Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:wc1m@msn.com: 83 ]

Total 83 documents matching your query.

61. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL and Open Logs - Time for the next step? (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 19:18:33 -0400
Not so. There's no need for the contest sponsor to sign the log. The contester would simply use TQSL to sign the log with his/her LoTW private key before uploading it to the contest robot. A copy of
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-07/msg00242.html (10,792 bytes)

62. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL and Open Logs - Time for the next step? (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:18:05 -0400
Right. I'd forgotten that TQSL strips data required by the contest sponsor. Pete's proposal would require a TQSL mod, perhaps a special contest mode that would leave all data intact. A contest-specif
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-07/msg00252.html (16,306 bytes)

63. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL and Open Logs - Time for the next step? (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:18:04 -0400
No, Pete specifically said both participants had to have LoTW certificates. And the answer to your question, "is it any more valid that a log submitted by F2xxx to LoTW confirms a QSO with me than a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-07/msg00253.html (13,232 bytes)

64. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL and Open Logs - Time for the next step? (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:23:26 -0400
Pete, (The following is my opinion. I don't represent or speak for ARRL): If you drop the requirement that both stations participating in the QSO be LoTW members, then it's quite easy to impersonate
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-07/msg00265.html (19,160 bytes)

65. Re: [CQ-Contest] Rohn 45 vs 55 (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 10:31:59 -0400
Best to ask questions like this on the TowerTalk reflector. I don't know for sure, but the brackets fit snugly and there may not be 1/4" of slop in the spacing. The Maximum Vertical Downpull spec on
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00052.html (8,975 bytes)

66. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 12:43:59 -0400
You'll probably get more answers if you ask this question on the Writelog reflector. I was using Writelog before N1MM came out. The main reason I stuck with Writelog is that it works very well for ev
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00071.html (10,492 bytes)

67. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 18:13:20 -0400
I could definitely be wrong about it, but my recollection is that Writelog supports boxes like dxdoubler via the LPT port. That's not a great solution for me, and it may not fully support the stereo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00079.html (8,689 bytes)

68. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 20:56:42 -0400
It's true that Writelog continues to be updated on a regular basis. That said, there are a lot of things N1MM does that Writelog does not. Does this affect my ability to contest effectively? I don't
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00106.html (12,761 bytes)

69. Re: [CQ-Contest] How do you get better? (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 11:38:09 -0400
I agree with Al completely: QRP stations are much better off sending at normal speed than at slower speed. As Al says, the odds of a static crash or fade taking out part of the transmission are reduc
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-11/msg00005.html (13,433 bytes)

70. Re: [CQ-Contest] How do you get better? (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 12:18:27 -0400
I'm hardly the expert, but Randy's advice to practice strikes a note for me. I tend to oscillate between working on antennas and equipment for a while, then focusing on operating. Antenna work, espec
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-11/msg00006.html (15,138 bytes)

71. Re: [CQ-Contest] self help during contest (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 10:20:53 -0500
With the same disclaimer as Doug (i.e., this is not an official opinion), here's my take on the question: As far as I know, no contest has explicit rules against recording QSOs and reviewing/editing
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00245.html (14,957 bytes)

72. Re: [CQ-Contest] self help during contest (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 13:43:09 -0500
This is common practice in large M/M stations with multiple radios per band. CT even has a "Partner" mode which allows the second-radio op to enter his/her version of the call and have it displayed j
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00255.html (11,150 bytes)

73. Re: [CQ-Contest] Ice Storms in NE (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:04:09 -0500
Dave is still without power. He hosts his own website, so it's available only when he runs his generator to warm the house and cool the fridge. Last I heard, they told him he *might* get power back b
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00413.html (11,167 bytes)

74. Re: [CQ-Contest] Custom Earbuds for Contesting Query (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 12:31:44 -0500
I use a pair of Etymotic earbuds (different model) with my music player, and sometimes use them during contests when the headphones get too painful. The frequency response is OK for one of of my radi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00449.html (12,044 bytes)

75. Re: [CQ-Contest] [YCCC] wtb, quick rx checker (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:23:12 -0500
Highly recommended. No shack should be without one. 73, Dick WC1M _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailma
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-01/msg00207.html (10,485 bytes)

76. Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX Plaques - Who should win them? (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 12:01:31 -0500
I like the idea of awarding plaques, trophies or even medals to the top three finishers in each major geographic category: World, Continent, Country. The awards don't have to be the same: the most ex
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00042.html (14,317 bytes)

77. Re: [CQ-Contest] ETHICS (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 20:20:18 -0400
Excellent questions, Tom. I believe the ARRL General contest rules that apply to this situation are: 2.1.Entrants agree to be bound by the provisions and intent of ARRL contest rules. 2.2.Entrants ag
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-04/msg00074.html (16,428 bytes)

78. Re: [CQ-Contest] ETHICS (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 20:32:14 -0400
I think most of your analysis is correct, but your identification of each station's license class may not be correct. Per my previous post, you can't determine the operating privileges of a US contes
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-04/msg00075.html (14,007 bytes)

79. Re: [CQ-Contest] Ethics (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 10:08:04 -0400
Actually, I was thinking about sponsors using observers during the contest to spot participants transmitting out of band. I don't know whether sponsors use observers on a regular basis, or how they m
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-04/msg00089.html (11,093 bytes)

80. Re: [CQ-Contest] ETHICS (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 10:23:05 -0400
Oops. I missed that (and I looked for it.) Do you know if that was added sometime in the last 25 years? I could have sworn there was a time when the FCC didn't require the control op's call to be inc
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-04/msg00090.html (16,517 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu