Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

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

Total 324 documents matching your query.

81. Re: [CQ-Contest] Dayton atendees - tell us about the new Yaesu (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 07:37:50 -0400
On May 17, 2004, at 10:42 PM, Tom Osborne wrote: Man, who would want to pay $13K for a radio? I looked at the pix and it looks like about 40 knobs and switches on the front panel. What do you think p
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-05/msg00161.html (10,961 bytes)

82. [CQ-Contest] LotW - Needs More Participation (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 08:29:06 -0400
Since the LotW now has support for the DXCC award, I've been spending some time converting older logs to cabrillo format and then uploading them to the Logbook of the World. I must say, though, that
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-05/msg00177.html (9,326 bytes)

83. Re: [CQ-Contest] LotW - Needs More Participation (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 23:55:02 -0400
On May 19, 2004, at 6:25 PM, KI9A@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 5/19/04 5:09:49 PM Central Daylight Time, aa4lr@arrl.net writes: This is really a great technology, it looks as if it will need mor
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-05/msg00185.html (10,682 bytes)

84. Re: [CQ-Contest] LotW - Needs More Participation (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 08:20:31 -0400
On May 20, 2004, at 12:18 AM, Igor Sokolov wrote: That initial hassle is a bit too much. Why should I send photocopy of my license and passport by snail mail when I could as well scan it and send it
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-05/msg00202.html (11,746 bytes)

85. Re: [CQ-Contest] LotW - Needs More Participation (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 22:23:28 -0400
On May 20, 2004, at 6:54 PM, K3FT wrote: Why is THAT acceptable for MORE important things while the ARRL requires snail mail?? Hypothetical situation: E-mail Slim. Say you have a guy that manages to
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-05/msg00204.html (10,348 bytes)

86. Re: [CQ-Contest] 160M in CW WPX (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 22:25:12 -0400
On May 24, 2004, at 7:26 AM, Pete Smith wrote: It's been a few years since I last did the CW WPX, and I didn't have a 160M antenna then. The question, basically, is whether it's worth spending time o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-05/msg00306.html (9,396 bytes)

87. Re: [CQ-Contest] 160M in CW WPX (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 22:26:54 -0400
On May 24, 2004, at 3:15 PM, Dave wrote: I recall one clever fellow remarking "if you're on 160m in the WPX contest, you're losing." It's missionary work, but good luck to you if you do it. No, that
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-05/msg00307.html (8,146 bytes)

88. Re: [CQ-Contest] K2/100 vs. MP (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 21:28:29 -0400
On May 26, 2004, at 9:49 AM, John Thompson wrote: I have had a K2/100 vs. an MP(original) now for 3 months. The Elecraft is a good FD/ DXpedition rig. It is NOT (and was not designed for) a primary c
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-05/msg00318.html (12,670 bytes)

89. Re: [CQ-Contest] K2/100 vs. MP (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 21:33:29 -0400
On May 26, 2004, at 6:33 PM, Blake M. Meinecke wrote: I've got both a regular 1998 MP and a K2/100. I mainly use the K2 as radio 2 and have noticed many of the things John mentions, but I need to put
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-05/msg00319.html (9,623 bytes)

90. Re: [CQ-Contest] K2/100 vs. MP (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 21:39:05 -0400
On May 27, 2004, at 7:50 AM, Marijan Miletic, S56A wrote: AA4LR> Big problem with implementing CW PTT is that this would deactivate the internal keyer. This is also nuisance with FT-1000MP. Simple mo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-06/msg00072.html (7,766 bytes)

91. Re: [CQ-Contest] radio recommendations (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 21:38:56 -0400
On Jun 1, 2004, at 11:08 AM, Robert Katz wrote: I have a budget of around $1000, so I'll be looking for used rigs. What radio would you recommend, and why? What criteria should I use in deciding on a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-06/msg00073.html (9,415 bytes)

92. Re: [CQ-Contest] radio recommendations (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 17:11:14 -0400
On Jun 4, 2004, at 2:31 AM, mike l dormann wrote: Nobody has yet mentioned the HW16 with the HG10 vfo, you can get a set for about $100. Good working radio, puts out 50w which is more than adequate,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-06/msg00086.html (8,905 bytes)

93. [CQ-Contest] What does this question mean? (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 21:10:55 -0400
During the recent NAQP CW, I was having fun running some stations on 40 CW. Between callers, someone sent me a burst of CW that I didn't quite catch. After a couple of repeats, I believe he asked: UR
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-08/msg00068.html (8,365 bytes)

94. Re: [CQ-Contest] Aluminum fatigue cracks and scratches - treatment? (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:15:26 -0400
On Aug 5, 2004, at 10:01 PM, Eric Scace K3NA wrote: Cracks due to resonances and vibration-induced fatigue can be halted. Drill a small hole at the end of the crack (the end which is propagating into
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-08/msg00110.html (8,583 bytes)

95. Re: [CQ-Contest] Advantages not created equal (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:32:55 -0400
On Aug 11, 2004, at 3:47 PM, <mark@nevus.org> wrote: I lost count of how many "can you QSY to 10?" we had to turn down because of the counterproductive and unnecessary 10 minute rule which should be
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-08/msg00111.html (9,430 bytes)

96. Re: [CQ-Contest] Advantages not created equal (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:03:11 -0400
On Aug 17, 2004, at 9:42 AM, Roy Maull wrote: The ten minute rule was applied to the SO class to squash the "so called" SO2R advantage. What contest implements a 10 minute rule for single operators?
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-08/msg00133.html (9,883 bytes)

97. Re: [CQ-Contest] Advantages not created equal (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:05:59 -0400
On Aug 17, 2004, at 11:29 AM, Kevin J. Rowett wrote: What other simple, enforceable rule would exile the octopus without any other deleterious effects? Consider the version of the 10 minute rule now
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-08/msg00134.html (9,612 bytes)

98. Re: [CQ-Contest] Advantages not created equal (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 19:38:15 -0400
On Aug 17, 2004, at 11:16 PM, Richard DiDonna NN3W wrote: Well, for one, Field Day. Field Day isn't a contest. It's ah..., an "operating event". <grin> Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@arrl.n
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-08/msg00176.html (8,360 bytes)

99. Re: [CQ-Contest] Advantages not created equal (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 19:39:32 -0400
On Aug 18, 2004, at 8:51 AM, Roger Parsons wrote: I hate the 10 minute rule! I can also see no reason why it can't be replaced by a rule that says "only one signal can be transmitted at any one time"
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-08/msg00177.html (8,540 bytes)

100. Re: [CQ-Contest] anyone need a small sprint score? (score: 1)
Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 12:44:32 -0400
On Aug 28, 2004, at 6:31 PM, N7MAL wrote: On behalf of the many contesters, like me, who are relegated to using a multi-band trap vertical, and some sort-of low trap dipole for the low bands, why don
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-08/msg00222.html (8,558 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu