Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+JARTS\s+Observations\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+JARTS\s+Observations\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] JARTS Observations (score: 1): Author: K0BX <k0bx@arrl.net>; Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 01:21:57 +0000; I was in and out of the contest all weekend and only made about 200 QSO's but here are a few observations: 1. There was one station with a big signal running the frequency. I guess the operator was n; /archives//html/RTTY/2007-10/msg00413.html (8,271 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] JARTS Observations (score: 1): Author: "Tom - KE1JF" <ke1jf@cox.net>; Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:52:19 -0400; I know that my primary station log has the option to spot each contact when it is entered. If that was the case & the operator wasn't watching the telnet they wouldn't even know it. 73, Tom, KE1JF __; /archives//html/RTTY/2007-10/msg00416.html (7,698 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] JARTS Observations (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>; Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:45:51 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- As always, the best approach to jammers is to ignore them completely and just keep operating. Do not answer them and do not QSY. Try to time your transmission so; /archives//html/RTTY/2007-10/msg00443.html (7,462 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]