From kazeringue at aol.com  Sat Nov  1 09:37:37 2008
From: kazeringue at aol.com (Kaz)
Date: Sat Nov  1 09:39:30 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] gl es cu in ss
Message-ID: <490C69B1.3060709@aol.com>

Good luck to everybody in the SS fray tonight.  Generous application of 
MonkeyButt powder as required is conducive to B.I.C. factor.

As as another incentive to operate, just think:
If you are concentrating on copying the VY1 or KH6 exchange, you won't 
care that the phone is constantly ringing with yet another desperate 
plea by yet another desperate politician seeking to gain/remain in his 
position of pillage and plunder.  (And that applies to all political 
persuasions.  It's a completely multi-partisan disrespect.)

Signals were strong last night and 80m was very low noise, and 40m was 
in similar shape yesterday afternoon......Sweeeeeet!

73 de w4kaz





From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Sat Nov  1 09:27:36 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Sat Nov  1 09:47:04 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] gl es cu in ss
References: <490C69B1.3060709@aol.com>
Message-ID: <21F70DBF7D654EB08300952CC7A43FED@JORDANLAW.local>

Great words, Kaz.

And it is my hope that for SS, PVRC will be in the same role as Georgia, and 
NCCC as LSU, in that classic football rivalry which took place last 
Saturday.  Sorry, Kaz, couldn't resist!!

73,

Jim, K4QPL

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kaz" <kazeringue@aol.com>
To: "PVRCNC" <pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 10:37 AM
Subject: [PVRCNC] gl es cu in ss


> Good luck to everybody in the SS fray tonight.  Generous application of 
> MonkeyButt powder as required is conducive to B.I.C. factor.
>
> As as another incentive to operate, just think:
> If you are concentrating on copying the VY1 or KH6 exchange, you won't 
> care that the phone is constantly ringing with yet another desperate plea 
> by yet another desperate politician seeking to gain/remain in his position 
> of pillage and plunder.  (And that applies to all political persuasions. 
> It's a completely multi-partisan disrespect.)
>
> Signals were strong last night and 80m was very low noise, and 40m was in 
> similar shape yesterday afternoon......Sweeeeeet!
>
> 73 de w4kaz
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
> 


From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Sun Nov  2 22:16:22 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Sun Nov  2 22:18:38 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] K4QPL ARRL SSCW SOLP Unassisted
Message-ID: <3D7EEF13EAB84DBF95A260936208E0DC@JFJLT07>


    CallSign Used : K4QPL
      Operator(s) : K4QPL

Operator Category : SINGLE-OP
             Band : ALL
            Power : LOW
             Mode : CW
 Default Exchange : A 57 NC
        ARRL Section : NC
        Club/Team : Potomac Valley Radio Club
         Software : N1MM Logger V8.10.6

        Band    QSOs    Pts  Sec
         3.5     414     828   37
           7     203     406    4
          14     243     486   37
          21       6      12    0
       Total     866    1732   78

            Score : 135,096      Time: 24 hrs.

Once again I'm disappointed when it's over. My favorite contest of the year. 
Also disappointed not to get a sweep. I spent 15 mins trying to break the 
pileup on VO1HP but seemed no closer then than at the beginning and he said 
he was getting tired so hoped he'd come on the low bands later. Never heard 
him again. I think that call sign means "Victory Only with 1 Horse Power. 
Never heard NWT. Sometimes I get envious of assisted mode!

Otherwise had fun. My highest qso total in recent memory for low power cw 
unassisted, despite one power supply collapsing. Had to make an unscheduled 
pit stop to grab the mult radio PS and connect it to the run. After cooling 
overnight it seemed to work OK on the second radio.

Boy, did the NCCC gang run in the troops with the "second transmitter" 
loophole. More like a barn door than a loophole. Gave us more excitement at 
the end but of course not the same results. I sure wish points had to be 
earned in the same way most of the PVRC members earn them. Guess that's why 
they call it the "Left Coast." (OK, I won't be a grouch tomorrow.)

73,

Jim, K4QPL


From n4ydu at nc.rr.com  Mon Nov  3 07:21:16 2008
From: n4ydu at nc.rr.com (Nathan Moreschi)
Date: Mon Nov  3 07:23:22 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] N4YDU SS
Message-ID: <007801c93dae$ab74c450$8801a8c0@YOURE2BE199155>

              ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, CW

Call: N4YDU
Operator(s): N4YDU
Station: N4YDU

Class: SO Unlimited HP
QTH: NC
Operating Time (hrs): 11

Summary:
 Band  QSOs
------------
  160:    0
   80:   67
   40:  317
   20:  209
   15:   32
   10:    0
------------
Total:  625  Sections = 80  Total Score = 100,000

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

Comments:

Limited time for this one, but Sunday was fun. This was the first time I've used
HP and the cluster for SS. I figured a sweep would be simple, but it wasn't.
VY1EI made my day when he answered my 20M CQ to complete the sweep at sunset on
Sunday.

Actually, this was the first sweep ever for me.

Rig: IC 765
Amp: SB 200
Antennas: 80: Inverted L and 1/4 vertical
           40: half square and inverted vee (50 feet high)
           20: Rectangle loop, doublet (60 feet high)
           15: Dipoles at 60 feet

SS phone could be a similar effort.

73,

Nate/N4YDU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081103/90635086/attachment.htm
From k1se at verizon.net  Mon Nov  3 07:26:40 2008
From: k1se at verizon.net (Bill -- K1SE)
Date: Mon Nov  3 07:28:50 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] SS CW K1SE SO Unlimited HP
Message-ID: <823795.67446.qm@web84105.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



                    ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, CW

Call: K1SE
Operator(s): K1SE
Station: K1SE

Class: SO Unlimited HP
QTH: VA
Operating Time (hrs): 7.0

Summary:
 Band  QSOs
------------
  160:     
   80:  126
   40:  108
   20:   38
   15:   19
   10:     
------------
Total:  291  Sections = 72  Total Score = 41,904

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

Comments:




Posted using 3830 Score Submittal Forms at:
http://www.hornucopia.com/3830score/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081103/8305b505/attachment.htm
From mike at bentwire.net  Mon Nov  3 08:01:17 2008
From: mike at bentwire.net (mike@bentwire.net)
Date: Mon Nov  3 08:02:42 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] N4GU SS CW LP
Message-ID: <20081103130241.E81748582B3@mailman.qth.net>


             SSCW Score Summary Sheet

       Start Date : 2008-11-01

    CallSign Used : N4GU
      Operator(s) : N4GU

Operator Category : SINGLE-OP
             Band : ALL
            Power : LOW
             Mode : CW
 Default Exchange : A 77 NC
     ARRL Section : NC
        Club/Team : POTOMAC VALLEY RADIO CLUB
         Software : N1MM Logger V8.10.6

        Band    QSOs    Pts  Sec
         3.5     309     618   26
           7     157     314   14
          14     147     294   32
          21      23      46    4
       Total     636    1272   76


            Score : 96,672
              Rig : Orion I

         Antennas : C3 @45', dipoles

          Soapbox : Saturday I couldn't buy a run on 40m, so headed 
to 80m early and spent most of the evening there. Rates weren't great, 
but better than S&P. Sunday was the usual grind. Never heard ND, MB, 
NWT, or NL. Sunday afternoon my fun meter was pegged, so went into 
casual mode and picked up what I could. AK was the last mult I found. 
Didn't hear one all weekend, and sat down at the rig after taking a 
break and there was a KL7 CQ'ing on frequency. Something about blind 
squirrels and nuts applies. Part of the pleasure of SS, for me,  is 
running across friends. Good to hear so many PVRC calls. Let's do 
this again in a couple of weeks.

From bemeier at bellsouth.net  Mon Nov  3 08:58:05 2008
From: bemeier at bellsouth.net (Bruce Meier)
Date: Mon Nov  3 09:00:36 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] N1LN - ARRL SS CW
Message-ID: <003901c93dbc$31ef92a0$95ceb7e0$@net>

ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, CW

Call: N1LN
Operator(s): N1LN
Station: N1LN

Class: SO Unlimited HP
QTH: NC
Operating Time (hrs): 19

Summary:
 Band  QSOs
------------
  160:    0
   80:  231
   40:  486
   20:  276
   15:   27
   10:    0
------------
Total: 1020  Sections = 80  Total Score = 163,200

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

Comments:

I was not sure if I would be able to even participate this year because of
the
broken hand and finger I got in a recent auto accident.  The doctor told me
it
would be good to take off the split cast and practice moving my fingers.  I
asked about typing.... he said that would be good exercise.  So for the five
days before ARRL SS I practiced moving my fingers.   For the most part, it
worked.  My run speed was limited as was my duration due to low level pain
and
arm / hand cramps, but with lots of breaks and ice, I was able to operate
for
about 19 hours.  My actual CW speed never went over 28 WPM as I was hoping
to
control the required typing speed to keep up.  In most cases it worked. 
Success.

As the goal was to maximize score, I again entered in the Unlimited class.
In
the end the only mult that I used the cluster to get was ND.   I was VERY
pleased to have VY1EI call me at 0440 while I was doing one of my slow runs
on
40.  Then soon after I got back on Sunday morning I saw KE0A posted on 20.
So,
buy 1347 I also had ND in the log and my sweep was done and I could
concentrate
totally on Qs.

Conditions were excellent on all bands and with the beverages both 40 and
even
80 were a total pleasure.  The only issue was that they worked so well I
occasionally missed some first replies to my CQ because I could not hear
California on my N or NE bev and the same for New England on W or NW bev.  

One comment that others may or may not agree with dealing with ending serial
numbers. In my opinion, sending ONLY what is needed would be much more
efficient.  Meaning, do not send leading zeros.  I had to ask for numerous
repeats from weaker stations simply because I could not tell if the leading
zeros were a needed Q count number.

I am now looking forward to SS-SSB with an improved ability to have longer
and
faster runs as long as my hand and finger continue to cooperate. 

73,
Bruce - N1LN

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081103/bdb4d657/attachment-0001.htm
From k4czusa at attglobal.net  Mon Nov  3 10:46:39 2008
From: k4czusa at attglobal.net (Barry Baker, K4CZ)
Date: Mon Nov  3 10:48:58 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FW: SS CW K4CZ SO Unlimited HP
Message-ID: <001e01c93dcb$5cdbe4a0$1693ade0$@net>

                    ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, CW

Call: K4CZ
Operator(s): K4CZ
Station: K4CZ

Class: SO Unlimited HP
QTH: Durham, NC
Operating Time (hrs): 15

Summary:
 Band  QSOs
------------
  160:    0
   80:  207
   40:  246
   20:   88
   15:    0
   10:    0
------------
Total:  541  Sections = 79  Total Score = 85,478

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

Comments:


My goal was to beat last year's SS CW score of 517 Qs, 79 mults and 81,686
points.

I'm planning a bigger effort for SS SSB.  My goal is to beat last year's
score (134,080 points) for a CW/SSB combined total of 200,000+ points.

Go PVRC!

73, Barry K4CZ

From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Mon Nov  3 10:51:41 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Mon Nov  3 11:14:38 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Re: [PVRC] SS CW W4KAZ SO Unlimited LP
References: <490E8CF9.6070602@aol.com>
Message-ID: <C69B6C25AF274DBCB0AB6FBB82066C15@JORDANLAW.local>

Outstanding job, Keith. You were like the "Energizer Bunny". Everywhere I 
listened I heard you running. Low power IS  being qso-challenged in SS. We 
can't bust the pileups and we don't have "Ed McMahon" aka VY1IE calling at 
OUR door! I missed the same ones you did. As to VO1HP, even with my TH7 
aimed his way, and trying all the DX tricks of calling "split" with Tx 
frequency slightly up or down, he still didn't hear me. Power rules for 
those situations, but I'm gonna stay LP anyway.

Don't worry too much about SO2R. Activity was pretty good this year and 
after losing a good run frequency while trying to grab a qso on the other 
radio, I was much more careful and ended up not actually making many qso's 
that way. Again, life is hard if you're low power.

I found that after a break and giving up run frequency, an aggressive S&P up 
and down the bands got most of them quickly before finding a frequency and 
resuming the run worked just as well.

73,

Jim, K4QPL

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "W4KAZ" <kazeringue@aol.com>
To: <pvrc@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 12:32 AM
Subject: [PVRC] SS CW W4KAZ SO Unlimited LP


> Heh...Even when I "cheat", I miss the sweep.  No cheap genuine imitation 
> crystal memento for me.  But I see there are scores a lot larger than mine 
> with only 79 mults.  Such is life.
>
> I "cheated" this year by hooking up the shack computer to the LAN router, 
> and operated unlimited so I could use packet spots for the very first time 
> from the home QTH.  Down with the Dread NCCC chair-hoppers! Go PVRC!
>
> The great big silver lining is the best number of Q's to ever be nabbed at 
> the W4KAZ all-wires-no-towers-no-amps antenna farm.  The raw score is 
> almost double last years' CW contribution, and is my best ever Sweeps 
> score in either mode.  (Do NOT expect the SSB score to improve that much!)
>
> It is still mundane by big gun standards, but huge for the home front.
>
> The spots definitely helped me get to 78 sections, but NL could not hear 
> me in the pileups, and I never even got a wiff of NT.  For me, OK was a 
> hold out until late Sunday afternoon. But I found that it pays to use the 
> tuning knob.  There were a lot of Q's in the gaps.  Also, I had 6 land all 
> locked up two hours into the contest.  Dang the Dread NCCC.
>
> Conditions seemed very quiet Saturday evening on 80m.  I dropped from 20m 
> directly down to 80m at 2300z Saturday.  Figured 40m to go long early. 
> That idea seemed effective, as I was able to hold a run on 80m for several 
> hours.  Running on 20m with just a dipole is fruitless.  40m was saved for 
> Sunday daytime, with some 20m S&P thrown in.  No 15m found, but some of 
> that was due to operator error.
>
> My plan to try out SO2R was delayed by not finishing the required 
> switching and filter projects.  I expect SO2R to be worthwhile, because 
> the run rates with low power are - well, low. The extra radio will fill 
> the gaps. (Plus, I'd rather S&P anyway.  I know.  Heresy, right?)
>
> I needed and received lots of fills.  Thanks!  It got sloppy towards the 
> end.  Now its time to blow the dust off the My-Crow-Fonie for some 
> not-so-Continuous Wave.
>
>
>
> Call: W4KAZ
> Operator(s): W4KAZ
> Station: W4KAZ
>
> Class: SO Unlimited LP
> QTH: NC
> Operating Time (hrs):
>
> Summary:
>  Band  QSOs
> ------------
>   160:    0
>    80:  315
>    40:  166
>    20:  123
>    15:    4
>    10:    0
> ------------
> Total:  608  Sections = 78  Total Score = 94,848
>
> Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club
>
> Comments:
>
> Lots of fun.  I'm sure my poor accuracy will destroy the score, but it is 
> a personal best for the number of QSO's in a contest.  The low wires are 
> not so good for DX, but they work fairly well for the domestic.
>
> I "cheated", and got the cat5 run into the shack to partake of spots, but 
> I was still 2 sections short(NT, NL).  (Insert colorful invective -here-). 
> One could not hear me, and I never found the other.  "OK" also proved 
> elusive.
>
> 73 de w4kaz
> _______________________________________________
> PVRC mailing list
> PVRC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc
> 


From will.roberts at pgnmail.com  Mon Nov  3 12:31:02 2008
From: will.roberts at pgnmail.com (Roberts, Will)
Date: Mon Nov  3 12:33:37 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] W4MR (AA4NC) SS CW 
Message-ID: <82FF0E9162BBC74ABC6097ABEEF19F7C06EC8CDF@NT000837.oak.zone1.progress-energy.com>

W4MR (AA4NC op.)

 

1161 x 80 = 185,760

 

Single Op Unlimited

 

SO2R - K3 / FT1000MP

N1MM Logger

80m: Inverted vee @ 115'

40m: nonrotating rotatable dipole @ 70'

20m: 4/4 el. Yagis @ 120'/50' (NE)

 

 

Good to hear all the PVRCers on amid the  vast horde of NCCC guys...

 

I had high hopes for this contest as the two practice sessions last week
went very well and I was unusually (for me) prepared this year. The omen
of how the contest was going to be for me was when I had a nice clear
frequency on 20 to begin at 2100z, then as I was entering the first QSO,
the computer locked up! I quickly rebooted but lost the frequency. The
first 4 hours were very frustrating on 20 and 40 as I got behind and
felt very weak. It was almost impossible to get any rate going for some
reason. 80m helped me get back in the game as there was a seemingly
endless supply of Qs on Saturday night.

 

79 sections went in the log very quickly without any searching. I had
resigned myself to not spend time in a VY1 pileup, knowing it could get
ugly with a new operator there. I saw a 15m spot for VY1EI late Sunday
afternoon, but heard nothing. I nabbed him pretty quickly later on 20
working split. I didn't have to spend much pileup time getting to him,
but it took a while before he corrected my call from W3MR to W4MR.

 

Sunday was going pretty much as planned until a very raspy wideband
noise hit 20m. It sounded a bit like power line noise but was not
evident on the other bands. I wonder if it was a plasma TV? I've heard
they are nasty, but I'm not sure what they sound like. 

 

Looks like I need to  get a lower antenna for 20m to the west. At this
point in the cycle, 120 feet seems too high.    

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081103/58d8d64a/attachment.htm
From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Mon Nov  3 16:09:31 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Mon Nov  3 16:29:28 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Re: [PVRC] SS-W4MY  Report
References: <174553.27741.qm@web53806.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <50E01B00EBC344C19618980173E7A7A3@JORDANLAW.local>

Wow, Marty, what an outstanding job! I noticed your high numbers whenever I 
heard you during the contest and figured if I slacked off early you'd surely 
pass me. Will definitely have to keep looking over my shoulder in future. 
;-)

Congrats on the Nwt and Nl mults which I just couldn't pull out. I was lucky 
to pick up the 0/VE4 without too much sweat and I think I got my Pac in the 
first couple hours. Took longer for Ak.

73,

Jim

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marty Young" <w4my@yahoo.com>
To: <pvrc@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:58 PM
Subject: [PVRC] SS-W4MY Report


> START-OF-LOG: 2.0
> ARRL-SECTION: NC
> CALLSIGN: W4MY
> CLUB: POTOMAC VALLEY RADIO CLUB
> CONTEST: ARRL-SS-CW
> CATEGORY: SINGLE-OP ALL LOW CW
> CLAIMED-SCORE: 125294
> OPERATORS: W4MY
> NAME: Marty Young
>
> Band  QSOs   Pt  Sec
> 3.5    277  554  16
> 7      238  479  16
> 14     268  536  46
> 21      10   20   1
> Total  793 1586  79
>
> Raw Score 125,294
>
> Really though I had a chance for a sweep after working NT early.  Not to 
> be, however, with VE4 the hold out for me!  Conditions were fantastic 
> Saturday night!  Worked PAC on 40 just after the sun went down!  Really 
> wierd.
>
> Respectfully Submitted
>
> Marty Youung / W4MY
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PVRC mailing list
> PVRC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc
> 


From n4tl2 at earthlink.net  Mon Nov  3 20:46:32 2008
From: n4tl2 at earthlink.net (Tom Lewis)
Date: Mon Nov  3 20:48:43 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] SS CW
Message-ID: <380-22008112414632334@earthlink.net>

Here is my contribution to the club's score.  

SSCW Score Summary Sheet

Operator(s) : N4TL

Operator Category : SINGLE-OP-ASSISTED
Band : ALL
Power : HIGH
Mode : CW
Default Exchange : U 65 NC

ARRL Section : NC
Club/Team : Potomac Valley Radio Club
Software : N1MM Logger V8.0.0

Band    QSOs    Pts  Sec
3.5      61     122   12
7     172     344   24
14     161     322   40
21       7      14    0
Total     401     802   76

Score : 60,95

From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Tue Nov  4 06:41:37 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Tue Nov  4 06:44:01 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Re: [PVRC] Fw: [3830] SS CW K8AC Single Op LP
References: <00cb01c93e35$987a7200$6802a8c0@wrf.com>
Message-ID: <75A46B01E662473B9557590F5FEE5CE1@JFJLT07>

No, but I suggested to AA4NC, our chapter chairman, to check him out as 
well. Alas, he beat me by 20 q's and a mult so will probably be NC category 
winner.  Could also be Roanoke Division if W4OC in SC wasn't in it full 
time. I didn't hear Don.  Would sure like to have those points for PVRC.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard DiDonna" <nn3w@cox.net>
To: "PVRC" <pvrc@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 11:27 PM
Subject: [PVRC] Fw: [3830] SS CW K8AC Single Op LP


> Anyone know this guy?  He did rather well and is on the southern edge of 
> the Circle.
>
> 73 Rich NN3W
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <webform@b4h.net>
> To: <3830@contesting.com>
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 9:39 PM
> Subject: [3830] SS CW K8AC Single Op LP
>
>
>>                    ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, CW
>>
>> Call: K8AC
>> Operator(s): K8AC
>> Station: K8AC
>>
>> Class: Single Op LP
>> QTH: NC
>> Operating Time (hrs): 22.4
>>
>> Summary:
>> Band  QSOs
>> ------------
>>  160:    0
>>   80:  448
>>   40:  186
>>   20:  202
>>   15:   53
>>   10:
>> ------------
>> Total:  889  Sections = 79  Total Score = 140,462
>>
>> Club:
>>
>> Comments:
>>
>> A great 15 meter opening on Sunday.
>>
>>
>> Posted using 3830 Score Submittal Forms at: 
>> http://www.hornucopia.com/3830score/
>> ______________________________________________
>> 3830 mailing list
>> 3830@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/3830
>
> _______________________________________________
> PVRC mailing list
> PVRC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc 

From kazeringue at aol.com  Tue Nov  4 18:27:28 2008
From: kazeringue at aol.com (KAZeringue)
Date: Tue Nov  4 18:29:47 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] PVRC/NC East Chapter Meeting - Stoke the Fire
Message-ID: <4910DA60.4010505@aol.com>

Okay, I had thought I would get a now unemployed telemarketing company 
to make 6,666 annoying robo-phone calls to everyone to remind you all 
that the meeting is Thursday night, November 6th.    But that apparently 
co$t$ ca$h money....So Forget That!  (Spam is FREE!)

Instead, K4QPL is going to buy an 807 for everybody.

Okay - that too is a complete fabrication.  I'm just getting back at Jim 
for busting my chops about the LSU-GA fiasco.

But the NC East chapter will indeed be in congress at the usual watering 
hole.  Y'all come.  You just never know who will show up, and if you 
wait for el Escribano Inexacto to transcribe the October minutes, you'll 
never find out who showed up last week after a long hiatus.  (Okay, it 
was K4HA and K4NYS)

807's.  Sweepstakes lies.  VY1 tales of woe.  QRM out the Yin-Yang. 
Mike-row-fonie angst.  So leave your Polly-Ticks at home, and show up 
for the November meat-n-greet.

Don't forget your straws for the one single 807 Jim is gonna buy for the 
group to share.....  :o

73 de w4kaz aka el Escribano Inexacto.
From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Wed Nov  5 08:10:34 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Wed Nov  5 08:15:18 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] PVRC/NC East Chapter Meeting - Stoke the Fire
References: <4910DA60.4010505@aol.com>
Message-ID: <F52E0B4D7362407290FAE63D8E8A1CB0@JFJLT07>

>
> Instead, K4QPL is going to buy an 807 for everybody.  Okay - that too is a 
> complete fabrication.  I'm just getting back at Jim for busting my chops 
> about the LSU-GA fiasco.

Well, another 24 qso's and 1 section and I could have been persuaded!
>
> Don't forget your straws for the one single 807 Jim is gonna buy for the 
> group to share.....  :o

Not exactly.  As it turned out, I look forward to buying one for PVRC 
member-to-be Floyd, K8AC, at his first meeting and to congratulate him on 
what looks like an NC and Roanoke victory for SOLP. Unfortunately, I 
understand he can't make it this month but will be attending in December.

And Kaz, in football as in radiosport, "There's always next year!"

GO PVRC!  GO DAWGS!

See y'all tomorrow. 73,

Jim, K4QPL




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "KAZeringue" <kazeringue@aol.com>
To: "PVRCNC" <pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 6:27 PM
Subject: [PVRCNC] PVRC/NC East Chapter Meeting - Stoke the Fire


> Okay, I had thought I would get a now unemployed telemarketing company to 
> make 6,666 annoying robo-phone calls to everyone to remind you all that 
> the meeting is Thursday night, November 6th.    But that apparently co$t$ 
> ca$h money....So Forget That!  (Spam is FREE!)
>
> Instead, K4QPL is going to buy an 807 for everybody.
>
> Okay - that too is a complete fabrication.  I'm just getting back at Jim 
> for busting my chops about the LSU-GA fiasco.
>
> But the NC East chapter will indeed be in congress at the usual watering 
> hole.  Y'all come.  You just never know who will show up, and if you wait 
> for el Escribano Inexacto to transcribe the October minutes, you'll never 
> find out who showed up last week after a long hiatus.  (Okay, it was K4HA 
> and K4NYS)
>
> 807's.  Sweepstakes lies.  VY1 tales of woe.  QRM out the Yin-Yang. 
> Mike-row-fonie angst.  So leave your Polly-Ticks at home, and show up for 
> the November meat-n-greet.
>
> Don't forget your straws for the one single 807 Jim is gonna buy for the 
> group to share.....  :o
>
> 73 de w4kaz aka el Escribano Inexacto.
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc 

From will.roberts at pgnmail.com  Wed Nov  5 16:02:44 2008
From: will.roberts at pgnmail.com (Roberts, Will)
Date: Wed Nov  5 16:05:37 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] PVRCNC Meeting Thursday November 6
Message-ID: <82FF0E9162BBC74ABC6097ABEEF19F7C06EC9357@NT000837.oak.zone1.progress-energy.com>

Just a quick reminder of the PVRCNC meeting on Thursday, November 6.
It's at Manchester's starting at 6PM.

 

K9EZ will be the featured speaker bringing us a program on REAL QROOO -
High power broadcasting stations. Mr. Paper Contest N4TL will then
baffle us all with his latest quiz. Bring a sharp pencil (or crayon).

 

See you there, 

 

Will AA4NC

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081105/aab2f2ad/attachment.htm
From kazeringue at aol.com  Thu Nov  6 09:27:16 2008
From: kazeringue at aol.com (KAZeringue)
Date: Thu Nov  6 09:29:46 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] PVRCNC-East Chapter meeting
Message-ID: <4912FEC4.6090509@aol.com>

Well, it is Thursday morning, so today is the day for the November 
meeting.  QRO program.  Paper contest.  QRM out the wazoo.  SS CW 
recap/lies/bragging.

And how appropriate.  November 6th just happens to be he 91st 
anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution.

Dosvedanya Tovarisch!

cul de w4kaz
From mike at bentwire.net  Thu Nov  6 10:00:41 2008
From: mike at bentwire.net (mike@bentwire.net)
Date: Thu Nov  6 10:02:03 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] PVRCNC-East Chapter meeting
Message-ID: <20081106150201.87A57859C0F@mailman.qth.net>

In Soviet Russia, you don't work contest, contest works you!

N4GUlog/UA0

KAZeringue <kazeringue@aol.com> wrote:

And how appropriate.  November 6th just happens to be he 91st 
anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution.

Dosvedanya Tovarisch!

cul de w4kaz
_______________________________________________
PVRCNC mailing list
PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc



From jcbrook at mindspring.com  Thu Nov  6 16:21:31 2008
From: jcbrook at mindspring.com (Jamey Brookover)
Date: Thu Nov  6 16:55:40 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] NT4D ARRL SS CW
Message-ID: <1429572.1226006492103.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

ARRL SS CW

NT4D

SO HP Assisted

Band  QSO's Sections
80    103   23
40    102   18
20    115   33
15     15    5
Total 335   79  (Missed NT)

SCORING:  670  QSO points x 79 sections =     
52930  claimed score

My goal was a 500 Q's and a sweep, but I came up a little short on both numbers.  All in all though, not too bad for 15 days after quadruple bypass surgery!  

Had lots of fun working all the PVRC'ers and I thought the bands were in pretty good condition.  I am looking forward to doing a little more in the phone SS.

I was rag chewing with Eric, VY1EI about 15 minutes before the start of the contest, but couldn't bag him during the official hours of the test.  He did a great job for a beginning contester.  I hope to hear him in many future contests.

73... Jay, NT4D


From bemeier at bellsouth.net  Sun Nov  9 07:18:16 2008
From: bemeier at bellsouth.net (Bruce Meier)
Date: Sun Nov  9 07:21:27 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FW: [NARS] Yaesu FT-1000MP for Sale
Message-ID: <026d01c94265$3f4052c0$bdc0f840$@net>

Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
NARS Website: www.w5nc.org
NARS mailing list
NARS@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nars
Send list questions or comments to list administrator
mailto: keith@dutson.net

From bemeier at bellsouth.net  Sun Nov  9 08:06:44 2008
From: bemeier at bellsouth.net (Bruce Meier)
Date: Sun Nov  9 08:09:53 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FT1000-MP for sale (from a Friend)
Message-ID: <028401c9426c$045e2630$0d1a7290$@net>

As the content of my email seems to have not made it to the digest version,
here it is again.

If anyone is looking for a FT-1000-MP in great shape, this would be the one.
I know George very well and he takes excellent care of his stuff.

His email address is on QRZ.com 

73,
Bruce - N1LN
(aka: NC4KW)


Cut/paste from NARS ( Northwest Amateur Radio Society - Houston, TX)

************************************************************************

I have a very nice Yaesu FT-1000MP (loaded) for sale.....very
clean....non-smoking environment.
 
Serial #:  6M160049 - Manufacture Date:  Nov 22, 1996.
 
It has all of the filters including:
 
8.2 MHz 2nd IF......2.0 kHz and 250 Hz
455 kHz 3rd IF.......2.0 kHz, 500Hz Collins Mechanical Filter and 250Hz
Sub-Receiver CW narrow filter - 500Hz Collins Mechanical Filter
 
Also a TXCO-6 (Temperature Compensated Crystal Oscillator)
 
And several International Radio upgrades including the current $175.00
Roofing Filter.
 
It comes with a Heil push to talk selective hand mike and a FH-1 Yaesu
Remote Control Keypad.
 
The current price (less than I paid originally) for the filters alone is
$719.00....the TXCO was $175.00 and the roofing filter is $175.00......plus
the Heil Mike and remote keypad....make this a mega bargain at:
 
$1500.00 Cash
 
This will go on eBay next week if it is not gone before Friday.
 
73 George K5VUU

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081109/f59ac382/attachment-0001.htm
From nt4q at earthlink.net  Sun Nov  9 14:38:33 2008
From: nt4q at earthlink.net (Jerry Cater)
Date: Sun Nov  9 14:41:13 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Ameritron AL-82 wire conversion question
Message-ID: <029901c942a2$c0ca7a40$425f6ec0$@net>

Anyone ever convert a Ameritron AL-82 from the original 3 wire Nema 6-15p to
a 4 wire Nema 14-30p or other 4 wire connector?  Since the original AL-82
wiring uses only Black, White and Ground and my house 240v uses Black, Red,
White, and Green, how do you handle the the Green (ground) and White
(neutral) wires?

 

The goal is to wire the amp for SS this weekend without destroying the amp
and/or burning the house down.

 

73 de NT4Q Jerry 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081109/837ab890/attachment.htm
From olinger at bellsouth.net  Sun Nov  9 15:11:48 2008
From: olinger at bellsouth.net (Guy Olinger, K2AV)
Date: Sun Nov  9 15:14:43 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Ameritron AL-82 wire conversion question
References: <029901c942a2$c0ca7a40$425f6ec0$@net>
Message-ID: <AC167DBFE5F04693A076EE6B9F105F6A@speed>

Hi Jerry,

A pure 220 connection has a pair of hot wires and a safety ground. The neutral is required on a 220 device if a 120V connection is brought outside, as in a utility outlet on an electric range, or if there is an internal 120V load not pulled from a floating primary winding center tap on a transformer rated for the extra load. 

The AL-82 transformer primaries are both 220 and it does not export a 120v connection, so only Black, Red and green should be connected. Using white wire [neutral] to connect to the AL82 chassis instead of or in parallel with the green safety wire is a code violation. 

73, Guy.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jerry Cater 
  To: pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net 
  Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 2:38 PM
  Subject: [PVRCNC] Ameritron AL-82 wire conversion question


  Anyone ever convert a Ameritron AL-82 from the original 3 wire Nema 6-15p to a 4 wire Nema 14-30p or other 4 wire connector?  Since the original AL-82 wiring uses only Black, White and Ground and my house 240v uses Black, Red, White, and Green, how do you handle the the Green (ground) and White (neutral) wires?

   

  The goal is to wire the amp for SS this weekend without destroying the amp and/or burning the house down.

   

  73 de NT4Q Jerry 

   



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  PVRCNC mailing list
  PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
  http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081109/98854400/attachment.htm
From k4czusa at attglobal.net  Mon Nov 10 09:54:35 2008
From: k4czusa at attglobal.net (Barry Baker, K4CZ)
Date: Mon Nov 10 09:57:39 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FW: WAE RTTY K4CZ Single Op HP
Message-ID: <000001c94344$40797ab0$c16c7010$@net>

                    WAE DX Contest, RTTY

Call: K4CZ
Operator(s): K4CZ
Station: K4CZ

Class: Single Op HP
QTH: Durham, NC
Operating Time (hrs): 18

Summary:
 Band  QSOs  Pts  QTCs  Mults
------------------------------
   80:  124  124     0   104
   40:  200  200    30   144
   20:  191  191   301   102
   15:   28   28    60    32
   10:    0    0     0     0
------------------------------
Total:  543  543   391   382  Total Score = 356,788

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

Comments:

Fun contest!   Propagation wasn't great but the QTC exchanges keep it
interesting and challenging.   Lowband propagation seemed much better on
Friday night than Saturday night.   K4GMH's comments about QTC strategy are
very true...just wish I had read them before the contest!   I didn't get on
the air Sunday morning and by the afternoon propagation to EU was less than
ideal.  A few South American stations were willing to exchange on Sunday
afternoon but not enough.  I got stuck with lots of QTCs...and some valuable
lessons for next year...

 73, Barry K4CZ

From mike at bentwire.net  Tue Nov 11 09:31:28 2008
From: mike at bentwire.net (mike@bentwire.net)
Date: Tue Nov 11 09:32:49 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] On the cover of the Rolling Stone
Message-ID: <20081111143248.6756F859BB8@mailman.qth.net>


Well, maybe not the cover, nor Rolling Stone magazine ....

But today's (or at least right now's) Spotlight picture on everybody's
second favorite contesting website (second only to PVRCNC.org) is
W4KAZ and KA1ARB at N1LN's for NAQP SSB.

They's famous now!


Mike N4GU
From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Tue Nov 11 09:31:41 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Tue Nov 11 09:52:30 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] On the cover of the Rolling Stone
References: <20081111143248.6756F859BB8@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <6C9470CDE0EA4C8A8371914560EF2B7B@JORDANLAW.local>

Sorry, Mike. I'm slow. Give me a url for the website.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <mike@bentwire.net>
To: "PVRCNC" <pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 9:31 AM
Subject: [PVRCNC] On the cover of the Rolling Stone


> 
> Well, maybe not the cover, nor Rolling Stone magazine ....
> 
> But today's (or at least right now's) Spotlight picture on everybody's
> second favorite contesting website (second only to PVRCNC.org) is
> W4KAZ and KA1ARB at N1LN's for NAQP SSB.
> 
> They's famous now!
> 
> 
> Mike N4GU
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
>

From mike at bentwire.net  Wed Nov 12 07:53:36 2008
From: mike at bentwire.net (mike@bentwire.net)
Date: Wed Nov 12 07:54:55 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008
Message-ID: <20081112125453.61540859BB8@mailman.qth.net>


FYI, the 2008 FD results on the ARRL website. Some bunch of yokels
called the NC Contesters Club finished in 10th place in 3A out of 303
entries with less than half of the number of operators #1 through 9
had. But FD isn't a contest so scores don't matter. 

