Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Why\s+the\s+10\s+min\s+rule\s+anyway\?\s*$/: 31 ]

Total 31 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: KI9A@aol.com
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:04:51 EDT
Excuse my ignorance, and, not condoning the recent DQ's. But, what is the idea behind the 10 min rule for M/S, anyway? It's still a single transmitter, just multiple operators. What makes this any di
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00282.html (7,033 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: k3bu@optimum.net
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 11:47:54 +0000 (GMT)
_______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00285.html (7,833 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: David Pruett <k8cc@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:50:04 -0400
Chuck, The answer is pretty simple. To prevent a multi-transmitter station from using it's full capabilities to enter a category where the number of transmitters in simultaenous use is limited (multi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00333.html (7,726 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: "Davor Kucelin" <davor.kucelin@plavalaguna.hr>
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 14:52:49 +0200
Chuck, Very simple, M/S can work only multiplayers on other band. M/2 can work anyqso on 2 bands. M/M can work anyone anywhere Dave 9A1UN _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest ma
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00002.html (7,744 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: "RW4WZ" <rw4wz@udm.net>
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 10:31:44 +0500
And SOAB could work any qso on 5 bands with out the restrictions of 10 min rule Why ? It seems for me because Contest committee TRUST to single operators and DO NOT TRUST to people who are participa
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00007.html (9,284 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 11:14:35 -0400
Sorry Larry, but the fact remains that several Multi-Multi stations in different contests got caught trying to get around the spirit, if not the letter, of the Multi-Single category. I agree in princ
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00010.html (11,447 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 10:25:25 -0800
We all like to talk about things being in the "spirit of the rule." However, the 'spirit' is often open to interpretation by each participant! At the top tier multi-multi and multi-single efforts, th
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00011.html (13,728 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 16:55:45 -0400
C'mon Randy, that's an easy one. A multi-single station can only have one operational station (single transceiver, or transmitter/receiver combo) on the air either listening or transmitting at any on
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00020.html (16,033 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: "K1TTT" <K1TTT@ARRL.NET>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 21:56:30 +0000
not so... be 'on the air', on which band... or both. How many vfo's can be in that radio? How about if I use a single ft-1000mp, can I split out the sub rx headphone audio and have a second set of e
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00021.html (10,460 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: steve.root@culligan4water.com
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 22:51:55 +0000
If you have more than one signal present on one band, the FCC considers at one of them to be spurious and therefore illegal. That's a bigger deal than a contest rule. Now how many of you have heard M
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00022.html (14,441 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 20:36:53 -0400
Just to be clear, there's no "10-minute rule" or other band-change rule in sweepstakes. There is a "1 transmitted signal at any time" rule that makes a M/2 or M/M which uses a single transmitted sign
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00023.html (8,803 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 22:10:18 -0400
And this is exactly the problem. Nit pick and search for loopholes, all for reasons to really run a M/2 or M/M under the guise of an M/S/ One radio on the air at a time... that is, for a given period
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00025.html (12,674 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 22:37:08 -0400
Before making pronouncements about the spirit or intent of the M/S category, a look back at the history of that category might have been useful. The once and future "10-minute rule" being discussed o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00027.html (9,735 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: KI9A@aol.com
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 22:52:47 EDT
AMEN! That's my WHOLE point the whole time.. 73- Chuck KI9A In a message dated 8/2/2009 9:48:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, wn3vaw@verizon.net writes: One radio on the air at a time... that is, for a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00028.html (8,963 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 22:59:35 -0400
If that were actually true wouldn't it have put a damper on a lot of Field Day operations by now? Or are you going to try to tell us that the FCC considers different modes to be different bands as we
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00029.html (8,994 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: "k6ufo@arrl.net" <k6ufo@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 20:19:19 -0700 (PDT)
Errr... Before jumping to this conclusion, you might need more information. For example, I know a club station that has hosted TWO single operators at its building during Sweepstakes. Each operator u
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00030.html (8,811 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 00:29:04 -0400
Fine. I wasn't active at the time, so if the original intent of the CQ WW M/S category was to allow a "multiplier hunting" station, so be it -- for that contest. I'm not looking for a "straw man" to
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00031.html (12,567 bytes)

18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: steve.root@culligan4water.com
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 12:52:03 +0000
Good point. Now you have me thinking.....I was sure that you couldn't transmit two signals on the same band/mode. Maybe it's true if they both were sending the same information at the same time. I gu
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00037.html (9,491 bytes)

19. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: "Milt, N5IA" <n5ia@zia-connection.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 09:19:31 -0700
I note that no one has yet responded to the quiery about the 2 receiver transceivers. In my career in Amateur Radio, I was taught and have always heard that "rig" referred to a transmitter, not the r
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00040.html (12,912 bytes)

20. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 16:55:06 -0400
What is this "time slicing" concept? -73 de Mike N3LI - _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00043.html (9,711 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu