pdf 6436KB Sep 25 2010 04

un on 40. The next minute everything
sounds like ‘Mary Had a Little Lamb’
played on the ocarina.”
“Propagation was not too bad. Basically,
20 was open the entire 24 hours to somewhere.
At 0800 we were working the East
Coast on long path and listening to our
echoed signals traveling around the globe
— which seems really cool when you are
sleep deprived. There was a brief opening
on 15 and an even shorter one on 10.
“We lost our 160 meter antenna right
before the start of the contest when someone
let the smoke out of the antenna relay
switch. I don’t think it cost us too much. We
did fi ne on 40, but we really had a hard
time on 80 with the compromise vertical
we were running. That is something we
need to work on for next time.”
John reported that working Europe “was
a stretch” that weekend. “We got some,
but they were hard work.” Fortunately, the
team found favorable propagation to Oceania
and to the Far East and was able to log
a respectable number of fi ve-pointers.
Using a 1×1 call sign carries its own
benefits and challenges, he said, but
it puts all stations on an equal footing
with respect to call sign length. “But the
most comical moment of the contest was
listening to Dan trying to explain a 1×1
call to D4C, who should have been able
to fi gure it out: ‘One, two, three. You have
three, we have three.’ I wish I’d had a tape
recorder.”
“We had two stations networked with
WriteLog, and that was pretty sweet,” he
recounted. “You can set it up so that when
one station is sending, it locks out the
other. There were some limitations and
a couple of minor problems, but it was a
solid confi guration that I
wouldn’t hesitate to use
again.”
“All in all, it was fun and
educational,” John said in
summary. He quipped that
Amateur Radio contests
should not be sponsored
by radio manufacturers
but by purveyors of coffee,
caffeinated soft drinks,
beef jerky and pretzels.
“Wearing Depends does
not improve your score,”
he added.
“We are already making
plans and coming up with
ideas for next year. Thanks
to K6AM and the SCCC for
this great idea!”
W6C
Paul, WN6K, and Juan,
W6NOW, operated as
W6C. “As there were only
three 1×1 stations on the
air for the WCRRTC event
42 November/December 2008 NCJ
W6B Scoring Summary
Band SSB QSOs CW QSOs Total QSOs Mults
160 0 0 0 0
80 7 11 18 6
40 131 74 205 26
20 267 365 632 55
15 71 19 90 15
10 7 4 11 3
Total 484 473 956 105
W6C Scoring Summary
Band CW QSOs SSB QSOs Zones HQ Stns
160 0 0 0 0
80 124 2 9 4
40 323 12 21 5
20 200 115 14 6
15 24 41 9 0
10 0 0 0 0
Total 667 170 53 15
created by John, K6AM, someone had to
come in last,” Paul philosophized afterward.
“Band conditions were sporadic.
Although at times we heard loud stations
calling CQ, we just could not be heard
by them, and they were those precious
multipliers.
“Juan and I only used a single radio due
to no equipment here at WN6K to operate
SO2R,” Paul continued. “Although the rules
for our contest-inside-the-contest allowed
that we could switch bands with impunity,
we chose to stay within the 10-minute
rule of the IARU so that we could submit
a ‘regular’ score there.”
According to Paul, he handled all of the
CW operating while Juan dealt with “the
other mode,” with the exception of 40 and
75 meters, where they took turns. He said
the pair had more requests to repeat their
1×1 call sign on SSB than on CW.
“Thanks for the QSOs. We got a minitaste
of what the WRTC might feel like,”
he concluded. “Bottom line: Lots of fun,
but competing at WRTC level is in the F 2
layer as far as our abilities and equipment
limitations go. Do more S&P if you are not
loud is the lesson learned, but then that’s
why we contest — to learn more.”
WCRRTC 2009?
Thanks to all who helped by giving points
to our teams. If there’s enough interest, we
will try it again next year.