CQ SS.....(just warming up)

73, Mike N4GU

From alsopb at nc.rr.com  Wed Nov 12 08:35:03 2008
From: alsopb at nc.rr.com (Brian Alsop)
Date: Wed Nov 12 08:38:09 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article
Message-ID: <491ADB87.4020604@nc.rr.com>

Guys,

This makes interesting reading.

http://www.ncjweb.com/k3lcmaxgainradials.pdf

It determines the optimum length and number of radials (40/80/160M) at 
given amounts of available wire.
The results are plotted and tabulated for various ground conductivity 
values.

Given the data one may conclude that on 160M 500' of radial wires (with 
optimum radial lengths) is within 1.5 db of 32000' of wire also with 
optimum radial length!   The cost to obtain the extra 1.5 db is 
astronomical.

It gives hope to those who previously thought they couldn't put up a LF 
vertical because of ground system costs.

73 de Brian/K3KO
From kwinrich at gmail.com  Wed Nov 12 10:11:25 2008
From: kwinrich at gmail.com (Kent Winrich)
Date: Wed Nov 12 10:14:33 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article
In-Reply-To: <491ADB87.4020604@nc.rr.com>
References: <491ADB87.4020604@nc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <615f119e0811120711h124066d8q4718488b46e8feaf@mail.gmail.com>

You can play with burying hundreds of feet of wire or you can go elevated:
http://www.nottltd.com/ElevatedRadialSystem.pdf

As I mentioned in my presentation, it is most important to cover an area
close in to the antenna.  There is not a big addition in coverage with the
longer wires.  It is better (if you go buried) to have MORE then LONGER
radials.  I suggested a 20' square of an interwoven 'grid" with about 1 - 2'
squares to create a "screen" .  Elevate it if you can!

In this article a number of issues are skipped over (or I read to fast,
which is quite possible).

Dont you find it interesting that they are suggesting a LOWER number of
radials in poor soil?  That is because of ground loss.... something the
elevated system is supposed to lower.

Another issues is that they talk about the NUMBER of radials versus the area
covered.  So if I have 500' of wire, they are still suggesting that ALL
radials be 1/4 wavelength.  Unfortunately they didnt try shorter, but more
numerous radials.

BTW in our area, I always assume that we have poor (heh or NO) ground
conductivity.

Here is a discussion and data about elevated versus standard ground system
in Ham Radio Frequencies:
http://www.arising.com.au/people/Holland/Ralph/shortvert.htm

Here you will see that 3 -4 elevated wires can out perform 32 buried wires!

Kent Winrich
K9EZ/4
b0zo #143. www.ab0zo.com
Somewheres near Fuquay
Ex Cheesehead
Packer Fan and Stock holder!

On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Brian Alsop <alsopb@nc.rr.com> wrote:

> Guys,
>
> This makes interesting reading.
>
> http://www.ncjweb.com/k3lcmaxgainradials.pdf
>
> It determines the optimum length and number of radials (40/80/160M) at
> given amounts of available wire.
> The results are plotted and tabulated for various ground conductivity
> values.
>
> Given the data one may conclude that on 160M 500' of radial wires (with
> optimum radial lengths) is within 1.5 db of 32000' of wire also with optimum
> radial length!   The cost to obtain the extra 1.5 db is astronomical.
>
> It gives hope to those who previously thought they couldn't put up a LF
> vertical because of ground system costs.
>
> 73 de Brian/K3KO
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081112/000326e3/attachment-0001.htm
From mike at bentwire.net  Wed Nov 12 11:00:27 2008
From: mike at bentwire.net (mike@bentwire.net)
Date: Wed Nov 12 11:01:45 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article
Message-ID: <20081112160144.31DC88582B3@mailman.qth.net>

After Ken's presentation, I got to thinking about implementing his
suggestion of a tight mesh in close to the vertical feedpoint. Wire
mesh fencing would seem ideal. Except all of that stuff is galvanized
steel - Low conductivity, difficult to establish a solid electrical
connection to. Not to mention the eventual rust issue.

Any suggestions for a) aluminum mesh fencing source or b) ways of
solidly connecting to galvanized mesh?

I believe b) has more practical potential. I'm thinking some sort of
clamp with lotsa alumilox or equivalent.

Of course, once I win the lottree, I'm installing copper sheeting in
the back forty.

Mike/N4GU



"Kent Winrich" <kwinrich@gmail.com> wrote:


Note: Forwarded Email Message Below:



You can play with burying hundreds of feet of wire or you can go elevated:
http://www.nottltd.com/ElevatedRadialSystem.pdf

As I mentioned in my presentation, it is most important to cover an area
close in to the antenna.  There is not a big addition in coverage with the
longer wires.  It is better (if you go buried) to have MORE then LONGER
radials.  I suggested a 20' square of an interwoven 'grid" with about
1 - 2'
squares to create a "screen" .  Elevate it if you can!

In this article a number of issues are skipped over (or I read to fast,
which is quite possible).

Dont you find it interesting that they are suggesting a LOWER number of
radials in poor soil?  That is because of ground loss.... something the
elevated system is supposed to lower.

Another issues is that they talk about the NUMBER of radials versus
the area
covered.  So if I have 500' of wire, they are still suggesting that ALL
radials be 1/4 wavelength.  Unfortunately they didnt try shorter, but more
numerous radials.

BTW in our area, I always assume that we have poor (heh or NO) ground
conductivity.

Here is a discussion and data about elevated versus standard ground system
in Ham Radio Frequencies:
http://www.arising.com.au/people/Holland/Ralph/shortvert.htm

Here you will see that 3 -4 elevated wires can out perform 32 buried
wires!

Kent Winrich
K9EZ/4
b0zo #143. www.ab0zo.com
Somewheres near Fuquay
Ex Cheesehead
Packer Fan and Stock holder!

From wlbaber at bellsouth.net  Wed Nov 12 11:55:40 2008
From: wlbaber at bellsouth.net (wlbaber@bellsouth.net)
Date: Wed Nov 12 11:58:51 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article
In-Reply-To: <20081112160144.31DC88582B3@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <111220081655.21453.491B0A8C0001E19D000053CD22243429029B0A02D2089B9A019C04040A0DBF9D0A0D0E0D0499@att.net>




 

How many radials?  After an initial 16 on one 160 meter "T"
vertical 3 years ago, I added a second T vertical and phased it with
the first one, and since then I have added radials each of two year,
and usually about this time (my third year).  In the meantime, I
look for cheap wire, and repair radials cut by the lawn mower!  I
don't ask that question any more (how many radials?).


Another way to go is elevated radials.  I use 6 of them on each
element of an 80 meter four square, which I am renovating according to
the admonishments of antenna Guru, Guy, K2AV.  BTW, anyone over 6
foot tall must not run in my back yard.


I had each element extended by, and clamped to, the support ropes off
the 90 foot point of the tower.  I'm in the process of cutting the
ropes so that the top-hat loading wires are suspended in space with
rope attached to both ends.  Also, I'm uing ladder line instead of
a single wire element  in the same T type configuration, but at
the angle of the ropes.  It became clear to me from 160 meter
success that ladder line carries more current and as a result there is
higher efficiency compared to a single wire element, as in the typical
inverted L.   I'll see if the same results occur on 80 meters in
CQWW!  


For 160 meters I need a regular high dipole to work locals before 160
meters goes long.  The T verticals are not as good as a beverage
but if you don't have room for a full-size beverage you will appreciate
a T vertical.


Anyway, the point is:  adding radials comes under "there is always
something to fix."  I noted loss of  one element of a T
vertical used as an 80 meter antenna during
SSCW...I knew it in the first 15 minutes of switching to 80 meters for
the run! 
After that I could relax, the competitive part of the contest was over,
early!


73, Will, wj9b, dit dit

Once PVRC, always PVRC


 



 -------------- Original message from mike@bentwire.net: --------------


> After Ken's presentation, I got to thinking about implementing his
> suggestion of a tight mesh in close to the vertical feedpoint. Wire
> mesh fencing would seem ideal. Except all of that stuff is galvanized
> steel - Low conductivity, difficult to establish a solid electrical
> connection to. Not to mention the eventual rust issue.
> 
> Any suggestions for a) aluminum mesh fencing source or b) ways of
> solidly connecting to galvanized mesh?
> 
> I believe b) has more practical potential. I'm thinking some sort of
> clamp with lotsa alumilox or equivalent.
> 
> Of course, once I win the lottree, I'm installing copper sheeting in
> the back forty.
> 
> Mike/N4GU
> 
> 
> 
> "Kent Winrich"  wrote:
> 
> 
> Note: Forwarded Email Message Below:
> 
> 
> 
> You can play with burying hundreds of feet of wire or you can go elevated:
> http://www.nottltd.com/ElevatedRadialSystem.pdf
> 
> As I mentioned in my presentation, it is most important to cover an area
> close in to the antenna.  There is not a big addition in coverage with the
> longer wires.  It is better (if you go buried) to have MORE then LONGER
> radials.  I suggested a 20' square of an interwoven 'grid" with about
> 1 - 2'
> squares to create a "screen" .  Elevate it if you can!
> 
> In this article a number of issues are skipped over (or I read to fast,
> which is quite possible).
> 
> Dont you find it interesting that they are suggesting a LOWER number of
> radials in poor soil?  That is because of ground loss.... something the
> elevated system is supposed to lower.
> 
> Another issues is that they talk about the NUMBER of radials versus
> the area
> covered.  So if I have 500' of wire, they are still suggesting that ALL
> radials be 1/4 wavelength.  Unfortunately they didnt try shorter, but more
> numerous radials.
> 
> BTW in our area, I always assume that we have poor (heh or NO) ground
> conductivity.
> 
> Here is a discussion and data about elevated versus standard ground system
> in Ham Radio Frequencies:
> http://www.arising.com.au/people/Holland/Ralph/shortvert.htm
> 
> Here you will see that 3 -4 elevated wires can out perform 32 buried
> wires!
> 
> Kent Winrich
> K9EZ/4
> b0zo #143. www.ab0zo.com
> Somewheres near Fuquay
> Ex Cheesehead
> Packer Fan and Stock holder!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc




-------------- next part --------------
Skipped content of type multipart/related
From Guy.Olinger at sas.com  Wed Nov 12 12:48:30 2008
From: Guy.Olinger at sas.com (Guy Olinger)
Date: Wed Nov 12 12:51:45 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article
In-Reply-To: <615f119e0811120711h124066d8q4718488b46e8feaf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <491ADB87.4020604@nc.rr.com>
	<615f119e0811120711h124066d8q4718488b46e8feaf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <345520A34347BA49B798F70B218ACD1305B60AD909@MERCMBX14.na.sas.com>

Kent, the problem with much of the ground radial flak (including the article referenced in the URL) is that it goes something like this:

Lawrence Livermore Labs is very smart and was paid by the government to do smart work.  They came up with Sommerfield Ground which got put in NEC2 and NEC4.

So we can run NEC2 and NEC4 and treat the model results as fact because of all the smart people.

The problem is that when you talk to the people responsible for the models THEY don't believe they have dirt solved at RF.  The intention of the Sommerfield ground was to get some measure of predictability of wire antennas IN THE AIR.  None of the principals involved thinks that the models are exact for wire ON or IN the ground.  And no one is paying them to find out.  A LOT of funding for a lot of things dried up with the end of the cold war.

What you do not see in a lot of internet expositions is raw data with case A, and A environment carefully qualified, and raw data with case B with its environment carefully qualified.  There is a simple reason for that...getting raw data for 160 meters is a genuine real first class pain in the *rse.  You have to account for ground moisture, the chemistry of the dirt, which is never constant, and take measurements.  Then do it all over again later to make sure your measurements are repeatable, and account for the almost inevitable variations, and maybe do the same thing 30, 50, 100 times over the seasons and identify any statistical variations.

It's far, far easier to do a NEC2 run in your nice warm house, and write a paper based on a graph showing overlaid curves from several model runs.

The seminal careful measurements in the 30's and 40's by Bell Laboratories and others, who had budgets, vast acreage, and a commercial mandate to do the work, do not agree with some of the model results for elevated systems. W8JI has done extensive comparative measurements on elevated vs. buried, and his measurements do not agree with some of the model results.  He's gone back to buried, and it's hard to argue with his results.

There remains, still, some number of poorly understood phenomena regarding the behavior of dirt at RF, which because they are poorly understood, mean the models poorly estimate.  To wit, if you construct a copper plane and base an antenna on top, there is a significantly less level of current detectable underneath.  Changing over to wires, at some concentration of wire radials, the wires begin to behave as if they were a sheet, the area underneath gradually starts to behave as if it's shielded. One thing for sure, it's not at four radials, and there is significant flux density underneath four radials. One measured variable is that it takes fewer radials to accomplish the same measure of shielding as one goes higher.  Four radials is fairly effective at heights over a quarter wavelength, talking 125+ feet in the air for 160 meters.  W8JI was measuring equivalence between 60 buried radials and 60 elevated radials at something like 8' (anti-garotting height) for 160.

Model results presented as facts based upon the popular reputation of a model is still a violation of basic science.  For commercial enterprise, the beef is location, location, location.  For science the beef is measure, measure, measure.

Where's the beef?

73, Guy.

From: pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net [mailto:pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Kent Winrich
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 10:11 AM
To: Brian Alsop
Cc: PVRCNC
Subject: Re: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article

You can play with burying hundreds of feet of wire or you can go elevated:
http://www.nottltd.com/ElevatedRadialSystem.pdf

As I mentioned in my presentation, it is most important to cover an area close in to the antenna.  There is not a big addition in coverage with the longer wires.  It is better (if you go buried) to have MORE then LONGER radials.  I suggested a 20' square of an interwoven 'grid" with about 1 - 2' squares to create a "screen" .  Elevate it if you can!

In this article a number of issues are skipped over (or I read to fast, which is quite possible).

Dont you find it interesting that they are suggesting a LOWER number of radials in poor soil?  That is because of ground loss.... something the elevated system is supposed to lower.

Another issues is that they talk about the NUMBER of radials versus the area covered.  So if I have 500' of wire, they are still suggesting that ALL radials be 1/4 wavelength.  Unfortunately they didnt try shorter, but more numerous radials.

BTW in our area, I always assume that we have poor (heh or NO) ground conductivity.

Here is a discussion and data about elevated versus standard ground system in Ham Radio Frequencies:
http://www.arising.com.au/people/Holland/Ralph/shortvert.htm

Here you will see that 3 -4 elevated wires can out perform 32 buried wires!

Kent Winrich
K9EZ/4
b0zo #143. www.ab0zo.com<http://www.ab0zo.com>
Somewheres near Fuquay
Ex Cheesehead
Packer Fan and Stock holder!

On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Brian Alsop <alsopb@nc.rr.com<mailto:alsopb@nc.rr.com>> wrote:
Guys,

This makes interesting reading.

http://www.ncjweb.com/k3lcmaxgainradials.pdf

It determines the optimum length and number of radials (40/80/160M) at given amounts of available wire.
The results are plotted and tabulated for various ground conductivity values.

Given the data one may conclude that on 160M 500' of radial wires (with optimum radial lengths) is within 1.5 db of 32000' of wire also with optimum radial length!   The cost to obtain the extra 1.5 db is astronomical.

It gives hope to those who previously thought they couldn't put up a LF vertical because of ground system costs.

73 de Brian/K3KO
_______________________________________________
PVRCNC mailing list
PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net<mailto:PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net>
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081112/28e69d02/attachment-0001.htm
From kwinrich at gmail.com  Wed Nov 12 14:16:49 2008
From: kwinrich at gmail.com (Kent Winrich)
Date: Wed Nov 12 14:19:59 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article
In-Reply-To: <345520A34347BA49B798F70B218ACD1305B60AD909@MERCMBX14.na.sas.com>
References: <491ADB87.4020604@nc.rr.com>
	<615f119e0811120711h124066d8q4718488b46e8feaf@mail.gmail.com>
	<345520A34347BA49B798F70B218ACD1305B60AD909@MERCMBX14.na.sas.com>
Message-ID: <615f119e0811121116o350d541du82c357f9f2b95bea@mail.gmail.com>

No doubt that running NEC is a pain in the backside.
 Personally I have difficulty in working with the ground systems in those
programs.  IMHO a lot of the models are not that reliable when trying to
model ground systems.
W8JI may have done some testing, but where did he do the testing? Different
times of year?  What was the comparison?   I can argue with his results, as
my antennas are different than his.  I am not one of the "pro" stations.  I
am an average ham station (heh below average actually).

Those that can run 120 radials per tower..... knock yourself out.  I
dont know about you, but I dont have the room nor the resources to put in
120 radials.  If I could yes I would run a full ground plane.  Please do
notice that the comparison was at up to 35 radials.  How many of
us have more than that?  The big guns, like W8JI, but I bet the rest of us
dont.  Again W8JI was comparing 60 radials.  The charts provided dont even
go that high.

I am presenting this as an option for us smaller guys.  And to concentrate
on the area around the base of the antenna.   I mentioned in PVRC, is this
group strictly for the big guns?  If so, I guess I am in the wrong group.

A good point you brought up is "There remains, still, some number of poorly
understood phenomena regarding the behavior of dirt at RF".  HOW TRUE!  How
do you suggest that we better understand this phenomena?  By just relying on
W8JIs tests?  Or perhaps by trying out our own situations?

Yes there is more measuring that needs to be done.  But that is what Ham
radio is all about.  So go ahead and go with the W8JI situation.. if
you have a four square.. and 40,000' of copper laying around.

On the other hand, I am going to build a ground system based on my own
design.  And experiment with it.

BTW I believe the quarter wave "radial" situation you mention is close to
the Franklin Antenna design that only one broadcast station KFBK in
Sacramento has.  It is basically a vertical dipole (stacked balanced fed
quarter waves).

Please correct me if I am wrong in any of the above areas.  I love to learn.

Kent
K9EZ




On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Guy Olinger <Guy.Olinger@sas.com> wrote:

>  Kent, the problem with much of the ground radial flak (including the
> article referenced in the URL) is that it goes something like this:
>
>
>
> Lawrence Livermore Labs is very smart and was paid by the government to do
> smart work.  They came up with Sommerfield Ground which got put in NEC2 and
> NEC4.
>
>
>
> So we can run NEC2 and NEC4 and treat the model results as fact because of
> all the smart people.
>
>
>
> The problem is that when you talk to the people responsible for the models
> THEY don't believe they have dirt solved at RF.  The intention of the
> Sommerfield ground was to get some measure of predictability of wire
> antennas IN THE AIR.  None of the principals involved thinks that the models
> are exact for wire ON or IN the ground.  And no one is paying them to find
> out.  A LOT of funding for a lot of things dried up with the end of the cold
> war.
>
>
>
> What you do not see in a lot of internet expositions is raw data with case
> A, and A environment carefully qualified, and raw data with case B with its
> environment carefully qualified.  There is a simple reason for that?getting
> raw data for 160 meters is a genuine real first class pain in the *rse.  You
> have to account for ground moisture, the chemistry of the dirt, which is
> never constant, and take measurements.  Then do it all over again later to
> make sure your measurements are repeatable, and account for the almost
> inevitable variations, and maybe do the same thing 30, 50, 100 times over
> the seasons and identify any statistical variations.
>
>
>
> It's far, far easier to do a NEC2 run in your nice warm house, and write a
> paper based on a graph showing overlaid curves from several model runs.
>
>
>
> The seminal careful measurements in the 30's and 40's by Bell Laboratories
> and others, who had budgets, vast acreage, and a commercial mandate to do
> the work, do not agree with some of the model results for elevated systems.
> W8JI has done extensive comparative measurements on elevated vs. buried, and
> his measurements do not agree with some of the model results.  He's gone
> back to buried, and it's hard to argue with his results.
>
>
>
> There remains, still, some number of poorly understood phenomena regarding
> the behavior of dirt at RF, which because they are poorly understood, mean
> the models poorly estimate.  To wit, if you construct a copper plane and
> base an antenna on top, there is a significantly less level of current
> detectable underneath.  Changing over to wires, at some concentration of
> wire radials, the wires begin to behave as if they were a sheet, the area
> underneath gradually starts to behave as if it's shielded. One thing for
> sure, it's not at four radials, and there is significant flux density
> underneath four radials. One measured variable is that it takes fewer
> radials to accomplish the same measure of shielding as one goes higher.
> Four radials is fairly effective at heights over a quarter wavelength,
> talking 125+ feet in the air for 160 meters.  W8JI was measuring equivalence
> between 60 buried radials and 60 elevated radials at something like 8'
> (anti-garotting height) for 160.
>
>
>
> Model results presented as facts based upon the popular reputation of a
> model is still a violation of basic science.  For commercial enterprise, the
> beef is location, location, location.  For science the beef is measure,
> measure, measure.
>
>
>
> Where's the beef?
>
>
>
> 73, Guy.
>
>
>
> *From:* pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net [mailto:
> pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net] *On Behalf Of *Kent Winrich
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 12, 2008 10:11 AM
> *To:* Brian Alsop
> *Cc:* PVRCNC
> *Subject:* Re: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article
>
>
>
> You can play with burying hundreds of feet of wire or you can go elevated:
>
> http://www.nottltd.com/ElevatedRadialSystem.pdf
>
>
>
> As I mentioned in my presentation, it is most important to cover an area
> close in to the antenna.  There is not a big addition in coverage with the
> longer wires.  It is better (if you go buried) to have MORE then LONGER
> radials.  I suggested a 20' square of an interwoven 'grid" with about 1 - 2'
> squares to create a "screen" .  Elevate it if you can!
>
>
>
> In this article a number of issues are skipped over (or I read to fast,
> which is quite possible).
>
>
>
> Dont you find it interesting that they are suggesting a LOWER number of
> radials in poor soil?  That is because of ground loss.... something the
> elevated system is supposed to lower.
>
>
>
> Another issues is that they talk about the NUMBER of radials versus the
> area covered.  So if I have 500' of wire, they are still suggesting that ALL
> radials be 1/4 wavelength.  Unfortunately they didnt try shorter, but more
> numerous radials.
>
>
>
> BTW in our area, I always assume that we have poor (heh or NO) ground
> conductivity.
>
>
>
> Here is a discussion and data about elevated versus standard ground system
> in Ham Radio Frequencies:
>
> http://www.arising.com.au/people/Holland/Ralph/shortvert.htm
>
>
>
> Here you will see that 3 -4 elevated wires can out perform 32 buried wires!
>
>
>
> Kent Winrich
>
> K9EZ/4
>
> b0zo #143. www.ab0zo.com
>
> Somewheres near Fuquay
>
> Ex Cheesehead
>
> Packer Fan and Stock holder!
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Brian Alsop <alsopb@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> This makes interesting reading.
>
> http://www.ncjweb.com/k3lcmaxgainradials.pdf
>
> It determines the optimum length and number of radials (40/80/160M) at
> given amounts of available wire.
> The results are plotted and tabulated for various ground conductivity
> values.
>
> Given the data one may conclude that on 160M 500' of radial wires (with
> optimum radial lengths) is within 1.5 db of 32000' of wire also with optimum
> radial length!   The cost to obtain the extra 1.5 db is astronomical.
>
> It gives hope to those who previously thought they couldn't put up a LF
> vertical because of ground system costs.
>
> 73 de Brian/K3KO
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081112/57fa22fc/attachment.htm
From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Wed Nov 12 17:23:34 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Wed Nov 12 17:46:09 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008
References: <20081112125453.61540859BB8@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <846A155A311E4DC9BBC86CAE360E39D3@JORDANLAW.local>

Wow, Mike, that's quite an achievment.

Might mention that a few other yokels, including PVRCNC ops K4QPL and AA4FU 
pushed a group called CARS K4M to 19th out of 441 in the highly competitive 
2A class with a score of 8,306, just some 498 points less than the 3 
transmitters in the group you mentioned. As far as qso's are concerned, the 
2A CARS group actually had more qso's with 2,364 vs. 2,319 for 3A.

But of course we wouldn't brag since this is not a contest at 
all......................A darn good thing, too. How can the #2 FD station 
in NC operate 8, count 'em, 8 radios with 36 participants and a grand total 
of 1,067 qso's and have a total of 10,530 points??  8 QRP radios on 
batteries? Bruce--was this your crowd??

73,

Jim, K4QPL

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <mike@bentwire.net>
To: "PVRCNC" <pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 7:53 AM
Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008


>
> FYI, the 2008 FD results on the ARRL website. Some bunch of yokels
> called the NC Contesters Club finished in 10th place in 3A out of 303
> entries with less than half of the number of operators #1 through 9
> had. But FD isn't a contest so scores don't matter.
>
> CQ SS.....(just warming up)
>
> 73, Mike N4GU
>
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
> 


From Guy.Olinger at sas.com  Wed Nov 12 18:13:23 2008
From: Guy.Olinger at sas.com (Guy Olinger)
Date: Wed Nov 12 18:16:37 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article
In-Reply-To: <615f119e0811121116o350d541du82c357f9f2b95bea@mail.gmail.com>
References: <491ADB87.4020604@nc.rr.com>
	<615f119e0811120711h124066d8q4718488b46e8feaf@mail.gmail.com>
	<345520A34347BA49B798F70B218ACD1305B60AD909@MERCMBX14.na.sas.com>
	<615f119e0811121116o350d541du82c357f9f2b95bea@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <345520A34347BA49B798F70B218ACD1305B60ADEF6@MERCMBX14.na.sas.com>

W8JI is one of those who measures.  And he's not some kind of autocrat rich celebrity we "common men" of common resources can now dismiss because of his dastardly autocratic money-bags celebrity-ness as nothing he's done could possibly scale down to our ordinariness.

Far from it.  He keeps up a large web site where he shares what he has.  He has an email address.  Ask him what you want to know.  He's been a great resource to a lot of hams.

He's had the opportunity to try all kinds of stuff on 160, including the only ham I know who put up a 160 dipole up at 300 feet to see how well  it would compare against a ? wave vertical over dense radials for DX. Models tell you all day long that broadside the dipole should be better by 3db or even more, depending. His description of the dipole (admittedly my recollection) was that it was rarely equal and mostly worse than the vertical.  Clearly something going on the models don't know about.

The comparison you quote is from a MODEL run.  The flaw in the model comparison is not from what happens in the air, but is in the evaluation of what happens from radials ON THE GROUND.

As to trying a solution, knock yourself out.  But do we want to export that to others as the way to go based on absolute specifications from a model based on the one thing that the model writers themselves say is imprecise?

From: Kent Winrich [mailto:kwinrich@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 2:17 PM
To: Guy Olinger
Cc: Brian Alsop; PVRCNC
Subject: Re: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article

No doubt that running NEC is a pain in the backside.  Personally I have difficulty in working with the ground systems in those programs.  IMHO a lot of the models are not that reliable when trying to model ground systems.

W8JI may have done some testing, but where did he do the testing? Different times of year?  What was the comparison?   I can argue with his results, as my antennas are different than his.  I am not one of the "pro" stations.  I am an average ham station (heh below average actually).

Those that can run 120 radials per tower..... knock yourself out.  I dont know about you, but I dont have the room nor the resources to put in 120 radials.  If I could yes I would run a full ground plane.  Please do notice that the comparison was at up to 35 radials.  How many of us have more than that?  The big guns, like W8JI, but I bet the rest of us dont.  Again W8JI was comparing 60 radials.  The charts provided dont even go that high.

I am presenting this as an option for us smaller guys.  And to concentrate on the area around the base of the antenna.   I mentioned in PVRC, is this group strictly for the big guns?  If so, I guess I am in the wrong group.

A good point you brought up is "There remains, still, some number of poorly understood phenomena regarding the behavior of dirt at RF".  HOW TRUE!  How do you suggest that we better understand this phenomena?  By just relying on W8JIs tests?  Or perhaps by trying out our own situations?

Yes there is more measuring that needs to be done.  But that is what Ham radio is all about.  So go ahead and go with the W8JI situation.. if you have a four square.. and 40,000' of copper laying around.

On the other hand, I am going to build a ground system based on my own design.  And experiment with it.

BTW I believe the quarter wave "radial" situation you mention is close to the Franklin Antenna design that only one broadcast station KFBK in Sacramento has.  It is basically a vertical dipole (stacked balanced fed quarter waves).

Please correct me if I am wrong in any of the above areas.  I love to learn.

Kent
K9EZ



On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Guy Olinger <Guy.Olinger@sas.com<mailto:Guy.Olinger@sas.com>> wrote:

Kent, the problem with much of the ground radial flak (including the article referenced in the URL) is that it goes something like this:



Lawrence Livermore Labs is very smart and was paid by the government to do smart work.  They came up with Sommerfield Ground which got put in NEC2 and NEC4.



So we can run NEC2 and NEC4 and treat the model results as fact because of all the smart people.



The problem is that when you talk to the people responsible for the models THEY don't believe they have dirt solved at RF.  The intention of the Sommerfield ground was to get some measure of predictability of wire antennas IN THE AIR.  None of the principals involved thinks that the models are exact for wire ON or IN the ground.  And no one is paying them to find out.  A LOT of funding for a lot of things dried up with the end of the cold war.



What you do not see in a lot of internet expositions is raw data with case A, and A environment carefully qualified, and raw data with case B with its environment carefully qualified.  There is a simple reason for that...getting raw data for 160 meters is a genuine real first class pain in the *rse.  You have to account for ground moisture, the chemistry of the dirt, which is never constant, and take measurements.  Then do it all over again later to make sure your measurements are repeatable, and account for the almost inevitable variations, and maybe do the same thing 30, 50, 100 times over the seasons and identify any statistical variations.



It's far, far easier to do a NEC2 run in your nice warm house, and write a paper based on a graph showing overlaid curves from several model runs.



The seminal careful measurements in the 30's and 40's by Bell Laboratories and others, who had budgets, vast acreage, and a commercial mandate to do the work, do not agree with some of the model results for elevated systems. W8JI has done extensive comparative measurements on elevated vs. buried, and his measurements do not agree with some of the model results.  He's gone back to buried, and it's hard to argue with his results.



There remains, still, some number of poorly understood phenomena regarding the behavior of dirt at RF, which because they are poorly understood, mean the models poorly estimate.  To wit, if you construct a copper plane and base an antenna on top, there is a significantly less level of current detectable underneath.  Changing over to wires, at some concentration of wire radials, the wires begin to behave as if they were a sheet, the area underneath gradually starts to behave as if it's shielded. One thing for sure, it's not at four radials, and there is significant flux density underneath four radials. One measured variable is that it takes fewer radials to accomplish the same measure of shielding as one goes higher.  Four radials is fairly effective at heights over a quarter wavelength, talking 125+ feet in the air for 160 meters.  W8JI was measuring equivalence between 60 buried radials and 60 elevated radials at something like 8' (anti-garotting height) for 160.



Model results presented as facts based upon the popular reputation of a model is still a violation of basic science.  For commercial enterprise, the beef is location, location, location.  For science the beef is measure, measure, measure.



Where's the beef?



73, Guy.



From: pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net<mailto:pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net> [mailto:pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net<mailto:pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net>] On Behalf Of Kent Winrich
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 10:11 AM
To: Brian Alsop
Cc: PVRCNC
Subject: Re: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article



You can play with burying hundreds of feet of wire or you can go elevated:

http://www.nottltd.com/ElevatedRadialSystem.pdf



As I mentioned in my presentation, it is most important to cover an area close in to the antenna.  There is not a big addition in coverage with the longer wires.  It is better (if you go buried) to have MORE then LONGER radials.  I suggested a 20' square of an interwoven 'grid" with about 1 - 2' squares to create a "screen" .  Elevate it if you can!



In this article a number of issues are skipped over (or I read to fast, which is quite possible).



Dont you find it interesting that they are suggesting a LOWER number of radials in poor soil?  That is because of ground loss.... something the elevated system is supposed to lower.



Another issues is that they talk about the NUMBER of radials versus the area covered.  So if I have 500' of wire, they are still suggesting that ALL radials be 1/4 wavelength.  Unfortunately they didnt try shorter, but more numerous radials.



BTW in our area, I always assume that we have poor (heh or NO) ground conductivity.



Here is a discussion and data about elevated versus standard ground system in Ham Radio Frequencies:

http://www.arising.com.au/people/Holland/Ralph/shortvert.htm



Here you will see that 3 -4 elevated wires can out perform 32 buried wires!



Kent Winrich

K9EZ/4

b0zo #143. www.ab0zo.com<http://www.ab0zo.com>

Somewheres near Fuquay

Ex Cheesehead

Packer Fan and Stock holder!



On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Brian Alsop <alsopb@nc.rr.com<mailto:alsopb@nc.rr.com>> wrote:

Guys,

This makes interesting reading.

http://www.ncjweb.com/k3lcmaxgainradials.pdf

It determines the optimum length and number of radials (40/80/160M) at given amounts of available wire.
The results are plotted and tabulated for various ground conductivity values.

Given the data one may conclude that on 160M 500' of radial wires (with optimum radial lengths) is within 1.5 db of 32000' of wire also with optimum radial length!   The cost to obtain the extra 1.5 db is astronomical.

It gives hope to those who previously thought they couldn't put up a LF vertical because of ground system costs.

73 de Brian/K3KO
_______________________________________________
PVRCNC mailing list
PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net<mailto:PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net>
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081112/7b95de43/attachment-0001.htm
From inventor61 at gmail.com  Wed Nov 12 18:39:44 2008
From: inventor61 at gmail.com (inventor_sixty_one)
Date: Wed Nov 12 18:42:55 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] I was pretty happy with the OCRA FD results, too
Message-ID: <70ec52290811121539ya101dcdtb1c3a24eb6a5430d@mail.gmail.com>

"But of course we wouldn't brag since this is not a contest at
all......................A darn good thing, too. How can the #2 FD station
in NC operate 8, count 'em, 8 radios with 36 participants and a grand total
of 1,067 qso's and have a total of 10,530 points??  8 QRP radios on
batteries? Bruce--was this your crowd??"

Orange Co. Radio Amateurs
W4EZ
FD 2008, for those keeping score:
#2 8A battery QRP
#3 8A
#2 NC section
#35 nationally, all stations and classes

Steve, KZ1X
From henry at summitschool.com  Wed Nov 12 18:46:09 2008
From: henry at summitschool.com (henry@summitschool.com)
Date: Wed Nov 12 18:49:21 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008
Message-ID: <78kb1c$98ds4r@rrcs-agw-01b.hrndva.rr.com>

FYI- the NC WEST group pulled sicko duty with the Forsyth ARC, running 5A off batteries- qrp- gads. 2nd US sounds good, but only out of 4 entries in the category. Hell, still sounds good. 
Oh, yeah, its not a contest.

See you all this weekend in phone SS. We'll be running our own calls as well as a multi op at W4WS.
Anyone for beers in Burlington after the new year?
Kaz?
Henry W2DZO


> 
> From: "Jim Jordan, K4QPL" <k4qpl@nc.rr.com>
> Date: 2008/11/12 Wed PM 05:23:34 EST
> To: "PVRCNC" <pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net>,  <mike@bentwire.net>
> Subject: Re: [PVRCNC] FD2008
> 
> Wow, Mike, that's quite an achievment.
> 
> Might mention that a few other yokels, including PVRCNC ops K4QPL and AA4FU 
> pushed a group called CARS K4M to 19th out of 441 in the highly competitive 
> 2A class with a score of 8,306, just some 498 points less than the 3 
> transmitters in the group you mentioned. As far as qso's are concerned, the 
> 2A CARS group actually had more qso's with 2,364 vs. 2,319 for 3A.
> 
> But of course we wouldn't brag since this is not a contest at 
> all......................A darn good thing, too. How can the #2 FD station 
> in NC operate 8, count 'em, 8 radios with 36 participants and a grand total 
> of 1,067 qso's and have a total of 10,530 points??  8 QRP radios on 
> batteries? Bruce--was this your crowd??
> 
> 73,
> 
> Jim, K4QPL
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <mike@bentwire.net>
> To: "PVRCNC" <pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 7:53 AM
> Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008
> 
> 
> >
> > FYI, the 2008 FD results on the ARRL website. Some bunch of yokels
> > called the NC Contesters Club finished in 10th place in 3A out of 303
> > entries with less than half of the number of operators #1 through 9
> > had. But FD isn't a contest so scores don't matter.
> >
> > CQ SS.....(just warming up)
> >
> > 73, Mike N4GU
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > PVRCNC mailing list
> > PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
> 
From bemeier at bellsouth.net  Wed Nov 12 18:46:13 2008
From: bemeier at bellsouth.net (Bruce Meier)
Date: Wed Nov 12 18:49:30 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008
In-Reply-To: <846A155A311E4DC9BBC86CAE360E39D3@JORDANLAW.local>
References: <20081112125453.61540859BB8@mailman.qth.net>
	<846A155A311E4DC9BBC86CAE360E39D3@JORDANLAW.local>
Message-ID: <006b01c94520$d9a2e090$8ce8a1b0$@net>

Yes Jim - that was us.

I was part of the OCRA - Orange County Radio Amateurs - FD team (W4EZ)
Yes, we were 8A-Battery.

Here are a few data points - 
*******************************************

Ranking out of all participating stations: 35th out of 2,410

Ranking for stations running QRP: 5th out of 252

Ranking for stations in the North Carolina Section: 2nd out of 73
********************************************

Next year we will be running K3s - - so watch out !!

73,
Bruce - N1LN
(aka: NC4KW)




-----Original Message-----
From: pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net [mailto:pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of Jim Jordan, K4QPL
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 17:24 PM
To: PVRCNC; mike@bentwire.net
Subject: Re: [PVRCNC] FD2008

Wow, Mike, that's quite an achievment.

Might mention that a few other yokels, including PVRCNC ops K4QPL and AA4FU 
pushed a group called CARS K4M to 19th out of 441 in the highly competitive 
2A class with a score of 8,306, just some 498 points less than the 3 
transmitters in the group you mentioned. As far as qso's are concerned, the 
2A CARS group actually had more qso's with 2,364 vs. 2,319 for 3A.

But of course we wouldn't brag since this is not a contest at 
all......................A darn good thing, too. How can the #2 FD station 
in NC operate 8, count 'em, 8 radios with 36 participants and a grand total 
of 1,067 qso's and have a total of 10,530 points??  8 QRP radios on 
batteries? Bruce--was this your crowd??

73,

Jim, K4QPL

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <mike@bentwire.net>
To: "PVRCNC" <pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 7:53 AM
Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008


>
> FYI, the 2008 FD results on the ARRL website. Some bunch of yokels
> called the NC Contesters Club finished in 10th place in 3A out of 303
> entries with less than half of the number of operators #1 through 9
> had. But FD isn't a contest so scores don't matter.
>
> CQ SS.....(just warming up)
>
> 73, Mike N4GU
>
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
> 


_______________________________________________
PVRCNC mailing list
PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc

From mike at bentwire.net  Wed Nov 12 19:31:34 2008
From: mike at bentwire.net (mike@bentwire.net)
Date: Wed Nov 12 19:32:53 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008
Message-ID: <20081113003250.05BF8859BB8@mailman.qth.net>

There seems to be a common thread among all these top scoring NC
entries, east and west......

You can take the contest out of the operating event, but you can't
take the drive out of the contester.

Congrads to all the PVRC-driven FD operations!

Mike/N4GU


From kwinrich at gmail.com  Wed Nov 12 19:58:47 2008
From: kwinrich at gmail.com (Kent Winrich)
Date: Wed Nov 12 20:02:00 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Optimum # radials article
In-Reply-To: <345520A34347BA49B798F70B218ACD1305B60ADEF6@MERCMBX14.na.sas.com>
References: <491ADB87.4020604@nc.rr.com>
	<615f119e0811120711h124066d8q4718488b46e8feaf@mail.gmail.com>
	<345520A34347BA49B798F70B218ACD1305B60AD909@MERCMBX14.na.sas.com>
	<615f119e0811121116o350d541du82c357f9f2b95bea@mail.gmail.com>
	<345520A34347BA49B798F70B218ACD1305B60ADEF6@MERCMBX14.na.sas.com>
Message-ID: <615f119e0811121658r15c331d2ta1595227abc3da73@mail.gmail.com>

Guy... seriously.. do you have W8JIs lineup??: I know I dont have a four
square on 160!  And enough with the autocratic crap.  Seriously  Can
we have a grown up conversation???  Feel free to ignore everything below if
that makes you feel better.
I did have a nine square on 1130 kHz (which by the way uses a partial
elevated ground system on all nine towers.  Just like WISN, KFAN, WDFN,
KKGN, and so many others.  I guess RCA was wrong in their design.
http://www.fybush.com/Tower%20Site/060324/wisn-twrbase.jpg

Full article: http://www.fybush.com/sites/2006/site-060331.html

Or IEEE
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel1/11/93/00001415.pdf?arnumber=1415

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel1/11/5720/00217997.pdf?arnumber=217997

But it all depends on the take off angle you desire.

Trust me, the guys I am working with in regards to this consult with the
FCC, the military, antenna manufacturers, and have a number of papers on
antennas and design.  I am not just pulling this out of my back side.

I am aware of the models and that there are flaws.  These are not perfect.
 REPEAT: THESE ARE NOT PERFECT!  Never claimed them to be.  But all I can
say is that the elevated grounds I have worked with have performed rather
decently.  And they dont fade is j with moisture either.  In other words
they are much more stable.  But these were in VERY POOR SOIL CONDITIONS.

Here is all I am saying......

This was meant for a discussion, I never claimed that this is the final
word.

Unless you are one of the "professional" stations (that can afford to do a
four square on 160 with 60+ radials), going with MORE but shorter radials is
better than going with longer but fewer radials.

Elevated radials can (that doesnt mean WILL) improve your situation, IF you
are in a low conductive ground area:
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/m3/index.html.  If you are in a high conductive
area, you more than likely will do better with buried.  I believe I have
always said that you will need to TRY this.  This is for the smaller station
to try.  REPEAT THIS IS FOR THE SMALLER STATION TO TRY.

I did find this review to be quite interesting:
http://www.antennasbyn6lf.com/files/antenna_ground_system_experiment_3.pdf

This review ALSO says that it depends on the ground at your
location... something I have been stating all along, and is true in any
situation.  Unfortunately he uses mainly 4 elevated radials, whereas the
people I talk to say use 6.

All of the reviews for that sire may be had here:
http://www.antennasbyn6lf.com/2008/08/hf-vertical-gro.html

But since everyone is hell bent on shutting this discussion down.  By all
means.  I will shut up.

I will have no further input into this.

W8JI:Transmitting antennas

Currently have four-square for 160 using 120/240 degree phase shift (more
gain, better pattern)with four 1/4 wl vertical elements. I also have a 220
foot insulated tower, a 318 foot insulated tower that supports various wire
antennas, a 300 foot Rohn 65G, a rotating 200 foot tower with monoband yagis
for 40 through two meters.

Receiving antennas

My receiving arrays are mostly located about 1000-2500 feet from the
transmitting arrays, although a few are closer. I currently have about 35
Beverages that include arrays of Beverages, 12 phased 20 foot tall verticals
(in two arrays, one steerable with eight elements in a 330 foot circle and a
four element array- 330 ft by 70 foot- fixed on Europe or switchable to
South Pacific).

On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Guy Olinger <Guy.Olinger@sas.com> wrote:

>  W8JI is one of those who measures.  And he's not some kind of autocrat
> rich celebrity we "common men" of common resources can now dismiss because
> of his dastardly autocratic money-bags celebrity-ness as nothing he's done
> could possibly scale down to our ordinariness.
>
>
>
> Far from it.  He keeps up a large web site where he shares what he has.  He
> has an email address.  Ask him what you want to know.  He's been a great
> resource to a lot of hams.
>
>
>
> He's had the opportunity to try all kinds of stuff on 160, including the
> only ham I know who put up a 160 dipole up at 300 feet to see how well  it
> would compare against a ? wave vertical over dense radials for DX. Models
> tell you all day long that broadside the dipole should be better by 3db or
> even more, depending. His description of the dipole (admittedly my
> recollection) was that it was rarely equal and mostly worse than the
> vertical.  Clearly something going on the models don't know about.
>
>
>
> The comparison you quote is from a MODEL run.  The flaw in the model
> comparison is not from what happens in the air, but is in the evaluation of
> what happens from radials ON THE GROUND.
>
>
>
> As to trying a solution, knock yourself out.  But do we want to export that
> to others as the way to go based on absolute specifications from a model
> based on the one thing that the model writers themselves say is imprecise?
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081112/08940215/attachment.htm
From kazeringue at aol.com  Wed Nov 12 23:15:14 2008
From: kazeringue at aol.com (KAZeringue)
Date: Wed Nov 12 23:18:23 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008
Message-ID: <491BA9D2.6000305@aol.com>

> But of course we wouldn't brag since this is not a contest... 

Sheesh.  What a killjoy!  No bragging takes all of the fun out of the 
post-it's-not-a-contest triage.

I'll stick with N4GU's brag point.  Our "QSO to Peep" ratio was 330:1.

I'm sure if we had a crew of 30+ somebodies to come along, set up all of 
the stations and antennas, cater a well rested N4YDU a nice high calorie 
BBQ dinner and a follow-up nice breakfast, we just might have squeezed 
those extra 50 Q's outta him.  He must have been exhausted from all of 
the pre-FD vacationing with the new XYL.

As it was, we also cut into the score drastically by letting that lid 
W4KAZ operate too long. He screwed up all of the antennas too.  -ahem-

2009 is at another totally unfamiliar site, so I'll make no predictions, 
other than that we shall make a valiant attempt to improve.

But I don't think we'll try to compete in the 5w category.  Not down 
here at the bottom of the cycle, anyway.  :o

73 de w4kaz/wod






From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Thu Nov 13 06:51:44 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Thu Nov 13 07:12:32 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008
References: <491BA9D2.6000305@aol.com>
Message-ID: <6BF1ED3AE8454B80ADB2D04B130499A1@JFJLT07>


From: "KAZeringue" <kazeringue@aol.com>


>> But of course we wouldn't brag since this is not a contest...
>
> Sheesh.  What a killjoy!  No bragging takes all of the fun out of the 
> post-it's-not-a-contest triage.

Perhaps honorable scribe not recognize TIC by author.

>
> I'll stick with N4GU's brag point.  Our "QSO to Peep" ratio was 330:1.

So next year I should go out by myself and make 660 qso's???   I thought the 
idea was to get more peeps involved in  FD, not to keep them out. But I 
guess one must choose whatever can put the best spin on performance in a 
non-contest.    ;-)


Until next time, 73,

Jim, K4QPL

>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
> 

From kazeringue at aol.com  Thu Nov 13 09:21:45 2008
From: kazeringue at aol.com (KAZeringue)
Date: Thu Nov 13 09:24:55 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FD2008
In-Reply-To: <6BF1ED3AE8454B80ADB2D04B130499A1@JFJLT07>
References: <491BA9D2.6000305@aol.com>
	<6BF1ED3AE8454B80ADB2D04B130499A1@JFJLT07>
Message-ID: <491C37F9.7040303@aol.com>

Shirley, you jest......

If we spread the peeps out a bit more, that would be more stations on 
the air, and more Q's for everybody.  I suspect the BBQ dinners might 
suffer, but there's trade offs everywhere.

With 30 peeps we'd have had 330x30 Qsos.  Almost 10K Q's!

Easy, right?  O'course, that's calculated using "new math".  ;)

73 de w4kaz, aka "Dos Cheeks"
From inventor61 at gmail.com  Sun Nov 16 22:14:28 2008
From: inventor61 at gmail.com (inventor_sixty_one)
Date: Sun Nov 16 22:18:04 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] 2008 ARRL SS CW
Message-ID: <70ec52290811161914k316aa04w560b39b3a4057881@mail.gmail.com>

                    ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, CW

Call: KZ1X
Operator(s): KZ1X
Station: KZ1X
Cook:  N1GMR

Class: SO Unlimited HP
QTH: NC
Operating Time (hrs): 18

Summary:
 Band  QSOs
------------
  160:    0
   80:   48
   40:   62
   20:   15
   15:    0
   10:    0
------------
Total:  125  Sections = 79  Total Score = 19,750

***************
I am just getting the hang of this reporting stuff.  As you can see, I
am a slow learner.
Will post another message with the 'phone results once I figure that out.

Steve KZ1X
Contesting Newbie
From inventor61 at gmail.com  Sun Nov 16 22:34:57 2008
From: inventor61 at gmail.com (inventor_sixty_one)
Date: Sun Nov 16 22:38:32 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] 2008 SS phone results, KZ1X
Message-ID: <70ec52290811161934i5abdc845pdee802f3561731a9@mail.gmail.com>

                  ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, SSB

Call: KZ1X
Operator(s): KZ1X
Station: KZ1X

Class: Single Op HP
QTH: NC
Operating Time (hrs): 17

Summary:
 Band  QSOs
------------
  160:    0
   80:   99
   40:   10
   20:   72
   15:   19
   10:    0
------------
Total:  200  Sections = 80  Total Score = 32,000

**************
This is my first 'clean sweep' in 30 years of being licensed.
Like I said, slow learner.  Since I don't touch-type, I find it pretty
hard to do a 'run' (so I didn't) but S&P is no problem for now until
my skill set improves.
I was able to avoid making mistakes by preparing the PC setup beforehand.
I sure like the K3.  Some things about it are very quirky - but as far
as handling the close-spaced, strong signals, it's really great.
I also like this Sennheiser headset.  Very comfortable.  I literally
could wear it all day, and I generally dislike having headphones on.
From NX9T at aol.com  Sun Nov 16 22:35:05 2008
From: NX9T at aol.com (NX9T@aol.com)
Date: Sun Nov 16 22:38:46 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] NX9T SS SSB QRP
Message-ID: <bfb.4661e0bd.36524069@aol.com>

ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, SSB

Call: NX9T
Operator(s): NX9T
Station: NX9T

Class: Single Op QRP
QTH: NC
Operating Time (hrs): 23

Summary:
Band? QSOs
------------
? 160:? ? 0
?? 80:? 346
?? 40:? 119
?? 20:?? 80
?? 15:?? 67
?? 10:? ? 0
------------
Total:? 612? Sections = 77? Total Score = 94,248

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

Comments:

That was a lot of fun (at least most of it was!). Thanks to all the great ops 
out there who turn on the
internal/mental "pre-amp" to work with the QRP signals when things get 
marginal. 
There are times when signals are super strong...then just as quickly they 
fade
away to about nothing.? This was my 3rd year slugging it out in the QRP class
and I was able to get up to 23 hours (last year only worked 20).

Thanks again to all of you out there on the bands making Qs.

73,
Jeff NX9T
qsl.net/nx9t




**************
Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news &amp; 
more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=htt
p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081116/71592f0e/attachment.htm
From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Sun Nov 16 22:37:06 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Sun Nov 16 22:40:45 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] K4QPL SS SSB SO Assisted
Message-ID: <7137EEB0664447A2A553D6216BBA942B@JFJLT07>


    CallSign Used : K4QPL
      Operator(s) : K4QPL

Operator Category : SINGLE-OP-ASSISTED
             Band : ALL
            Power : HIGH
             Mode : SSB
 Default Exchange : U 57 NC

     ARRL Section : NC
        Club/Team : Potomac Valley Radio Club
         Software : N1MM Logger V8.10.6

        Band    QSOs    Pts  Sec
         3.5     375     750   34
           7     214     428    7
          14     176     352   23
          21      32      64   16
       Total     797    1594   80

            Score : 127,520
              Rig :  Orion II, SB221 (Thanks, K2AV for loan of amp)

Don't have the stamina for SSB so stopped for the night at 0500 and ended up 
only a part time effort. Wanted to get a sweep which I missed on cw so did 
this one backwards. Worked the spots first to get the difficult mults with 
only occasional runs. Once I got the sweep I looked for the best place to 
get rate and work PVRC which was mostly 75. Great turnout!!

73,

Jim, K4QPL 

From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Sun Nov 16 22:41:09 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Sun Nov 16 22:44:48 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] NX9T SS SSB QRP
References: <bfb.4661e0bd.36524069@aol.com>
Message-ID: <0794AAF5DBD74359AE52D7A1FB7FEB7B@JFJLT07>

Jeff,

You're such a nice guy no one would ever suspect you had this masochistic problem that emerges once a year! 

Great job and thanks for the Q.

73,

Jim
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: NX9T@aol.com 
  To: pvrc@mailman.qth.net ; pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net 
  Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 10:35 PM
  Subject: [PVRCNC] NX9T SS SSB QRP


  ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, SSB

  Call: NX9T
  Operator(s): NX9T
  Station: NX9T

  Class: Single Op QRP
  QTH: NC
  Operating Time (hrs): 23

  Summary:
  Band  QSOs
  ------------
    160:    0
     80:  346
     40:  119
     20:   80
     15:   67
     10:    0
  ------------
  Total:  612  Sections = 77  Total Score = 94,248

  Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

  Comments:

  That was a lot of fun (at least most of it was!). Thanks to all the great ops out there who turn on the
  internal/mental "pre-amp" to work with the QRP signals when things get marginal. 
  There are times when signals are super strong...then just as quickly they fade
  away to about nothing.  This was my 3rd year slugging it out in the QRP class
  and I was able to get up to 23 hours (last year only worked 20).

  Thanks again to all of you out there on the bands making Qs.

  73,
  Jeff NX9T
  qsl.net/nx9t




  **************
  Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=http://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  PVRCNC mailing list
  PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
  http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081116/c0e185f7/attachment.htm
From w0uce at nc.rr.com  Sun Nov 16 23:30:45 2008
From: w0uce at nc.rr.com (W0UCE)
Date: Sun Nov 16 23:34:26 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] NX9T SS SSB QRP
In-Reply-To: <0794AAF5DBD74359AE52D7A1FB7FEB7B@JFJLT07>
Message-ID: <8857934782904F8A970563665A5EF55B@OFFICE>

Jeff, Jeff, Jeff:

 

OMG how can any sane and rational individual involve himself in two of the
most unimaginable things I can possibly imagine (1) SSB and (2) QRP all
neatly packaged up in one contest?  

 

Jeff, you are the man; I take my hat off to you! 

 

73,

Jack "CW Forever" UCE

 

-----Original Message-----
From: pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net [mailto:pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of Jim Jordan, K4QPL
Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 22:41 PM
To: NX9T@aol.com; pvrc@mailman.qth.net; pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [PVRCNC] NX9T SS SSB QRP

 

Jeff,

 

You're such a nice guy no one would ever suspect you had this masochistic
problem that emerges once a year! 

 

Great job and thanks for the Q.

 

73,

 

Jim

----- Original Message ----- 

From: NX9T@aol.com 

To: pvrc@mailman.qth.net ; pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net 

Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 10:35 PM

Subject: [PVRCNC] NX9T SS SSB QRP

 

ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, SSB

Call: NX9T
Operator(s): NX9T
Station: NX9T

Class: Single Op QRP
QTH: NC
Operating Time (hrs): 23

Summary:
Band  QSOs
------------
  160:    0
   80:  346
   40:  119
   20:   80
   15:   67
   10:    0
------------
Total:  612  Sections = 77  Total Score = 94,248

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

Comments:

That was a lot of fun (at least most of it was!). Thanks to all the great
ops out there who turn on the
internal/mental "pre-amp" to work with the QRP signals when things get
marginal. 
There are times when signals are super strong...then just as quickly they
fade
away to about nothing.  This was my 3rd year slugging it out in the QRP
class
and I was able to get up to 23 hours (last year only worked 20).

Thanks again to all of you out there on the bands making Qs.

73,
Jeff NX9T
qsl.net/nx9t




**************
Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news &
more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redi
r=http://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) 


  _____  


_______________________________________________
PVRCNC mailing list
PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081116/d732c02f/attachment-0001.htm
From n4ydu at nc.rr.com  Mon Nov 17 07:38:44 2008
From: n4ydu at nc.rr.com (Nathan Moreschi)
Date: Mon Nov 17 07:42:19 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] SS SSB N4YDU SOU
Message-ID: <004101c948b1$6df12020$8801a8c0@YOURE2BE199155>

Hey gang -

Here's the bottom line:

228 qsos, 67 sections, 30,552 points.

Managed to get on for four hours on Sunday.

73,

Nate/N4YDU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081117/b4201791/attachment.htm
From alsopb at nc.rr.com  Mon Nov 17 08:02:17 2008
From: alsopb at nc.rr.com (Brian Alsop)
Date: Mon Nov 17 08:05:55 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] K3KO SSB SS
Message-ID: <49216B59.5040003@nc.rr.com>

222 79 =35,0076  SOA   Missed MS.

No this isn't a misprint.   It really is possible to connect a mike to 
the K3 -- despite all the problems most SSB only K3 owners seem to 
have.  There must hundreds of postings on the Elecraft reflector asking 
how to do so.

Missed CW weekend because of a trip to PA.

Yes, a SSB contest with the K3 is a lot more pleasant than other rigs.  
It still is inhumane.  Hence mostly chased spots.

Nice to hear calls like W4KFC, W3GRF.   Also W4MR and K4HA op'ing 
simultaneously.   Even heard K4QPL holding a freq on 20M SSB.  Was 
really glad to hear NT4D!  Was this all an illusion?

One experience was interesting.  On or near the 40M SSTV freq, I was 
doing some running.  No SSTV sigs were present.
A SSTV sig came on and tried for ten minutes to get me to leave-- first 
digital SSTV and then the older analog SSTV.   Ignored it and continued 
to work stations.  Then a guy called in saying: "Do you know how strong 
your sig is on 7.xxx.  Told him 7.xxx is 1.2KHz away.  Asked him how 
loud my sig was there and what filter he was using.  No response.  
Suspect he was the SSTV QRM'er trying to protect the "SSTV freq".

73 de Brian/K3KO
From mike at bentwire.net  Mon Nov 17 08:30:22 2008
From: mike at bentwire.net (mike@bentwire.net)
Date: Mon Nov 17 08:31:44 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] SS SSB N4GU
Message-ID: <20081117133142.1D19F859C0B@mailman.qth.net>


    CallSign Used : N4GU
      Operator(s) : N4GU

Operator Category : SINGLE-OP
             Band : ALL
            Power : HIGH
             Mode : SSB
 Default Exchange : B 77 NC
       
      ARRL Section : NC
        Club/Team : POTOMAC VALLEY RADIO CLUB
         Software : N1MM Logger V8.10.6

        Band    QSOs    Pts  Sec
         3.5     550    1100   20
           7     149     298   25
          14     103     206   34
          21      15      30    1
       Total     817    1634   80


            Score : 130,720
              Rig : Orion I, Alpha 76

         Antennas : C3S, dipoles

Highlights 
- My first ever sweep as a single-op!
- 75m, the gift that just keeps on giving

Lowlights
- 75m - what the heck *is* that noise? Maybe its just me...
- still trying to figure out how to muscle my way into a run frequency
on 20m....
- Trying to get the DVK and audio switching working on the microKeyer.
I rigged it for the weekend.

A little history
My first, or second, Sweepstakes ever was in 1979 as a snot-nosed 16
year old with a Tempo One, a TA33 on my parent's chimney and low
dipoles. Thanks to being near the peak of a sunspot cycle and an
(apparent) paucity of competition I managed to take first place VA
section for low power phone and got my first and only piece of
wallpaper for Sweepstakes. I missed the sweep by one section. That was
the freebie that got me hooked on contesting and Sweepstakes. Although
I spent several enjoyable years as one-third of the K1GG team winning
the Roanoke Division multi-op phone title for several years, and have
a bunch of Sweep mugs from those efforts, I've never gotten the sweep
as a single op. 

2008 Phone
After getting my regular thrashing on cw SS by W8IVF :-) I knew I had
a chance for redemption during the phone weekend. This is only the
second year of SS with the current station, and it's still a work in
progress, although there just isn't much space or $$ to do a lot more.
I knew from last year that the 75m dipole played well, i.e. I can be
loud. About a month ago, I finished installing a K9AY loop system
which has proven to be just enough improvement on the low bands to
make me feel I'm not an alligator (completely).

After starting the contest on 20m and 40m, I went to 75m fairly early,
staked out a spot lower in the band and just ran for the next 3-4
hours. According to N1MM I almost had a couple of 100Q clock hours.
Since the phone band expansion, the space below 3800 is reasonably
open and (so far) doesn't seem to claimed by rabid pig farmers.

I went to bed needing UT, NL and NWT for the sweep. I spent Sunday
morning checking 15m and 20m for NL and UT. After working my first NL,
I worked about three more. Funny how that works. Got the NWT Sunday
afternoon busting the pileup on the low end of 20m for the sweep.
After that, I went pretty casual, opting to spend a little honey-do
time to keep the home waters calmed. N1MM says about 17 hours on the
clock.

GREAT hearing all the PVRC calls! Do we HAVE to wait whole year to do
this again? Maybe that's not such a bad thing....

73, Mike N4GU


From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Mon Nov 17 08:43:35 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Mon Nov 17 08:47:25 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] "Morning After" humor
Message-ID: <137C1FA1BE6641DC9BF9DCFABA90841B@JFJLT07>

I've been chuckling to myself this morning over an exchange on 75 last 
night.

I noticed that another run station was really qrm'ing the weak stations 
calling me. I asked one to standby and listened to find a station CQ'ing 
about 600 hz below. I slid down and politely asked him to please move down a 
bit.
He apologized but said he was sorry, he really couldn't do that as the 
station below him had just asked him to move up!
He was so plaintive about having no where to go, for a split second I 
thought maybe I should push the next guy up, but needing to get back to my 
run I didn't take time to explain that maybe there just wasn't room for him 
in the gap.
He kept CQ'ing for a couple minutes but when my TX developed this strange 
problem of jumping to the second VFO about 400hz down every other CQ, he 
moved off. And my tx stayed on freq after that! (I must report that 
phenomenon to Ten-Tec). 

From rgates1 at triad.rr.com  Mon Nov 17 09:11:24 2008
From: rgates1 at triad.rr.com (Bob Gates)
Date: Mon Nov 17 09:15:18 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] SS SSB Results KJ4IC
Message-ID: <EFB3C5140E0C441AB50812D6A32B3A92@cookandboardman.com>

                   ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, SSB

 

Call: KJ4IC

Operator(s): KJ4IC

Station: KJ4IC

 

Class: Single Op LP

QTH: NC

Operating Time (hrs): 

 

Summary:

 Band  QSOs

------------

  160:     

   80:     

   40:  127

   20:   36

   15:    7

   10:     

------------

Total:  170  Sections = 59  Total Score = 20,060

 

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

 

Comments:

 

 

 

 

Posted using 3830 Score Submittal Forms at:
http://www.hornucopia.com/3830score/

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081117/c38e60f0/attachment.htm
From mike at bentwire.net  Mon Nov 17 09:23:33 2008
From: mike at bentwire.net (mike@bentwire.net)
Date: Mon Nov 17 09:24:50 2008
Subject: -SPAM- (6.1) [PVRCNC] "Morning After" humor
Message-ID: <20081117142447.D6F43859BC1@mailman.qth.net>

I heard the following on W4MYA's run frequency Sunday evening about
0005Z ...(paraphrased)

"CQ SS W4MYA"
"The contest is over..."
"No it's not. It goes to 0300Z"
"Oh MAAAAN.... you're ruining my weekend" (real whinny voice)
"I'm sorry about that .... CQ SS W4MYA..."

"Jim Jordan, K4QPL" <k4qpl@nc.rr.com> wrote:
I've been chuckling to myself this morning over an exchange on 75 last 
night.


From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Mon Nov 17 09:10:56 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Mon Nov 17 09:43:43 2008
Subject: -SPAM- (6.1) [PVRCNC] "Morning After" humor
References: <20081117142447.D6F43859BC1@mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <2AEC32BD499444B2AC1E8FEE47FB4185@JORDANLAW.local>

At 0301 when the last runner said, "My [obviously slow] clock says the 
contest is over. Thanks to all." A voice from apparently one of the 75M 
regulars said, "Ain't silence wonderful??"


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <mike@bentwire.net>
To: <pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: -SPAM- (6.1) [PVRCNC] "Morning After" humor


>I heard the following on W4MYA's run frequency Sunday evening about
> 0005Z ...(paraphrased)
>
> "CQ SS W4MYA"
> "The contest is over..."
> "No it's not. It goes to 0300Z"
> "Oh MAAAAN.... you're ruining my weekend" (real whinny voice)
> "I'm sorry about that .... CQ SS W4MYA..."
>
> "Jim Jordan, K4QPL" <k4qpl@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> I've been chuckling to myself this morning over an exchange on 75 last
> night.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
> 


From bemeier at bellsouth.net  Mon Nov 17 10:01:54 2008
From: bemeier at bellsouth.net (Bruce Meier)
Date: Mon Nov 17 10:05:36 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] N1LN - ARRL - SS - SSB - 08
Message-ID: <004001c948c5$6e64d970$4b2e8c50$@net>

                   ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, SSB

Call: N1LN
Operator(s): N1LN
Station: N1LN

Class: SO Unlimited HP
QTH: NC
Operating Time (hrs): 17.0
Radios: SO2R

Summary:
 Band  QSOs
------------
  160:    0
   80:  646
   40:  233
   20:  352
   15:   22
   10:    0
------------
Total: 1253  Sections = 80  Total Score = 200,480

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

Comments:

This was a fun contest.  I don't usually say that about single-op SSB
contests,
but I will say that here.  Why?  Well, I think the first reason is directly
associated with my K3s.  The other reason is my beverage antennas that I
used
most if not all the time on both 75 and 40 mtrs.  The combination was
outstanding.

When QSO number 29 was NT with VY1EI and QSO number 44 was ND with N7IV I
knew
this was going to be fun and was optimistic about a sweep before the end of
Saturday evening.  By 0325Z or 0925 EST I had 79 sections.  The only one
from
using the cluster was NT.  Why was I running U class?  The answer was
because
of section 80, PR.  I only operated until 0600Z, 0000 EST, Saturday night. 
Then started up again 1041 Z or 0541 EST on Sunday morning.  At roughly 1225
Z
I saw a spot pop up for NP4Z.  My run, that was not really much of one at
that
time of day, stopped and off I went.  By 1228 Z the sweep was completed and
the
rest of the contest could be all focused on Q count.

My band Q counts point out one fact, specifically, that I am not a big fan
of
40 mtr SSB.  My main evening focus was 75 and the band was in excellent
condition.  Lots of strong stations and even the QRP stations seemed easy to
copy due to the beverages.  My 40 mtr Qs were almost all on Sunday during
the
day.  The band was quiet and busy enough for a few really good runs between
1500z and 1700z.  Having the two radios on Sunday was a big advantage to be
able to run on one and search and pounce on the other.  I can't say I am a
good
SO2R op, but when rates are slow I can almost coordinate my hands, ears, and
eyes.  Lots of practice is needed.

One more comment.  What if....I could stay in the chair for the full 24
hours?

It was great to hear all the "GO PVRC" comments from fellow club members. 
Congrats to all the clubs that showed up in force for SS.  Competition is
what
contests are all about.  Now we wait for the counting and final results.  

73,
Bruce - N1LN
(aka: NC4KW)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081117/9179843b/attachment-0001.htm
From Will.Roberts at pgnmail.com  Mon Nov 17 10:29:44 2008
From: Will.Roberts at pgnmail.com (Roberts, Will)
Date: Mon Nov 17 10:33:24 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] W4MR (AA4NC) SS Phone
Message-ID: <82FF0E9162BBC74ABC6097ABEEF19F7C06F84FBC@NT000837.oak.zone1.progress-energy.com>

W4MR (AA4NC op.)

SS Phone

Single Op High Power Unlimited

 

   80: 798

   40: 826

   20:  40

   15:  15

-------------------------

Total: 1678   Sections = 80   Total Score  = 268,480

 

Claimed score is a new Division record however I doubt it will stand up
to log checking! Between the tremendous amount of PW stations and the
QRN, I spent all weekend asking for repeats which probably means lots of
mistakes.  Saturday was rough due to noise on the low bands from the
thunderstorms and tornadoes that we had come through. Thank God for 40
meters as 20 was terrible for me.  I'll call this my "All Wires" contest
as 97% of my Q's were on 80 and 40.

 

Great PVRC turnout - I think we have a good chance to take back the
gavel this year. Thanks to everybody for getting on.

 

73,

 

Will AA4NC / W4MR 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081117/cba6f624/attachment.htm
From lclarks at nc.rr.com  Mon Nov 17 12:13:03 2008
From: lclarks at nc.rr.com (Larry stowell)
Date: Mon Nov 17 13:44:06 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] ss ssb
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAALsBWfsc0RVBu+KaBDEljV3CgAAAEAAAAIgKM1mEpKNHjQ/PMgrbrsQBAAAAAA==@nc.rr.com>

     SSSSB Score Summary Sheet

       Start Date : 2008-11-15

    CallSign Used : K1ZW
      Operator(s) : K1ZW

Operator Category : SINGLE-OP-ASSISTED
             Band : ALL
            Power : HIGH
             Mode : SSB
 Default Exchange : U 71 NC
       Gridsquare : FM06NC

             Name : Larry Stowell
          Address : 5422 Stephens Lane
   City/State/Zip : Durham  NC  27712
          Country : USA

     ARRL Section : NC
        Club/Team : Potomac Valley Radio Club
         Software : N1MM Logger V8.9.1

        Band    QSOs    Pts  Sec
         3.5      74     148   28
           7      41      82    8
          14      85     170   37
       Total     200     400   73

            Score : 29,200
  Operating time 8 hrs.         
   
Should have had more on 80 but my amp decided it didn't like the antenna and caused all sorts of rf.
I had to save the call before I keyed up the return or it would wipe out the call. All contacts were
S&P. 
         

  

Larry K1ZW
Durham, NC


From k4tmc at aol.com  Mon Nov 17 17:23:55 2008
From: k4tmc at aol.com (k4tmc@aol.com)
Date: Mon Nov 17 17:27:43 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] K4TMC SS SSB SOLP 2008
Message-ID: <8CB171A50220B6E-6B8-51F@webmail-de19.sysops.aol.com>

Suffice it to say that LP in my case meant ?Low Performance?, as in a 
total of 14 QSO?s. However, to add another log to the total, I will 
submit my few points.

My plan to implement the ?Butt In Chair? philosophy went out the door 
Saturday post noon.  Apparently, my pre-contest dietary intake was not 
conducive to proper body functions.  As a result, my butt needed to be 
in another smaller room of the QTH.  I did manage to work a few 
stations.  The Saturday afternoon high winds from the passing storms 
upset my wire arrays, and I was not feeling well enough to go outside 
and do the necessary adjustments to support ropes.  I called it quits 
early Saturday evening, went to bed around 9pm, hoping to feel better 
Sunday morning and try to make up some of the lost effort.  Sunday 
morning found my condition no better, so I did not even turn the rig 
on.  Relief occurred around 1 pm; however, I had to leave at 2:30pm for 
a week?s business trip.

There is always next year!

73,
Henry ? K4TMC
(from Lynchburg, VA this week)


From n4tl2 at earthlink.net  Mon Nov 17 19:38:29 2008
From: n4tl2 at earthlink.net (Tom Lewis)
Date: Mon Nov 17 19:42:08 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] N4TL summary
Message-ID: <380-220081121803829263@earthlink.net>

SS SSB Score Summary Sheet

Operator(s) : N4TL
Operator Category : SINGLE-OP-ASSISTED
Band : ALL
Power : HIGH
Mode : SSB
Default Exchange : U 65 NC
Club/Team : Potomac Valley Radio Club
Software : N1MM Logger V8.0.0

Band    QSOs    Pts  Sec
    3.5      89     178   19
       7      61     122   16
     14      55     110   28
     21      46      92    8
  Total     251     502   71

Score : 35,642


From k4czusa at attglobal.net  Mon Nov 17 20:40:24 2008
From: k4czusa at attglobal.net (Barry Baker, K4CZ)
Date: Mon Nov 17 20:44:11 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FW: SS SSB KI4GUO(@K4CZ) Multi-Op HP
Message-ID: <006901c9491e$a0df11f0$e29d35d0$@net>

                   ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, SSB

Call: KI4GUO
Operator(s): KI4GUO KI4ZWQ
Station: K4CZ

Class: Multi-Op HP
QTH: Durham, NC
Operating Time (hrs): 4.5

Summary:
 Band  QSOs
------------
  160:    0
   80:    2
   40:  113
   20:   94
   15:    0
   10:    0
------------
Total:  209  Sections = 65  Total Score = 27,170

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club



Jordan KI4GUO (my daughter) and Jeanne KI4ZWQ (my XYL) got on the air Sunday
for a few hours.  This was the first time that either had participated in
ARRL SS.

I'm reluctant to admit that their average rate and their best hour were
better than mine.  Maybe it's the DX spots they tend to attract during
contests:

K9XX            7232.9 KI4GUO       YL w/pileup                       1623
16 Nov
EA1SB          14277.0 KI4GUO       Jordan, 13 years old, good op    2029 12
Oct
MM0NDX         14326.0 KI4GUO       13 y/o op, WPX - give a call      1350
30 Mar
K9ZW-@         14258.1 KI4GUO       59 WI - NAQP Jordan NC - Good     2128
19 Jan

...or maybe it's just that they're better operators than me!  ;-)

It's not a big score but they both wanted to help bring the Gavel back to
the east coast.

Go PVRC!

73, Barry K4CZ

From k4czusa at attglobal.net  Mon Nov 17 21:36:19 2008
From: k4czusa at attglobal.net (Barry Baker, K4CZ)
Date: Mon Nov 17 21:40:08 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] FW: SS SSB K4CZ SO Unlimited HP
Message-ID: <006d01c94926$7119c930$534d5b90$@net>

                    ARRL Sweepstakes Contest, SSB

Call: K4CZ
Operator(s): K4CZ
Station: K4CZ

Class: SO Unlimited HP
QTH: Durham, NC
Operating Time (hrs): 17

Summary:
 Band  QSOs
------------
  160:    0
   80:  501
   40:  162
   20:  107
   15:    0
   10:    0
------------
Total:  770  Sections = 75  Total Score = 115,500

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

Comments:


My score was below last year (115,500 vs. 134,080) but I achieved my primary
goal of 200,000 total points for ARRL SS (CW 85,478 + SSB 115,500).

Operating time was 17 hours in SS SSB both this year and last year.  When I
went to bed late Saturday night, I was ahead of last year's score (462 Qs
vs. 405 Qs).  This year, I "lost" a few normally productive hours on Sunday
from 14:00 UTC to 19:00 UTC when KI4GUO (my daughter) and KI4ZWQ (my XYL)
used the station.  However, near the end of the contest (01:00 UTC) my QSO
total was almost the exact same as last year (688 vs. 689).  I only needed
112 more Qs this year to reach my secondary goal of 800 Qs.  Since I worked
150 stations on 80m during the last two hours of the contest last year, I
thought I would reach 800 Qs this year.  However, the propagation gods were
not smiling on me!  Conditions on 80m were very difficult in NC.  The band
went long so most stations within a 500+ mile radius seemed to be whisper
quiet when I could hear them at all.  I managed to work 52 stations during
the next to last hour but the rate was falling.  I switched run frequencies
and tried some S&P and even tried 40m for a few minutes but I couldn't reach
the rate I needed.  After I reached 115,000 points at 02:41 UTC, I shut down
the station and enjoyed a cold beer!

Even though I operated Unlimited, I spent very little time chasing mults.  I
was surprised to miss 5 mults so maybe that wasn't such a good idea...those
mults would have added 7,700 points to my score!  Mults missed were PR, MS,
NL, NWT and SK.

Thanks for the QSOs.  During one run, I talked to so many PVRC NC-East
members, I almost thought I was at a monthly meeting...

Go PVRC!

73, Barry K4CZ

From wes_quinn at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 17 23:05:23 2008
From: wes_quinn at yahoo.com (Wes Quinn)
Date: Mon Nov 17 23:09:07 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] K4WES SOABLP ARRL SS Phone
Message-ID: <726348.88550.qm@web31911.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

ARRL SWEEPSTAKES -- 2008
      Call:      K4WES
      Category:  Single Operator
      Power:     Low Power 
      Band:      All Band
      Mode:      SSB 
      Section:   NC

      BAND     QSO    QSO PTS   SECTIONS
      160        0        0        -
       80      136      272        -
       40        8       16        -
       20       58      116        -
       15       30       60        -
       10        0        0        -
     -----------------------------------
     Totals    232      464       74

               Score:  34,336
Club Affiliation: Potomac Valley Radio Club

It was great to hear so many PVRCers on the air and see so many scores!  I worked an EPA who said "there are a lot of NC stations on the air".

This was my first time working NT and my best score to boot.  The last hour I was actually able to run on 80m for about 30 minutes and I was working over 1 station per minute.  LP is a challenge, but it was fun, especially after working the NT whom I found Sunday afternoon CQing on 20m.  I missed sections MS, OK, OR, ND, QC, and PR.  I almost had PR, whom I found on 80m just at the end of the contest and he went QRT.  If I worked him, I would have gotten the free magnet.  :-)  Like someone mentioned, it is amazing to hear the silence on the air at the end of the contest.  :-D

Go PVRC!!!

73 de k4Wes

From ni4s at earthlink.net  Tue Nov 18 09:04:34 2008
From: ni4s at earthlink.net (Andy Peterson NI4S)
Date: Tue Nov 18 09:08:40 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] NI4S SS SSB SOLP
Message-ID: <7f6c3f1a0811180604s90aa067s40a2e0dbd11565c5@mail.gmail.com>

Short "effort."  Trying to get the juices flowing again.

- 1st QSO with new K3 (#1323) was made with Alan KO7X, back in 7-land.
 Very fitting.
- Need to get an antenna strategy and get to work, but I'm encouraged
by what I was able to do in a few spare minutes here and there..
- Great to have heard or worked a lot of PVRC stations.
- Hope to make a club meeting "one of these days..."


    CallSign Used : NI4S
      Operator(s) : NI4S

Operator Category : SINGLE-OP
             Band : ALL
            Power : LOW
             Mode : SSB
 Default Exchange : A 92 NC

     ARRL Section : NC
        Club/Team : Potomac Valley Radio Club

        Band    QSOs    Pts  Sec
         3.5       1      2    1
           7      47      94   28
          14       3      6    2
          21       1      2    1
       Total      52     104   32

            Score : 3,328
From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Tue Nov 18 13:40:48 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Tue Nov 18 14:10:00 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] SS Club scores
Message-ID: <0F92D8913AAB4400946323D15BC4C5AB@JORDANLAW.local>

Doing a quick eyeball check of the latest report from Dink at 3830, it looks 
like the big scores are somewhat cancelling each other out between NCCC and 
PVRC although you can see the effect of the HMO at the SOHP U   600 qso 
level Don't see the same effect further down the line with the LP and part 
timers where PVRC is stronger. Maybe someone with some free time could run 
some totals, but as expected, I think the results will depend on whether our 
big participation turns the tide.

http://lists.contesting.com/_3830/2008-11/msg01486.html

Nice to see PVRC'ers in the top ten in class:

KA1ARB    Multi  HP
WS4NC      Multi LP
NX9T          SO QRP
W3GRF       SOHP U
W4MR        SOHP U
W4KAZ      SOLP U
N3UA         SOLP U

Yes, I know, multi and U don't actually divide by power, but the LP guys 
need a few "attaboys".

73,

Jim, K4QPL 


From Will.Roberts at pgnmail.com  Tue Nov 18 15:08:19 2008
From: Will.Roberts at pgnmail.com (Roberts, Will)
Date: Tue Nov 18 15:12:18 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] computer items / advice needed
Message-ID: <82FF0E9162BBC74ABC6097ABEEF19F7C0704A032@NT000837.oak.zone1.progress-energy.com>

I'm looking for the following items if you have them for sale OR can
recommend a good model:

 

-              A 2.4 Ghz directional antenna for 802.11 WiFi. I
currently have a 7 dBi (So the specs say - I doubt it) omni antenna that
isn't getting upstairs or the far side of the house.

-              A PCI video card with VGA output so I can add an
additional monitor to my computer. I need to spread out all of those
N1MM windows !

 

Thanks / 73,

 

Will AA4NC / aka W4MR

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081118/39d17c26/attachment-0001.htm
From mike at bentwire.net  Tue Nov 18 21:49:13 2008
From: mike at bentwire.net (mike@bentwire.net)
Date: Tue Nov 18 21:50:29 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] computer items / advice needed
Message-ID: <20081119025028.41603859BC2@mailman.qth.net>

Will,
I can give you one of my patented (yes, really) Stub Loaded Helix
antennas for 2.4 GHz if you supply the cable (TNC to whatever you have
on your router, probably RP-SMA). This is a 10 dBic antenna
(circularly polarized for better multipath performance). I have a
quantity of samples from the manufacturer.

73, Mike N4GU



"Roberts, Will" <Will.Roberts@pgnmail.com> wrote:


Note: Forwarded Email Message Below:



I'm looking for the following items if you have them for sale OR can
recommend a good model:

 

-              A 2.4 Ghz directional antenna for 802.11 WiFi. I
currently have a 7 dBi (So the specs say - I doubt it) omni antenna that
isn't getting upstairs or the far side of the house.

-              A PCI video card with VGA output so I can add an
additional monitor to my computer. I need to spread out all of those
N1MM windows !

 

Thanks / 73,

 

Will AA4NC / aka W4MR

 



_______________________________________________
PVRCNC mailing list
PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc


From kazeringue at aol.com  Wed Nov 19 14:25:59 2008
From: kazeringue at aol.com (KAZeringue)
Date: Wed Nov 19 15:21:39 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Sweeps "Attaboys" (and "Attagirls" too)
Message-ID: <49246847.1090005@aol.com>

Curiosity occasionally gets the best of me in equally curious ways.
Last night it was Sweeps record scores.  So it is time for a bit of
in-house after action cheer leading.

It looks like 2008 is a unique year for members of our NC chapters in
terms of effort for this years' windmill tilting.

We have a few folks who not only improved their own recent efforts, but
may well have one-upped the record books for our NC section and Roanoke
division.  The log checking may be critical, but the raw scores reported
show outstanding efforts worthy of recognition - record or not.

Congrats to N4AF, NX9T, KA1ARB and AA4NC!

If I missed anybody else breathing hard vacuum in the upper
stratosphere, let me know.  I'm going to add the info to the pvrc/nc web
site soon.

I hope everyone else is as happy with their own individual efforts as I
am with my own.  I see a lot of scores from NC with significant QSO and
point gains over 2007.  Outstanding.  Especially outstanding with
unfavorable propagation conditions.

For my own part, I bumped up my own personal best from the KazShack, and
managed to tread water with self induced Murphy on my back for Ess Ess
Bee.  Sweet.  I'm looking forward to seeing my own UBN/NIL report to see
if I was able to improve accuracy as well.  (El Escribano Inexacto is
renowned for needing improvement, aina?)

Sweeps has quickly become one of my favorite contests.  I hope y'all had
as much fun as I did.

The scores and record scores below.

73 de w4kaz


KA1ARB  1569 Q's  251,040       SSB Multi - New NC Section record

NX9T    612 Q's    94,248       SSB QRP - New Roanoke Div & NC Section

W4MR(AA4NC) 1678 Q's   268,480  SSB U  -  New Roanoke Div & NC Section

N4AF   1420 Q's   227,200    CW B - New Roanoke Div & NC Section


Honorable mention:
W4MR(AA4NC) 1161 Q's   185,760
Will was only about 8000 points shy of his own record of 193280 set at
the last sunspot peak in 2002.  Purty damn good for the bottom of the
cycle with broken antennas.

SSB records as of 2007
Roanoke Division
W4OC               218,672  A    SC   1998    PH       Roanoke
N4UK               305,572  B    SC   1997    PH       Roanoke
WF7B               269,808  M    VA   1993    PH       Roanoke
WA4PGM              83,622  Q    VA   1992    PH       Roanoke
K4KDJ              115,182  S    VA   2000    PH       Roanoke
NI1N               267,680  U    VA   2007    PH       Roanoke


NC Section
W4AAA              214,400  A    NC   2007    PH       Roanoke
W4MR(AA4NC,op)     277,120  B    NC   2002    PH       Roanoke
W4MR(@AA4NC)       248,376  M    NC   1999    PH       Roanoke
NX9T                79,344  Q    NC   2007    PH       Roanoke
WF4DD(KG4CZU,op)    64,620  S    NC   2002    PH       Roanoke
W4MR(AA4NC,op)     254,880  U    NC   2001    PH       Roanoke



CW records as of 2007
Roanoke Division
W4OC               188,160   A       NC       2002   CW      Roanoke
N4AF               208,000   B       NC       2007   CW      Roanoke
W4RM               179,680   M       VA       2007   CW      Roanoke
KD8G               112,500   Q       WV       1995   CW      Roanoke
W4ATC              102,256   S       NC       1999   CW      Roanoke
NI1N               198,080   U       VA       2007   CW      Roanoke


NC Section
K7GM               159,448   A       NC     1994     CW      Roanoke
N4AF               208,000   B       NC     2007     CW      Roanoke
AA4S               173,558   M       NC     1994     CW      Roanoke
W2CS               105,924   Q       NC     1999     CW      Roanoke
W4ATC              102,256   S       NC     1999     CW      Roanoke
W4MR(AA4NC,op)     193,280   U       NC     2002     CW      Roanoke


finis!~
*********************************************************************

From rgates1 at triad.rr.com  Wed Nov 19 15:30:21 2008
From: rgates1 at triad.rr.com (Bob Gates)
Date: Wed Nov 19 15:34:15 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Sweeps "Attaboys" (and "Attagirls" too)
In-Reply-To: <49246847.1090005@aol.com>
References: <49246847.1090005@aol.com>
Message-ID: <E3E207B45AA445219F0D6D0553896C4D@cookandboardman.com>

I am pretty new to contesting and still trying to find my bearings, but I am
having tons of fun.  Maybe this has always been this way with PVRC and the
SS, but I thought a lot of my fun came from the pre-contest PVRC tips,
cheerleading and member encouragement.  It was great fun to watch all these
e-mails fly by (really helps the work day go by).  And as if that wasn't
enough fun, the post-contest "funny QSO" e-mail was great!

I enjoy being a part of PVRC and continue to look forward to each contest.

73 and Go PVRC!

Bob KJ4IC

-----Original Message-----
From: pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net [mailto:pvrcnc-bounces@mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of KAZeringue
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 2:26 PM
To: PVRCNC
Subject: [PVRCNC] Sweeps "Attaboys" (and "Attagirls" too)

Curiosity occasionally gets the best of me in equally curious ways.
Last night it was Sweeps record scores.  So it is time for a bit of
in-house after action cheer leading.

It looks like 2008 is a unique year for members of our NC chapters in
terms of effort for this years' windmill tilting.

We have a few folks who not only improved their own recent efforts, but
may well have one-upped the record books for our NC section and Roanoke
division.  The log checking may be critical, but the raw scores reported
show outstanding efforts worthy of recognition - record or not.

Congrats to N4AF, NX9T, KA1ARB and AA4NC!

If I missed anybody else breathing hard vacuum in the upper
stratosphere, let me know.  I'm going to add the info to the pvrc/nc web
site soon.

I hope everyone else is as happy with their own individual efforts as I
am with my own.  I see a lot of scores from NC with significant QSO and
point gains over 2007.  Outstanding.  Especially outstanding with
unfavorable propagation conditions.

For my own part, I bumped up my own personal best from the KazShack, and
managed to tread water with self induced Murphy on my back for Ess Ess
Bee.  Sweet.  I'm looking forward to seeing my own UBN/NIL report to see
if I was able to improve accuracy as well.  (El Escribano Inexacto is
renowned for needing improvement, aina?)

Sweeps has quickly become one of my favorite contests.  I hope y'all had
as much fun as I did.

The scores and record scores below.

73 de w4kaz


KA1ARB  1569 Q's  251,040       SSB Multi - New NC Section record

NX9T    612 Q's    94,248       SSB QRP - New Roanoke Div & NC Section

W4MR(AA4NC) 1678 Q's   268,480  SSB U  -  New Roanoke Div & NC Section

N4AF   1420 Q's   227,200    CW B - New Roanoke Div & NC Section


Honorable mention:
W4MR(AA4NC) 1161 Q's   185,760
Will was only about 8000 points shy of his own record of 193280 set at
the last sunspot peak in 2002.  Purty damn good for the bottom of the
cycle with broken antennas.

SSB records as of 2007
Roanoke Division
W4OC               218,672  A    SC   1998    PH       Roanoke
N4UK               305,572  B    SC   1997    PH       Roanoke
WF7B               269,808  M    VA   1993    PH       Roanoke
WA4PGM              83,622  Q    VA   1992    PH       Roanoke
K4KDJ              115,182  S    VA   2000    PH       Roanoke
NI1N               267,680  U    VA   2007    PH       Roanoke


NC Section
W4AAA              214,400  A    NC   2007    PH       Roanoke
W4MR(AA4NC,op)     277,120  B    NC   2002    PH       Roanoke
W4MR(@AA4NC)       248,376  M    NC   1999    PH       Roanoke
NX9T                79,344  Q    NC   2007    PH       Roanoke
WF4DD(KG4CZU,op)    64,620  S    NC   2002    PH       Roanoke
W4MR(AA4NC,op)     254,880  U    NC   2001    PH       Roanoke



CW records as of 2007
Roanoke Division
W4OC               188,160   A       NC       2002   CW      Roanoke
N4AF               208,000   B       NC       2007   CW      Roanoke
W4RM               179,680   M       VA       2007   CW      Roanoke
KD8G               112,500   Q       WV       1995   CW      Roanoke
W4ATC              102,256   S       NC       1999   CW      Roanoke
NI1N               198,080   U       VA       2007   CW      Roanoke


NC Section
K7GM               159,448   A       NC     1994     CW      Roanoke
N4AF               208,000   B       NC     2007     CW      Roanoke
AA4S               173,558   M       NC     1994     CW      Roanoke
W2CS               105,924   Q       NC     1999     CW      Roanoke
W4ATC              102,256   S       NC     1999     CW      Roanoke
W4MR(AA4NC,op)     193,280   U       NC     2002     CW      Roanoke


finis!~
*********************************************************************

_______________________________________________
PVRCNC mailing list
PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc


From wes_quinn at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 19 18:16:02 2008
From: wes_quinn at yahoo.com (Wes Quinn)
Date: Wed Nov 19 18:19:58 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] 2008 SS Results so far from 3380 Summary Emails
Message-ID: <592858.2839.qm@web31902.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


Hey Y'all!

I know Jim (K4QPL) was asking about this and I did a sum of the scores in the summary emails for both the CW and SSB contests from the 3830 web site.  My sums don't include the ones that came after the latest summary emails.  I imagine it only includes about half the logs on 3830, since many more PVRCers signed up in Jim's (WX3B) lists he was making.

I didn't see anyone else send out a summary, so hopefully it is fairly complete on logs received.  If anyone wants a copy of the Excel file, I'll gladly send it to you.  Just let me know.

Here is the info:
Summary Date    # Logs    Club     Points     Mode
7-Nov     61     PVRC     5,581,186     CW
18-Nov     65     PVRC     6,402,644     SSB
Total     126          11,983,830     
                
Summary Date    # Logs    Club     Points     Mode
7-Nov     59     NCCC     5,946,572     CW
18-Nov     53     NCCC     5,715,468     SSB
Total     112          11,662,040     


Also, on ARRL's web site for logs received, I did notice for the IARU HF contest, it listed the claimed points too, but not for the SS logs received, so hopefully once the log reception date has passed for SS, they will add the points to it and we'll get a good estimate per club.  I can easily copy the data from there and put it in Excel to sort by club and sum up the points.


Thanks and 73,
de k4Wes

From kazeringue at aol.com  Sat Nov 22 13:40:04 2008
From: kazeringue at aol.com (KAZeringue)
Date: Sat Nov 22 13:44:13 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] SS prefills file accuracy in SSB 2008
Message-ID: <49285204.2090907@aol.com>

Just in case anyone gives a rat's fuzzy hind-quarters....

Here are a few observations and notes about the prefill file some of you 
may have used for SS SSB.

After the contest, I solicited logs from AA4NC, N1LN, and KA1ARB.  My 
intention is to use their logs to build a more robust sample set for the 
2009 season.  They have all agreed and sent me their data.  (Thanks!)

I was also curious after the SSB Sweeps to see how accurate the prefills 
data may have been, so I thought I'd pass along what I have found.

Background:
The most comprehensive of the prefills files for 2008 SSB was built from 
3 sources.  Actual log data from N4AF, ARRL CW SS log data from the ARRL 
scores database, and ARRL SSB SS log data from the ARRL scores database.

The three data sources were applied to one another in the order outlined 
above, and in chronological order.

The intention for 2009 is to include the additional log data from AA4NC, 
N1LN, and KA1ARB.  This should add value by including data for casual 
contesters who may not ever actually submit logs to ARRL.

Observations:
After the contest AA4NC brought up a few questions about discrepancies 
he had found.  I expected there would be some, so once I got the logs 
from the gang I was able to slice and dice a bit.

I looked at only the discrepancies/errors for the "check" and the 
"section".  I'm sure the discrepancy in the precedence field is much 
higher - but folks change class a lot, so I don't care.

Check number errors:
Across all three sample logs, the error rate in the prefills seems to be 
about four percent.

I have found one source of error that seems easily explained.  The ARRL 
database data for some of these errors contained a '00' check number for 
some callsigns' MOST RECENT entry.  A look at the
scores data for prior years shows a uniform check value in prior years.

This seems to be a case of someone submitting a log without having 
filled in their own exchange info. (Note: As a writelog user, I know 
that this is possible with writelog.  All too easy a mistake to make!)

That accounted for just under a third of the errors.

In comparing the discrepancies in AA4NC vs KA1ARB vs N1LN, I found that 
the contestants had indeed logged the same check numbers.  I expect that 
means the prefills file was incorrect, as the three top NC ops are 
unlikely to all make the same logging error.  This covers almost all of 
the other errors.  Some of that is probably folks using different 
checks, guest ops, etc.  But some is just plain errors in the prefills. 
No known explanation for these errors(yet).

The final group are uniques in each of the three logs.  I figure the 
prefills are wrong rather than the contestants, but it could be either.

Summary on check numbers:
Expect to see about a four percent error rate in the prefills data for 
the check number.

Section Errors:
The discrepancies in the section ran just under half of the 
discrepancies in the check number.  If comes out to be about 1.5 
percent.  No research on the possible reasons for those yet.

Conclusions:
Looking at only three sample logs showed very similar discrepancy rates 
with the prefills, so I expect the following advice to be valid.

1) Log what you hear!

2) Expect four percent error on the check, about two percent error on 
the section.

3) I expected higher discrepancy rates than these, so at this point I 
don't see much reason to change my basic methodology.  For 2009, I'll 
produce the data in much the same way, sequences adjusted for the mode 
of the current contest.

I don't know what sort of accuracy anyone expected with these exchange 
files, but now you have a baseline on the error rates in the one 
produced for 2008.

73 es cu in ARRL 160m de w4kaz



From k4qpl at nc.rr.com  Sat Nov 22 17:44:53 2008
From: k4qpl at nc.rr.com (Jim Jordan, K4QPL)
Date: Sat Nov 22 17:49:10 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] SS prefills file accuracy in SSB 2008
References: <49285204.2090907@aol.com>
Message-ID: <DD4722AD8EA14763B1BFB0B908AFEDCC@JFJLT07>

Thanks for your work, Kaz.

I also noted quite a few changes to the info in the pre fills in cw as well. 
My ssb accuracy rate is questionable so that one didn't get as much 
attention as cw.  Changes in section are usually because the op moves. The 
checks are harder to determine. I did a couple random checks with last years 
database and found several where the pre-fill agreed with the log submission 
but was different from what they were sending this year. And I say that 
advisedly because whenever a prefill did not agree with my own copy, unless 
I was 100% sure I would ask for a confirmation, particularly where the op 
was sending his exchange manually. It's easy to get on autopilot and send 
what someone else sends you, or what you see in the log or whatever. Some 
actually changed back to the prefill check when queried! At least that kept 
ME from being charged with the error.
Several ones that had unexplained changes became obvious when looking at the 
database. It was K4XXX @ N3YYY so the op probably used his own check. And 
yes, some of them were just flat wrong. Even so, having something there 
improves rate and accuracy because you are comparing with something. As you 
say, log what you hear, but I'm very curious to see my LCR since this is the 
first time I've used prefills and I'm hopeful my accuracy will improve.

73,

Jim, K4QPL
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "KAZeringue" <kazeringue@aol.com>
To: "PVRCNC" <pvrcnc@mailman.qth.net>; <pvrc@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 1:40 PM
Subject: [PVRCNC] SS prefills file accuracy in SSB 2008


> Just in case anyone gives a rat's fuzzy hind-quarters....
>
> Here are a few observations and notes about the prefill file some of you 
> may have used for SS SSB.
>
> After the contest, I solicited logs from AA4NC, N1LN, and KA1ARB.  My 
> intention is to use their logs to build a more robust sample set for the 
> 2009 season.  They have all agreed and sent me their data.  (Thanks!)
>
> I was also curious after the SSB Sweeps to see how accurate the prefills 
> data may have been, so I thought I'd pass along what I have found.
>
> Background:
> The most comprehensive of the prefills files for 2008 SSB was built from 3 
> sources.  Actual log data from N4AF, ARRL CW SS log data from the ARRL 
> scores database, and ARRL SSB SS log data from the ARRL scores database.
>
> The three data sources were applied to one another in the order outlined 
> above, and in chronological order.
>
> The intention for 2009 is to include the additional log data from AA4NC, 
> N1LN, and KA1ARB.  This should add value by including data for casual 
> contesters who may not ever actually submit logs to ARRL.
>
> Observations:
> After the contest AA4NC brought up a few questions about discrepancies he 
> had found.  I expected there would be some, so once I got the logs from 
> the gang I was able to slice and dice a bit.
>
> I looked at only the discrepancies/errors for the "check" and the 
> "section".  I'm sure the discrepancy in the precedence field is much 
> higher - but folks change class a lot, so I don't care.
>
> Check number errors:
> Across all three sample logs, the error rate in the prefills seems to be 
> about four percent.
>
> I have found one source of error that seems easily explained.  The ARRL 
> database data for some of these errors contained a '00' check number for 
> some callsigns' MOST RECENT entry.  A look at the
> scores data for prior years shows a uniform check value in prior years.
>
> This seems to be a case of someone submitting a log without having filled 
> in their own exchange info. (Note: As a writelog user, I know that this is 
> possible with writelog.  All too easy a mistake to make!)
>
> That accounted for just under a third of the errors.
>
> In comparing the discrepancies in AA4NC vs KA1ARB vs N1LN, I found that 
> the contestants had indeed logged the same check numbers.  I expect that 
> means the prefills file was incorrect, as the three top NC ops are 
> unlikely to all make the same logging error.  This covers almost all of 
> the other errors.  Some of that is probably folks using different checks, 
> guest ops, etc.  But some is just plain errors in the prefills. No known 
> explanation for these errors(yet).
>
> The final group are uniques in each of the three logs.  I figure the 
> prefills are wrong rather than the contestants, but it could be either.
>
> Summary on check numbers:
> Expect to see about a four percent error rate in the prefills data for the 
> check number.
>
> Section Errors:
> The discrepancies in the section ran just under half of the discrepancies 
> in the check number.  If comes out to be about 1.5 percent.  No research 
> on the possible reasons for those yet.
>
> Conclusions:
> Looking at only three sample logs showed very similar discrepancy rates 
> with the prefills, so I expect the following advice to be valid.
>
> 1) Log what you hear!
>
> 2) Expect four percent error on the check, about two percent error on the 
> section.
>
> 3) I expected higher discrepancy rates than these, so at this point I 
> don't see much reason to change my basic methodology.  For 2009, I'll 
> produce the data in much the same way, sequences adjusted for the mode of 
> the current contest.
>
> I don't know what sort of accuracy anyone expected with these exchange 
> files, but now you have a baseline on the error rates in the one produced 
> for 2008.
>
> 73 es cu in ARRL 160m de w4kaz
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PVRCNC mailing list
> PVRCNC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrcnc
> 

From ni4s at earthlink.net  Mon Nov 24 00:39:25 2008
From: ni4s at earthlink.net (Andy Peterson NI4S)
Date: Mon Nov 24 00:44:01 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] SS prefills file accuracy in SSB 2008
In-Reply-To: <DD4722AD8EA14763B1BFB0B908AFEDCC@JFJLT07>
References: <49285204.2090907@aol.com>
	<DD4722AD8EA14763B1BFB0B908AFEDCC@JFJLT07>
Message-ID: <7f6c3f1a0811232139x7470410fpd7b54e8c4abc3ba3@mail.gmail.com>

So what are the thoughts on your check?  On phone, when S&Ping and
giving my check, 92, I got > 50% asking for confirmation on the check.
 In years past the check has always been the component getting the
most queries, regardless of how I spelled it out ("nine two"
"niiiinedy twooo" "niner two").

I know my "9" is easily confused for a "5".  If I wanted to make
things clearer I'd sign something easier to copy on phone.  The rules
state the intended check value, but the 'bot doesn't dip the callsign
database to find out what year I was *really* licensed..

WIll this turn in to the "Ed" sprint where everyone signs a check of
"73" for easy copy?
-ap

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Jim Jordan, K4QPL <k4qpl@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your work, Kaz.
>
> I also noted quite a few changes to the info in the pre fills in cw as well.
> My ssb accuracy rate is questionable so that one didn't get as much
> attention as cw.  Changes in section are usually because the op moves. The
> checks are harder to determine. I did a couple random checks with last years
> database and found several where the pre-fill agreed with the log submission
> but was different from what they were sending this year. And I say that
> advisedly because whenever a prefill did not agree with my own copy, unless
> I was 100% sure I would ask for a confirmation, particularly where the op
> was sending his exchange manually. It's easy to get on autopilot and send
> what someone else sends you, or what you see in the log or whatever. Some
> actually changed back to the prefill check when queried! At least that kept
> ME from being charged with the error.
> Several ones that had unexplained changes became obvious when looking at the
> database. It was K4XXX @ N3YYY so the op probably used his own check. And
> yes, some of them were just flat wrong. Even so, having something there
> improves rate and accuracy because you are comparing with something. As you
> say, log what you hear, but I'm very curious to see my LCR since this is the
> first time I've used prefills and I'm hopeful my accuracy will improve.
>
From k4cia at earthlink.net  Tue Nov 25 07:52:24 2008
From: k4cia at earthlink.net (William G. McDowell)
Date: Tue Nov 25 07:56:49 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] KE4GY(SK)
Message-ID: <12653978.1227617544598.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081125/732d54ad/attachment.htm
From kazeringue at aol.com  Tue Nov 25 09:03:15 2008
From: kazeringue at aol.com (KAZeringue)
Date: Tue Nov 25 09:07:45 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Frank, KE4GY, SK
Message-ID: <492C05A3.5040505@aol.com>


The Herald Sun obituary reports that there will be a wake at Clements 
Funeral home on Wednesday afternoon from 3:00 to 5:00pm.
http://www.heraldsun.com/obituaries/#61204

Thanks to N4CW and K4CIA for bringing this to our attention.

w4kaz
From k4tmc at aol.com  Wed Nov 26 12:23:57 2008
From: k4tmc at aol.com (k4tmc@aol.com)
Date: Wed Nov 26 12:28:54 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] AB-621 For Sale in TN
Message-ID: <8CB1E02E5CCE235-13EC-14@WEBMAIL-DY20.sysops.aol.com>

>From eHam.net:

AB-621 mast

This is the beefy version of the AB-577 with 6" diameter tubes. 
Includes everything needed to install (guys, crank assembly, stakes, 
copy of the manual) Approximately 48' tall without rotor and mast 
installed. Portable assembly will fit in the back of a small pickup. 
Dark military green, used surplus in good condition. PICK UP ONLY in 
the Knoxville Tn area. $800
Phone: None entered   Email: phriendly1@yahoo.com

Julius, N2WN, is a contester over in Knoxville, TN.

73,
Henry - K4TMC

From n4tl2 at earthlink.net  Thu Nov 27 12:49:59 2008
From: n4tl2 at earthlink.net (Tom Lewis)
Date: Thu Nov 27 12:54:37 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Johnson Viking Ranger transmitter
Message-ID: <380-2200811427174959129@earthlink.net>



Does anyone have experience with a Johnson Viking Ranger CW keying circuit?


I have a friend with one and it is not keying correctly and needs some help.

Tom, N4TL




From k4czusa at attglobal.net  Fri Nov 28 14:20:39 2008
From: k4czusa at attglobal.net (Barry Baker, K4CZ)
Date: Fri Nov 28 14:25:31 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Johnson Viking Ranger transmitter
Message-ID: <003401c9518e$67916ec0$36b44c40$@net>

Tom,

There are manuals and mods for the Viking Ranger at:
http://bama.edebris.com/manuals/johnson/ranger/

The first file listed includes a mod for the Johnson Ranger Keyer Circuit.
I don't know if it's relevant but it's probably worth a look.

73, Barry K4CZ

From k4cia at earthlink.net  Sat Nov 29 20:31:01 2008
From: k4cia at earthlink.net (Bill McDowell)
Date: Sat Nov 29 20:35:50 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] Elecraft K3 available in Raleigh
Message-ID: <4931ECD5.6030309@earthlink.net>

PVRC'ers..

Got a call tonight from Mike Falzone, K4PSP...an old friend here in
town..now 92 years old!

He has a FACTORY built K3, serial 939 he has had since September that
he would like to sell. Too much radio for him he thinks.

Includes:

100 watt amp
Tuner
KXV-3 transverter interface
General coverage board
2.7 filter

Perfect condition.

If u are interested give him a call at 919-781-8838 or email:
k4psp@nc.rr.com

Asking $2450

73
Bill, K4CIA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081129/f353b993/attachment.htm
From inventor61 at gmail.com  Sun Nov 30 20:56:46 2008
From: inventor61 at gmail.com (inventor_sixty_one)
Date: Sun Nov 30 21:01:48 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] 2008 CQWW CW :: KZ1X
Message-ID: <70ec52290811301756u3c339440nd6b73d3288b34b8d@mail.gmail.com>

          CQ Worldwide DX Contest, CW

Call: KZ1X

Class: SOAB HP
QTH: Chapel Hill NC
Operating Time (hrs): 26 (!)

Summary:
Band  QSOs  Zones  Countries
------------------------------
  160:     3         3        2
  80:     43        16       37
  40:    107       18       73
  20:    201       29      108
  15:     34        12      27
  10:       1         1        1
------------------------------
Total:  389       79      248

Total Score = 343,350


* * * *

Comments/questions:

K3 really does the job on RX.  Looking forward to the new 2nd RX unit,
still on backorder.

I don't know if this is a good score or not for this contest, given my
newbie handicap.

Some multipliers were really like mini-DX-pileups and ate up a lot of
time.  I never heard of somebody working split in a contest, but there
they were.

Had a nice JA run for a while there on 20.

Why do some folks bust my call so bad?  Is it my call sign?  Is my keying bad?

Is it me, or did I not see a lot of local PVRC folks on?
From n4ydu at nc.rr.com  Sun Nov 30 22:05:26 2008
From: n4ydu at nc.rr.com (Nathan Moreschi)
Date: Sun Nov 30 22:10:26 2008
Subject: [PVRCNC] CQWW N4YDU SOABLP
Message-ID: <003701c95361$a8f680b0$8801a8c0@YOURE2BE199155>

   CQ Worldwide DX Contest, CW

Call: N4YDU
Operator(s): N4YDU
Station: N4YDU

Class: SOAB LP
QTH: NC
Operating Time (hrs): 37
Radios: SO2R

Summary:
 Band  QSOs  Zones  Countries
------------------------------
  160:   50    10       19
   80:  142    17       59
   40:  251    26       85
   20:  483    24       96
   15:   98    18       50
   10:    8     5        5
------------------------------
Total: 1032   100      314  Total Score = 1,056,114

Club: Potomac Valley Radio Club

Comments:

Another challenging weekend, but it sure was a lot of fun (I think). The low
bands were sluggish for me on Friday night and they flat out stunk on Saturday
night. Signals to Europe were strong on 80, but it was tough to get them to hear me until it got close to sunrise there. The local sunrise openings were good. The highlight for me was working JA on
80 for the first time ever with 100 watts. I managed my first JA there earlier
in the week with some power, so nice to get it with 100 watts for a mult during
the contest. Twenty was good to me on Sunday with a nice three hour run to
Europe.

Station:
Rigs: ICOM 765, Ten Tec OMNI D
Antennas:
160M: L
80: GP and L
40: Two half squares
20: Rectangle Loop at 60 feet and Dipole NW/SE at 70 feet
15: Dipole at 65 feet fixed NE/SW and a dipole NW/SE at 40 feet
10: Dipole at 45 feet fixed N/S and a dipole NW/SE at 40 feet

Software: Writelog version 10

73,

Nate/N4YDU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/pvrcnc/attachments/20081201/26523d65/attachment.htm
