Band Qsos Zones Countries
1.8 4 1 3
3.7 36 9 15
7 1159 30 73
14 1609 34 121
21 2521 33 126
28 1219 26 90
Total 6548 133 428
Score: 10,459,284 approx; haven't had time to look at log since returning
from Africa.
Multi-Multi; Operators: K6MC, N6AA, N6ZZ, VK5AI, W6XD, ZS6EZ, ZS6NW and
ZS6RI.
Comments: Callsign was frequently misunderstood, made S&P a real challenge.
Thunderstorms in area contributed to poor show on 80/160, but probably not
as much as European QRM covering us. Used N6TR program relatively
hassle-free. No radios broke during contest.
IMPORTANT NOTE: QSLs go to ZS6EZ, and will take awhile for printing and
distribution. Patience, please!
73 - Phil, N6ZZ aka N6ZZ@AOL.COM
>From David O. Hachadorian" <0006471356@mcimail.com Tue Nov 8 23:28:00 1994
From: David O. Hachadorian" <0006471356@mcimail.com (David O. Hachadorian)
Subject: K6LL SSCW Score
Message-ID: <32941108232823/0006471356PK2EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
K6LL, high power, single operator
80 76
40 482
20 424
15 384
-----
total 1366 x 77 = 210,364
My first venture into single operator, two radio. Slowly phased it in, and
by Sunday morning sorta had the hang of it. Only made 57 Q's on the second
radio. The radio shack had been totally torn apart the previous few days
getting the second radio and borrowed amp wired in. It's amazing that
anything worked at all! Used N6TRLog for the first time, with no major
problems, just a few little rough edges that may have been due to my lack of
familiarity.
Solar flare? It went unnoticed down here in the "banana belt," as k6xo calls
it.
The second radio was a used TS-830. The guy I bought it from had installed
two Fox - Tango 400 Hz. cw filters and believe me those filters are *nice*.
Much sharper than the two Kenwood 500's in the TS-850 sitting right next to
the 830, and no ringing or other adverse effects were noted. Gotta get those
in the next radio, whatever it is, if hardware filters are still used by
that time.
Exactly two minutes before the contest, RF started getting into the
computer. The lights on the keyboard started blinking like a cheap pinball
machine, the speaker started beeping, it all locked up and I had to go to
full power off to reboot. It happened immediately twice more, and I missed
the first twelve minutes of the contest frantically rearranging ground wires
and cables until It finally worked. I had just worked Tree on backscatter at
about 2045, and mentioned to him that I thought everything was ready. His
reply was "That's the first sign of danger." Prophetic.
Rarest sections: NWT(1), WY(1), PAC/AK/PQ(2 ea.)
Least rare: IL(66), MI(62), OH(62), STX(49)
Equipment:
Rig 1: TS-850, SB-220
Rig 2: TS-830, SB-220 (Borrowed. It's true friendship when somebody loans
an amplifier to a contester.)
Antennas, all on one 48' tower (no laughing, please)
80m - half sloper from 46'
40m - 2 el Cushcraft at 55 feet
20/15m rig 1 - KT34XA at 49 feet.
20m rig 2 - the same half sloper as above with an open switch at 50'
for 3/4 wavelength.
15m rig 2 - driven element of the Cushcraft 40m beam fed through a tuner.
Other stuff:
N6TRLog software
Dunestar Bandpass filters
Transmission line stubs. (Will post more on the stubs later in the week.)
Thanks to everyone for all the qso's. See you all in a couple of weeks.
Here's hoping for a ten meter novice opening from the Banana Belt. heh heh
Dave, K6LL
k6ll@mcimail.com
>From James White <0006492564@mcimail.com> Wed Nov 9 03:45:00 1994
From: James White <0006492564@mcimail.com> (James White)
Subject: LONG MSG - SS de K1ZX
Message-ID: <81941109034518/0006492564PK1EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
-----------------
Anatomy of an SS...for you left coasters, SS starts at 4PM over here
6:30 Saturday AM - alarm sounds
8:30 Breakfast with W1YL/W1CW-this year going to have station ready
by noon so I can take a nice nap before SS, allowing me to work 80 and 40
til late...the antennas are all working so there will be no pre-contest
tower work this year.
9:30 Start hooking up the keying lines for the two rigs into the
"blackbox" I have used for several years...then hook coaxes into appropriate
stations' coak switches, boot NA...keying is funky but it is early.
10:30 AM cannot get NA to surpress leading zeroes on
exchanges...call WC4E on the 'phone at AC4NJ (Jeff is my comuter guru -
he'll know how to loose the zeroes - NOT, he's been up and down the towers
there twice already, I wish him luck).......Really would like to use TR but
still haven't made the time to learn it. OK I'll adjust, boot up good ole
CT-7, I liked the colors on NA better but, its pretty much so same same and
I will use CT instead - no biggie. Keying still is funky...hmmm
11:00 Keying is still funky, guess I should find that "loose" cable
now......
11:30 Still no loose cables found
12:30 Have used up all of the ferrite doughnuts, and the keying from
the computer on radio number two is unintelligable on 10 meters...swap a few
cables around only to find the problem whilst seemingly fixed wasn't - there
is RF on the cables, while I hold them it is surpressed, the moment I stop
holding the cabling its back....hmm.
12:45 The inboard keyer on the Omni VI and an outboard keyer on the
Omni VI also seem to key it poorly...in addition to the problems keying
either radio, there is a problem with the OMNI VI...when you hit a dot
sometimes you get a "dit dah"....adjust the OMNI's keying to hardest setting
(choppiest) and the keying oddity problem isn't apparent, keying sounds like
hell though-hopefully I won't have to use the paddle much.
1:00 Still trying to find the weak link, there are a ton of grounds
on all the station equipment, lifting the ground to the KC keyer fixes the
ten meter keying problem...great....whooops, now its doing it on 15. Swap
keyers, nope, its not in the keyer....panic starting to set in
2:00 think problem is in the phenolic jack board on my black
box...hard wire key line...NOPE....
2:15 decide to trash black box...cannot figure what is different
with the setup, have used this combo for years, including this exact combo
of computer/radios/keyers in last NA contests....decide I have to use two
radios, now what.
2:30 Audio portion of blackbox is ok, set up second station with a
second paddle to a memory keyer...I will do it ole fashioned with "B K1ZX 70
SFLA" loaded in the keyers memory....just need to send call and number, and
then jump over to keyboard to fill in info for CT.
2:45 lay down and set alarm for 3:45...I am determined to get a lil
rest pre contest...
3:00 fall asleep
3:45 RINGGGGGGGGGGGG, its SHOWTIME
SS starts and I have my worst start since I had a 2 x 3 call...in
the first fifteen minutes I had five QSOs......on ten.....had I been
listening to the bands prior to sitting down in front of the rig at 2055 I
would have known to start on 15, right.....jeez. The first five hours of the
contest were way behind on my goal sheet-I could not get anything going on
20 meters AT ALL, and end up with 24 QSOs on 20 the first day-20 has been a
key for me in previous years, now what....try my low 40 dipole....no help.
Can it really be late enough that the high yagi will work on 40?
YES! It is true there is no meters like 40 meters. Spend the rest of
the night on 40 CQing including hours of 98, 93 and 89...I ain't never ran
em that fast in SS! 40 ends up being 55% of my QSOs...thank god for the
high beam (make that thanks, Dad!).
By the end of the contest I had gotten the crossed arm memory keyer
button, paddle pushin and hunt and peckin' into a rhythm of sorts....but I
tell ya - NEVER AGAIN! Next year I will test the station the week before,
FOR SURE!
Other SS notes:
Nebraska=no biggie, first one @2144 Saturday (total of 6 NE worked)
lots VE activity VE4-4, VE5-4, VE6-8, VE7-8...still missed KL7, they were
all /stateside...you automatic software section fill in guys take note!
Musts for contesting are a computer and a second radio. Although,
some of us are becoming super dependant on our computers! We're upset when
they don't tell us our on/off time!
I cannot see how anything other than the last contacts in an over 24
hour entry should be edited from the end of the log...anything else is sheer
manipulation...tell Billy you goofed on your summary sheet and that if
anyone claims you at the end of the contest yes he will see it in your log
but you have claimed only the first 24 hours worth of score!
Yes, Mark/Billy lets include hours operated in the line scores,
please.
Yes, frequency theft was rampant, sometimes I would be pulling out
an exchange and would take a second to reply........I prefer the olde:
.. . (I E) to check if a frequency is in use and an .-. (R) is a good
quick response.
(Q): di dit dit
(A): dee dahr dit
How can I crunch my CT log to show me a breakdown of contacts per
section like this weekends' N6TR users have...knowing this will be very
enlightening for future antenna planning.
I really love SS CW and contesting...my wife knows that, it is "my
thing" and she can see the pleasure it gives me...fair warning of oncoming
contests is given so she can schedule her time appropriately and when it is
contest weekend she wishes me GL. What's the big deal?
To the station :-) who did not work SFL....I cannot imagine it, the
Florida CW Contest Group had four full bore efforts by:
K1ZX ending up prox 1340 Q's
N4BP Mr. SFL in Sweepstakes CW
AC1O breaking 1K QSOs "A" power from repeaterville
WD4AHZ "A" intimidating me with a 13 Q lead in the first hour, ouch!
...plus some casual guys, too.
Congrats to the above, and WC4E-thanks for nipping at my ankles all
weekend, Jeff!
73-Thanks for all the Qs guys n gals (missed KU2Q)
Jim, K1zx
>From David O. Hachadorian" <0006471356@mcimail.com Wed Nov 9 04:13:00 1994
From: David O. Hachadorian" <0006471356@mcimail.com (David O. Hachadorian)
Subject: Stubs for adjacent band operation
Message-ID: <70941109041307/0006471356PK4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
While preparing for my first single operator two radio venture, I ran into
some severe RF interaction problems which at first looked overwhelming, but
which proved amazingly simple to completely eliminate, with the help of
transmission line stubs.
Since I live on a small 70 x 100 foot city lot, and have only one small 48
foot tower, all of my antennas are very close to each other. In fact, the
feedpoints of all the antennas are no more than six feet from each other.
With this intimate physical proximity, there was enough stray RF coming down
the feedlines to produce painful RF burns to the finger ("RF detector"),
when a transmitter was operating at only 50 watts into one of the nearby
antennas. I had purchased Dunestar bandpass filters, but I was afraid to
damage them to so much stray RF when the amplifiers were operating at the
1500 watt level. I had already smoked an Autek Antenna Analyzer by
inadvertently leaving it hooked up to an unused antenna while transmitting
on another antenna. Having seen some recent correspondence regarding
transmission line stubs on the contest reflector, I decided to try some
experiments in that direction.
Since I was primarily interested in operating two radios on adjacent bands
(i.e. 10/15, 15/20, 20/40, and 40/80), I took notice of an interesting
property of quarter wave stubs for 40 meters. These stubs, which are about
23 feet long, will alternately pass/reject the amateur bands 40, 20, 15, and
10 meters as shown in the table below:
BAND LENGTH SHORTED 23'STUB OPEN 23' STUB
40 .25 wave pass reject
20 .5 wave reject pass
15 .75 wave pass reject
10 1 wave reject pass
I built a pair of these stubs, one open and one shorted, and tested them in
the "reject" mode sequentially on each of the unused transmission lines, and
on all of the possible band/antenna combinations. The same feedlines that
produced burns at 50 watts were now totally cool to the touch at 1500 watts!
Operationally, the shorted stub is placed in the feedline anywhere after the
amplifier on 40 or 15 meters, and the open stub is used on the other
amplifier, which is on an adjacent band, 20 or 10 meters. For example, to
operate stations on 15 and 20 meters, put the shorted stub in the 15 meter
feedline, since it will pass 15 and reject 20. Put the open stub on the 20
meter feedline, since it will pass 20 and reject 15. I tuned the stubs to
7075, which makes them resonant also at 14150, 21225, and 28300. I made the
stubs out of RG-8 and tuned them with an old tube-type grid dip meter, using
the station receiver for accurate frequency determination. I sure wish I
hadn't smoked the Autek analyzer!
The concept of alternate pass/reject can be extended to 80 and 160 meters,
but more stubs need to be built. To operate stations on 40/80 meters, build
two quarter wave 80 m. stubs (about 46' long.) Leave one stub open, and put
it in the 40 m. feedline. Make the other stub shorted and put it in the 80
meter feedline.
Similarly, for 80/160 meters, make two quarter wave stubs for 160 meters.
Put the shorted stub on the 160 feedline and the open stub on the 80
feedline.
I recently used the 40 and 80 meter stubs in the CW Sweepstakes on adjacent
bands from 15 through 80 meters. Dunestar bandpass filters were also used
between the transceivers and amplifiers. At no time did I hear even the
SLIGHTEST HINT that there was a 1500w transmitter operating on the adjacent
band. The second harmonic from 80 could be heard on 40, and the second
harmonic from 40 could be heard on 20, but they sounded like just another
very loud station on the band, and produced no desensing or phase noise
outside the normal IF bandpass.
If the "wrong" stub is placed on the transmission line, received signals go
down by four to five s-units, indicating a rejection in the order of 24 to
30 dB. Not bad for a few bucks worth of coax. Note - DO NOT TRANSMIT ON THE
WRONG STUB! I don't know what will happen, but it will probable involve your
local fire department!
The folks who have lots of real estate and/or big towers to physically
separate their antennas may not need the extra rejection provided by
transmission line stubs, But where the antennas are close, the combination
of stubs and lumped constant bandpass filters definitely does the job.
Dave, K6LL
k6ll@mcimail.com
>From PARAT Gerard (Tel 34813272)" <parat@dassault-elec.fr Wed Nov 9 13:17:28
>1994
From: PARAT Gerard (Tel 34813272)" <parat@dassault-elec.fr (PARAT Gerard (Tel
34813272))
Subject: 1994 CQ WW SSB : F6FGZ
Message-ID: <19941109131728*/S=parat/O=dassault-elec/PRMD=fr/ADMD=/@MHS>
Hello,
First time in High Power category, this was not the year for high score.
73 Gerard / F6FGZ
parat@dassault-elec.fr
-+-+-+-+-+-
CQ WORLD WIDE DX CONTEST -- 1994
Call: F6FGZ Country: France
Mode: SSB Category: Single Operator High Power
BAND QSO QSO PTS PTS/QSO ZONES COUNTRIES
160 176 245 1.39 11 43
80 195 264 1.35 11 52
40 268 491 1.83 22 64
20 698 1558 2.23 28 88
15 534 1052 1.97 28 109
10 220 452 2.05 24 92
---------------------------------------------------
Totals 2091 4062 1.94 124 448 => 2,323,464
Continent Statistics
160 80 40 20 15 10 ALL percent
North America 35 28 82 330 162 18 655 31.2
South America 1 4 11 32 41 53 142 6.8
Europe 138 158 154 267 273 100 1090 52.0
Asia 1 2 13 52 29 14 111 5.3
Africa 2 4 5 13 18 33 75 3.6
Oceania 0 0 4 7 11 2 24 1.1
>From es@mvuss.att.com (Edward S Parsons +1 508 960 6722) Wed Nov 30 18:53:00
>1994
From: es@mvuss.att.com (Edward S Parsons +1 508 960 6722) (Edward S Parsons +1
508 960 6722)
Subject: W1MK 80m score
Message-ID: <9411301855.AA23159@ig1.att.att.com>
W1MK CQ WW CW 80m score:
QSOs Zones Cty
---- ----- ----
633 24 94
Score: 205,700 pts
System: IC765, 4-1000 homebrew amp (1.5kW), 4-square
>From Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> Wed Nov 23 04:36:39 1994
From: Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> (Steve Harrison)
Subject: K0GU ARRL 160 Score
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.90.941205163131.11167D-100000@eagle>
On Mon, 5 Dec 1994, Jay Kesterson K0GU x6826 wrote:
> Kind of surprised me, frequencies weren't that hard to come by,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>unless you wanted to be in the window :-).<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> Oh well, I probably PO somebody myself.
Oh, were you one of those violating the gentlemen's agreement about
reserving the DX window for DX who was CQing within the DX window, and
about whom everybody has been complaining about on the Cluster and here?
If so, you can bet there are a LOT of people out here POed at you! Steve,
KO0U/4
>From Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> Wed Nov 23 23:49:49 1994
From: Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> (Steve Harrison)
Subject: OO reports during contest
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.90.941206114522.1463B-100000@eagle>
Unless things have changed, all ARRL field appointments are still at the
pleasure of the Section Manager. You should probably send a copy of the
OO notice and a short explanation of your viewpoint of the OO's
notification to the Section Manager of whatever section the OO was
within. Obviously, if the OO was a W6, it may be difficult to identify,
exactly, which section he is within. A request directly to the ARRL with
an explanation that you wish to complain to the OO's boss (the Section
Manager) would most likely provide you with the information.
I would say that if you get no response from the Section Manager within a
month or so, take it to the Division Director.
73, Steve KO0U/4 <sharrison@sysplan.com>
>From Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> Wed Nov 23 23:24:45 1994
From: Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> (Steve Harrison)
Subject: 160 Test Soap Box (LONG)
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.90.941206104022.1463A-100000@eagle>
On Mon, 5 Dec 1994 n0dh@comtch.iea.com wrote:
>
> 1) A "mandatory" DX window 5 khz for listening and 5 khz for calling a DX
> station who is calling CQ. Any one abusing this window and using it to
> call CQ would be DISQUALIFIED.
A recent editorial by K1AR in his CQ contest column explained, in terms
most of us have rarely heard before, just why it is that ham radio
contest sponsors are so reluctant to establish rules that require
disqualification of the rule breakers. I suggest you all break out your
magazines and bifocals and look for the column (not only do I not
remember whether it was in the October, November or December issue, some
of the comments I've read on this reflector over the last few months lead
me to believe that very few of these subscribers bother to crack open
their magazines, let alone read the fine print. Who knows: you may find
the answer to that question about which you've been meaning to start a new
thread, thus saving us all some bandwidth, which I can then personally
use to expound my own jaundiced and biased opinions...:-))
Briefly, what John brought up is that it is far too easy for a competitor
to use another station's callsign to cause that station to be observed as
apparently breaking the rules, and thus eligible for disqualification.
Although John seemed to be talking about such things happening among
multi-multis in Europe, a simple extension of his thought would obviously
apply to the 160 meter contest, not to mention almost any other ham radio
competition taking place over the airwaves. This is one big reason that
the WRTC competition has judges physically present at each contestant's
station; to actually lay eyeballs on what is going on. There is NO WAY
that it would be feasible to have judges present for less-organized
competitions such as the various DX or Sweepstakes contests.
A perfect example of how easy it is for somebody to get a perfectly
legitimate contester in trouble with his peers took place during the
September VHF QSO Party. A ham was observed at a swapmeet in
Gaithersburg, Maryland with large signs inviting all and sundry to work
one of the many highly-competitive multi-operator stations within
handie-talkie range. This guy went so far as to set up a tower with small
yagis for several bands that appeared to be aimed directly at that station
(K3MQH, located somewhere near Gettysburg, Pennsylvania). You could step
right up and connect the coax from any of the antennas to your HT and
work whomever you found.
The problem was that two operators at another multi-operator station that
was nowhere near as competitive decided that this activity had to have
been sponsored by K3MQH, and those two then began yelling and screaming
to all within ear and eyesight how aggrieved they, personally, felt about
the situation. There was never any attempt on their part to find out just
who the guy at the swapmeet was, why he did what he did, or even if the
swapmeet guy even knew any of the operators at K3MQH. MQH, to his credit,
did not bother to respond to the two complainers. He DID, however,
respond to dispassioned inquiries as to whether he had anything to do
with the swapmeet guy or his activities, and left it to others to spread
the truth of the situation around the various networks (which WZ1V, in a
recent message on this reflector, did for this reflector).
Whether or not MQH actually did have anything to do with the swapmeet guy
and his activities, the point here is that it is far too easy for any of
us to do something, even unknowingly, that can reflect great discredit
upon a perfectly innocent and legitimate contester or contest station.
This is what John Dorr is trying to point out in his column about why it
is nearly impossible to base disqualification criterial upon the actual
operating activities during a contest; it is far too difficult to prove
that any particular station or operator did, in fact, perform the
offending action; and far too easy to either innocently or
purposely implicate another.
What this means, of course, is that the only real recourse for most of us
to keep the unruly in line remains peer pressure. Unfortunately, it seems
to be a tenet of human nature to criticize the actions and beliefs of
others without due consideration of the situation from another's
viewpoint; thus, many of us have tended to not utilize to the fullest our
abilities to pressure the offender to conform to the norm (or, in this
case, a "gentleman's agreement") because we are afraid that we may not
know all of the facts; this is the attitude taken by the vast majority of
contest sponsors.
However, there are any number of ways for individuals to express
displeasure at another's actions, some overt, some covert. If any of us
really want to see offenders cease unethical and/or illegal action, I
would suggest that it is up to each of us, individually, to take whatever
action we, personally, feel is appropriate to that end, because the
contest sponsors' hands are effectively tied by their fear of convicting
the innocent.
73, Steve KO0U/4 <sharrison@sysplan.com>
>From Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> Sat Nov 26 01:09:39 1994
From: Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> (Steve Harrison)
Subject: Callsigns
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.90.941208130240.1463F-100000@eagle>
On Wed, 7 Dec 1994 W7NI@delphi.com wrote:
> Anyway, on 27MHz there are no offical callsigns these days. You can
> use just about anything you want including your ham call. In fact, you
> can use anybody's ham call you want. I wonder how long it would take
> to change that rule if N4RH started showing up a lot on 27 MHz?
>
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!! Somewhere, I can't remember exactly where, the FCC
regulations specifically PROHIBIT the use of US ham calls in anything
other than a ham band. This question came up just a couple of months ago
in connection with another thread, I mentioned I had read in one of the
beginner's columns of QST that you cannot use your call on any other
telecommunications service, and somebody else kindly looked up the
reference in Part 97. Irrespective of WHATEVER other services do or are
allowed to do, YOU ARE, BY HAVING ACCEPTED YOUR HAM OPERATOR'S LICENSE,
REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE RULES AND REGULATIONS UNDER WHICH THAT LICENSE IS
GRANTED!
Just for old times' sake, can somebody dig out their rule book and find
the appropriate reference? 73, Steve KO0U/4
>From Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> Sun Nov 27 04:59:26 1994
From: Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> (Steve Harrison)
Subject: VHF FM Contest Times & Freqs
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.90.941209164120.1463L-100000@eagle>
On Thu, 8 Dec 1994, Jim Stahl wrote:
>
> The December 1994 QST contains two items promoting the use of FM
> in VHF contests: "FM Contesting on Taylor Mountain" (P.71) and a
> description in the June VHF QSO Party results of the K6MEP effort
> to encourage FM contacts with members of its unnamed club (p.
> 114). I applaud such efforts to expand awareness of and
> participation in contests.
>
SERIOUS V/UHF contesters moan, groan and wonder what planet the ARRL is
on every time they see promotion of the use of FM in V/UHF contests of
the sort seen in QST over the past several years. One of the biggest
controversies that is NOT going to go away is that the evils of the use
of FM in these contests detract severely from the whole concept of V/UHF
weak signal contest work. Almost without exception, those who are
addicted to such contests would be happier were FM operation to be
completely outlawed as a valid contest mode. This will not happen,
obviously, because it is cheapest and easiest for newly-licensed
operators and potential new contester blood to start out with 2 meter FM
equipment. But that does not change the facts: FM simplex operation is
almost universally abhorred by serious weak-signal V/UHF operators, just
as CW is by most no-code Techs.
