At FD it's not so much the radio, but the operator. I could be on 20
punching out page after page of q's, turn my op over to a visitor come
back in 20 and find only 2 contacts had been made. Move him out, make
another 20 q's in 15 minutes time, turn my position over, 30 minutes
later NO contacts. Oh, plenty of running up and down the band alright,
but not the trained ear to decipher what was available and harvest the
QSO's out. There were a few transmitters there, a IC-756 that would
fuzz out the entire spectrum when it transmitted, the Scout didn't seem
to bother anyone much.
Steve Baron wrote:
>
> True, but still of interest.
>
> Think some one had been bashing things like the 706, yet a friend of mine
> made about 1200 Q's with a 706 and a 40 meter dipole up abt 30 feet; oops -
> a few doen 20 M Q's were in there too.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: w8au@sssnet.com <w8au@sssnet.com>
> To: Steve Baron <stevebaron@starlinx.com>
> Cc: tentec@contesting.com <tentec@contesting.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> Date: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 10:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] TT FD setups
>
> >At 08:02 PM 6/29/99 +0100, you wrote:
> >
> >>How many Q's does each station make ?
> >
> >
> >
> >Steve:
> >
> >Not even TT or the Triton's can make good operators out of all of us.
> >
> >Let's just say, (paraphrasing that Army promo) "It lets us be 'all that we
> >can be.'"
> >
> >Perry
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>Old german proverb= "We get too soon old, and too late smart!"
> >>>
> >>>At Massillon ARC (OH) (W8NP) we finally found the best FD rig after years
> >>>and years of using the latest rigs and technology. We have since
> purchased
> >>>a few (at prices tailored to a club budget!)
> >>>
> >>>Recent times have required the guest operators to either not touch any of
> >>>the controls on whatever PLL "bells & whistles" rig is being used,
> (except
> >>>for the tuning knob) or face the embarassment of having to ask someone
> "how
> >>>to adjust this or that, or how to restore it to operation after pushing a
> >>>wrong button."
> >>>
> >>>Realizing that most rigs today require a programming course and that most
> >>>operators won't own the same rig that's being used.... plus the fact that
> >>>the band capabilities of new rigs are far in excess of what is needed in
> >>>the "traditional FD bands," (80/40/20/15/10) we, a couple years back,
> made
> >>>the decision to use a "user friendly" set that any operator could use
> >>>comfortably with no previous instruction... One that would take the
> abuse
> >>>of FD and not fail.... One that had superb CW and Fone characteristics
> and
> >>>had no unneeded bells and whistles... In other words, a purely functional
> >>>radio having everything needed for FD.
> >>>
> >>>Ten Tec will not benefit from this disclosure, unless they decide to
> >>>recondition and resell these units. Unfortunately this will not aid new
> >>>sales.
> >>>
> >>>The rig? The 25+ year old digital Triton 4 (model 544)...! Stock! No
> >>>extra convertors or external VFO's! A little thinking on the part of any
> >>>FD operator will confirm our choice.
> >>>
> >>>Our prior PLL "phase-noise" problems that really messed up our multiple
> >>>station/close proximity environment have about 90% disappeared. As long
> as
> >>>antenna orientation considerations are kept in mind, our separate
> stations
> >>>can operate even the same band (CW and Fone) despite being 200 feet or
> less
> >>>apart.
> >>>
> >>>The standard Sideband filter plus the two CW audio filters (included in
> the
> >>>AGC loop!) are all that is needed to handle the QRM. We have had no
> >>>complaints in three years... nor have we had any rig failures to contend
> >>>with during the middle of the contest. (If you are curious about the PLL
> >>>rigs that we have HAD to fix during or after FD, just Email me and I will
> >>>give the short list)
> >>>
> >>>This is not to suggest going back to 25 year old contesting technology...
> >>>by all means use computer aided logging and transmission, programmable
> >>>keyers, DVR audio messages and Headset/boom mikes. Our only concession
> to
> >>>the "good old days" is the TT 544. (other than antennas, where there is
> >>>nothing new under the sun)
> >>>
> >>>Hated to post this, as we don't need our competition using any ideas that
> >>>give US a small advantage.... and we don't want the prices of these old
> >>>gems going up to where they are less affordable for good operators and
> >>>newcomers, but....
> >>>
> >>>We just wanted to give credit to what will have to be looked upon in
> years
> >>>to come...as the (last refinement of) the first solid state 100W xcvr
> ever
> >>>built, and as one of the all-time classic Ham transceivers.
> >>>
> >>>73,
> >>>
> >>>Perry w8au
> >>>
> >>>P.S. = Oops, we did have ONE failure this year.... the meter lamp in one
> >>>of the 544's burnt out!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
> >>>Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> >>>Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> >>>Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
> >>>Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
> --
> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
> Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
> Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|