Ok. I missed it. That's what I thought.
On 7/10/06, Jan Erik Holm <sm2ekm@telia.com> wrote:
>
> I worked 46 teams, as far as I understand that should
> be all, same calls are also missing for me.
>
> 73 Jim SM2EKM
> ----------------
>
> Doug Smith W9WI wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 12:08, w8hc@aol.com wrote:
> >
> >>It looks like they didn't want to handicap anyone with the "S" or "H"
> suffix. That just wouldn't work too well on CW following the "5." Looks
> like maybe the PT5Z was dropped too.
> >
> >
> > W1AW/4 worked all PT5 and PW5 suffixes *except*:
> >
> > PT5H PT5S PT5Z
> > PW5H PW5R PW5S
> >
> > Hard to believe we would have missed one that was on, as all the ones we
> > did work we worked on multiple bands. Not sure why they didn't use
> > PW5R, I'd sure like to have that call<grin>.
> >
> > BTW, both during the contest and in the pre-contest warmups, the signals
> > on 40m CW were almost uncannily equal in strength. They did a very good
> > job in matching the stations. (can't vouch for any other band)
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
--
73, Craig Cook - N7OR in Sandy, OR
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|