Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:nt5c@texas.net: 59 ]

Total 59 documents matching your query.

41. [CQ-Contest] Zone(s) of UA9S, UA9T (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 09:33:00 -0600
I had a discussion recently with Art RX9TX about the UA9 boundary between Europe and Asia, hence presumably between CQ Zones 16 and 17. One can't tell the true geographic continent and CQ Zone of a U
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-10/msg00441.html (7,887 bytes)

42. Re: [CQ-Contest] An Observation (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 07:03:45 -0500
Yes but.... I have serious problems with "Tango" in my callsign. On tough QSOs, it's recognized as "Echo" at least 30% of the time. So then I have to repeat with Tokyo or Toronto - Tokyo seems to wor
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-10/msg00667.html (7,761 bytes)

43. Re: [CQ-Contest] WW SSB (40M) (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 07:34:16 -0500
When all this happens, we need AT LEAST 7125-7150 permitted by FCC and supported by IARU/ARRL as the new 'Phone DX Window, for worldwide transceive contacts. (Just like 3790-3800 in each Jan QST "Gui
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-11/msg00024.html (8,409 bytes)

44. Re: [CQ-Contest] Proposed Rule Change - CQWW PHONE (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 20:28:21 -0500
Jose - As you say, it's not an IARU Region 2 rule which prevents the Lower 48 states from operating 'phone below 7150 - It's a U.S. FCC rule. Anyone who can arrange to operate from the U.N. club stat
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-11/msg00259.html (9,883 bytes)

45. Re: [CQ-Contest] Conditions for 10m (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:35:50 -0600
Rick, I'm sure the propagation gurus will explain it to us, but that Scandinavian 10M opening is not unusual, good conditions or bad. In Texas it normally peaks just before our sunset, i.e. far into
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-12/msg00253.html (7,489 bytes)

46. Re: [CQ-Contest] Survey Results - Contest Software (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 22:57:51 -0500
Hmmmm. As an interested non-contesting observer, I have a question. Why would contesters be willing to spend thousands - or tens of thousands - of dollars to build a great station, and then worry abo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-01/msg00302.html (7,557 bytes)

47. Re: [CQ-Contest] 75M and the DX Window (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 21:50:14 -0500
Folks: Aren't we getting a bit too emotional to make logical points supporting our case? That "large swath of spectrum" which Rich so covets is 10 KHz, which is 4% of the total 'phone spectrum availa
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-02/msg00079.html (8,104 bytes)

48. Re: [CQ-Contest] G2QT SK (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 22:55:57 -0500
I spent a lot of my childhood in East Kent, a few miles from Frank's home, and we had a number of QSOs chatting about my favorite part of the UK. Finally met Frank on that visit to Dayton. He was a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-03/msg00056.html (7,240 bytes)

49. Re: [CQ-Contest] SSB in CW band (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 21:57:51 -0500
Mal, Somehow I seem to recall this conversation before - many times! The 40M band just isn't big enough, and a major contest in any mode spills over "normal" boundaries, and gets the folks on the oth
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00588.html (8,618 bytes)

50. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW in SSB band (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:03:34 -0500
Based on the righteous anger about wicked SSB contesters displayed on this reflector for these many days, may I assume that when CQWW/CW comes around, the true believers will keep all QSOs below 7040
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00730.html (8,630 bytes)

51. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW in SSB band (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:48:21 -0500
....but by gentlemen's agreement just up to 7040, right Zik? - and CW ops ARE gentlemen (or gentlewomen) aren't they Zik? John, NT5C. _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailin
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00733.html (8,647 bytes)

52. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL REPLY - Remote Site & Contesting Rules (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 09:54:25 -0600
Rich, I think you'll find that DXCC has a very different set of rules from contesting. So far as I can tell, you can operate from anywhere within one DXCC Entity to accumulate your DXCC scores. With
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-03/msg00389.html (8,587 bytes)

53. Re: [CQ-Contest] A call to action (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 15:16:37 -0600
Our discussions always concentrate on how to bring more young people into ham radio, and then how to keep them interested/involved. How can one argue with that noble objective. But there's another po
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-03/msg00510.html (9,041 bytes)

54. Re: [CQ-Contest] 9V1YC, etc (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:44:45 -0600
9V1YC was 57/58 into Texas on 7085 SSB, calling CQ as the contest began. He was getting no answers, but that didn't prompt him to QSX up for USA! (It wasn't James operating). In fact, one of the char
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-07/msg00279.html (8,260 bytes)

55. Re: [CQ-Contest] 10 meters Propagation in June (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:05:14 -0500
There's another interesting 10M propagation mode which happens most summers, and doesn't seem to depend much on the state of the sunspot cycle. That's "side-scatter" between N America and Europe. I'm
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00352.html (9,169 bytes)

56. Re: [CQ-Contest] AADXCW Age Breakdown (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:26:09 -0500
I think (and hope) that you're being a bit too pessimistic Dennis. My observation - certainly in our Contest/DX club CTDXCC - is that serious contesting has become a hobby for "upper-middle-aged" fol
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00532.html (8,140 bytes)

57. Re: [CQ-Contest] European sigs to W9 (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:51:39 -0500
I'm somewhat surprised at the comments about poor conditions during CQWW/SSB. On the higher bands, sure, but what can one expect. But I thought 40M was extremely good. Europe pounded in of course, bu
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-10/msg00249.html (8,355 bytes)

58. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Band Contests (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 10:05:01 -0600
Tack, It's so that normal hams can find somewhere to operate every weekend. 73, John, NT5C _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lis
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00076.html (7,433 bytes)

59. Re: [CQ-Contest] PU2FAN, etc (score: 1)
Author: John Warren <nt5c@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:56:47 -0600
Hmmmm. I think that attitude is very hard toward this young fellow David. I'm a serious DXer and not a contest entrant, but if you had highlighted me in that way, I would have told you where to stuff
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00429.html (8,610 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu