On 1/17/2016 00:50, Jim Brown wrote: On Sat,1/16/2016 10:30 AM, Franki ON5ZO wrote: Question 1 is: would I benefit from a pre-amp right at the feedpoint of such a flag or single K9AY loop antenna? Co
During some of my modest runs in the CW ARRL DX contest last weekend, it seemed many of the callers were on exactly the same frequency, making it really hard to pick out a call. This phenomenon seems
One very well-known contester from Portugal once gave me a lengthy CW lecture when I asked for his cal, then refused to work me. I accidentally hit upon an effective strategy last weekend: If a stati
On 2/22/2016 22:32, Jim Brown wrote: I said that this is not often enough, because it slows down S&P operators a lot. Call me cynical, but it's in the interest of the DX operator to slow down the S&P
My old FT-1000 sits right next to the K3, one flip of a switch away. Perhaps I should take out the W8JI mod, and make the FT-1000 back into one of the worst click generators around, and switch to it
I see. That's under Telnet: Filters. I only operate unassisted, but I hope others will use this feature. 73, Scott K9MA -- Scott Ellington K9MA Madison, Wisconsin, USA k9ma@sdellington.us ___________
On 2/24/2016 12:02, Steve London wrote: Better yet, try to work them. When they come back to you, send them the report and "call?". That is precisely what prompted the lengthy CW lecture from the fam
So what is the proper way to politely decline to QSY? Something which means, "Sorry, I do not wish to QSY now, and please let's not argue about it." I often send "SRI", but I'm not sure it get's the
On 2/27/2016 07:33, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote: I think the solution is quite simple - it should only be acceptable to ask someone else to QSY when they have answered your CQ. In fact, it is bad manners,
On 2/29/2016 18:58, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote: NA QSO parties this is very common place as you work the mult once per band. Another factor is the difficulty of finding a new run frequency. If the band
On 3/7/2016 13:59, Barry N1EU wrote: And I'll repeat once more: We need an S&P only category in the major dx contests! Give folks a viable option if they choose to avoid all the out-muscling, splatte
But how, exactly, is a little pistol to procure a run frequency when every open band is packed wall to wall, and stacked three deep, with big guns calling CQ? 73, Scott K9MA -- Scott Ellington -- via
On 3/8/2016 16:01, Art Boyars wrote: K9MA (one of my W9YT buddies) asks, "But how, exactly, is a little pistol to procure a run frequency when every open band is packed wall to wall, and stacked thre
On 3/9/2016 06:04, kr2q@optimum.net wrote: A lot of guys simply ENJOY S+P and do NOT enjoy running. I think this is especially true of the so-called "casual" guys you later refer to: Ah, but it's har
I've had one of these for years, and really like the noise reduction. They're long since discontinued, and Heil has no information on them and does not repair them. Mine was always susceptible to RF,
Although I've virtually never operated assisted, I can see one major attraction: In some parts of the world, those of us with modest stations can end up with excruciatingly boring low rates, especial
I'm all for keeping CQWW a DX contest by not allowing intra-country QSO's. I would, however, like to see some sort of rule changes to make things more interesting, especially late in the contest, for
Totally aside from "winning", I think "fun and enjoyment" should be the goal of any rule changes. By allowing those with modest stations and/or geographic disadvantages to make more contacts, we can
Unless the feedline is radiating a lot, the type of feedline does not affect the pattern. Open wire line is used with this kind of antenna because the high SWR on some bands would make coax extremely
In case an obviously incorrect or impossible exchange, it seems to me the sensible thing is to delete the QSO. Otherwise, it's a guaranteed penalty for me, as opposed to a NIL for the other operator.