Personally in contests I don’t even switch the computer on, but maybe I am old
fashioned.
Regards
Richard G3OQT
> On 6 Dec 2022, at 17:01, topband-request@contesting.com wrote:
>
> Send Topband mailing list submissions to
> topband@contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> topband-request@contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> topband-owner@contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. ARRL 160 (Ron Spencer)
> 2. Re: Fwd: Ground conductivity discussions ? oops
> (James V Redding PE)
> 3. Re: My new 9 Circle works great! (Joe)
> 4. Re: Ground conductivity discussions ? oops (Dennis Ashworth)
> 5. Prop For ARRL 160 (Jim Brown)
> 6. Re: My new 9 Circle works great! (Stig Vestergaard)
> 7. Re: ARRL 160 (Ed Parish)
> 8. Cluster Spots and the ARRL 160 (ws6x.ars@gmail.com)
> 9. Re: ARRL 160 (Pete Smith N4ZR)
> 10. Stew Perry coming in 11 days (Tree)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2022 08:55:10 -0700
> From: Ron Spencer <ron.spencer@zoho.com>
> To: "topband" <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: ARRL 160
> Message-ID: <184e2ff8fe7.cc36e5d13296722.8911938702354885415@zoho.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Re Packet and the contest??????
>
>
> May not be of interest to everyone.?
>
>
>
> Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then a
> dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15 minutes
> until I finally QSY'd to escape.?
>
>
>
> My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect call. On
> all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on it, dumped in
> their call. Typically I work all dupes and,? for the first few did but, as
> the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine and "B4". Most went away but
> a few insisted on a Q.?
>
>
>
> In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the
> responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign? Many of
> the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations. Again, guessing,
> they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called and expected a quick Q.
> NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet spot. Is it a valid contact if
> you don't copy the actual call sign? Even if the call was correct on packet.
> Or are we moving towards letting the computer do most of the work??
>
>
>
> Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry where no
> spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the
> information...... Yes, I know. A radical idea.
>
>
>
> Ron
>
> N4XD
> Sent using https://www.zoho.com/mail/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 12:33:00 -0500
> From: James V Redding PE <jredding@ieee.org>
> To: Dennis Ashworth <dennis@ashworth.org>
> Cc: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Fwd: Ground conductivity discussions ? oops
> Message-ID:
> <CAEa-wQj5kMXVV5=eNJdufrKLHvVkTVKC-onGtPPc-qfGa3N5UA@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Here is a link to a method of actually measuring the soil complex
> conductivity characteristics and it is focused on 80M:
>
> https://rudys.typepad.com/files/soil-characteristics-qex.pdf
>
> Since the depth of the measurement is a function of frequency, the numbers
> for 80M may be quite different than for other HF bands.
>
> Was also curious whether the elements were detuned for their individual
> impedance measurements like would be done with a BCB array or if the 25
> ohms is a common point measurement.
>
> Jim/VEZ
>
>
>
>> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:21 AM Dennis Ashworth <dennis@ashworth.org> wrote:
>>
>> I meant to post this to the TowerTalk group. It still may be relevant to
>> Topband ops.
>>
>> Dennis, K7FL
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Dennis Ashworth <dennis@ashworth.org>
>> Date: Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 8:54 AM
>> Subject: Ground conductivity discussions
>> To: <topband@contesting.com>
>>
>>
>> Very interesting and timely discussions on radials and ground conductivity.
>> I?m currently rebuilding an 80M broadside array (with shortened, top loaded
>> elements) in SW Utah that I?ve modeled at 12 ohms impedance. The current
>> antenna was tested and the impedance measured was 25 ohms. Each element in
>> the array (4 total) also measured 25 ohms. What accounts for additional
>> system loss?
>>
>> Upon consulting the original builders, I learned they had also predicted an
>> impedance of approximately 12 ohms. I?m not clear what methods or models
>> they used for their prediction. There are 4:1 baluns at the base of each
>> vertical which begs the question whether the array impedances were ever
>> checked post-install. I suspect not ? and I doubt anything has changed over
>> the years that would equally affect the impedance *on all 4 verticals.*
>>
>> Where I don?t blindly trust models (antennas or otherwise), I do believe
>> the 12 ohm figure is reasonable given the short, top loaded elements. I
>> reviewed the FCC conductivity tables for the locale and they indicate 15-30
>> millimos/meter. That?s pretty good! I would think the loss from a ground
>> system of 32, 1/4 wave plus radials would NOT account for the 12 ohms of
>> loss ground losses. But what if my ground conductivity is less than the FCC
>> tables report?
>>
>> I?m going to the site again next week to install 26 additional 1/4 wave
>> radials on one of the verticals and see if (and how much) the measured
>> impedance drops. I?ll share my results here.
>>
>> This loss has to be a ground system issue. If so, adding radials and seeing
>> a corresponding drop in impedance should confirm my suspicions.
>>
>> At some point, I?ll measure the ground conductivity, but it needs to wait
>> for warmer temps (current temp at site is 19F!).
>>
>> Insight from the masses always appreciated.
>>
>>
>> Dennis, K7FL
>> Las Vegas, NV
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 13:16:25 -0600
> From: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: My new 9 Circle works great!
> Message-ID: <800f959c-6c0b-aa78-3495-ccf0b93c51d3@mwt.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Any links to this system?
>
> Joe WB9SBD
>
>> On 12/4/2022 1:34 PM, Jim Miller wrote:
>> Thanks to Steve's, VE6WZ, excellent YouTube videos, I decided to tackle a
>> better RX antenna. I've been using a 2 element array phased by an NCC-2
>> which is better than what I've had in the past (BOG, K9AY) but I wanted
>> better.
>>
>> After evaluating my space available and finding it too small I asked my
>> neighbor for seasonal use of their adjoining lot and they graciously
>> agreed! My N, NW and W elements are on their property.
>>
>> Steve's videos include KiCad files for the combiner and preamps and he was
>> very helpful by email with any of my questions.
>>
>> I just completed the array last night and got it on the air and I was
>> astonished by how well it worked.
>>
>> Of course it isn't going to create signals out of thin air but it is much
>> quieter due to better RDF and the front to back is very impressive. Strong
>> signals on the waterfall just disappear when the antenna is reversed!
>>
>> I'm very happy to get such an improved antenna for 80 and 160 in a 120ft
>> diameter circle!
>>
>> As a bonus I use it with PSTRotator and a USB controlled relay box so no
>> manual switch box is required on my desk. Just a mouse click selects the
>> desired direction or it can track my logger automatically.
>>
>> FYI, most of the cost is in the aluminum, the combiner and preamps were
>> pretty cheap to build.
>>
>> Many thanks to VE6WZ!!
>>
>> 73
>>
>> jim ab3cv
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives:http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 11:20:47 -0800
> From: Dennis Ashworth <dennis@ashworth.org>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Ground conductivity discussions ? oops
> Message-ID:
> <CAEn-CUqMPBdzEqnW2aPrW+Se+q8=niEiDW4MCtaMDaoTL_xPkg@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>> Hi Jim ? thanks for the info. Rudy?s latest method is the one I was
>> planning to employ. Brian, K6STI also mentioned Rudy?s method. Good
>> consensus on which method to use!
>>
>> Yes, all other elements were either de tuned or on the ground. I have
>> checked each vertical one at a time (with others decoupled) and read 25
>> ohms on all 4 elements. Such a head scratcher! I?m beginning to the my
>> aluminum elements are doped with Nichrome! :-)
>>
>> Dennis, K7FL
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 9:33 AM James V Redding PE <jredding@ieee.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Here is a link to a method of actually measuring the soil complex
>>> conductivity characteristics and it is focused on 80M:
>>>
>>> https://rudys.typepad.com/files/soil-characteristics-qex.pdf
>>>
>>> Since the depth of the measurement is a function of frequency, the
>>> numbers for 80M may be quite different than for other HF bands.
>>>
>>> Was also curious whether the elements were detuned for their individual
>>> impedance measurements like would be done with a BCB array or if the 25
>>> ohms is a common point measurement.
>>>
>>> Jim/VEZ
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:21 AM Dennis Ashworth <dennis@ashworth.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I meant to post this to the TowerTalk group. It still may be relevant to
>>>> Topband ops.
>>>>
>>>> Dennis, K7FL
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>> From: Dennis Ashworth <dennis@ashworth.org>
>>>> Date: Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 8:54 AM
>>>> Subject: Ground conductivity discussions
>>>> To: <topband@contesting.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Very interesting and timely discussions on radials and ground
>>>> conductivity.
>>>> I?m currently rebuilding an 80M broadside array (with shortened, top
>>>> loaded
>>>> elements) in SW Utah that I?ve modeled at 12 ohms impedance. The current
>>>> antenna was tested and the impedance measured was 25 ohms. Each element
>>>> in
>>>> the array (4 total) also measured 25 ohms. What accounts for additional
>>>> system loss?
>>>>
>>>> Upon consulting the original builders, I learned they had also predicted
>>>> an
>>>> impedance of approximately 12 ohms. I?m not clear what methods or models
>>>> they used for their prediction. There are 4:1 baluns at the base of each
>>>> vertical which begs the question whether the array impedances were ever
>>>> checked post-install. I suspect not ? and I doubt anything has changed
>>>> over
>>>> the years that would equally affect the impedance *on all 4 verticals.*
>>>>
>>>> Where I don?t blindly trust models (antennas or otherwise), I do believe
>>>> the 12 ohm figure is reasonable given the short, top loaded elements. I
>>>> reviewed the FCC conductivity tables for the locale and they indicate
>>>> 15-30
>>>> millimos/meter. That?s pretty good! I would think the loss from a ground
>>>> system of 32, 1/4 wave plus radials would NOT account for the 12 ohms of
>>>> loss ground losses. But what if my ground conductivity is less than the
>>>> FCC
>>>> tables report?
>>>>
>>>> I?m going to the site again next week to install 26 additional 1/4 wave
>>>> radials on one of the verticals and see if (and how much) the measured
>>>> impedance drops. I?ll share my results here.
>>>>
>>>> This loss has to be a ground system issue. If so, adding radials and
>>>> seeing
>>>> a corresponding drop in impedance should confirm my suspicions.
>>>>
>>>> At some point, I?ll measure the ground conductivity, but it needs to wait
>>>> for warmer temps (current temp at site is 19F!).
>>>>
>>>> Insight from the masses always appreciated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dennis, K7FL
>>>> Las Vegas, NV
>>>> _________________
>>>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>>>> Reflector
>>>>
>>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 12:05:36 -0800
> From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: 'TopBand' <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Prop For ARRL 160
> Message-ID:
> <72a34bfc-d14d-05c5-5c24-f48a7174928e@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> It was totally stinko for the contest.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 06:51:41 +0100
> From: Stig Vestergaard <gsvestergaard@gmail.com>
> To: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
> Cc: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: My new 9 Circle works great!
> Message-ID:
> <CA+_O4RoK6RbeaZ18YuXrRiVJr+s=sdQxoXwtXK5amp5PN50ksA@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> I completely agree with you Jim, AB3CV.
>
> I am in more or less the same situation as you, too little footprint for
> several serious beverages, single or phased, but instead the W1EW / VE6WZ 9
> circle with only 120ft diameter is really an improvement here on a little
> footprint. Steve, VE6WZ has done so many great YouTube videos, not only on
> the 9 circle subject, but other TopBand issues.
> By the way I am using my 9 circle in diversity RX mode on the transceiver
> with other small receive antennas, as short beverages, Bog's and DHDL, it
> works great.
> Sure long Beverage (too long for my property), would outperform the 9
> circle in the same direction, but then I need a serious big property to get
> the opportunity to switch directions from several bev's.
>
> Now we only need more activity on 160M CW, so we can have more fun, and
> reason to play with antennas, hi.
>
> Great job Steve, VE6WZ and ofcourse John, W1FV who optimized and
> developed the smaller 9 circle.
>
>
> Stig, OZ4MM
>
>
>> Den tir. 6. dec. 2022 kl. 05.49 skrev Joe <nss@mwt.net>:
>>
>> Any links to this system?
>>
>> Joe WB9SBD
>>
>>> On 12/4/2022 1:34 PM, Jim Miller wrote:
>>> Thanks to Steve's, VE6WZ, excellent YouTube videos, I decided to tackle a
>>> better RX antenna. I've been using a 2 element array phased by an NCC-2
>>> which is better than what I've had in the past (BOG, K9AY) but I wanted
>>> better.
>>>
>>> After evaluating my space available and finding it too small I asked my
>>> neighbor for seasonal use of their adjoining lot and they graciously
>>> agreed! My N, NW and W elements are on their property.
>>>
>>> Steve's videos include KiCad files for the combiner and preamps and he
>> was
>>> very helpful by email with any of my questions.
>>>
>>> I just completed the array last night and got it on the air and I was
>>> astonished by how well it worked.
>>>
>>> Of course it isn't going to create signals out of thin air but it is much
>>> quieter due to better RDF and the front to back is very impressive.
>> Strong
>>> signals on the waterfall just disappear when the antenna is reversed!
>>>
>>> I'm very happy to get such an improved antenna for 80 and 160 in a 120ft
>>> diameter circle!
>>>
>>> As a bonus I use it with PSTRotator and a USB controlled relay box so no
>>> manual switch box is required on my desk. Just a mouse click selects the
>>> desired direction or it can track my logger automatically.
>>>
>>> FYI, most of the cost is in the aluminum, the combiner and preamps were
>>> pretty cheap to build.
>>>
>>> Many thanks to VE6WZ!!
>>>
>>> 73
>>>
>>> jim ab3cv
>>> _________________
>>> Searchable Archives:http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>>
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 05:57:59 -0500
> From: Ed Parish <k1ep.list@gmail.com>
> To: Ron Spencer <ron.spencer@zoho.com>
> Cc: topband <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160
> Message-ID:
> <CAKR4uUOdqqn8ZkD=c8DQNev3tJtPz=YFEi6Bt_89fxeQZtrPYA@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> The same thing happened to me. I occasionally get a dupe, but at one point,
> all of a sudden, I worked 10 or 12 dupes in a row. I finally had to QSY.
> Running unassisted, I couldn't tell what was spotted on my frequency, but I
> knew it was a busted call.
>
> reply to: K1EP@arrl.net
>
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022, 23:47 Ron Spencer via Topband <topband@contesting.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Re Packet and the contest
>>
>>
>> May not be of interest to everyone.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then a
>> dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15 minutes
>> until I finally QSY'd to escape.
>>
>>
>>
>> My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect call.
>> On all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on it, dumped
>> in their call. Typically I work all dupes and, for the first few did but,
>> as the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine and "B4". Most went
>> away but a few insisted on a Q.
>>
>>
>>
>> In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the
>> responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign? Many
>> of the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations. Again,
>> guessing, they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called and expected
>> a quick Q. NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet spot. Is it a valid
>> contact if you don't copy the actual call sign? Even if the call was
>> correct on packet. Or are we moving towards letting the computer do most of
>> the work?
>>
>>
>>
>> Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry where
>> no spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the
>> information...... Yes, I know. A radical idea.
>>
>>
>>
>> Ron
>>
>> N4XD
>> Sent using https://www.zoho.com/mail/
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 07:42:31 -0500
> From: <ws6x.ars@gmail.com>
> To: "'Ron Spencer'" <ron.spencer@zoho.com>, "'topband'"
> <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Cluster Spots and the ARRL 160
> Message-ID: <000601d90970$3552db70$9ff89250$@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Ron,
> And I thought it was just me. I too, had to resort to S&P because of the
> number of dupes. In 9 hrs. of operating, I had 16 total, plus another 4 where
> the operator caught themselves and said, "SRI." I have never seen anything
> like it. I had a K2 who called me on Sat evening for a dupe, and 4 minutes
> later called me again!
> Like you, I figured it was bad cluster spots. However, I searched the
> database for the usual blown calls -- WI6X, WS6K, WH6X and WS7X. To my
> surprise, I can't find a single spot with any of these variations.
> I agree: several of these callers were well-known, competent contest
> operators. Most I had worked dozens of times.
> For 160M tests, I have long since adjusted my callsign in the N1MM text
> scripts. I add a half-space before the "S" and slow the "S" down by 2 wpm. In
> the past, this has always served me well. But not in this test.
>> From this QTH I had lots of QRN and rapid, deep QSB. I even slowed my
>> sending by 2 wpm from Sat evening on. That did not seem to do the trick.
> Besides the usual wide key-clickers, I also heard an unusual number of
> signals breaking up. Some to the point of being nearly uncopiable. Was this
> strange atmospheric condx? Was this what was bugging my signal?
> I'm curious if others experienced the same stuff.
> Jim - WS6X
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband <topband-bounces+ws6x.ars=gmail.com@contesting.com> On Behalf
> Of Ron Spencer via Topband
> Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 10:55 AM
> To: topband <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: ARRL 160
>
> Re Packet and the contest
> May not be of interest to everyone.
> Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then a
> dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15 minutes
> until I finally QSY'd to escape.
>
> My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect call. On
> all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on it, dumped in
> their call. Typically I work all dupes and, for the first few did but, as
> the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine and "B4". Most went away but
> a few insisted on a Q.
>
> In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the
> responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign? Many of
> the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations. Again, guessing,
> they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called and expected a quick Q.
> NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet spot. Is it a valid contact if
> you don't copy the actual call sign? Even if the call was correct on packet.
> Or are we moving towards letting the computer do most of the work?
>
> Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry where no
> spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the
> information...... Yes, I know. A radical idea.
>
> Ron
> N4XD
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 09:15:07 -0500
> From: Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr@gmail.com>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160
> Message-ID: <863f416c-a9cc-c39a-23b9-67618eccfcf1@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> I had 598 QSOs in CQWW CW (10M) and 420 in the ARRL 160 CW, about 85
> percent S&P (assisted), and don't recall a single instance where an
> incorrect spot led me even to think about calling a station who wasn't
> really there.? N1MM's Spectrum Display shows previously-worked stations,
> so it would be glaringly obvious when spots for K3LPL and W3LPL showed
> up on the same frequency. I didn't see it happen.
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR,for the N1MM Team
> Check out our web server at
> <https://reversebeacon.net/main.php>.
> For spots, please use your favorite
> "retail" DX cluster.
>
>> On 12/5/2022 10:55 AM, Ron Spencer via Topband wrote:
>> Re Packet and the contest
>>
>>
>> May not be of interest to everyone.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sat evening around 0010 or so, had been running with a nice rate. Then a
>> dupe. And another. And yet another. This continued for around 15 minutes
>> until I finally QSY'd to escape.
>>
>>
>>
>> My guess of what happened: someone spotted me but with an incorrect call. On
>> all those using packet, a new call popped up. They clicked on it, dumped in
>> their call. Typically I work all dupes and,? for the first few did but, as
>> the volume grew, I replied with their call, mine and "B4". Most went away
>> but a few insisted on a Q.
>>
>>
>>
>> In addition to showing how far our hobby has sunk, isn't it the
>> responsibility of the calling station to actually copy the call sign? Many
>> of the stations that duped me were very recognizable stations. Again,
>> guessing, they were running SO2R, clicked on the spot, called and expected a
>> quick Q. NEVER bothering to check accuracy of packet spot. Is it a valid
>> contact if you don't copy the actual call sign? Even if the call was correct
>> on packet. Or are we moving towards letting the computer do most of the work?
>>
>>
>>
>> Sure would be interesting if more contests were like the Stew Perry where no
>> spotting assistance is allowed. You have to actually copy the
>> information...... Yes, I know. A radical idea.
>>
>>
>>
>> Ron
>>
>> N4XD
>> Sent usinghttps://www.zoho.com/mail/
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives:http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 07:31:33 -0800
> From: Tree <tree@kkn.net>
> To: 160 <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Stew Perry coming in 11 days
> Message-ID:
> <CAKF9HhatQv4YHuctArr+_ShMNYgrYgG=tAsKDamNNHaiZbT4Yg@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Due to the timing of New Year's Eve, the Stew Perry will move up to the
> weekend before the holidays this year. That would be on December 17/18th.
>
> We understand that this is a bad time for some people - and perhaps a
> better time for some others. Most of the time, the contest ends up being
> on the weekend between XMAS and New Year's, but this is the one exception.
>
> As you all know, this contest features a robust menu of plaques. Without
> much prodding at all, we already have nearly a full set of plaques
> sponsored. You can find the list here:
>
> Stew Perry TBDC Plaques (kkn.net)
> <https://www.kkn.net/stew/stew_plaques.html>
>
> If you were waiting for an announcement before sponsoring your plaque of
> choice - consider this that announcement. Please send me an email with the
> info on the plaque you want to sponsor. Payment is best via PayPal to this
> email address (tree@kkn.net). The current price is $65.
>
> The Boring Amateur Radio Club would like to thank Patrick, W7TMT, who is
> helping with shipping last year's plaques. These should be arriving in the
> next couple of weeks.
>
> 73 Tree N6TR / K7RAT
> tree@kkn.net
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing list
> Topband@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Topband Digest, Vol 240, Issue 4
> ***************************************
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|