California QSO Party -- 1995
Call: PY2NY Country: BRASIL
Category: Single Operator Low Power
MODE QSO QSO PTS MULTS
CW 27 81 0
SSB 26 52 0
-----------------------------------------
Totals 53 133 26 = 3,458
All reports sent were 59(9), unless otherwise noted.
Equipment Description: Kenwood TS 140 S - 100 Watts
10-15-20 2 el Quad
Comments: "No propagation on 10... No one from CA looking to South.
Maybe no believe in PY calling in CQP... Well, let's
wait next year!! 73 for all"
Club Affiliation: TuPY Dx Group
This is to certify that in this contest I have operated my transmitter
within the limitations of my license and have observed fully the rules
and regulations of the contest.
Signature _________________________________
Vitor Luis Aidar dos Santos PY2NY
P O Box 190
Campinas, SP 13001-970 BRASIL
>From Jim Hollenback" <jholly@hposl62.cup.hp.com Thu Oct 12 16:34:13 1995
From: Jim Hollenback" <jholly@hposl62.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback)
Subject: No more printed contest rules in QST?
References: <307D2C43@arrl.org>
Message-ID: <9510120834.ZM18144@hpwsmjh1.cup.hp.com>
On Oct 12, 10:56am, Lau, Zack, KH6CP wrote:
> Subject: RE: No more printed contest rules in QST?
>
> My understanding was that newcomers could read "user friendly"
> explanations of how to operate the contest. See the October 1995
> QST for an example, page 125.
>
> Of course, the BOOK will be a necessity for serious competitors
> who have invested $$$ into their competitive stations.
>
> Personally, I think this makes sense. Why subject newcomers to
> the detailed fine print? Most beginners just want enough information
> to participate without sounding like a lid. I think this will result in
> more
> participation.
>
How much you want to bet that the book of rules will not be a very
hot item in the ARRL book store? Bet most will operate the contest
from memory, or old copies of QST, or the beginers guide to the contest.
73, Jim, WA6SDM
jholly@cup.hp.com
>From Steven Affens <k3sa@access.digex.net> Thu Oct 12 16:36:20 1995
From: Steven Affens <k3sa@access.digex.net> (Steven Affens)
Subject: Web page
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951012113546.8029A-100000@access5.digex.net>
It is on the PVRC page http://www.access.digex.net/~k3sa/pvrc.html
Steven C. Affens
K3SA@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET
On Thu, 12 Oct 1995, Greg Becker wrote:
>
> Apologies in advance - what's the address of KA9FOX's Web page with all
> the contest -related info?
>
> Thanks & 73, Greg
>
> Greg Becker NA2N
> gb546@bard.edu
>
>
>From Cain, Jim, K1TN" <jcain@arrl.org Thu Oct 12 16:43:00 1995
From: Cain, Jim, K1TN" <jcain@arrl.org (Cain, Jim, K1TN)
Subject: New ARRL Section multipler starting June 1996
Message-ID: <307D374D@arrl.org>
>>According to W1WEF, NNY (Northern New York) will be a new ARRL Section
>>multiplier starting in June 1996.
Not exactly. For ARRL administrative purposes NNY is born
January 1, 1996. The first contest after that that counts ARRL
sections as multipliers will be the 1996 November Sweepstakes.
For the purpose of ARRL contest certificates and awards (when
they are awarded by ARRL Section) the start date is January 1, 1996.
Jim Cain, K1TN
ARRL Senior Editor/News Editor
>From k7fr@ncw.net (Gary Nieborsky) Thu Oct 12 16:48:03 1995
From: k7fr@ncw.net (Gary Nieborsky) (Gary Nieborsky)
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: <199510121552.IAA09912@bing.ncw.net>
California QSO Party -- 1995
Call: K7FR Country: USA, Washington State
Category: Single Operator, Low Power
MODE QSO QSO PTS MULTS
CW 72 216 16
SSB 57 114 19
-----------------------------------------
Totals 129 330 45 = 14,850
All reports sent were 59(9), unless otherwise noted.
Equipment Description:
TS-850, bunches of aluminum, couple of owls.
Sorry for the limited participation, had many home projects to complete
before Contest season really gets underway. Had a blast, will do better
next year.
>From David C. Patton" <mudcp3@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu Thu Oct 12 16:54:14 1995
From: David C. Patton" <mudcp3@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (David C. Patton)
Subject: zone8-multi-single-records-CW
Message-ID: <199510121554.KAA12785@ecom4.ecn.bgu.edu>
Here are the top 20 or so scores from Zone 8 in the Multi-Single Class!
CALL SCORE QSOs ZONES DX YEAR
J6DX 11,691,029 7180 159 532 93
NP4A 11,648,565 6881 168 515 82
VP2MW 9,041,590 5968 151 426 88
ZF2WW 8,385,030 5697 155 462 93
ZF2PR 8,177,472 5783 139 437 90
NP4A 7,982,576 6100 141 385 79
KP4BZ 7,922,868 5635 139 426 86
NP4Z 7,629,219 5217 141 450 94
HH2VP 7,208,271 5470 145 422 83
VP5Q 6,984,120 5038 143 412 89
VP5P 6,782,160 5505 129 399 91
C6AHX 5,760,495 4162 140 445 94
PJ7A 5,630,310 4766 114 372 83
HH2MC 5,426,104 4776 127 339 79
HH2CQ 5,256,944 4696 133 369 78
C6A/K1XA 5,062,020 4430 122 356 91
KP4BZ 4,992,390 4612 117 325 85
VP2SX 4,859,777 4931 107 296 79
VP5W 4,841,910 5011 112 283 87
VP5P 4,814,810 4524 123 332 90
That NP4A score from 1982 was obviously a great one that stood for 11
years!
73, Dave Patton, WX3N
mudcp3@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu
>From David C. Patton" <mudcp3@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu Thu Oct 12 17:04:49 1995
From: David C. Patton" <mudcp3@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (David C. Patton)
Subject: CQWWCW/ZONE8-M/M
Message-ID: <199510121604.LAA19600@ecom3.ecn.bgu.edu>
Here are the CQWW CW records (Last 20 contests) for Zone 8
MULTI-MULTI!
KP2A 32,325,150 15198 191 631 88
J6DX 26,968,675 13829 171 614 91
KP2A 25,019,982 12387 188 595 87
VP5VW 21,823,275 11740 169 586 94
J6DX 19,320,544 11465 166 515 90
NP4A 17,627,820 10846 171 487 80
KP2N 17,480,855 10152 162 515 86
J6DX 15,623,712 9742 162 480 89
J6DX 14,710,800 10299 141 457 86
J6DX 13,375,437 9833 149 428 87
6Y5YL 11,603,808 9334 141 375 80
VP2MU 10,725,081 7646 134 435 86
J77J 8,599,387 6496 123 424 94
VP2EZA 8,280,048 6479 121 411 94
V2A 7,463,449 6209 134 363 85
KP4EAJ 7,177,275 7017 129 312 77
J6DX has sure gone into lots of logs!
73, Dave Patton, WX3N
mudcp3@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu
>From Skelton, Tom" <TSkelton@engineer.ClemsonSC.ATTGIS.COM Thu Oct 12
>19:49:00 1995
From: Skelton, Tom" <TSkelton@engineer.ClemsonSC.ATTGIS.COM (Skelton, Tom)
Subject: FW: No more printed contest rules in QST?
Message-ID: <307D688E@admin.ClemsonSC.ATTGIS.COM>
<del>
Also according to W1WEF, QST will no longer print contest rules in QST.
Instead, you must buy a BOOK (I assume from ARRL) that contains the rules
for
all ARRL-sponsored contests.
