[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Not a Serious Contester Definition

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Not a Serious Contester Definition
From: Kevin Schmidt <w9cf@ptolemy.la.asu.edu>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 01:56:00 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
When I used a non CAT capable radio, I hooked up a pic microcontroller as
a frequency counter and serial port to read the frequency using a minmial
Kenwood protocol just so that the TRlog band would follow the radio. Later
on I found that N1MM read the frequency fine from the same interface.
The parts cost was about $20.

But having said that, I don't see where writing the "exact" frequency
from a non CAT radio (I assume that 1 KHz would be adequate for log
checking) is that much worse than writing the time back when we used
paper logging. Certainly for running, you only need to record it when
you change run frequency, and its just an extra 3 digits when S&Ping.

73 Kevin w9cf

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 03:18:42PM -0800, Ken Widelitz wrote:
> ...
> If you have a CAT capable radio, adding CAT
> control is relatively inexpensive and will definitely add to your score
> because you won't lose that mult where you forgot to change the band in the
> log. 
> 73, Ken, K6LA / VY2TT
CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>