[SADXA] KH1/KH7Z "partial" results

[Wes]

Good job.

The only one I wish I would have worked was 40 CW.  I guess I should have stuck 
with it the first night.  They had a good signal but huge JA piles.  I figured I 
wouldn't bother until later then they never cooperated.  I think they were on 
the 4th but we went out to watch fireworks, etc.  FT8 contacts, even though I 
made a couple, are a don't care for me.

Wes  N7WS

On 7/7/2018 10:40 AM, Jim Wysocki wrote:
> I say "partial" because, while I was able to recover 30m CW with an insurance 
> contact, my 160m FT8 QSO is still in limbo.  I withdrew my request for N4XP to 
> research the original CW QSO, but reinstated one for a log check on the 160m 
> QSO.  I got an "RR73" response from the operator which triggered the autolog 
> popup box on my software, so I know that the QSO should have been logged on 
> their side.  I'll see in a few weeks what the verdict is on this one.
>
> My 80m dipole was converted into a 160m OCF antenna for this DXPedition.  It 
> can be reverted back to its original status just by removing the jumper 
> connection.  I'll probably try the antenna for a few more weeks, just to log a 
> Canadian to increase my totals on this band.  Its been over 25 years since 
> I've been active on 160, and only have three confirmed (USA, Mexico, and 
> Argentina) on this band.  I realize that I've missed the active 160 DX season, 
> but if I get that Baker Is. QSO confirmed I will have met my 160m goals for 
> the year.
>
> This was a good DXPedition for me overall, even if that missing QSO isn't 
> confirmed.  This wasn't an ATNO but there were a lot of band fills.  16 band 
> slots on all HF bands from 12 to 160, with 15 of them showing up on ClubLog 
> already.  Six on CW, five on FT8, and four on SSB.  They weren't audible on 
> 10m so there was no opportunity for a contact on that band.
>
> I hope lots of our members have had their Baker Is. needs met as well.
>
> 73, Jim  W9FI