Tine.Brajnik@guest.arnes.si> (TINE S50A)
Subject: EU HF CHAMPIONSHIP
Message-ID: <01HT3GIP38XE0003SY@arnes.si>
Hi contestors from Europe,
herewith please find rules for EU HF CHAMPIONSHIP which is held this year
on August 5th from 10 to 22 UTC. Sorry but this year SWL are not included
yet. Contest directorate will include SWL from next year on.
CU in EUHFC 95
73 Tine S50A
>From TINE S50A <Tine.Brajnik@guest.arnes.si> Thu Jul 20 15:29:26 1995
From: TINE S50A <Tine.Brajnik@guest.arnes.si> (TINE S50A)
Subject: RULES EUHFC
Message-ID: <01HT3HCSEBXU0003MV@arnes.si>
>From TINE S50A <Tine.Brajnik@guest.arnes.si> Thu Jul 20 15:33:17 1995
From: TINE S50A <Tine.Brajnik@guest.arnes.si> (TINE S50A)
Subject: rules euhfc
Message-ID: <01HT3HI807UA0003MV@arnes.si>
E U R O P E A N H F C H A M P I O N S H I P
EVERY YEAR FIRST SATURDAY IN AUGUST 10.00 - 22.00 UTC CW/SSB
1. OBJECTIVE: For European amateurs to contact other European amateurs
- to determine European HF champion. Only EU to EU contacts count.
Calling - CQ EU on CW and CQ EUROPE on SSB.
2. BANDS: All bands 1,8 through 28 MHz except for WARC bands. Avoid using
DX portions of the bands.
3. TYPE OF COMPETITION
Only single operator - all band category in three classes: CW only, SSB
only and CW/SSB. Only one signal allowed at any one time; the operator
can change bands or modes at any one time, CW contacts on the SSB
portion of the bands or vice versa are not allowed.The same station may
be worked on CW and on SSB on the same band. Cross band/mode contacts
are not permitted.
4. EXCHANGE: RST report (CW) or RS report (SSB) plus two digit number
designating to the last two digits of the year of operator's first license
(i.e. 57982 or 5982 means that operator obtain his first amateur radio
licence in the year 1982).
5. MULTIPLIER: A multiplier of one (1) for each different last two digit
numbers of received reports per band regardless of mode.
6. POINTS: Only contacts between European stations count for points and
multipliers. Contacts on SSB count one (1) point, contacts on CW count
two (2) points.
7. SCORING: The final score is the total sum of the QSO points from all bands
multiplied by the sum of multipliers from all bands.
8. AWARDS: CW/SSB winner will be awarded with a cup and will be announced as
EUROPEAN HF CHAMPION for that year. Respectively, only CW and SSB winner
will become the CW and SSB HF EUROPEAN CHAMPION. Second and third places
will be awarded with plaques. Additionaly, first place certificates will be
awarded for winners in every participating country. Other special awards may
be given by the championship committee's decision. Persons or organizations
interested in sponsoring a trophy are encouraged to contact the address below.
To promote low power operations, stations with power output of 100W or less
will be marked regardless of the place or category.
9.NATIONAL COMPETITION: Separate list of national scores will be published.
Scores of all logs from one country will be summed for national list
regardless of clubs.
10. LOG INSTRUCTIONS:
a) all times must be in UTC
b) all sent and received exchanges are to be logged
c) indicate multiplier only first time it is worked on each band regardless
of the mode
d) logs must be checked for duplicate contacts, correct QSO points and
multipliers. Submitted logs must have duplicate contacts clearly shown.
e) entrants are encouradged to send logs on disks. IBM MS-DOS compatible
disks are recommended. Logs should be submitted in ASCII.
f) use a separate sheet or file for each band
g) each entry must be accompanied by a summary sheet (on a paper) showing
all scoring information,station description, contestant's name and address
in BLOCK letters and signed declaration that all contest rules and
regulations for amateur radio in the coutry of operation have been observed.
h) all entrants are required to submit cross-check sheets (an alphabetical
list of calls worked) for each band.
i) unmarked duplicate contacts and broken calls penalty: up to 3%, three
(3) additional contacts removed; over 3% is grounds for possible
disqualification. Disqualification will occur with other violations of
the rules.
11. DEADLINE: All entries must be postmarked NO LATER than August 31st of
that year. Indicate EU HF CHAMPIONSHIP on envelope. Logs should be sent to:
SLOVENIA CONTEST CLUB, SAVELJSKA 50, 61113 LJUBLJANA, SLOVENIA
Slovenia contest club
>From barry@w2up.wells.com (Barry Kutner) Thu Jul 20 12:32:12 1995
From: barry@w2up.wells.com (Barry Kutner) (Barry Kutner)
Subject: "Is the frequency in use?" or "QRL?"
Message-ID: <Ds0i9c1w165w@w2up.wells.com>
De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> writes:
> Chalk me up as being against the use of "QRL?" or "Is the frequency
> in use?" in contests.
>
> Here are my reasons:
>
> 1. IT'S ILLEGAL IN THE USA
>
> Unless the station sending "QRL?" also signs his call immediately,
> he has made an illegal transmission. FCC Part 97.119 (a) clearly
>
Gimme a break! I suppose you've never exceeded the speed limit either...
And if you wanna play by the rules, you shouldn't be running a KW, as
it's not the minimum power needed to sustain communications.
> 2. IT PUTS A STATION WHO IS ALREADY USING THE FREQUENCY IN A
> DILEMMA:
>
> Take the following example as an illustration of this:
>
> W5XYZ has been running Europeans on the frequency and has just sent
> an exchange to PA3ABC, who is in the process of giving his exchange
> when W5XYZ hears a loud "QRL?" on the frequency.
>
> If W5XYZ replies with "R" or "YES" he misses part of PA3ABC's
> exchange and will need to ask for a repeat.
Not necessarily. If operating one of the "exchangeless" contests, like
CQWW, you know what the exchange is before you get it. In ARRL, if you've
worked the guy on another band, CT fills in the exchange for you, so no
need to copy it.
> 3. THE PROCEDURE IS USED AS A CRUTCH BY OPERATORS WHO ARE NOT
> SKILLED IN OPERATING IN "HEAVY TRAFFIC."
>
> I remember particularly admiring WB2K on 75 meters in one Phone SS.
> I moved in near him and he was loud, very loud, and I suppose I was
> the same to him. But he sat there for a couple of hours and
> continued to operate and knock them off without complaint, and in
> the end it was finally I who moved. And I went away thinking: "Now
> THERE is a real contester."
>
> Very 73,
>
> Fred Laun, K3ZO
>
You may be correct about SS Fred, but that's a different ballgame than a
DX contest. Suppose you are on 3510 CQing in CQWW. You've already worked
the first two tiers of Europeans, and now you are trying to copy those
millions of 10-100W stations that barely exceed the noise level. You
aren't gonna be a happy camper with WB2K adjacent to you now, are you?
Bottom line, even though it is "war" of sorts, there's no reason to throw
common courtesy out the window.
73 Barry
P.S. You have my permission not to QRL? on 14230 :.)
--
Barry N. Kutner, W2UP Internet: barry@w2up.wells.com
Newtown, PA Packet Radio: W2UP @ WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA.NA
Packet Cluster: W2UP >WB2R (FRC)
.......................................................................
>From Bill Feidt <wfeidt@cpcug.org> Thu Jul 20 14:32:10 1995
From: Bill Feidt <wfeidt@cpcug.org> (Bill Feidt)
Subject: European HF Championship Rules
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950720093027.21416A@cpcug.org>
For those with Web access, the rules are available at the following URL:
http://cpcug.org:80/user/wfeidt/Contest/euhfcham.html
--
William B. Feidt (Bill) NG3K
wfeidt@cpcug.org
>From Larry Tyree <tree@cmicro.com> Thu Jul 20 15:15:24 1995
From: Larry Tyree <tree@cmicro.com> (Larry Tyree)
Subject: Knowing the exchange
Message-ID: <199507201415.HAA28227@cascade.cmicro.com>
While someone was flaming K3ZO, they mentioned:
> Not necessarily. If operating one of the "exchangeless" contests, like
> CQWW, you know what the exchange is before you get it. In ARRL, if you've
> worked the guy on another band, CT fills in the exchange for you, so no
> need to copy it.
Please continue to think this. The errors that this creates are VERY
easy to find with the log checking software and I really enjoy seeing
people's score get reduced because they think they can turn off their
brain when it comes time to receive the exchange.
If you have had a sheltered life and have only operated the contest from
the USA, you mostly are correct (with the exception of the UA9s and UA0s
who sometimes are sure what zone they are in). However, if you ever
go outside the USA, you will find that people in West Virgina, half of
W4 and parts of W7 are in different zones than you might think. That
doesn't even include people like N6AR who have moved.
Tree N6TR
PS: Other programs also fill in the exchange other than CT.
>From Chad Kurszewski" <kurscj@OAMPC12.csg.mot.com Thu Jul 20 15:14:29 1995
From: Chad Kurszewski" <kurscj@OAMPC12.csg.mot.com (Chad Kurszewski)
Subject: "Is the frequency in use?" or "QRL?"
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950719230216.14406B-100000@cappuccino.eng.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <9507200914.ZM11055@WE9V>
Well....since I didn't see any smiley faces and the date isn't April 1st,
I have to assume that Fred isn't making a joke here.
On Jul 19, 11:12pm, De Syam wrote:
>
> Chalk me up as being against the use of "QRL?" or "Is the frequency
> in use?" in contests.
>
> Here are my reasons:
>
> 1. IT'S ILLEGAL IN THE USA
If you go by the letter of the law Fred, and read very closely your
quote from the FCC Part 97, asking QRL? is not against the ID rule.
If you read close enough, you can see that I only have to ID AFTER
10 minutes from my first transmission, and at the end of the transmission.
I do NOT have to ID immediately.
(I also like Barry's comment about using the lowest power necessary.)
> 2. IT PUTS A STATION WHO IS ALREADY USING THE FREQUENCY IN A
> DILEMMA:
> If W5XYZ replies with "R" or "YES" he misses part of PA3ABC's
> exchange and will need to ask for a repeat.
Well, first of all, the timing would have to be perfect to have the
QRL?er and PA3 finish at the same time. If so, the proper and logical
reply would be "QRL PA3ABC TU DE K3ZO" or quickly on phone,
"Yes the frequency is in use...PA3ABC QSL..". I'm sure you get the
idea and it's really not that difficult or time consuming.
Now, if the QRLer is at the beginning of PA3s exchange, it's very
easy to send R and still get the exchange. Not too difficult.
And if I'd miss it, I'd much rather ask for one fill than to constantly
duke it out with someone the 'the' frequency.
> 3. THE PROCEDURE IS USED AS A CRUTCH BY OPERATORS WHO ARE NOT
> SKILLED IN OPERATING IN "HEAVY TRAFFIC."
WOW! That comment should open up a can of worms.
> If indeed I had asked "QRL?" at first, I might not have heard
> the QRP'ers reply anyway.
Come on now. You can pick out DX stations that run 1 watt to a 10'
piece of wire 3 feet above the ground, you'll probably hear the 5 watter
with the tribander.
> I feel that for years I did my penance in contests with 100 watts
> and a trap dipole without complaint, and I don't think I should
> have to apologize for using the maximum power permitted now. I
> paid my dues.
So, someday when I can afford that big amplifier and antennas, does
that give me the right to plop down on any frequency that I'm not
zero beat with??
> Am I happy that someone asks "QRL?" before starting up? No, I
> would rather they just start up by calling "CQ TEST". That way I
> am not faced with the dilemma I described above. My attitude about
> this is "May the better man win." Contesting is, to a certain
> extent, war.
> Very 73,
>
> Fred Laun, K3ZO
So, may the person with the biggest amplifier and antennas win and
throw all common courtesy out the window? I'm sorry, but that's just
downright rude, and frankly, I'm surprised.
Sincerely,
Chad WE9V chad_kurszewski@csg.mot.com
>From Ronald D. Rossi" <rrossi@VNET.IBM.COM Thu Jul 20 15:46:42 1995
From: Ronald D. Rossi" <rrossi@VNET.IBM.COM (Ronald D. Rossi)
Subject: "Is the frequency in use?" or "QRL?"
In a previous message, Fred Laun wrote:
> .
> .
> .
>Chalk me up as being against the use of "QRL?" or "Is the frequency
>in use?" in contests.
>
>When I started contesting 43 years ago, the procedure was unknown,
>and I can't see that anything in the intervening years has made it
>any more useful now than it would have been then.
>
>Here are my reasons:
>
>1. IT'S ILLEGAL IN THE USA
>
>Unless the station sending "QRL?" also signs his call immediately,
>he has made an illegal transmission. FCC Part 97.119 (a) clearly
>says: "Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand
>station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting
>channel at the end of each communication, and at least every ten
>minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making
>the source of the transmissions from the station known to those
>receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified
>communications or signals..."
I am not clear about what constitutes a channel in HF communications.
Part 97 is not clear about it either. There is reference regarding
frequency coordination where Tx/Rx channels are prescribed. In any
case each transmission need not be IDed only each communication.
I tend to QRL? and "Is frequency in use" (sometimes in a southern
drawl to draw out the good old boys that have too much fun messin'
with us Yankees!).
> .
> .
> .
>2. IT PUTS A STATION WHO IS ALREADY USING THE FREQUENCY IN A
>DILEMMA:
> .
> .
> .
I guess I miss the point here. I am on a countdown to being heavily
QRMed (maybe) if I don't respond anyway. A matter of timing for sure.
> .
> .
> .
>3. THE PROCEDURE IS USED AS A CRUTCH BY OPERATORS WHO ARE NOT
>SKILLED IN OPERATING IN "HEAVY TRAFFIC."
> .
> .
> .
Sure! One of the tools maybe. I agree with your assessment that
radiosport is competitive and you need to be good at receiving
as well as sending. Neighboring QRM is one of the challenges and
frustrations of the sport. My Omni-D and me do a good job of picking
out the weak ones off the wakes of the big guns. Makes my ears ring,
but I love it!
>
> Very 73,
>
> Fred Laun, K3ZO
>
73 de N1PBT...Ron (rrossi@vnet.ibm.com) ><>
|