<del>
73 - Jim AD1C
reisert@eng.pko.dec.com
----------------------------
I guess this is an offshoot of having DXCC member stats printed in the
yearly
DXCC book. If the ARRL wants to get out of the contest biz, this is a great
way to do it. How many times did you, as a contest newbie, have to get out
your
QST and re-read the rules for the Puxhatawnie QSO party to make sure you
knew the times and dates? Or make sure you have your cheat sheet written
with the correct exchange for SS?
Ladies and Gentlemen, the pen is mightier than the keyboard. Please write
your directors and K1ZZ if you find this as unsettling as I do. (NB: count
the number of pages in Contest Corral and see what a very small percentage
of pages they occupy in a typical monthly issues of QST.)
cheers....
73, Tom WB4iUX
Tom.Skelton@ClemsonSC.ATTGIS.COM
ps: ARRRRRGGHHHHHHHHHHHH: 15 DAYS TILL CQWW AND THE DEAD
PINES ARE STILL LAYING ON THE GROUND IN THE WAY OF THE TOWER!
Looks like a SOA effort with a KW and Butternut vertical!
(Dear God: A miracle right now would really be OK. :-)) )
>From David Robbins KY1H <robbins@guid2.dnet.lmco.com> Thu Oct 12 17:26:06 1995
From: David Robbins KY1H <robbins@guid2.dnet.lmco.com> (David Robbins KY1H)
Subject: qst contest rules
Message-ID: <199510121622.MAA19225@franklin.vf.mmc.com>
I think haveing a simplified guide to a contest instead of the typically
legalese type rules would be a help to getting more contesters. however
i would hope that the full rules would be available for an sase along with
log and summary sheets for those who want them. i would also hope that
they would be available on the www.arrl.org web pages and for download
via ftp or the dialup bbs.
73, Dave KY1H Robbins@guid2.dnet.lmco.com
>From David C. Patton" <mudcp3@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu Thu Oct 12 17:29:02 1995
From: David C. Patton" <mudcp3@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (David C. Patton)
Subject: CQWWCW-Zone4-Canada-S/op
Message-ID: <199510121629.LAA11309@ecom2.ecn.bgu.edu>
Here are the top Single Operator scores from Canadian Zone 4
in CQWW CW!
CALL SCORE Qs Zs Cs YR
1 VE3EJ 5,011,815 3308 164 433 92
2 VE3IY 4,140,384 3179 139 377 90
3 VE6OU/3 3,148,977 2334 145 362 89
4 VE6OU/3 2,725,002 2189 144 342 88
5 VE3IY 2,607,795 2563 113 292 81
6 VE6OU/3 2,117,920 1737 145 343 87
7 VE3IY 2,060,180 1959 133 298 87
8 VE6OU 1,839,702 2302 110 217 81
9 VE3IY 1,833,920 1708 131 309 88
10 VE3KP 1,620,504 1955 90 227 89
11 VG3BVD 1,616,670 1990 107 238 85
12 VD3AT 1,534,456 1529 99 272 92
13 VE3KZ 1,484,280 1693 106 254 82
14 XL3AT 1,390,170 1400 85 213 89
15 VD4VV 1,324,050 1727 111 239 92
16 VE3KP 1,231,672 1469 111 227 92
17 VE3IY 1,226,232 1456 113 265 86
18 VE3AKG 1,181,460 1723 91 200 78
19 VE3AT 1,179,720 1249 93 246 90
20 VE3KP 1,174,568 1501 99 229 88
Looks like VE4,5, and 6 need their own zone! How about the
top ten VE6s?
73, Dave Patton, WX3N
mudcp3@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu
>From Jim Hollenback" <jholly@hposl62.cup.hp.com Thu Oct 12 18:11:08 1995
From: Jim Hollenback" <jholly@hposl62.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback)
Subject: PED and SS
Message-ID: <9510121011.ZM24457@hpwsmjh1.cup.hp.com>
Is there a way to get PED to send and recieve SS format messages?
73, Jim, WA6SDM
jholly@cup.hp.com
>From Cain, Jim, K1TN" <jcain@arrl.org Thu Oct 12 18:10:00 1995
From: Cain, Jim, K1TN" <jcain@arrl.org (Cain, Jim, K1TN)
Subject: New ARRL Section multipler starting June 1996
Message-ID: <307D4BD7@arrl.org>
Jay: Wrong. The RTTY Roundup counts states, not
ARRL sections, as multipliers. See the rules on page
121 of Dec 1994 QST.
JC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Cain, Jim, K1TN wrote:
> >>According to W1WEF, NNY (Northern New York) will be a new ARRL Section
> >>multiplier starting in June 1996.
>
> Not exactly. For ARRL administrative purposes NNY is born
> January 1, 1996. The first contest after that that counts ARRL
> sections as multipliers will be the 1996 November Sweepstakes.
Ah...does that mean that ARRL RTTY Roundup won't use NNY in Jan '96 ? As
that is the first contest after Jan 1.
Your explanation is NOT clear.
Please let me know as several software authors are preparing changes.
73
--
Jay Townsend, WS7I < jayt@iea.com >
>From KAY, LEONARD" <LKAY@pria.com Thu Oct 12 21:36:00 1995
From: KAY, LEONARD" <LKAY@pria.com (KAY, LEONARD)
Subject: No more printed contest rules in QST?
Message-ID: <307D7C10@pria.com>
>> Of course, the BOOK will be a necessity for serious competitors
>> who have invested $$$ into their competitive stations.
>>
>> Personally, I think this makes sense. Why subject newcomers to
>> the detailed fine print? Most beginners just want enough information
>> to participate without sounding like a lid. I think this will result in
>> more participation.
>>
>
>How much you want to bet that the book of rules will not be a very
>hot item in the ARRL book store? Bet most will operate the contest
>from memory, or old copies of QST, or the beginers guide to the contest.
>
>73, Jim, WA6SDM
>jholly@cup.hp.com
Or how about sticking *all* the contest rules for the whole year in the
annual 'pull-out' section, with the schedule of operating events, band
allocations, etc. in the January issue?
Maybe I missed an earlier post... what is HQ's argument for removing
the rules? To make more space for advertising? Because 'most people'
aren't interested? I mean, if you stretch the point, why put in all
those mathey-matical details and ekwa-shuns in those technical
articles? Why not just describe what the circuit does in one-syllable
words and say, 'see the 1995 Circuit Book for details?'
73, Len
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Kay, KB2R | "But we are not dealing with the
PRI Automation, Inc. | normal world. We are chasing DX."
Billerica, MA 01821 | -- W9KNI, 'The Complete DXer'
lkay@pria.com or KB2R>K1EA |
Editor, YCCC Scuttlebutt | #include <disclaimer.h>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Ken Silverman" <ken.silverman@CCMAIL.AirTouch.COM Thu Oct 12 19:50:42
>1995
From: Ken Silverman" <ken.silverman@CCMAIL.AirTouch.COM (Ken Silverman)
Subject: CQP Score de WM2C/6
Message-ID: <9509128135.AA813520514@CCMAIL.AIRTOUCH.COM>
CQP 1995: WM2C/6 in Contra Costa County
Band CW SSB
20 151 16
15 16 23
Tot 167 40 47 Mults = 27,307 pts
QTH: K6ZM Memorial Station, Danville, CA.
Only got on for about 4 hours at the start of the contest. 15m opened
on Saturday with +20 dB signals from the East Coast, but no takers. I
dumped CT, and lost my CQP.BIN file after 150 QSOs, so I started a new
one.. after a few QSOs, I found the original file called "QP.BIN".
Back to old file... so a few of you who I worked on multiple
modes/bands where surprised with some odd serial numbers.