NO FLAMES FROM THE WEST COASTERS, NOW!!! I grew up on the West Coast, I
operated V/UHF there for almost 17 years, and I KNOW that without 2 meter
FM, it would be extremely difficult for any station on the West Coast to
be competitive in a V/UHF contest. Similarly, it is extremely difficult
for any station in the midwest to be competitive against the East Coast
in DX contests. And, it is almost impossible for an East Coast station to
win Sweepstakes against the southwest stations. These are the facts of life,
and no amount of flaming, rule changing or handicapping can equalize them.
> It's not enough just to say try FM. Specific frequencies
> and suggested times need to be established.
>
All ARRL VHF contest announcements ALREADY clearly state that only
commonly-accepted FM simplex channels shall be used for such contest QSOs
except that 146.52 may NOT be utilized.
73, Steve, KO0U/4 <sharrison@sysplan.com>
>From Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> Sun Nov 27 05:19:11 1994
From: Steve Harrison <sharriso@sysplan.com> (Steve Harrison)
Subject: What's a valid QSO?
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.90.941209170959.1463M-100000@eagle>
On Fri, 9 Dec 1994, Trey Garlough wrote:
> If you call the guy, and he comes back with YOURCALL DUPE, then go
> ahead and put him in your log at that time. He may or may not log
> the QSO, but if he thinks you are a dupe, then you are already in
> his log. This will be good enough for most contest log checking
> and will be good enough for QSLing, since the QSL manager will (should)
> look up all the contacts made with you when he replies to your card.
>
This certainly will not work for me since I do everything I possibly can
to avoid logging dupes. Since I'm not a super-contester to whom rate is
everything, I often go out of my way to get a dupe out of the log right
then and there rather than accept CT's DUPE notice.
And I'm not the only little guy who feels this way, I discovered during
FD last year. Both of the other two guys in my small local club who also
use CT were adamant about not allowing CT to log a dupe. I dare say that
there will be many others out there who also have this perfectly
reasonable attitude.
I've had a couple guys call me whom I had worked before in V/UHF contests
and whom I told them were dupes. They insisted they were not, and each
time I go back to identify the date and time of the first Q, they said
their dupe sheet was messed up so they could not read my call or my call
was busted (such as KAY-ZERO-OH-YOU rather than KAY-OH-ZERO-YOU). Made me
feel a lot better knowing that I was entered correctly, at last, in
somebody else's log, and simultaneously, made me wonder how many other
logs out there were incorrect.
73, Steve KO0U/4 <sharrison@sysplan.com>
>From w6go@netcom.com (Jay O'Brien - W6GO) Sun Oct 2 00:15:51 1994
From: w6go@netcom.com (Jay O'Brien - W6GO) (Jay O'Brien - W6GO)
Subject: Want 80M antenna modeled
Message-ID: <199410012315.QAA09081@netcom5.netcom.com>
I would like some help from you folks who run antenna modeling
software. A new 80M antenna has been installed today at W6GO and
local comparisons with the KLM rotary dipole (at 153") show that the
new antenna is at least an S-unit better than the KLM.
The antenna is supported between two towers that are 286' apart.
The top support is at 100' on both towers, but due to sag, the top
wire of the antenna is about 90' above ground. The antenna is two
full-wave loops. The loops are rectangular. The top and bottom
lengths are 80', the vertical length is 60', thus with 280' per
loop. The centers of the loops are 140' apart (or said another way,
the closest vertical wires of the two loops are 60' apart). The
feedpoints of the loops are in the center of the bottom horizontal
wire. A half-wave section of 450 ohm transmitting twin lead is
connected to each loop's feedpoint, and the two half-wave sections
are paralleled at the end away from the antenna. A 1:1 balun is
used at this point to match the 50 ohm line that runs about 400' to
the operating position.
I expected the antenna to be resonant at 3.6 MHz, and that is
exactly where I see the best SWR, which is 1.62:1. The antenna is
just over 2:1 at 3500 and 3700. I also see a resonance at 7050 kHz
with a 2:1 SWR. When I put the feedlines from the two loops in
series, I see a resonance at about 1750 kHz with a 3:1 SWR.
