Mail Archive Search: <+from:i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] Does size matter? (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 10:56:31 +0100; A vertical stack can overcome the path nulls on a wide vertical angle whose fact is generally more effective than concentrating all the power on a single antenna of a stated height. Ten meters are pe; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-03/msg00157.html (11,728 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet statistics (score: 1): Author: Maurizio Panicara <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:40:46 +0100; Unassisted category splits into two kind of operators: 1) I say I do not use or take any benefit from packet, and actually I do (suffering a lot if someone is spotting me). 2) I swear I dont use it,; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00247.html (10,319 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet statistics (score: 1): Author: Maurizio Panicara <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:58:14 +0100; It has been verified in a MM or MS that packet finally hepls a lot if properly used, although skills and stations always make the difference. The rulement of better skills and stations plays its role; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00259.html (10,074 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet statistics (score: 1): Author: Maurizio Panicara <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:22:15 +0100; Power is another issue and deserves another thread. Technically, any ERP can be obtained with almost any input power level, and no one can verify remotely, the only plain field occurs in WRTC. Packe; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00291.html (8,862 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Single Op Unassisted - Propagation Assistance? (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 10:28:23 +0100; I respectulyy disagree with the point that packet is only a crutch for handicapped, it can be instead a weapon. I know about "winning" operators dealing hard to have internet it in the most lost lan; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00451.html (10,096 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Packet statistics (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:26:32 +0100; Because of their inherent nature, generical statements always contain some truth. The important point is not to be misleaded by fake syllogisms and to keep focusing on single problems. 73, Mauri I4JM; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00486.html (8,912 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Here we go again (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:25:09 +0100; This concept is wise and should have been adopted, but such an idea implies mind flexibility and will to learn, as well as the real understanding of the word "competition". Reality is actually differ; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00771.html (10,733 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Here we go again (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:19:22 +0100; Ability to use a second radio is totally in the range of plain field. Everyone can try doing it,although not everyone will be able to succed and get benefits. This doesn't apply with amateur radio. S; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00788.html (10,980 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Be careful (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:09:52 +0100; WRTC is basically an event, moreover WRTC plain field is only theorical. It's an attempt to evaluate operating ability which is only one of the elements required for ham radio contesting. Have it cle; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00001.html (8,749 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:34:54 +0100; I'm not so sure, or better to say I disagree. Any qso made on different bands with the purpose to increase contest score is obviously out of SB rule, and this independently by the used call. But also; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00335.html (9,829 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:38:21 +0100; Do qsos made on different bands give direct and indirect helps when the used call is the same? If the answer is Yes, then the permission to work other bands is only a virtual permission and basic rul; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00341.html (10,176 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Be careful (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:38:50 +0100; Nothing excludes that best operators is coincident with best contester but contesting in a real world is another story than WRTC. WRTC has its own rules and finds out the best operators within its st; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00532.html (8,609 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Be careful (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:45:08 +0100; With all the respect, aiming for an equal setup is not only a pie in the sky but also off the ham spirit. Ham radio and contesting is not only keying a pad or speaking into a microphone and having go; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00544.html (9,822 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Be careful (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:34:59 +0100; Correction John, great fun, but the best in what? Where's Ham radio? _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mail; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00561.html (8,990 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]