Mail Archive Search: <+from:w4tv@subich.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:w4tv@subich.com: 169 ]

Total 169 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the SO2R horse... (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 11:30:46 -0400; If you want to limit two radios are you going to prohibit the FT-1000D, FT-9000, IC-7800, Orion, etc. that allows using the second receiver to search for multipliers on a different band? What about a; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00164.html (11,377 bytes)
22. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the SO2R horse... (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 13:14:59 -0400; That's fine ... ask the sponsors to create a new class for those who do not want to compete in the unlimited class. Boxing started as one class, the little guys got together to create their own class; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00172.html (10,320 bytes)
23. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the SO2R horse... (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:50:34 -0400; You're correct ... the point is that it is not particularly popular with many "TS eligible" stations choosing to submit in the broader "single operator" category anyway. 73, ... Joe, W4TV ___________; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00187.html (9,560 bytes)
24. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the ANTENNA OVERKILL horse... (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 17:56:35 -0400; This is totally unenforceable and counter productive ... it would force any 160 meter operator with a second receiver (R4C?) or separate receive antenna (K9AY array?) into the "unlimited" category. S; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00210.html (9,710 bytes)
25. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the ANTENNA OVERKILL horse... (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 19:31:47 -0400; If that's your definition, "Limited Mode" should be defined as a multiband vertical (e.g., flagpole), an endfed wire or a 1/2 wave dipole/inverted V no higher than 50 feet. Anything beyond the most b; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00215.html (9,611 bytes)
26. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the ANTENNA OVERKILL horse... (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 20:34:16 -0400; W6WRT Write: If you are going to create a limited class, make it the lowest common denominator so that everyone has an equal chance. Otherwise you are picking winners and losers ... I would suggest t; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00220.html (9,695 bytes)
27. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 21:14:20 -0400; Each operator picks those tools, techniques and equipment that best fit his situation. One may use SO2R to make up for a less than killer antenna farm ... another may choose big antennas over power .; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00222.html (8,131 bytes)
28. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the ANTENNA OVERKILL horse... (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 22:47:22 -0400; The problem with trying to define a class is you discriminate against certain techniques and attempt to draw a line in the sand. In doing so your definition of limited vs. unlimited would create a gr; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00227.html (10,033 bytes)
29. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 22:57:25 -0400; One can contest every weekend ... and practice with tapes or one of the contest simulators every day. There are even "practices' on Thursday nights many weeks. That still doesn't address the thousand; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00228.html (7,550 bytes)
30. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the ANTENNA OVERKILL horse... (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 23:07:25 -0400; That same top contester also says he started doing SO2R to overcome antenna disadvantages. Are you saying there isn't a 25%, 50% or more difference between the flagpole/endfed wire and stacked triba; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00230.html (10,316 bytes)
31. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 23:49:20 -0400; Bob, We have a basic disagreement on the level of benefit from the second radio. AA5AU's experience is probably right in that SO2R might provide a 40% benefit if one has a compromised antenna system; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00233.html (9,863 bytes)
32. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 02:25:06 -0400; I don't think you can base a judgment on a "sample of one" - particularly a pair of stations that may or may not otherwise be matched and without controlling for other variables. If you grind away f; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00235.html (12,685 bytes)
33. Re: [RTTY] (no subject) (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:57:47 -0400; My current "antenna farm" consists of a multiband vertical for 20/17/15/12/10 and a trap dipole for 80/40/30 at 30' ... that is fairly common, perhaps even advanced, for someone in a HOA or antenna r; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00253.html (10,863 bytes)
34. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the ANTENNA OVERKILL horse... (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 14:07:47 -0400; I'm not arguing that. The first two are obvious significant advantages and have been for 50 years of contesting. The High vs. Low power advantage was perhaps 100% in the early days. However, SO2R wil; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00256.html (12,343 bytes)
35. Re: [RTTY] An open letter to Shelby, K4WW (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 15:38:32 -0400; Unfortunately, this effort to exile SO2R to the ghetto is dead wrong. SOmR has been a fixture of contesting for 30 years that I know about ... I played with SO2R in the late 70's as AD8I in the Colum; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00289.html (11,308 bytes)
36. Re: [RTTY] Two sides (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 21:21:39 -0400; Phil. That's not what I'm saying at all ... What I'm saying is that SO2R is one more tool for the operator. It belongs in the same toolbox as antenna choices, learning propagation, learning how to ef; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00313.html (10,256 bytes)
37. Re: [RTTY] An open letter to Shelby, K4WW (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 22:25:14 -0400; Whether you make a separate category for SO1R or for SO2R the effect is the same. A "SO1R only" category would have the effect of placing any operator who used SO2R is a separate. smaller category. T; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00327.html (10,421 bytes)
38. Re: [RTTY] Two sides (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 22:46:01 -0400; Banning, excluding, or separating that which you do not like, understand or approve is bigotry - that is the definition: "strongly favoring one's own group, ... and intolerant of those who differ." T; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00333.html (8,577 bytes)
39. Re: [RTTY] Two sides (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 22:56:18 -0400; I disagree ... let me turn the argument around: With a directional (gain) antenna you can hear and be heard by two, five, ten times as many stations as you can with a single element (non-gain) antenn; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00334.html (7,884 bytes)
40. Re: [RTTY] SO1R/SO2R listed in combined results? (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 23:38:41 -0400; That's not what your proposal was, nor is it what Shelby is proposing. Voluntary self reporting is not the issue - separate categories is the issue. 73, ... Joe, W4TV ________________________________; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00339.html (7,708 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]