73, Ken WM2C/6
>From Daniel R. Violette" <Daniel_R._Violette@ccmail.anatcp.rockwell.com Thu
>Oct 12 20:06:47 1995
From: Daniel R. Violette" <Daniel_R._Violette@ccmail.anatcp.rockwell.com
(Daniel R. Violette)
Subject: Re[2]: New ARRL Section multipler starting June 1996
Message-ID: <9509128135.AA813521621@ccmail.anatcp.rockwell.com>
I would guess the software would need to be modified by Field Day. I
know it does not act as a multiplier, but will not go into the log
properly otherwise.
Another thought I have had. Has it ever been pursued to have sections
as multipliers for ARRL DX. Sure would help the big states out a
little bit. CA is not much of a multiplier, but ORG could be a little
better (admit not much).
73,
Dan KI6X
e-mail: Daniel_R._Violette@ccmail.anatcp.rockwell.com
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: New ARRL Section multipler starting June 1996
Author: "Cain, Jim, K1TN" <jcain@arrl.org> at SMTPGTY
Jay: Wrong. The RTTY Roundup counts states, not
ARRL sections, as multipliers. See the rules on page
121 of Dec 1994 QST.
JC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Cain, Jim, K1TN wrote:
> >>According to W1WEF, NNY (Northern New York) will be a new ARRL Section
> >>multiplier starting in June 1996.
>
> Not exactly. For ARRL administrative purposes NNY is born
> January 1, 1996. The first contest after that that counts ARRL
> sections as multipliers will be the 1996 November Sweepstakes.
Ah...does that mean that ARRL RTTY Roundup won't use NNY in Jan '96 ? As
that is the first contest after Jan 1.
Your explanation is NOT clear.
Please let me know as several software authors are preparing changes.
73
--
Jay Townsend, WS7I < jayt@iea.com >
>From Rich L. Boyd" <rlboyd@CapAccess.org Thu Oct 12 18:48:09 1995
From: Rich L. Boyd" <rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd)
Subject: No more printed contest rules in QST?
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91-FP.951012134700.5081I-100000@cap1.capaccess.org>
I can see the potential for a negative impact on contesting, but the
other side is there is an opportunity for others to come out with user
friendly books, maybe bundled with other things, but in any case
presented in an eye-catching-to-newcomers way on the book rack at the ham
stores. If others pick up the baton not only can negatives impacts be
overcome but an upturn could be seen.
Rich Boyd KE3Q
>From Neal.Campbell@ping.be (Neal Campbell-ON9CNC) Thu Oct 12 20:53:31 1995
From: Neal.Campbell@ping.be (Neal Campbell-ON9CNC) (Neal Campbell-ON9CNC)
Subject: No more printed contest rules in QST?
Message-ID: <v01510102aca321a9d7ce@[193.74.4.11]>
>Guess you can expect a sharp decline in newcomers entering contesting if they
>can't find the rules in their monthly rag!
We should set up a contest rules home page somewhere so that at least those
with internet capability can get to them. Also, we should have the
SH/CONTEST database on the packetcluster expanded so that you can get the
rules from there is needed. I use SH/Contest all the time!
73,
Neal
Neal Campbell
AB4MJ/ON9CNC
>From Jim Hollenback" <jholly@hposl62.cup.hp.com Thu Oct 12 20:23:54 1995
From: Jim Hollenback" <jholly@hposl62.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback)
Subject: No more printed contest rules in QST?
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91-FP.951012134700.5081I-100000@cap1.capaccess.org>
Message-ID: <9510121223.ZM24787@hpwsmjh1.cup.hp.com>
On Oct 12, 1:48pm, Rich L. Boyd wrote:
> Subject: Re: No more printed contest rules in QST?
>
> I can see the potential for a negative impact on contesting, but the
> other side is there is an opportunity for others to come out with user
> friendly books, maybe bundled with other things, but in any case
> presented in an eye-catching-to-newcomers way on the book rack at the ham
> stores. If others pick up the baton not only can negatives impacts be
> overcome but an upturn could be seen.
