band QSOs mults
____________________________
160CW 48 19
80CW 86 30
40CW 126 45
20CW 190 47
15CW 110 42
10CW 65 25
____________________________
total: 625 208 claimed score: 130,000
AB6FO - Couldn't seem to get a rythym until I hit 40 meters
late in the contest. Then 40 died. Don't ever remember
hearing no QRN and no signals on 40. And this is really
unusual - no 8's on 80 at all. 73. Ken, AB6FO
>From Danny Eskenazi <0005720561@mcimail.com> Tue Jan 11 00:46:00 1994
From: Danny Eskenazi <0005720561@mcimail.com> (Danny Eskenazi)
Subject: SURVEY RESULTS...Attn KR1R,K1AR,K3EST,CAC
Message-ID: <53940111004635/0005720561PK3EM@mcimail.com>
The unofficial results are in of the unscientific poll. Everyone (half a
dozen) responded that YES INDEED, they wanted to see hours in the score
listings for contests. Given, that this doesnt imply much of anything, other
than six people answering a question....it nevertheless asks the question.
I would like to propose to contest editors that hours be published next
to scores. So Billy and Bob...what exactly is the procedure to get this done?
(only dissenting voice was from an overworked contest editor who thinks that
life may include MORE than contesting! egad!) Does the CAC need to vote on
this Walt? or is it simply a matter of telling BIlly what we think? Perhaps
he can pose the question as well. ps the Alpha Delta got one resounding NO
vote.... thanks to all for taking time to respond. 73 Danny K7SS
>From Trey Garlough <GARLOUGH@TGV.COM> Tue Jan 11 06:26:59 1994
From: Trey Garlough <GARLOUGH@TGV.COM> (Trey Garlough)
Subject: More Taxes!!!
Message-ID: <758269619.881435.GARLOUGH@TGV.COM>
> Subject: More Taxes!!!
>
> A new regulation that the FCC is quietly working on will directly
> affect you as the user of a computer and modem. The FCC proposes
> [...]
> YOU NEED TO ACT NOW IN ORDER TO PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS!
This type of message in not related to contesting and is therefore IMHO
inappropriate for this mailing list.
--Trey, WN4KKN/6
>From Trey Garlough <GARLOUGH@TGV.COM> Tue Jan 11 06:34:38 1994
From: Trey Garlough <GARLOUGH@TGV.COM> (Trey Garlough)
Subject: Repeated mail??
Message-ID: <758270078.685435.GARLOUGH@TGV.COM>
> Hi all. Think I saw something about this a while before Christmas but don't
> remember any follow-up. I get multiple copies of the same messages sent over
> the Reflector. Sometimes more than twice.
> Anyone else getting this - is there a problem somewhere?????
This type of inquiry should be directed to me in a private mail message.
--Trey, WN4KKN/6
>From Scott A Stembaugh <n9ljx@ecn.purdue.edu> Tue Jan 11 08:31:15 1994
From: Scott A Stembaugh <n9ljx@ecn.purdue.edu> (Scott A Stembaugh)
Subject: Running contest from Cluster node site
Message-ID: <9401110831.AA11214@en.ecn.purdue.edu>
Hi Gang:
We are suffering from what we believe is a somewhat unique problem.
When we try to run a contest from the same site that the DX Cluster
node is at we often crash the cluster. We run 2 computers, 1 for the
node and 1 for the logging (usually CT) which is hooked to the node
via a serial port. We have determined (we think) that the only time
we trash the node is when we are transmitting and the node is sending
a spot to the logging computer. While the serial line is 'open' is is
probably getting hit with RF that the cluster computer can't handle.
To cut down on the amt of RF we have put the 2 towers together and
are currently running abt a 6 inch serial cable. This has not
completely solved the problem, although it has helped.
Now I have come up with an idea, but don't know how to implement it.
I have been playing with the RXCLUSTER software which will receive
cluster info (spots, ANN, WWV, WX) without being connected. My daily
logging software also does a very good job of this (LOG-EQF). Can CT
do it? I tried to do it with CT but it duplicated all the spots for
however many people were connected to the cluster. Are there any
switches for CT that can make it handle spots without being onnected?
If we could make it work we could just setup a scanner with a tnc and
not bother the cluster CPU at all.
If you have any other suggestions besides the normal ones for dealing
with RF (bonding cases, grounding better, etc) I would welcome them
abunch.
vy 73,
--scott
|