Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[ct\-user\]\s+WPX\s+M\/S\s+Rules\s+and\s+Contest\s+Software\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [ct-user] WPX M/S Rules and Contest Software (score: 1)
Author: i4ufh@libero.it (Fabio I4UFH)
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 23:22:33 +0100
Hi Kenny, I remember well that the rules were adapted to use M/M configurations in = the Contest Programs,but the way that=20 you suggest ( using M/M setup and respecting the M/S 10min rules ) is = n
/archives//html/CT-User/2002-03/msg00048.html (12,483 bytes)

2. [ct-user] WPX M/S Rules and Contest Software (score: 1)
Author: n5nj@gte.net (Bob Naumann - N5NJ)
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 21:32:08 -0600
This strikes me as though not enough thought was given to the new rule. This is a logistical nightmare for the entrants as well as the log checkers. What's the point? Multipliers in WPX? Give me a br
/archives//html/CT-User/2002-03/msg00052.html (13,187 bytes)

3. [ct-user] WPX M/S Rules and Contest Software (score: 1)
Author: k2kw@prodigy.net (K2KW)
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:54:33 -0800
station I was involved in a competitive M/S from Jamaica in 2000 & 2001. The first was a classic M/S - 1 transmitter, 2 ops. In 2001, we had a MULT station per the new rules AND used packet, with 4
/archives//html/CT-User/2002-03/msg00053.html (9,163 bytes)

4. [ct-user] WPX M/S Rules and Contest Software (score: 1)
Author: Timo" <timo.klimoff@kolumbus.fi (Timo)
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:21:43 +0200
On the second day there is really hard to find new multipliers (at multiplier station), so it was quite boring to listen at mult station on Sunday evening (M/S). See you from ES9C (M/M) 73 Timo OH1N
/archives//html/CT-User/2002-03/msg00055.html (7,948 bytes)

5. [ct-user] WPX M/S Rules and Contest Software (score: 1)
Author: kwolff@charter.net (Ken Wolff)
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 09:33:59 -0500
I asked N8BJQ about this and got the following reply: Ken My original intent as by transmitter but that appears to be quite difficult to implement. I will be happy with numbers per band. Thanks Steve
/archives//html/CT-User/2002-03/msg00061.html (14,001 bytes)

6. [ct-user] WPX M/S Rules and Contest Software (score: 1)
Author: n5nj@gte.net (Bob Naumann - N5NJ)
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 08:41:37 -0600
Clearly, the per-band numbering scheme makes the most sense. The only potential problem is if the station has two rigs on one band, but that's their "problem" to resolve. We're doing numbers per band
/archives//html/CT-User/2002-03/msg00062.html (16,581 bytes)

7. [ct-user] WPX M/S Rules and Contest Software (score: 1)
Author: nf4a@knology.net (NF4A)
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:16:51 -0600
Am I missing something somewhere? Wouldn't numbers by transmitter be simple to do? Charlie NF4A (getting ready for m/s ssb wpx)
/archives//html/CT-User/2002-03/msg00063.html (7,417 bytes)

8. [ct-user] WPX M/S Rules and Contest Software (score: 1)
Author: n5nj@gte.net (n5nj@gte.net)
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 13:40:39 -0500
I think it would be a problem when transmitter one was on 15 meters and worked 350 stations there but is now tuning for multipliers on 20 meters. Transmitter two is now running on 15 meters but only
/archives//html/CT-User/2002-03/msg00064.html (7,571 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu