Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:aa4lr@arrl.net: 324 ]

Total 324 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [CQ-Contest] FCC on CW (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:05:06 -0400
Nope. It may affect the level of activity in Phone contests. (Or just the number of complaints received after a major Phone contest....) Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net Quote: "Not
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00366.html (8,971 bytes)

22. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesters on CW (was: FCC on CW) (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:00:22 -0400
There are three good reasons today for someone to learn CW, besides the licensing requirements that the FCC has slated for the chopping block: * Contesting - gives you that many more opportunities to
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00370.html (9,850 bytes)

23. Re: [CQ-Contest] FT-1000MP (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:43:29 -0400
That sounds accurate, although there are some variations. CT, NA and TR have historically been more prevalent, although there's a lot of WriteLog and N1MM about. Collins was a top contender when rigs
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00819.html (11,962 bytes)

24. Re: [CQ-Contest] FW: New and better (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:52:06 -0400
MorseRunner. Amazingly realistic. Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 ____________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00820.html (8,161 bytes)

25. Re: [CQ-Contest] Question re Interstation interference (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 08:34:05 -0400
At NQ4I, we ran into this same problem with the 15m mult station and the 20m run station. When 20m transmitted, there was a low-level signal that would not respond to tuning. The cause had to do with
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00848.html (9,054 bytes)

26. Re: [CQ-Contest] L.O.T.W. (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 09:49:37 -0400
What I find very interest is that - a full week after IARU - not a SINGLE HQ station I worked has uploaded logs to LotW. Not even W1AW/5 or NU1AW. You'd think that the IARU member societies headquart
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00850.html (9,714 bytes)

27. Re: [CQ-Contest] Operating Methods or Equipment? (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 10:24:46 -0400
Do not be discouraged. You've just be introduced to the cruel reality of contesting. It's really an opportunity to improve. A friend of mine once told me, the thing about playing a musical instrument
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00852.html (13,316 bytes)

28. Re: [CQ-Contest] Question re Interstation interference (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:43:08 -0400
Several people have written me asking which filters we used. I figure I'll hit everyone by replying here. I also want to correct an incorrect call I sent out with the designs in some of the individua
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00869.html (9,019 bytes)

29. Re: [CQ-Contest] Operating Methods or Equipment? (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:48:55 -0400
It has since been pointed out to me that UP4L probably filled out the form wrong and 7201 isn't the number of Phone QSOs, but the point value for his 1614 CW QSOs. My bad for not noticing the score d
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00870.html (10,037 bytes)

30. Re: [CQ-Contest] FT-920 - IC-718 (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 22:37:46 -0400
I think this depiction is inaccurate. The so-called "dead years" have a number of innovative rigs introduced: Elecraft K2 and K2/100 TenTec Orion IC-7800 FT-7900DX And even that misses the FT-1000 va
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00953.html (10,401 bytes)

31. Re: [CQ-Contest] FCC on CW (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:05:06 -0400
Nope. It may affect the level of activity in Phone contests. (Or just the number of complaints received after a major Phone contest....) Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net Quote: "Not
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00955.html (8,971 bytes)

32. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesters on CW (was: FCC on CW) (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:00:22 -0400
There are three good reasons today for someone to learn CW, besides the licensing requirements that the FCC has slated for the chopping block: * Contesting - gives you that many more opportunities to
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00959.html (9,850 bytes)

33. Re: [CQ-Contest] Single versus Dual Lever Paddles (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:56:57 -0400
Around 25 years ago, when I was re-licensed as a General, I was involved with the West Virginia Novice Net. There were two guys who were often NCS, one was Dave, WD8LDY and the other was Steve, who I
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-05/msg00289.html (8,394 bytes)

34. Re: [CQ-Contest] What to log? (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 12:16:42 -0400
So here's a dumb question -- how does the software know? If the portable designation can come before or after the callsign -- how can we tell which is which? If the (now SK) King of Jordan were to co
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-05/msg00331.html (9,297 bytes)

35. Re: [CQ-Contest] RE: Awesome Morse Trainer (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 08:20:01 -0500
On Dec 9, 2004, at 8:52 PM, Bryn wrote: As someone who did get his 20wpm ticket but let the skill lapse, I think this program will give me the confidence to try a CW contest in the future. With a 1x2
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-01/msg00001.html (8,325 bytes)

36. [CQ-Contest] Re: [3830] 2005 NAQP CW - All Claimed Scores 10Jan2005 (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:25:55 -0500
On Jan 10, 2005, at 1:18 PM, mwdink@eskimo.com wrote: Call QSOs Mults hr Score Club/Team All Single Op HP N4AF 906 255 10 231,030 PVRC #1 W1EBI 248 93 3:23 23,064 YCCC Wait a second -- since when is
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-01/msg00147.html (8,041 bytes)

37. Re: [CQ-Contest] Just when you think (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 09:48:20 -0500
On Jan 14, 2005, at 10:42 PM, Eric Hilding wrote: On 40m tonight, I heard 3G0YP make FIFTEEN QSOs without sending his callsign, then send "QSL Via (whatever the call is) but NOT his call, make anothe
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-01/msg00181.html (9,029 bytes)

38. Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Newbies at VE7FO (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 20:18:02 -0500
On Jan 16, 2005, at 2:35 AM, Jim Smith wrote: The newbies have come and gone. One complained about the addictive nature of the activity (hah - got another one). There were a few startled expressions
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-01/msg00202.html (7,975 bytes)

39. Re: [CQ-Contest] Help Needed REF CW Log (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 17:54:27 -0500
On Feb 2, 2005, at 11:29 PM, VR2BrettGraham wrote: If it isn't enshrined in the spec, it isn't Cabrillo. Agreed. The one & only way to avoid chaos & allow all concerned to benefit from Cabrillo is if
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-02/msg00102.html (8,720 bytes)

40. Re: [CQ-Contest] How frequent to ID? Every QSO? No way! (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 17:57:08 -0500
On Jan 17, 2005, at 6:03 PM, CT1BOH - Jos&eacute; Carlos Nunes wrote: Let's determine how much time each operator spends in a 48-hour contest transmitting his call: ZD8Z 1,655*8000=13240 seconds = 3,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-02/msg00103.html (9,028 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu