Hi Rich, With all due respect, I truly believe Bud doesn't deserve a single bit to be treated like in your email below. So sad somebody had the great idea of creating something like "World and Contin
First of all, you should not make conclusions based on my comments since those represent my personal vision and thoughts, and have nothing to do with the decisions made by the Contest Directors. Seco
That is a fallacy. Those new ways you talk about have been implemented "since forever" and have been perfected starting 2002. 73, Martín LU5DX _______________________________________________ CQ-Conte
Hi Dave, The problem with signing "/X" in LU is that it is not compliant with the local Regulations. AZ1A/X is located in Rio Gallegos in Provincia de Tierra del Fuego, Antártida e Islas del Atlántic
Hi Dave, I have not heard portable stations located in Tierra del Fuego signing neither /XQ nor /XZ, but it would be perfectly according to the local Regulations. Vy 73, Martín, LU5DX _______________
Depends on the QSO rate at which you are working, the speed at which stations are replying to you, and whether your pileups are fully synced. It also depends on the type of keyboard. If you have a ke
You are totally wrong Jeff. Operating using the DX Cluster takes a lot more skills than just running two pileups without any additional information. I think I don't need to explain why, since your wa
Point taken Jeff. Vy 73, Martín, LU5DX _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
Well, no. I mean not in general. If you are to compete in SOAB now dominate by 2BSIQ, looking for mults is no longer part of the equation. Eventually you would pass mults to one of your two, or three
Hi Jim, Totally. It depends on many factors, including the perspective from which the op approaches the contest. I have mostly entered SOAB (A) starting back in 2006. However, in my case SOAB ended u
2BSIQ is not dueling CQs. You can eventually user that feature if one of the pileups dries up, ideally, you would have two constant streams of calling stations on two separate bands, without the need
2BSIQ was actually implemented, when conditions allowed for it, way before 2016. It didn't have that name though. https://cqww.com/publiclogs/2009cw/lp1h.log 73, Martin, LU5DX _______________________
No. That is not how it is setup. You wouldn't want dueling CQs. Dueling CQs mean after a CQ has been sent another will start on the opposite radio. CQs on the opposite radio should not be automatical
I would choose the IC-7410 over the IC-7300 if those are the only two options. Do not go only by those labs numbers. The IC-7300 as well as the 7610 tend to overload when multiple strong nearby signa
Another great option would be a TS 590 SG. That rigs is totally undervalued and is actually an extremely good performer for contest stations. In fact, one of the most successful EU MS stations (TK0C)
Hi Frank, Do you mean the IC-7300 is a fantastic radio for contest use? The receiver has really major issues under crowded band conditions. 73, Martín, LU5DX _________________________________________
Hi Frank, The three different units I saw tested during contests from 2016 to 2019 here exhibited severe ADC overflow. Sort of what is seen here: https://youtu.be/uVslSyqNbYk But also with Preamps OF
Hi Ray, I think you and the rest of the teams that entered the Multi-Operator Distributed category did a really amazing thing inviting young people. Facilitating that, is above and beyond anything we
Hello, You might want to reach out directly to Ray, he has just unsubscribed from the reflector. Thank you all for constructive criticism, ideas to innovate and support in general. 73, Martín, LU5DX
Yuri, That is indeed a big level of prejudice on your part. Or at least, totally "Non sequitur". Do you know each of the kids who were involved in these operations and their expectations about the ho