WM5R said: > I can easily imagine a multiop in Virginia or Illinois or Florida or someplace having an "Internet" station where an op not on the air could be listening to Internet audio streams to hea
Eric, Standardization is the key, and we don't need to re-invent the wheel here. The ICAO phonetics are fine, and the reason you had trouble with using "Golf" is because whoever you were working does
would be to station K3LR or KC1XX on 14300 keeping the frequency clear for use in case a true emergency occurred. << Too much intelligent logic in that suggestion for it to ever happen. 73, Bob Nauma
likely has the effect of increasing overall participation - a benefit to both the sponsor and to contest stations that are competitive. << majority of the scores will be down. << Curious. You both th
that Q, because after the second try you're going to get a quick "R TU" from me and I'll do an <alt-W> and move on. << What type of logic leads you to tell the QRP (or other difficult to copy) statio
Good question Pat. I think the obvious answer is that we're talking about a single operator. Some persist in not understanding this distinction. Even so, I think this deserves some thought, and discu
" Yes, computerization has made SO2R more easier and more efficient but the techniques have been in use for at least 30 years. " No argument. The question I think that needs to be asked is: Should th
My questioning is where is the line drawn? I have no problem with SO2R as it is done today - for the most part. Is it ok for a computer to work stations on behalf of the operator and since it's not a
An oldie but a goodie from KR2Q: (Yes, 1994!) Well, I guess it's time to 'fess up and take the blame/credit. Somewhere between 15 and 20 years ago, I wrote an article in CQ magazine about how to run
W7WHY Opined: "Seems to me to be really efficient, one DX station should call CQ in the window and only 1 station at a time reply :^)" How about the DX stations using the window *must* operate split
I worked OH2PM at 1818Z on Sunday. Following that I worked several stations in the Pacific NW, including 3 VE7's (SI, NL, & XF). Perhaps the path was over that area? I was running low power CW to a 1
Didn't we go through all of this back in October? (Déjà vu all over again?) You say: "You will get no help from the contest sponsors. Oh they say they aggressively pursue cheating but t
N2IC's hypothetical situation occurs often in DX contests. During the contest, someone will bootleg a rare DX callsign, and the generally few operators who work the pirate have no knowledge of its no
"It doesn't say it's OK to spot if you are not actually in the contest." This has to be the silliest comment posted on CQ-Contest for the year 2005. How do contest rules apply in any way to someone w
Mal, Good try, but you can't deflect the criticism for this one. Your assertion in this matter, along with your earlier condemnations of legions of contesters as cheaters, AND your specious accusatio
Barry, What is silly is making an issue out of it, and not recognizing that in our contest parlance, and certainly in this specific discussion, the term "packet" is used to reference *all* digital sp
I was just looking at the ARRL's calendar for next month's contests, and I see the weekend of January 21-23. There are 7 contests that weekend. 3 of which I would like to participate in. 1) ARRL Janu
Barry, Nope. Sorry. In addition to the second place honor you earned for the packet/telnet thing, you now win 3rd place honors for 2005 for this one. By the way, the "Silliest Comment made on CQ-Cont
Simply, if you are receiving (listening) or transmitting, you are operating. Many contests specifically include "listening" as operating time. For example, the ARRL 10 Meter Contest: "2.2. Listening
The reality is that this beacon problem happens so rarely that nothing need be done. Back to net. 73, Bob W5OV _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@conte