Questions: What would happen if I reverse the feedline (phase) to
one loop? What should I do to make the antenna work at 3800 kHz,
preferably something relay switchable at the balun location? Is
there any point to putting the two loops in series and trying to
resonate it on 160? What should I expect from the antenna on 40
meters? With reversed phase on 40 Meters? What is the expected
gain of this antenna on usable bands with the loops paralleled, in
series and with one loop reversed in parallel and in series? Is
there anything I am overlooking with this antenna?
The dimensions of this antenna were influenced by the physical
constraints here. The flat-top length is longer to get the lower
horizontal wire off the ground to clear the grazing cattle. Maybe
the fact that the lower wire is higher makes up for it being "too
close" to the upper wire? By the way, the antenna is broadside to
Japan and South America.
Your comments, suggestions, and predictions will be most appreciated.
73, Jay
w6go@netcom.com
>From Victor Burns-KI6IM <vburns@netcom.com> Mon Oct 3 01:08:47 1994
From: Victor Burns-KI6IM <vburns@netcom.com> (Victor Burns-KI6IM)
Subject: CQWW M/S 10 Minute Rule
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9410021612.A4885-0100000@netcom9>
Did we get a real answer to this? Perhaps I misssed it! I for one do not
want jeopordize being classified M/M by mistake.
**************************************************************************
My final input is simple; No three bands can show up in the log in ANY ten
(10) minute period. It's that simple!
**************************************************************************
Let's get a ruling that is direct. The bottom line is there is no
difference in the run or mult station-They are the same! The answer
should be simple and the above covers it very directly without confusion.
__
---==-------||-----==--- Victor V. Burns - KI6IM / V31VB
||
---===-------||-----===--- V31DX - THE CUBA LIBRE CONTEST CLUB
|| PO Box 9794
---===-------||-----===--- Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067
|| 619-744-6836
----===-------||-----===---- e_mail vburns@netcom.com
||
----===-------||-----===---- "Heh...your signal is really wide".
|| "Thank you. It cost a lot of money
----===--------||------===---- to be this wide!"
||
----===--------||------===---- Has anyone ever told you that "You
|| have a very nice yagi"?
----===---------||-------===----
||
----==----------||-------===----
||
~~
>From Celia Tony Becker <becker@shell.portal.com> Mon Oct 3 01:08:59 1994
From: Celia Tony Becker <becker@shell.portal.com> (Celia Tony Becker)
Subject: CQP '94 score, QXQ, and Hidden Antenna challenge
Message-ID: <199410030008.RAA27155@jobe.shell.portal.com>
California QSO Party -- 1994
Call: AE0M County: Santa Clara
QXQ: Low Power, Poor Ant. Category: Single Operator
MODE QSO QSO PTS MULTS
California QSO Party -- 1994
Call: AE0M County: Santa Clara
QXQ: Low Power, Poor Ant. Category: Single Operator
MODE QSO QSO PTS MULTS
CW 143 429 0
SSB 130 260 0
-----------------------------------------
Totals 273 689 49 = 33,781
Equipment Description:
RIG: FT-990 & 486DX2-66 MHz running CT9. ANT: My CC&R's prohibit external
antennas, so I have an indoor 20m, 15m, and 10m fan dipole, stuck to the
attic rafters in my townhouse with push pins (green for 20m, blue for 15m,
yellow for 10m) and a nearly invisible 40m delta loop in the eucalyptus
over the garden wall.
I am still looking for (non-sarcastic) helpful ideas for equally invisable
antennas. When (if?) I get enough responses, I'll summarize for the net.
So far the count is 2 helpful, 1 semi-constructive, and the rest shall
remain unaccounted for. I was told that this reflector would generate
many responses, as the best of the best are all here.
How about the half-square antenna? My ground resistance would be marginal
but the heavy clay/adobe here in the west valley can't be bad enough to
perform worse than the delta loop.
Club Affiliation: Northern Califonia Contest Club
AE0M, Tony Becker - becker@shell.portal.com - Silicon Valley, U.S.A.
|