PLS EMAIL LIST OF OPERATIONS FROM CARRIBEAN IN CQWW CW.
>From Mayer, Eliot" <emayer@analogic.com Fri Nov 10 14:23:00 1995
From: Mayer, Eliot" <emayer@analogic.com (Mayer, Eliot)
Subject: CW SS QRP Scores
Message-ID: <30A39C5E@cda>
Hi all. I was hoping to find out if I made the top-10
QRP in CW SS, and WO1N just suggested I try this mailing
list. I see that lots of SS discussion is already in
progress, and hope that I didn't miss what I was looking
for.
I also saw a message that tried to make me feel guilty
that I guest operated at a big station. I've done plenty
of SS's from my humble home QTH, and I really had a blast
this time, pumping 5W into K1EA's awesome antennas. Both
approaches have their merit.
Anyhow, I had approximately 651 QSOs (approximately? yes,
I actually paper-logged from Ken's shack, and have to
double check) in 73 sections, for 95,046 points.
Is there a claimed QRP score listing somewhere?
73,
Eliot Mayer, W1MJ
emayer@analogic.com
>From Patrick Barkey <pbarkey@wp.bsu.edu> Fri Nov 10 17:45:29 1995
From: Patrick Barkey <pbarkey@wp.bsu.edu> (Patrick Barkey)
Subject: QSLs Deter Contest Operation
Message-ID: <s0a34952.054@wp.bsu.edu>
>>> Sean E. Kutzko <tigger@prairienet.org> 11/10/95 07:22am >>>
writing in response to N6AA's appraisal that DX operations are inhibited
by expectations of QSLs:
>Getting QSL's if you are in a semi-rare to rare place is part of the game;
> an occupational hazard, if you will.
If you mean by this comment that this is a common expectation shared by
many thousands of hams whose behavior cannot be instantaneously
changed, then I agree. But if you mean that this is the way it has to be,
then I totally disagree.
In an era when it is possible to make over 10,000 QSOs in a 48-hour
period, I think the notion that a QSL is a "courtesy" due after a QSO
needs to be updated. There must be some other way to fufill the needs
of award chasers to get a confirmation of a contact other than the
exchange of expensive piece of paper through the international mail.
As a CONTESTer, I don't care a whit about whether or not someone
sends me a QSL card -- but I definitely do want them on for the contest.
I answer QSLs sent to me purely as a defensive measure -- I don't want
to get anyone upset at me for not doing it.
> I feel that this is a reasonable, albeit unfortunate, solution. If you aren't
> willing to answer the cards from the folks that call you, you shouldn't
> be calling "CQ Contest" in the first place.
Not on the CONTEST reflector, for reasons stated above. QSLing places
radically assymetric responsibilities on sender and recipient. I'd love to
see more BY's on the air -- imagine how a large influx of Asian
contesters would throw the contesting pecking order into tumult -- and
can't imagine anything as silly as an outdated QSL custom being
important enough to contesters as a justifiable reason for keeping them
out.
-- Pat
WA8YVR
>From Steve Sacco <0006901972@mcimail.com> Fri Nov 10 17:56:00 1995
From: Steve Sacco <0006901972@mcimail.com> (Steve Sacco)
Subject: Contest/QSLing "Problems"
Message-ID: <15951110175651/0006901972DC4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
-- [ From: Steve Sacco KC2X * EMC.Ver #2.5.03 ] --
I'm thinking that the thread this subject has taken might
need a little nudge in a more positive direction.
The orginal problem was this: that some "rare" DX
stations, which we as contesters would very much like to
be active in our favorite 'tests, may not be QRV due to the
burden of QSLing the QSOs which are generated from their
efforts.
I think we need to stop right here, and shed our "Rich American" perspective (I
say "American" because so far, only U.S. ops have offered their opinions), and
realize that in some countries, people make something like 14 cents/week.
It is very obvious that the costs of QSLing are too great a burden for them to
shoulder. We should be thankful that
they have the ethics to feel they have an obligation to respond to QSL
requests; let's not discourage that kind
of thinking.
Let's face it; if they are QRV during a 'test, it's to help EVERYONE ELSE, not
themselves! They generally have no
competition from their country, and they're not going to
beat whoever's at EA8 or V2 or wherever! They know this!
So come on, folks! Here's an opportunity for the contest
community: Solve the problem! Perhaps contest clubs in
some of the "richer" countries could team with club or
personal stations in some of "rare" countries, and arrange
to handle the QSLing chores for contest QSOs. This could
create good will between the Amateurs in both countries,
encourage more casual DXers and contesters to work these
stations during the 'tests (because they know they will be
able to obtain a QSL) and keep these great mults on the air!
There are sure to be dozens of better, more imaginative
answers! Let's go! Solve the problem, don't complain!
As to SS QSL problems, rather than make snide remarks, if
you are aware that a station you have QSLed is on the
reflector, and has not responded to your request, why not
pursue the matter privately with that person via e-mail?
Well, it's a beautiful day here in Central Florida - I've
taken the day off from work to assemble an antenna or two,
and then I've got some rotator problems to figure out
before CQWW CW.
73, and think those positive thoughts!
Steve KC2X
ssacco@mcimail.com
Narcoosee, Florida
>From ac1o@sunken.gate.net (Walt Deemer) Fri Nov 10 16:51:17 1995
From: ac1o@sunken.gate.net (Walt Deemer) (Walt Deemer)
Subject: KR0Y
Message-ID: <9511101651.2tlj@sunken.gate.net>
KR0Y, commenting on his awesome 1358 QSO low power SS outing, said:
>Over the last year I've seen a few comments on the reflector about how us
>hired guns hide behind big stations, and that it would be nice to see what
we
>can do from a "normal home station". Next question ? :)
Yeah, Jeff: Why don't you try operating from K1TN's 1960 SuperStation(tm)
--
running 4.9 watts??
(Oh, hell, don't bother; you'd walk all over us doing THAT, too!!)
Congrats, OM, on a *truly* outstanding accomplishment. Some of us can but
watch (and listen) in awe and admiration at the incredible skills of
others...
73, Walt, AC1O/4
>From George Cutsogeorge <0006354141@mcimail.com> Fri Nov 10 18:29:00 1995
From: George Cutsogeorge <0006354141@mcimail.com> (George Cutsogeorge)
Subject: Contest QSLing.
Message-ID: <60951110182906/0006354141PK4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
There is a very easy way to solve the Contest QSL problem.
That is to give QSL confirmation for the major awards from
the contest logs themselves. The ARRL used to do this for
DXCC and some of my countries are confirmed this way. I
don't know why it was stopped and maybe we could have a
comment by an ARRL representative.
The cost would be minimal using email to send in the logs.
Of course this method has limitations, but it would help.
George, W2VJN. gcutso@mcimail.com
>From jrouse@dc.infi.net (John L. Rouse) Wed Nov 8 19:39:28 1995
From: jrouse@dc.infi.net (John L. Rouse) (John L. Rouse)
Subject: QSLs Deter Contest Operation
Message-ID: <199511101845.NAA24353@moe.infi.net>
>I'll second that!!!! There are some CONTESTERS on this reflector who
>seem to dislike answering QSL requests... even when I include an SASE!
>
>Bob ki5ez
>
--------
Amen to that! Last year I inserted my big toe into the 160 contest and came
away thrilled at having logged 38 states. I assumed, erroneously as it turns
out, that these dedicated contesters, overjoyed at having upped their scores
with my QSO, would answer my QSL request (accompanied by SASE, natch). Wrong.
To date, my rate of return hovers at 15 percent. My teeth tingle every time
I see one of those non-QSLing calls here on the reflector, usually
pontificating about someone else's alleged failings. However, I won't give
up -- I enjoy 160 too much for that. I'll try out my new antennas and upped
wattage in the next
160 contest and hope I encounter a better sort of contester -- one who
answers QSL requests from a neophyte. After all, isn't it in vogue to make
attempts at enouraging newbies to the contest world, or did I miss something?
73, John KA3DBN
/-------------------------------------------------------------------\
John L. Rouse Packet: KA3DBN@KA3RFE.MD.USA.NOA
Capital-Gazette Communications FAX: (301) 464-7027
jrouse@dc.infi.net VOICE MAIL: (301) 262-3700 X200
'CQ DELTA X-RAY....OVER'
\--------------------------------------------------------------------/
>From David & Barbara Leeson <0005543629@mcimail.com> Fri Nov 10 18:45:00 1995
From: David & Barbara Leeson <0005543629@mcimail.com> (David & Barbara Leeson)
Subject: QSLing
Message-ID: <21951110184512/0005543629NA2EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
Many years ago I read with great interest an article by Hugo Gernsback
titled "Will We Go to the Stars?" The thesis was that it will always be
cheaper to send zero-rest-mass particles (photons) than finite-rest-mass
particles (matter), so communications will ultimately dominate trans-
portation. This concept helped me focus my career and hobby.
So why can't we figure out a communications-based rather than mail-based
method of confirming QSO's? It seems ridiculous to send a hunk of cardboard
through the mail at a cost of many times the cost of the QSO itself, just
to be able to convince a sponsor to issue an award certificate for DXCC
and the like.
Barb and I ran into Dick Baldwin, W1RU, then of ARRL at the 1979 Telecom
shindig at WARC 1979 in Geneva. I suggested that the ARRL ought to be
able to receive logs in electronic form, cross them against claims, and
provide awards without lugging paper all over the world. (I also suggested
the idea of DXCC-Decade or DXCC-Solar Cycle, but that's a story for
another reflector). It seemed as if the time weren't right then, but it
sure is now.
That's not to say that there aren't some technical problems to be solved.
It takes way too much storage capacity to store all the big contest logs
just waiting for the smaller number of requests for confirmation, but there
has to be a better way to do this.
Solving this problem in a practical way, using Internet and modern cheap
computing power would be a big step for ham radio contesting (I admit I
don't put QSLing very high on my priority list, but I'd be willing to
foward the big log files from EA9UK, P40V and HC8A operations I've been
part of).
The ever-increasing cost of postage compared to the ever-decreasing cost of
electronic communication is a fact of life that confirms what I read in
Astounding Science Fiction fifty years ago. So let's help awards sponsors
recognize that fact by making electronic QSLing a practical reality.
You bet I'd like to see an explosion of ham radio contesters in Asia, and
sorting out the QSL cost issue may be a contributing element. Ideas,
comments?
73 de Dave, W6QHS
>From rrossi@VNET.IBM.COM (Ron D. Rossi) Fri Nov 10 18:46:24 1995
From: rrossi@VNET.IBM.COM (Ron D. Rossi) (Ron D. Rossi)
Subject: QSLs Deter Contest Operation
In a previous message, you wrote:
>Dick N6AA sez:
>>>The recent posts on SS QSLing bring to mind several thoughts.
>
>>>Seems the guys with interest in operating in contests don't have
>>>equal enthusiasm for answering QSLs afterward.
>
>
>I'll second that!!!! There are some CONTESTERS on this reflector who
>seem to dislike answering QSL requests... even when I include an SASE!
>
>Bob ki5ez
If any of you are waiting for QSLs from me (I have about 45 in the
queue), I have to get some more printed. Please be patient. I answer
all my QSLs.
I'M FEELING GUILTY!!
73 de N1PBT...Ron (rrossi@vnet.ibm.com) ><>
>From snace@wsc.nasa.gov (Steve Nace) Fri Nov 10 19:35:16 1995
From: snace@wsc.nasa.gov (Steve Nace) (Steve Nace)
Subject: K7UP Multi op SS CW Effort
Message-ID: <v01510106acc957332778@[192.77.86.129]>
K7UP Multi op New Mexico Ops: K7UP, KN5H
Station: IC 765 Drake L4B
4 ele 15 M @ 75 ft
4 ele 20 M @ 70 ft
4 ele 40 M @ 80 ft
inv vee (80 M) @ 75 ft
3 ele tribanber @ 35 ft
Breakdowns:
160 0 QSOs Are you kidding!
80 91 Good condx, poor activity?
40 719 AWESOME!
20 374 Always there for 50 hour rates
15 262 W8 "A" Power stns 40 over 9
10 0 Couldn't justify leaving other bands,
sounded open.
TOTAL 1446 77 mults
Comments:
Doesn't it drive you nuts when you get an answer to a CQ,
you transmit your exchange and the station sends
"... de (his call)" a couple of times when you 1) already
know it and 2) they are going to send again during their
exchange!!
73 de Steve KN5H & John K7UP -- CU in SSB
>From vp2ve@caribsurf.com (Lee E. Reisenweber) Fri Nov 10 20:11:22 1995
From: vp2ve@caribsurf.com (Lee E. Reisenweber) (Lee E. Reisenweber)
Subject: CQWW-CW
Message-ID: <9511102011.AA09245@col2.caribsurf.com>
Anyone interested in the CQWW-CW from VP2VE, on Anegada Is, BVI. Mni Q's,
great Lobster on the best beaches in the most nothern island of the West
Indies and a unobstructed shot to the entire North Atlantic Ocean. Can't
miss !! Give me a jingle. Cheers es DX....Lee/VP2VE
>From vp2ve@caribsurf.com (Lee E. Reisenweber) Fri Nov 10 20:13:02 1995
From: vp2ve@caribsurf.com (Lee E. Reisenweber) (Lee E. Reisenweber)
Subject: 160
Message-ID: <9511102013.AA11365@col2.caribsurf.com>
Firstly, we will not issue any licenses to anyone but permanent residents.
All previous have been wiped out. but no problem w/ my call. All u need is a
copy of your stateside license and $20, and I will walk u thru in 15 min.
I hve a ft-900,ft-990 (still in the box), a new ft-706. Our license states
400w pep but that's the English method of computing power,but if u are with
me we can do anything we want. Don't hve a linear here cuz cudn't get it
over fm John's KP2A yet. So suggest u bring a rig and linear. I will meet
you at customs and there will be no prob. An antenna would be vy vy much
appreciated ! Tuners, no problem. Really want to get the work out to any of
the guy tt want to go to Anegada for the CQWW-CW. Mebbe wa can also get Ken
K4TEA to come wid us for 160, but don;t have his e-mail of number. Cud u lok
him up, fone or e-mail , It's Ken Byers ?? He won't be goin to KP2A his
year,Hi. Cheers es DX...Lee
My mgr, WA2NHA will handle everything !!
>From Jorma@salor.pp.fi (Jorma Saloranta) Fri Nov 10 20:15:28 1995
From: Jorma@salor.pp.fi (Jorma Saloranta) (Jorma Saloranta)
Subject: LX4B and ZB2X CQWWCW
Message-ID: <199511102015.AA17281@personal.eunet.fi>
Announcing: LX4B CQWW CW 3.5 MHz by OH2PQ, QSL via LX1TI.
ZB2X CQWW CW 28 MHz by OH2KIm QSL via OH2KI
(www:http://www.mpoli.fi/~leif/oh2ki.html)
73 OH2KI
>From Dr. Eugene Zimmerman" <ezimmerm@DGS.dgsys.com Fri Nov 10 21:05:41 1995
From: Dr. Eugene Zimmerman" <ezimmerm@DGS.dgsys.com (Dr. Eugene Zimmerman)
Subject: QSLs Deter Contest Operation
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.951110160003.11586B-100000@DGS>
Pat
You are absolutely on target when you say:
> In an era when it is possible to make over 10,000 QSOs in a 48-hour
> period, I think the notion that a QSL is a "courtesy" due after a QSO
> needs to be updated. There must be some other way to fufill the needs
> of award chasers to get a confirmation of a contact other than the
> exchange of expensive piece of paper through the international mail.
>
> As a CONTESTer, I don't care a whit about whether or not someone
> sends me a QSL card -- but I definitely do want them on for the contest.
> I answer QSLs sent to me purely as a defensive measure -- I don't want
> to get anyone upset at me for not doing it.
[snip, snip]
> . . . . . . . . . . QSLing places
> radically assymetric responsibilities on sender and recipient. I'd love to
> see more BY's on the air -- imagine how a large influx of Asian
> contesters would throw the contesting pecking order into tumult -- and
> can't imagine anything as silly as an outdated QSL custom being
> important enough to contesters as a justifiable reason for keeping them
> out.
I wonder if there could be a solution involving E-mail and public/private
encryption keys. This would only cut down the work a little bit and
would fill your inbox to overflowing BUT it would eliminate much of the
cost - particularly if you are connected to the Net anyway.
What do the coding wizards out there say (not the Morse code)??
73 Gene W3ZZ
|