>
>
Good point ... sort'a like a "Now your contesting" book? Probably be
a bigger impact on the VHF contesting crowd than the HF crowd. Of course,
this can be a good thing. After contesting more on VHF they may decide
that upgrading and doing HF contesting would be fun. This, of course,
is also a good thing.
Actually, the introductory write-ups in QST are quite good for explaining
the contests to new comers. I find it hard to believe that the few pages
a year they run on the detailed rules are that important to take away. I
wonder if this is like the flap this last summer on dropping contest coverage
and the recent flap on the DXCC. Maybe QST will become a shack-on-a-belt
journal. Hopefully NCJ will continue to survive, and hopefully the CQ
magazines will continue to survive. Would be kind'a interesting reading
the ARRL DX results in CQ though. If they go to a separate book for the
detailed rules, rule changes will be very hard to propagate and some
interesting interpretations probably will be the result.
73, Jim, WA6SDM
jholly@cup.hp.com
>From wws@renaissance.cray.com (Walter Spector) Thu Oct 12 04:21:20 1995
From: wws@renaissance.cray.com (Walter Spector) (Walter Spector)
Subject: Rad Shack DSP
Message-ID: <9510121821.AA16796@raphael.cray.com>
> I saw a bunch of traffic recently (within the past few months) about the
> Radio Shack DSP unit, but can't find anything in my archives.
I'd be interested in the conclusions of other people after my experience.
> Local store has them on clearance - any comments for use on the
> second/S&P contest radio? I have an IC-725, which doesn't have the best
> filtering...
The local Rat Shaks have had them on sale here for $49.95.
I figured at that price, I couldn't go wrong so tried one.
My station setup includes the following:
Kenwood TS-930S/AT with extra CW and AM filters
Cushcraft R-7 Vertical
David Clark headset/boom mike
I hooked the DSP filter to the headset output of the TS-930 and
used a 12 volt power supply (the expensive regulated Rat Shak one)
to power it.
First impression was a low audio level. I easily adjusted the output
of the receiver to just flash the lights on the front of the unit as
described in the manual. But I had to turn the volume WAY up on
the DSP to get any reasonable output. This with both the internal
speaker and with my headset. Surprising since the unit advertises
a 5 watt audio amplifier, and the 930 is only rated 1.5 watts. The
930 can easily drive the headphones to unlistenable output levels.
Once connected, I started critically listening to how the unit
worked. There is a *marked* difference in audio quality between
turning DSP processing on and off. I found the processing difficult
to listen to, even at wide settings.
The notching feature seemed to work ok on strong carriers. On
weak ones it either ignored them or audibly 'searched' trying to
lock onto them.
As far as simple bandwidth reduction, I was very impressed with
the sharpness of the filter. Signals outside the ranges of the
filter fall off after just a few hertz! But with the reduction in
audio quality within the passband, I would just as soon not use it.
The slope tuning and VBT on the 930 are much more pleasing.
The 'noise reduction' setting does not actually use a noise reduction
algorithm. It merely changes the audio cutoff frequencies, so would
do nothing for, for example, power line noise (which is a problem I
have in the evening.)
One other problem I had with the unit was that I found myself constantly
adjusting the audio output on the 930 to match the proper input level
of the filter. This would be very annoying in a contest.
I much preferred the existing audio quality and filtering in the TS-930
so decided to return the DSP. Since I had written a personal check,
they needed a few days to let it clear before refunding me the purchase
price. So he let me try a second unit on the theory that my first one
was defective. The second attempt was identical to the first with
identical results. So I took it back and eventually got my refund.
I am definately not biased against audio filters - I played with a
Timewave DSP for about two hours at a ham store and really liked it.
I've also made great use of an analog Datong filter in contest
situations. But was very unimpressed with the Rat Shak DSP - even
at $49.95.
My question is: QST and others have given the unit good marks.
Why was my experience so contrary?
73,
Walt
----
Walter Spector kk6nr
(wws@renaissance.cray.com)
Sunnyvale, California
|