Just wanted to let the folks on here know that I now have a new
Internet address. My old one will no longer be checked regularly.
New address: WR3O@isd2.tdec.state.tn.us
73, Kirk WR3O ( WR3O@isd2.tdec.state.tn.us )
>From tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) Fri Feb 4 20:57:28 1994
From: tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Subject: KR0Y doubtful in Sprint CW.
Message-ID: <9402042057.AA14705@cmicro.com>
Yes, KR0Y may not be able to participate in the CW Sprint contest this
Saturday. He was hoping to extend his winning streak to 10.
It seems while he was returning from a business trip in Seattle, he was
attacked in the airport by a masked man with a police club. The club
made contact with his right wrist and it appears he will not be able to
send CW for at least a week or two. Hopefully he will be back in shape
in time for the International DX Contest.
Police are looking for clues are are focused on finding someone who would
benefit from Jeff's absence. In particular, anyone from the state of
Oregon who might shop from the same shopping center that Tonya Harding
skates at.
Any clues should be sent to the National Enquire.
>From charlie.morrison@chowda.sbs.com (Charlie Morrison) Fri Feb 4 21:38:53
>1994
From: charlie.morrison@chowda.sbs.com (Charlie Morrison) (Charlie Morrison)
Subject: ARRLDX-Another Option-1M!
Message-ID: <9402041800132843@chowda.sbs.com>
RE: ARRL DX Reporting - Another View - Achievement.
I've reviewed the ARRL DX Results in QST October 1993 pages 105-121.
What's printed in the results NOW:
---------------------------------
-Callsign/Score/Band Breakdowns for 10 S/O, 10 S/O Asst., 5 M/S, 5 M2,
5M/M
= 35 per mode = 70.
>> These presently take up less than 1/2 of a page in the Results.
**(Apporoximately 100 breakdowns would be a 1/2 page.)**
How many exceeded the 1 Million Point Level ?
---------------------------------------------
There were 32 S/O CW Scores (All power levels) over 1 Meg.
There were 67 S/O/A + M/S + M2 + M/M CW Scores over 1 Meg.
There were 53 S/O Ph Scores (All power Levels) over 1 Meg.
There were 55 S/O/A + M/S + M2 + M/M Scores over 1 Meg.
---
207 = 1 Full page.
Historically, the 1991 event produced 228 scores over 1 Meg.
1988 yeilded 125 and 1986 had merely 50 ! Much of the recent upswing
must be attributed to both improved propagation and the impact of
Packetcluster and the S/O Asst. category.
(I doubt there will be ONLY 50 scores over 1 meg in the next few
years.)
1,000,000 at 3 points/QSO =
1000 QSOs x 334 Band countries -or- 1667 QSOs x 200 Band countries
Each of us recalls, vividly, the very first time in which we exceeded
this threshhold in our contesting experience. Although many will be
hard pressed to achieve a score of this level during the next few
years,
(even from the East) this is a desirable format. When a full page is
NOT
filled by 1 Meg Scores, lower the limit.......
Also: Expand the Single-band Top Ten Boxes to show QSOs/Mults.
-This would occupy an additional 1/8 page.
Also: Expand the W/VE LP + QRP Top Ten Boxes to include QSOs/Mults too.
-This would occupy a fraction of a page.
Charlie WZ1R
charlie.morrison@chowda.sbs.com
>From len@ariel.coe.neu.edu (Leonard Kay) Fri Feb 4 23:58:06 1994
From: len@ariel.coe.neu.edu (Leonard Kay) (Leonard Kay)
Subject: electronic log submission
Message-ID: <9402042358.AA03603@ariel.coe.neu.edu>
>>But I still don't think submitting logs electronically is what make you
>>a competitor verus a participant. I think the electronic logs should be
>>ENCOURAGED, but not required.
>>
>>73, Jim, WA6SDM
>>jholly@cup.hp.com
>>
First, Jim, congrats on getting the RTTY logs formatted!
Now, why shouldn't electronic logs be *required* - FROM THOSE WHO USE
LOGGING SOFTWARE? You've already got the log on disk - so why not mail
the disk, with log file suitably formatted (or even better - upload it
directly). Sure, if you still log with pencil and paper, then you should
have the option to submit it that way. Just don't accept paper logs churned
out by CT, or NA, or whatever.
Of course, this comes with an implied responsibility to the contest
organizers: if the logs are all computerized, we should expect and demand
more extensive, better contest reporting (and score checking/analysis).
Oh, and Jim's right - *everyone's* a competitor, no matter what!
Len KB2R
>From Skelton, Tom" <TSkelton@engineer.clemsonsc.NCR.COM Fri Feb 4 18:05:00
>1994
From: Skelton, Tom" <TSkelton@engineer.clemsonsc.NCR.COM (Skelton, Tom)
Subject: FW: QSL survey results
Message-ID: <2D528EBD@admin.ClemsonSC.NCR.COM>
Only one reply from a multi-multi op saying they don't QSL.
Another very active contester said he got too far behind and it became
too expensive.
73 Barry
In one contest, I had a European contester ask me why Wxxxxxx
(multi-multi contest station I won't bother to mention) never
responds to his request for qsl's. I told him I didn't know, because
I thought he "should". However, when you consider a major multi-
multi makes thousands upon thousands of DX QSO's a year, the
QSL costs (money and time) are signification. So are, however,
multi-yagi/tower stations.....food for thought. Realistically, I can
see how you can't have time to maintain a large station and
answer hundreds of bureau QSL's a month.
73, Tom WB4IUX
ps: A good acquaintance of mine in Atlanta actually paid
someone to sit down and answer thousands of bureau QSL's he
had received. With his work, travel, and normal radio
operating/dx'ing/contesting, he simply didn't hours in the day
to devote to QSL'ing (without giving up something else important).
>From kitagawa@ee.ES.Osaka-U.AC.JP (Masahiro KITAGAWA) Sat Feb 5 06:15:18 1994
From: kitagawa@ee.ES.Osaka-U.AC.JP (Masahiro KITAGAWA) (Masahiro KITAGAWA)
Subject: IC-736 [was: Re: Contest/DXpedition Radios]
References: <199402041927.LAA19981@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <9402050615.AA12265@qed.laser.ee.es.osaka-u.ac.jp>
I am also interested in IC-736 and have just got a brochure.
Most of the features are already listed by Sandy. So I just
add a few.
1) Builtin switching regulator accepts: AC85-135V / AC187-265V [switchable]
2) Weight: 10.5kg
3) Power MOSFET final amplifier: Motorola MRF174 push-pull
4) 6m output is: 50W [but adjustable to 100W] {direct info, not from brochure}
If we do this "adjustment", Japanese Post & Comm ministry
regards it as "homebrew". How honorable!
Icom will probably sell 100W version outside Japan.
5) Quick split: presetable shift width
6) Optional CW filters at 2nd IF (9.0106MHz) and 3rd IF (455kHz),
bandwidth 500Hz or 250Hz each
7) Builtin antenna tuner: HF: 16.7-150ohm / 6m: 20-125ohm
8) Outlook is: very similar to IC-737
masa
*--- **** ***-- *--* *-* *-* QRZ? de JH3PRR
Masahiro Kitagawa <kitagawa@ee.es.osaka-u.ac.jp>
I live in Osaka prefecture to which Icom is paying tax.
But my rig is Kenwood TS-930SA :-)
>From Saty NAKAMURA <QFH00345@niftyserve.or.jp> Sat Feb 5 23:33:00 1994
From: Saty NAKAMURA <QFH00345@niftyserve.or.jp> (Saty NAKAMURA)
Subject: Contest/DXpedition Radios
Message-ID: <199402051440.XAA16144@inetnif.niftyserve.or.jp>
Hello to all the contesters who gather here. I have got a passport to
access to Internet and became a subscriber to CQ-Contest-Reflector
very recently.
As being an owner of an IC-736 for a month, I feel that I must add some
more comments on it to what Sandy and Masa said.
1)
Unlike IC-737 (or IC-732 in Japan), RIT and XIT are clearable. I believe
that contesters will like this.
2)
During Split operation, "Lock" button locks the receiving frequency only.
This means you can still change the transmitting frequency by pressing
"XFC" even if "Lock" is on.
3)
CW Pitch is not variable. I would like to modify the rig to adjust the
pitch to 400Hz, although it does not seem so easy.
4)
No "RX ANT IN / OUT" jacks are provided. I have installed these jacks
already.
I am now using this IC-736 with two 500Hz CW filters as a sub-rig to an
IC-760PRO (Japanese model of IC765), and I am satisfied with this rig in
spite of the points mentioned above 3) and 4). I cannot use any rig
without modifications anyway.
Although I think the weight of IC-736 "10.5kg" is a bit heavy for Contest-
Expedition Radio, it is still within the tolerable range considering its
features and the built-in power supply. Actually I took a much heavier
rig "IC-760PRO" with me when I joined AH0K for '93 CQ WW CW.
73,
Saty JE1JKL/NH6J/9M6NA
>From H. Ward Silver" <hwardsil@seattleu.edu Sat Feb 5 16:18:49 1994
From: H. Ward Silver" <hwardsil@seattleu.edu (H. Ward Silver)
Subject: Contest QSLing
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9402050848.A20765-b100000@bach>
You bet you get a lot of cards at the big multi-multis...UPS groans
carrying the boxes! Even 100% QSL after the contest takes a lot of time
to print labels, box 'em up, etc.
An idea I've had for a while is on-line QSL credit. Really, most of the
contest QSLs just want a QSO acknowledgement and couldn't care less about
the card itself. Most of the high-volume QSLs are nothing to hang on the
wall...no offense intended!
Why not have an on-line QSL service, financed by the QSLer and QSLee,
in which contest logs would be stored for access by QSLers? Each QSLer
would submit a list of the desired QSOs. The system looks each one up,
verifies the QSO, and submits the list to the indicated award manager. Or
maybe the QSLer can submit the list to award managers and they can access
the data base. It can work any number of ways.
There are simple control mechanisms to allow the log submitters to
maintain as much control as they wish over acknowledgements.
Just think, you could have a DXCC "account" which would forward verified
QSOs to ARRL's DXCC computer for automatic credit! And save all those
cards and stamps and envelopes and time for filling out cards which go to
those new friends overseas you work between contests.
Even DX-peditions could use it, but it would cut down on the
contributions. Nor would those snazzy photo cards get sent. It's
probably just a good idea for contest QSLs. What say?
73, Ward N0AX
hwardsil@seattleu.edu
|