I know darn well that when I'm S&Ping and the guy I'm trying to work is close to a bigger signal, I'll often lean away from the big signal to improve our chances. I think Pete is just reporting the o
It seems to me a bit incongruous for people who have figured out how to install and use WriteLog, N1MM, TRLog and/or CT, and who can find their way around the menu systems of modern high-end radios,
It seems to me a bit incongruous for people who have figured out how to install and use WriteLog, N1MM, TRLog and/or CT, and who can find their way around the menu systems of modern high-end radios,
Hi Jose, I believe your analysis of the clones is over-simplified and is missing some important secondary effects. Clearly the less often one IDs, the more important these secondary effects become. T
Bob, It is true that the list of Canadian call areas is not the same in all contests, but may I point out that exactly the same kinds of differences can be found in the US multipliers for the "lower
A follow-up to my own message: 1. Apologies to N6TR for leaving him off the list of contest software writers at the end of my post - I originally had you first in the list, Tree, and when I sorted th
Great first step, Kenneth, but you could have taken the idea further. My contesting software already knows you are in zone 4, so there is no point in exchanging that information. Of course, the signa
Without making any judgment as to the appropriateness of this new rule, I note that several people have questioned whether TRLog can include frequencies in the log. TRLog can indeed be used to produc
Nat, I believe the official information is at http://www.arrl.org/contests/vev0vy.html (for US and Canada - all other countries are listed in http://www.arrl.org/contests/announcements/prefixtable.ht
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 at 14:29:50 -0000 , K9JY said: It's scoring correctly; I noticed the same thing two years ago. They count call areas in the US and other places as a 'country.' One of the reasons
The case under discussion is not at all the same as miscopying IL for IN, for which no-one is arguing that the log checking should not be strict. The point here is that the station on the other end c
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 at 23:52:44 -0500, John WA2GO wrote: <snip> Problem solved? Only partly, John. Packet helps two people; the running station who gets assistance in getting his CQ heard by a lot mo
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 at 09:22:50 -0500, WB0WAO said: I think it IS the next step in the "evolution" of contesting - but would a station that is running such software and NOT receiving spots be in the
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 at 18:23:53 -0000. N7MAL said: ... When the op sent the check it was 30+ years off... <snip> My question is: Are the rules really rules or just guidelines we can all bend and twis
The TS-950S Digital was reviewed in QST for January 1991, p.31 (there called the TS-950SD), while the TS-950SDX was reviewed in December 1992, p. 72. Both reviews were reprinted in the ARRL Radio Buy
Rick, K6VVA wrote Exactly. But when I copy his correction *after* I've already pushed the Enter button, at present, I can not go back and correct the log so that it will reflect what was "copied"...a
Ian K5ZM said, ... and a RIT function and ... about an hour after George W1EBI had said, Gee, maybe Alex can work in a virtual RIT with the up/down arrows for next rev? Was this for real, or were you
Rick K6VVA said: Hmmm...I was thinking if the ability to edit before the next QSO that would be great. But, why screw up a good "run" if, by simply keeping a notepad handy, any post-corrections could
I really don't understand this fascination with using hard-to-copy names. The idea in a contest is to complete as many QSOs as possible within the allotted time, and the best way to do that is to mak
strategy say, to And the point of the brief analysis in my previous post was to point out that any such "defensive" technique is counter-productive, i.e. over the duration of a contest it can hurt yo