Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:n5ot@n5ot.com: 212 ]

Total 212 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [CQ-Contest] Uniques not counting and emotion (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 10:15:28 -0500
"Stations that do not cheat" - Kind of makes the point, I think. Good post Bob. Sums it up. Mark, N5OT _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.co
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00353.html (8,563 bytes)

42. Re: [CQ-Contest] 1960 SS (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:32:12 -0500
There is a category called "Single Operator, Unassisted" that you can enter if you like to operate contests the old way. This category is for people who prefer to find and copy stations without assi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00390.html (7,028 bytes)

43. Re: [CQ-Contest] Unique perspectives (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 22:49:50 -0500
No. The object is to get more calls in your log than your competitor does. Mark, N5OT _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.c
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00438.html (8,240 bytes)

44. Re: [CQ-Contest] Icom 746 as contesting rig (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 08:23:17 -0500
Our team (PJ4R&TI5N ARRL DX CW 2004-2006) has been using 746PROs. We find the receivers too hot. They act like good contest rigs with some attenuation. Mark, N5OT Yes in many cases our receivers thes
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00442.html (7,805 bytes)

45. Re: [CQ-Contest] Icom 746 as contesting rig (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 19:12:28 -0500
No, I have consecutive serial numbers later than the trouble period, yet both of mine still failed 3 days apart about 2 months after purchasing them new (June 2004). The factory repaired them at no
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00474.html (8,576 bytes)

46. Re: [CQ-Contest] Cheating by M/S - 3 QSO "penalty" by K3BU (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 09:10:18 -0500
I guess I'm not equal to the conversation, Gord. What is the difference? You don't determine your score anyway, you only submit what you think it is. Your text above reads like you think a log checke
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00498.html (9,270 bytes)

47. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting in the Sunlight [was: SO1R and SO2R] (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 22:06:10 -0500
Ev, you're championing an underclass of people running 151 watts that does not exist. The rule was designed to separate people who run exciters only from people who use an amplifier. Virtually all p
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00575.html (10,796 bytes)

48. Re: [CQ-Contest] A proposal (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 09:16:19 -0500
I think this is a bad idea, Jim. The fact that the WARC bands represent a contest-free haven has allowed us to be hard core in our refusal to cave in on the standard HF bands. The fact that whiners
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00003.html (7,209 bytes)

49. [CQ-Contest] "?" not equal to "QRL?" (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 18:35:45 -0500
"Di-di-dah-dah-di-dit" does not mean "is the frequency in use?" Using it as such is bad form. MHO. Mark, N5OT _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@conte
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00095.html (6,571 bytes)

50. Re: [CQ-Contest] "?" not equal to "QRL?" (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 22:24:14 -0500
Silly me, I guess I made the assumption that one should only inquire if the frequency is in use if they have first determined that it is void of signals. I am pretty sure that most people who send "?
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00102.html (10,624 bytes)

51. Re: [CQ-Contest] "?" not equal to "QRL?" (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 21:01:06 -0500
This is news to me. I think it has become the "de facto standard" for *some* people. K8CC's post, echoed below, pretty much says it all. MAny ops are skipping past the "listen" part and going straig
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00126.html (10,541 bytes)

52. Re: [CQ-Contest] "?" not equal to "QRL?" (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:54:33 -0500
And that, my friends, is the problem. Mark, N5OT _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-cont
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00146.html (10,117 bytes)

53. Re: [CQ-Contest] "?" not equal to "QRL?" (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 17:10:10 -0500
I don't recall seeing the number "30 seconds" cited. I take "some tens of seconds" to mean 20. That's only one QSO at a rate of 180. I don't think it's unreasonable. There are many more foolish ways
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00147.html (10,686 bytes)

54. Re: [CQ-Contest] Defacto Calendar (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 08:08:50 -0500
Good question. Compliments to all the amateurs who try to make this information available. I, too, have trouble finding exactly what I am looking for in a contest calendar, in particular: I could be
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00374.html (7,378 bytes)

55. Re: [CQ-Contest] Defacto Calendar (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 18:47:30 -0500
With all due respect to Bruce and all he's done to help out contesting, at the moment his calendar only lists through December 2006. That is approximately 8 months short of the year I am looking for
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00384.html (7,872 bytes)

56. [CQ-Contest] Get it right (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 04:52:47 -0500
In the Sprint, had a number of guys tell me "worked before" who weren't in my log - I think at least some of them had me confused with that other 5OT guy. I'm askin' ya: please remember we're both ac
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00149.html (6,954 bytes)

57. [CQ-Contest] no acknowledgement (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 17:59:52 -0500
Bummer. I asked for fills once and the station went off and worked another station instead. I just copied the exchange again and did a (-1) on the number and logged it. I guess he didn't hear my requ
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00220.html (7,460 bytes)

58. Re: [CQ-Contest] I shouldnt be complaining but.. (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 07:57:58 -0500
And if I recall, the Stew Perry has some excellent QRP trophies. Mark, N5OT _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00243.html (7,921 bytes)

59. Re: [CQ-Contest] No Dit-Dit (was Sending Speed) (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 21:04:39 -0500
P.T. Barnum was right. Here's my opinion of what he's saying: "Gee this software is just GREAT, all I had to was copy his number since I already have his name and state from earlier on 20 meters. Ev
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00262.html (8,660 bytes)

60. Re: [CQ-Contest] Pre tuned Hf amps (score: 1)
Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 18:42:04 -0500
FWIW I have never heard of a contest failure in a station that uses one humongous HV supply and separate finals. I think those supplies are generally way over-built. I always wondered why some of th
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00368.html (8,757 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu