- 1. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
- Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
- Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:57:37 -0500
- Bob, What kind of contesting are you talking about? The TS-2000 isn't most people's first choice in a contest rig, although it's not nearly as poor a performer as most people claim. Especially those
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-04/msg00273.html (8,292 bytes)
- 2. Re: [CQ-Contest] KENWOOD TS-2000 (score: 1)
- Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
- Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 14:31:15 -0500
- The TS-2000 is a complex rig that takes a little while to figure out. Sitting down at AES or a buddies house probably doesn't do the rig justice. Most people don't like the TS-2000 because they "hear
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00015.html (9,451 bytes)
- 3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contest Rig (score: 1)
- Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
- Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 19:39:33 -0500
- Nothing wrong with the Mark V or Mark V Field, they're essentially the much the same rig as the "original" MP. In fact, check the Sherwood Engineering web page and you'll see that the MP and Mark V F
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-05/msg00276.html (8,714 bytes)
- 4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contest Rig (score: 1)
- Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 11:42:16 -0500
- Dave, The idea that the original MP has better RX specs than the Mark V series is a fallacy. This notion got it's genesis because, in the original ARRL MP review, the specs were taken with an MP that
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-06/msg00011.html (8,643 bytes)
- 5. Re: [CQ-Contest] radio MP vs all (score: 1)
- Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 14:25:52 -0500
- It was probably locking up due to it's external power supply. You be surprised at just how much of the MP innards the Field and Mark V share. The Field is essentially the same rig, with slightly diff
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-06/msg00012.html (7,988 bytes)
- 6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contest Radios (score: 1)
- Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:07:29 -0500
- Your reasoning is interesting. Since Yaesu doesn't make the Field anymore, you decided to go for a rig a generation older for more money? The FT-1000 is a great rig and I'd probably even pay $2K for
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00100.html (9,210 bytes)
- 7. Re: [CQ-Contest] A question of protocol (score: 1)
- Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
- Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 17:41:37 -0600
- The QSO may be legal, but it can't be submitted for DXCC credit. The "buddy" is in Guam or Okinawa and these are different DXCC entities than W/K and legally, he can't just use a W/K call there. If t
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-11/msg00466.html (8,952 bytes)
- 8. Re: [CQ-Contest] QRM in DX Window (score: 1)
- Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
- Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 21:05:01 -0600
- I think during contests, ALL rules and gentleman's agreements should be suspended- no power limits, no subbands, no frequency allocations. All of these are an impediment to my making contacts, and re
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-11/msg00628.html (10,663 bytes)
- 9. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP5 Call (score: 1)
- Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:32:11 -0500
- Since the FCC doesn't issue KP5 licenses, a KP5 callsign would not be available. This is why K5K was used for Kingman Reef, K4M was used for Midway, K7C was used for Kure, etc., etc. This is not a ne
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00276.html (8,263 bytes)
- 10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Dx peditions and contests (score: 1)
- Author: Scott Manthe <n9aa@arrl.net>
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:40:50 -0500
- AH1A was canceled in 2001 because the Italian amateur who held the call obtained it fraudulently. The address he used (on Canton Island, now part of Kiribati) to get the call never existed. It only t
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00277.html (10,469 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu