2003 Tennessee QSO Party - All Claimed Scores 19Sep2003
Submit logs by: November 12, 2002
E-mail logs to: w9wi@bellsouth.net
Mail logs to:
Tennessee QSO Party
c/o Doug Smith, W9WI
1385 Old Clarksville Pike
Pleasant View, TN 37146-8098
USA
3830 Score Web Page - http://www.hornucopia.com/3830score/
http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/3830/
Submission info ( tnx WA7BNM) - http://www.hornucopia.com/contestcal/
Contest Station Database - http://www.pvrc.org/
73 dink
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Call CW/DgQ PhQ Mults hr Score Club
In State Single Op HP
W4NZ 137 31 67 3 31,691
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Call CW/DgQ PhQ Mults hr Score Club
In State Single Op LP
K0EJ 100 125 78 3:40 43,400
WO4O 101 8 59 18,844 TCG
WN4M 41 70 50 15,500 TCG
KE4KMG 0 37 26 3 7,124 TCG
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Call CW/DgQ PhQ Mults hr Score Club
Out of State Single Op HP
K4BAI 26 3 17 1.5 1,235 SECC
K1GU 21 0 14 0.8 982 YCCC
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Call CW/DgQ PhQ Mults hr Score Club
Out of State Single Op LP
N9JF 68 22 37 7 9,428 SMC
W1KLM 0 24 20 1.5 4,960 TCG
WN6K 22 16 14 4 1,772 SCCC
N2CU 10 0 8 0.25 440
Operators:
(none)
---------------------------------------------------------------
The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!
http://home1.pacific.net.sg/~jamesb/
---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
From either the DX or US end, the only time I don't sign every QSO is
when I feel the pile is so big that its slowing me down, and then only
for a few Q's in a row will I not sign. (In other words, sometimes
not signing will drive some of a big pile away for a while - if it
doesn't seem to work, then I go right back to signing every Q).
Ron DeBry WA6DGX
debry@sb.fsu.edu
From KM9P:
> This past SS I had a number of guys call me and I blew them off with the
> usual "QSO B4 TU TEST DE N4RJ". After the contest Jeff (KR0Y) told me
> that one of his buddies tried to work me twice on Sunday and I told him he
> was a dupe. Jeff said the guy told him that I wasn't in his log.
Not to sound rude, but
I, too, know of a local who tried to work you but wasn't able to...
and he will be sending in his log... maybe the same guy...
We were a multi-op and taped parts of SS... it's AMAZING how many people
got blown out of our log due to hickups in the timing of the exchange
coupled with the burning desire to keep the frequency by one of our ops.
The radio started with the semi-breakin delay being set too long and caused
some exchange timing to get off (we might miss most of a request for a fill,
silence, then we both transmit at just about the same time, silence, then
a big "?" by a 3rd station caused the cq to rattle again to protect the
frequency...) Those are our rookie mistakes.
> Keeping this mind... I will probably lose 3 QSO's now because this guy
> wouldn't say "Hey lid, you didn't work me!".
Unfortunately there is no provision in the software to keep you from calling
someone whose call you might have miscopied (how can it? a "he won't work me"
entry?). One of our ops logged a suffix FU as RU, and our notes file indicated
we tried working FU 4 times afterwards, the last he sent QSO B4 DAMIT :-)
We couldn't call up the notes file during the contest, and he wouldn't work
us again, so we kept calling- finally someone put up a sticker to not call him.
So it could have been that he loses 3 Q's and we lose 3 Q's... except we
figured it out... and now we delete him and only HE loses 3 Q's :-).
He has nothing to lose to work us again, and plenty if he doesn't.
The idea of assembling a "hit squad" just came to mind.
For the right incentive, a group could drop XXXXXX from their logs... :-) :-)
On the first "dupe" call, we send QSO B4 --- but if the guy protests we work
him again (like if someone sent NO NO in response to QSO B4),
no big deal on the computer IF we think the other guy knows what he's doing.
So, I guess we should delete the 1st QSO if we work him again, but if we do that
the software renumbers all the QSO's thereafter... so I guess we mark
the 1st QSO as a dupe to keep the software happy and the log checker happy.
Do the log checkers verify serial numbers in the exchanges in SS? It
hasn't appeared that way in the past... maybe the software "renumbering"
of serial numbers isn't important. Maybe what serial number you send out
isn't important...
Dwaine
--
Dwaine Hurta, N5HD hurta@lobby.ti.com
Texas Instruments, Dallas, Texas 480-1338
From either the DX or US end, the only time I don't sign every QSO is
when I feel the pile is so big that its slowing me down, and then only
for a few Q's in a row will I not sign. (In other words, sometimes
not signing will drive some of a big pile away for a while - if it
doesn't seem to work, then I go right back to signing every Q).
Ron DeBry WA6DGX
debry@sb.fsu.edu
From KM9P:
> This past SS I had a number of guys call me and I blew them off with the
> usual "QSO B4 TU TEST DE N4RJ". After the contest Jeff (KR0Y) told me
> that one of his buddies tried to work me twice on Sunday and I told him he
> was a dupe. Jeff said the guy told him that I wasn't in his log.
Not to sound rude, but
I, too, know of a local who tried to work you but wasn't able to...
and he will be sending in his log... maybe the same guy...
We were a multi-op and taped parts of SS... it's AMAZING how many people
got blown out of our log due to hickups in the timing of the exchange
coupled with the burning desire to keep the frequency by one of our ops.
The radio started with the semi-breakin delay being set too long and caused
some exchange timing to get off (we might miss most of a request for a fill,
silence, then we both transmit at just about the same time, silence, then
a big "?" by a 3rd station caused the cq to rattle again to protect the
frequency...) Those are our rookie mistakes.
> Keeping this mind... I will probably lose 3 QSO's now because this guy
> wouldn't say "Hey lid, you didn't work me!".
Unfortunately there is no provision in the software to keep you from calling
someone whose call you might have miscopied (how can it? a "he won't work me"
entry?). One of our ops logged a suffix FU as RU, and our notes file indicated
we tried working FU 4 times afterwards, the last he sent QSO B4 DAMIT :-)
We couldn't call up the notes file during the contest, and he wouldn't work
us again, so we kept calling- finally someone put up a sticker to not call him.
So it could have been that he loses 3 Q's and we lose 3 Q's... except we
figured it out... and now we delete him and only HE loses 3 Q's :-).
He has nothing to lose to work us again, and plenty if he doesn't.
The idea of assembling a "hit squad" just came to mind.
For the right incentive, a group could drop XXXXXX from their logs... :-) :-)
On the first "dupe" call, we send QSO B4 --- but if the guy protests we work
him again (like if someone sent NO NO in response to QSO B4),
no big deal on the computer IF we think the other guy knows what he's doing.
So, I guess we should delete the 1st QSO if we work him again, but if we do that
the software renumbers all the QSO's thereafter... so I guess we mark
the 1st QSO as a dupe to keep the software happy and the log checker happy.
Do the log checkers verify serial numbers in the exchanges in SS? It
hasn't appeared that way in the past... maybe the software "renumbering"
of serial numbers isn't important. Maybe what serial number you send out
isn't important...
Dwaine
--
Dwaine Hurta, N5HD hurta@lobby.ti.com
Texas Instruments, Dallas, Texas 480-1338
From either the DX or US end, the only time I don't sign every QSO is
when I feel the pile is so big that its slowing me down, and then only
for a few Q's in a row will I not sign. (In other words, sometimes
not signing will drive some of a big pile away for a while - if it
doesn't seem to work, then I go right back to signing every Q).
Ron DeBry WA6DGX
debry@sb.fsu.edu
From KM9P:
> This past SS I had a number of guys call me and I blew them off with the
> usual "QSO B4 TU TEST DE N4RJ". After the contest Jeff (KR0Y) told me
> that one of his buddies tried to work me twice on Sunday and I told him he
> was a dupe. Jeff said the guy told him that I wasn't in his log.
Not to sound rude, but
I, too, know of a local who tried to work you but wasn't able to...
and he will be sending in his log... maybe the same guy...
We were a multi-op and taped parts of SS... it's AMAZING how many people
got blown out of our log due to hickups in the timing of the exchange
coupled with the burning desire to keep the frequency by one of our ops.
The radio started with the semi-breakin delay being set too long and caused
some exchange timing to get off (we might miss most of a request for a fill,
silence, then we both transmit at just about the same time, silence, then
a big "?" by a 3rd station caused the cq to rattle again to protect the
frequency...) Those are our rookie mistakes.
> Keeping this mind... I will probably lose 3 QSO's now because this guy
> wouldn't say "Hey lid, you didn't work me!".
Unfortunately there is no provision in the software to keep you from calling
someone whose call you might have miscopied (how can it? a "he won't work me"
entry?). One of our ops logged a suffix FU as RU, and our notes file indicated
we tried working FU 4 times afterwards, the last he sent QSO B4 DAMIT :-)
We couldn't call up the notes file during the contest, and he wouldn't work
us again, so we kept calling- finally someone put up a sticker to not call him.
So it could have been that he loses 3 Q's and we lose 3 Q's... except we
figured it out... and now we delete him and only HE loses 3 Q's :-).
He has nothing to lose to work us again, and plenty if he doesn't.
The idea of assembling a "hit squad" just came to mind.
For the right incentive, a group could drop XXXXXX from their logs... :-) :-)
On the first "dupe" call, we send QSO B4 --- but if the guy protests we work
him again (like if someone sent NO NO in response to QSO B4),
no big deal on the computer IF we think the other guy knows what he's doing.
So, I guess we should delete the 1st QSO if we work him again, but if we do that
the software renumbers all the QSO's thereafter... so I guess we mark
the 1st QSO as a dupe to keep the software happy and the log checker happy.
Do the log checkers verify serial numbers in the exchanges in SS? It
hasn't appeared that way in the past... maybe the software "renumbering"
of serial numbers isn't important. Maybe what serial number you send out
isn't important...
Dwaine
--
Dwaine Hurta, N5HD hurta@lobby.ti.com
Texas Instruments, Dallas, Texas 480-1338
From estate, one owner, works like new. I'm not taking a cent.
If interested let me know here.
Tnx Bob WN3K (FRC memeber)
From estate, one owner, works like new. I'm not taking a cent.
If interested let me know here.
Tnx Bob WN3K (FRC memeber)
From estate, one owner, works like new. I'm not taking a cent.
If interested let me know here.
Tnx Bob WN3K (FRC memeber)
From IBM Contest Forum. 73, K4PQL...
************************************
Subject: ARRL DX Phone Score rumors
W6QHS (M/M-2) 4.3M
W6GO (M/M-2) 3.98M
NZ7E (KI3V+pkt) 4.1M
K3EST/6 (15 S/B) 2200+ QSOs
73,
Bob, N6TV
From IBM Contest Forum. 73, K4PQL...
************************************
Subject: ARRL DX Phone Score rumors
W6QHS (M/M-2) 4.3M
W6GO (M/M-2) 3.98M
NZ7E (KI3V+pkt) 4.1M
K3EST/6 (15 S/B) 2200+ QSOs
73,
Bob, N6TV
From IBM Contest Forum. 73, K4PQL...
************************************
Subject: ARRL DX Phone Score rumors
W6QHS (M/M-2) 4.3M
W6GO (M/M-2) 3.98M
NZ7E (KI3V+pkt) 4.1M
K3EST/6 (15 S/B) 2200+ QSOs
73,
Bob, N6TV
From an operational standpoint (normalizing the scores of all-band
entrants), how do propose to equalize the 80 meter effort of a VE5
who makes zero QSOs with that of a W1 who makes 300?
> Operating contests in VE5 land is interesting. First, it is located in
> the center of the 'auroral blackhole'.
This brings up another point. Since you are not willing to consider your
performance in the context of your regional competition, then it would
make more sense to focus your efforts on events and competition categories
that favor your particular location and capabilities. Jim Bearman (VE5DX)
demonstrated in the 1970s that you can compete at a national level from
Saskatchewan in the ARRL Sweepstakes, both modes.
> I am sure there are many of you at other QTHs that have the same
> problem. AND in addition many of you, like me have neither the
> financial resources or real estate to put up stacked arrays.
Nonetheless, in the majority of contests it's the folks who work the
hardest and who have the most resources that are winning. I don't think
this can be equalized. I believe that if you ever develop a scheme to
equalize scores based on location, then you will find yourself getting
pounded by guys with huge stations in similarly difficult locations,
like W0AIH.
It's not fair that they have stacked yagis and you have only dipoles.
How about equalization based on antenna size? As soon as you do this,
guys like W0AIH will be putting up the finest diploes you have ever
seen. How about stacked dipoles? No fair, right? Perhaps you will
make the rule related to antenna gain. Theoretical gain, or actual
gain measured by engineers? How about feedline losses? How about the
difference between W1KM and K1EA on 80 meters? They have similar
antennas yet W1KM is *much* louder in Europe. You can't explain the
difference using geographical normalization. Perhaps a ground
conductivity equalizer?
Perhaps on-site competitions are the answer. Everyone at the World
Games in Seattle was at a similarly equipped station in the same
general area and hence had identical signal strengths. Bzzzt. Sorry,
some stations were *much* louder than others.
Speaking for myself, it's the tremendous variety of factors (geography,
skill, experience, gear, antennas, conditions) that affect the scores
that gives on-air competition its richness. The fact that no two
instances of the same contest are ever quite the same coupled with the
fact that people are constantly adapting (hardware, operating strategy)
is what keeps things interesting. In fact, this is one of the reasons
I chose not to participate in the World Games in Seattle. The concept
of putting a bunch of guys in the same place with identical stations
in order to eliminate the variables and determine the "best operator"
didn't seem like a very interesting exercise to me.
> It is at this point I will end my contribution to this topic. BUT I
> sincerely hope that we can let our imaginations run wild. Let us try
> be creativity and as a community of contesters dreaming up a
> #equalised# contest.
I think some of this creativity would be better spent better interpreting
the results as they are currently presented by the magazines. For
instance, when I read DX contest results I would say: "#1 KM1H,
east coast, who cares?, next? ... #2 K1ZZ, east coast, who cares?, next?
#3 K1TO, east coast, who cares?, #4 W5WMU, he runs 7 KW, who cares?,
next? ... #5 WN4KKN/5, hey! look! I won the contest!, next? .. #6 N5RZ,
whew! glad I beat him. I hate getting beaten by the guy in the next
city" and so on.
--Trey
From an operational standpoint (normalizing the scores of all-band
entrants), how do propose to equalize the 80 meter effort of a VE5
who makes zero QSOs with that of a W1 who makes 300?
> Operating contests in VE5 land is interesting. First, it is located in
> the center of the 'auroral blackhole'.
This brings up another point. Since you are not willing to consider your
performance in the context of your regional competition, then it would
make more sense to focus your efforts on events and competition categories
that favor your particular location and capabilities. Jim Bearman (VE5DX)
demonstrated in the 1970s that you can compete at a national level from
Saskatchewan in the ARRL Sweepstakes, both modes.
> I am sure there are many of you at other QTHs that have the same
> problem. AND in addition many of you, like me have neither the
> financial resources or real estate to put up stacked arrays.
Nonetheless, in the majority of contests it's the folks who work the
hardest and who have the most resources that are winning. I don't think
this can be equalized. I believe that if you ever develop a scheme to
equalize scores based on location, then you will find yourself getting
pounded by guys with huge stations in similarly difficult locations,
like W0AIH.
It's not fair that they have stacked yagis and you have only dipoles.
How about equalization based on antenna size? As soon as you do this,
guys like W0AIH will be putting up the finest diploes you have ever
seen. How about stacked dipoles? No fair, right? Perhaps you will
make the rule related to antenna gain. Theoretical gain, or actual
gain measured by engineers? How about feedline losses? How about the
difference between W1KM and K1EA on 80 meters? They have similar
antennas yet W1KM is *much* louder in Europe. You can't explain the
difference using geographical normalization. Perhaps a ground
conductivity equalizer?
Perhaps on-site competitions are the answer. Everyone at the World
Games in Seattle was at a similarly equipped station in the same
general area and hence had identical signal strengths. Bzzzt. Sorry,
some stations were *much* louder than others.
Speaking for myself, it's the tremendous variety of factors (geography,
skill, experience, gear, antennas, conditions) that affect the scores
that gives on-air competition its richness. The fact that no two
instances of the same contest are ever quite the same coupled with the
fact that people are constantly adapting (hardware, operating strategy)
is what keeps things interesting. In fact, this is one of the reasons
I chose not to participate in the World Games in Seattle. The concept
of putting a bunch of guys in the same place with identical stations
in order to eliminate the variables and determine the "best operator"
didn't seem like a very interesting exercise to me.
> It is at this point I will end my contribution to this topic. BUT I
> sincerely hope that we can let our imaginations run wild. Let us try
> be creativity and as a community of contesters dreaming up a
> #equalised# contest.
I think some of this creativity would be better spent better interpreting
the results as they are currently presented by the magazines. For
instance, when I read DX contest results I would say: "#1 KM1H,
east coast, who cares?, next? ... #2 K1ZZ, east coast, who cares?, next?
#3 K1TO, east coast, who cares?, #4 W5WMU, he runs 7 KW, who cares?,
next? ... #5 WN4KKN/5, hey! look! I won the contest!, next? .. #6 N5RZ,
whew! glad I beat him. I hate getting beaten by the guy in the next
city" and so on.
--Trey
From an operational standpoint (normalizing the scores of all-band
entrants), how do propose to equalize the 80 meter effort of a VE5
who makes zero QSOs with that of a W1 who makes 300?
> Operating contests in VE5 land is interesting. First, it is located in
> the center of the 'auroral blackhole'.
This brings up another point. Since you are not willing to consider your
performance in the context of your regional competition, then it would
make more sense to focus your efforts on events and competition categories
that favor your particular location and capabilities. Jim Bearman (VE5DX)
demonstrated in the 1970s that you can compete at a national level from
Saskatchewan in the ARRL Sweepstakes, both modes.
> I am sure there are many of you at other QTHs that have the same
> problem. AND in addition many of you, like me have neither the
> financial resources or real estate to put up stacked arrays.
Nonetheless, in the majority of contests it's the folks who work the
hardest and who have the most resources that are winning. I don't think
this can be equalized. I believe that if you ever develop a scheme to
equalize scores based on location, then you will find yourself getting
pounded by guys with huge stations in similarly difficult locations,
like W0AIH.
It's not fair that they have stacked yagis and you have only dipoles.
How about equalization based on antenna size? As soon as you do this,
guys like W0AIH will be putting up the finest diploes you have ever
seen. How about stacked dipoles? No fair, right? Perhaps you will
make the rule related to antenna gain. Theoretical gain, or actual
gain measured by engineers? How about feedline losses? How about the
difference between W1KM and K1EA on 80 meters? They have similar
antennas yet W1KM is *much* louder in Europe. You can't explain the
difference using geographical normalization. Perhaps a ground
conductivity equalizer?
Perhaps on-site competitions are the answer. Everyone at the World
Games in Seattle was at a similarly equipped station in the same
general area and hence had identical signal strengths. Bzzzt. Sorry,
some stations were *much* louder than others.
Speaking for myself, it's the tremendous variety of factors (geography,
skill, experience, gear, antennas, conditions) that affect the scores
that gives on-air competition its richness. The fact that no two
instances of the same contest are ever quite the same coupled with the
fact that people are constantly adapting (hardware, operating strategy)
is what keeps things interesting. In fact, this is one of the reasons
I chose not to participate in the World Games in Seattle. The concept
of putting a bunch of guys in the same place with identical stations
in order to eliminate the variables and determine the "best operator"
didn't seem like a very interesting exercise to me.
> It is at this point I will end my contribution to this topic. BUT I
> sincerely hope that we can let our imaginations run wild. Let us try
> be creativity and as a community of contesters dreaming up a
> #equalised# contest.
I think some of this creativity would be better spent better interpreting
the results as they are currently presented by the magazines. For
instance, when I read DX contest results I would say: "#1 KM1H,
east coast, who cares?, next? ... #2 K1ZZ, east coast, who cares?, next?
#3 K1TO, east coast, who cares?, #4 W5WMU, he runs 7 KW, who cares?,
next? ... #5 WN4KKN/5, hey! look! I won the contest!, next? .. #6 N5RZ,
whew! glad I beat him. I hate getting beaten by the guy in the next
city" and so on.
--Trey
From my own small gun station I operated SOA and had 1328 Qs, 141 Zs &
523 Cs for 2.46M.
Gerry, W1GD
From my own small gun station I operated SOA and had 1328 Qs, 141 Zs &
523 Cs for 2.46M.
Gerry, W1GD
From my own small gun station I operated SOA and had 1328 Qs, 141 Zs &
523 Cs for 2.46M.
Gerry, W1GD
From WB2EKK
Subject: SKY RADIO BEGINS BROADCASTING
Reply-To: dans@rehab1.UUCP (Dan Schein)
SKY RADIO BEGINS BROADCASTING:
For the first time in commercial aviation history, air
travelers can tune in to news, business reports and weather
information live. USA TODAY Sky Radio, the world's first live,
satellite-delivered, in-flight audio information service,
conducted its inaugural broadcast on a commercial flight Tuesday.
It was used on United Airlines Flight 97, which left Newark at
7:59 a.m. ET.
LIVE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE:
Sky Radio is designed to provide air travelers with
around-the-clock news, business, sports and weather coverage. It
made its debut Tuesday. "This was the first time, ever, commercial
air travelers enjoyed live news and information via an aircraft's
audio entertainment system."said William O. Hider, president of
USA TODAY Sky Radio. "A new advertising medium began today."
***Note: William O. Hider is PVRCer N3RR***
SERVICE TAILORED TO TRAVELERS:
Sky Radio is tailored specifically to the needs of the business
traveler audience. The majority of Sky Radio's programming is
produced by a full-time broadcast staff located at Sky Radio's
studios near Washington. Sky Radio also has agreements with CNN
and the Mutual Broadcasting System for each to supply a range of
programming, including "The Larry King Show."
SPORTS CHANNEL IS PLANNED:
This fall, Sky Radio plans to launch a 24-hour sports channel,
giving fans an entire channel of sports news, interviews and
features by some of the USA TODAY Sports section and USA TODAY
Baseball Weekly writers, along with live play-by-play sports. Sky
Radio is operated by Gannett Co. Inc.
From WB2EKK
Subject: SKY RADIO BEGINS BROADCASTING
Reply-To: dans@rehab1.UUCP (Dan Schein)
SKY RADIO BEGINS BROADCASTING:
For the first time in commercial aviation history, air
travelers can tune in to news, business reports and weather
information live. USA TODAY Sky Radio, the world's first live,
satellite-delivered, in-flight audio information service,
conducted its inaugural broadcast on a commercial flight Tuesday.
It was used on United Airlines Flight 97, which left Newark at
7:59 a.m. ET.
LIVE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE:
Sky Radio is designed to provide air travelers with
around-the-clock news, business, sports and weather coverage. It
made its debut Tuesday. "This was the first time, ever, commercial
air travelers enjoyed live news and information via an aircraft's
audio entertainment system."said William O. Hider, president of
USA TODAY Sky Radio. "A new advertising medium began today."
***Note: William O. Hider is PVRCer N3RR***
SERVICE TAILORED TO TRAVELERS:
Sky Radio is tailored specifically to the needs of the business
traveler audience. The majority of Sky Radio's programming is
produced by a full-time broadcast staff located at Sky Radio's
studios near Washington. Sky Radio also has agreements with CNN
and the Mutual Broadcasting System for each to supply a range of
programming, including "The Larry King Show."
SPORTS CHANNEL IS PLANNED:
This fall, Sky Radio plans to launch a 24-hour sports channel,
giving fans an entire channel of sports news, interviews and
features by some of the USA TODAY Sports section and USA TODAY
Baseball Weekly writers, along with live play-by-play sports. Sky
Radio is operated by Gannett Co. Inc.
From WB2EKK
Subject: SKY RADIO BEGINS BROADCASTING
Reply-To: dans@rehab1.UUCP (Dan Schein)
SKY RADIO BEGINS BROADCASTING:
For the first time in commercial aviation history, air
travelers can tune in to news, business reports and weather
information live. USA TODAY Sky Radio, the world's first live,
satellite-delivered, in-flight audio information service,
conducted its inaugural broadcast on a commercial flight Tuesday.
It was used on United Airlines Flight 97, which left Newark at
7:59 a.m. ET.
LIVE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE:
Sky Radio is designed to provide air travelers with
around-the-clock news, business, sports and weather coverage. It
made its debut Tuesday. "This was the first time, ever, commercial
air travelers enjoyed live news and information via an aircraft's
audio entertainment system."said William O. Hider, president of
USA TODAY Sky Radio. "A new advertising medium began today."
***Note: William O. Hider is PVRCer N3RR***
SERVICE TAILORED TO TRAVELERS:
Sky Radio is tailored specifically to the needs of the business
traveler audience. The majority of Sky Radio's programming is
produced by a full-time broadcast staff located at Sky Radio's
studios near Washington. Sky Radio also has agreements with CNN
and the Mutual Broadcasting System for each to supply a range of
programming, including "The Larry King Show."
SPORTS CHANNEL IS PLANNED:
This fall, Sky Radio plans to launch a 24-hour sports channel,
giving fans an entire channel of sports news, interviews and
features by some of the USA TODAY Sports section and USA TODAY
Baseball Weekly writers, along with live play-by-play sports. Sky
Radio is operated by Gannett Co. Inc.
From a personal perspective, I never asked for a single QRS when I was
starting out..... for fear of someone finding out I was (am) a rookie ;-)
73,
Blake N4GI
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
.
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/related
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
image/gif
---
|