Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:sawyered@earthlink.net: 493 ]

Total 493 documents matching your query.

221. Re: [CQ-Contest] Automation = lost essential skills (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 14:34:40 -0500
I worked 7O2A for an all time new one in CQWW SSB. Almost fell out of my chair, but then challenged him on the zone 37 and said "you are in ZONE 37?" and he of course said "yes, zone 37". Seeing that
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00197.html (9,051 bytes)

222. [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 07:28:29 -0500
As usual, the frustration of stations not sending calls sets in during contests. Is it worse, personally, I don't think so. Its been bad for at least 5 years if not more. A few notables were VP2MMM,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00268.html (8,953 bytes)

223. [CQ-Contest] Is it Time? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 07:13:50 -0500
Its pretty straightforward to define assisted. You either found and copied all the information on your own or you didn't. If a machine or human (directly or indirectly) has provided you a callsign -
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00378.html (9,694 bytes)

224. [CQ-Contest] Classic - Doing what was intended? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:16:07 -0500
After seeing literally more than a dozen well known contesters in each mode "opt down" for the 24 hours of Classic and others commenting they may try it next year, I have to ask - is it doing what wa
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00408.html (7,635 bytes)

225. Re: [CQ-Contest] Classic - Doing what was intended? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 10:23:53 -0500
Just to be clear, I have no objection to the Classic Category. I think that categories that match competitive desires with like minded people are great. During the commentary leading up to the catego
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00445.html (9,695 bytes)

226. Re: [CQ-Contest] Evolving Scoring (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 03:56:59 -0500
Tom Stated "Sorry Peter, but it takes a lot more than that. No matter how much hardware you have, you are not going to win from the Pacific Northwest." Sure you can. You can win Zone 3 from the Pacif
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-12/msg00027.html (7,098 bytes)

227. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 17:31:12 -0500
Guys, these are all great ideas for a NEW CONTEST or one that is struggling to find growth. CQ WW is the biggest and fastest growing contest already. Not sure if anyone ever said to you - but you don
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-12/msg00077.html (9,370 bytes)

228. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ Magazine Continuance (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 08:15:20 -0500
I completely disagree that the contesting community should "prop up" a failing business just to sponsor great contests. Its far more efficient to just take over the contest. What does it need? - Rule
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-01/msg00200.html (9,199 bytes)

229. Re: [CQ-Contest] What else is lost? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2014 13:10:10 -0500
Charlie, I agree that if the reason to "prop something up" is good for society, it's a noble cause and worthy. My point is that its not an efficient way to simply preserve the CQ WW Contests. Also, i
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00013.html (8,780 bytes)

230. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:51:06 -0500
I took great interest in Herb's post. As a competitive Low Power competitor, this issue is very important to me. I thought I would share my observations. I routinely use RBN history after a CW contes
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00323.html (13,140 bytes)

231. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 12:33:05 -0500
Thanks Tor and I agree with you analysis. It still ties to my conclusions. In the case of K1LZ vs N1UR, the difference is the amplifier but not much more. But it should be more based on the antennas.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00338.html (11,989 bytes)

232. Re: [CQ-Contest] The two/four-point rule in WPX (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 07:38:36 -0400
I only took a look at this year's results on 3830 for SSB to get a sense of the potential results of this issue. This whole issue is really just about Carib and VE and KL7 stations since the change o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-04/msg00108.html (10,313 bytes)

233. [CQ-Contest] Stirring the pot - Used to be "Flex Radio Question" (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 12:49:58 -0400
There might be an app for sex too - but that doesn't mean its better or more enjoyable than the real thing. A lot of us like turning the big knob. And as SO2R ops know - 2 big knobs are better than 1
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-05/msg00066.html (6,969 bytes)

234. Re: [CQ-Contest] SDR's have knobs too! (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 16:13:36 -0400
Why bother turning the knob when the callsigns and signal strength are all there available for you in point and click fashion - or worse - in automated harvest and log and somehow think its still fun
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-05/msg00080.html (10,625 bytes)

235. Re: [CQ-Contest] SDR's have knobs too! (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 06:34:12 -0400
Tor, I agree that this is a typical assumption. Is there data to show otherwise? All the comments that I see blend seamlessly in and out of dialog of things on band maps, RBN, and SDR. There is no sp
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-05/msg00086.html (12,555 bytes)

236. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL Log checking reports (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2014 09:13:38 -0400
I beg to differ with Dave - K8CC's post. Not with the well intended volunteering of the individuals on behalf of contesting - kudos to them and thank you very much. But with the ARRL. The ARRL is not
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-08/msg00017.html (9,305 bytes)

237. Re: [CQ-Contest] antenna setup question (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 10:10:06 -0400
In my opinion, you should decide whether the primary goal is SO2R, M/S, or M2. They would not likely point to the same set up. In SO2R, you are never transmitting at the same time and there is only s
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-08/msg00160.html (9,114 bytes)

238. [CQ-Contest] Morse Code Wine (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 09:48:52 -0400
Just thought that I would share this fun item with the group here. While at the store the other day, I noticed out of the corner of my eye what looked like Morse Code elements on the label of a wine
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-09/msg00106.html (6,836 bytes)

239. Re: [CQ-Contest] History of Low Power Category (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 07:05:36 -0400
As someone who has spent the past 10 years competitively low power contesting at 100 and 150W depending on the contest, I can tell you that it does make a difference. I have routinely experimented in
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-09/msg00154.html (9,030 bytes)

240. Re: [CQ-Contest] History of Low Power Category (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:22:02 -0400
A few comments on this ever expanding topic. I believe the CQWW 160 contests also have a 150W power limit now, if I am not mistaken. I personally think the extra 50W does matter but honestly whicheve
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-09/msg00177.html (9,587 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu