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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+RTTY\s+RU\s+\-\s+poor\s+band\s+condx\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] RTTY RU - poor band condx (score: 1): Author: RLVZ@aol.com; Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 16:32:56 -0500 (EST); It sure is amazing that we have so many people reporting "poor band condx" when the SSI was around 200. I too... thought the condx were terrible considering the SSI number. Makes me wonder if 20-10m.; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-01/msg00119.html (6,768 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] RTTY RU - poor band condx (score: 1): Author: "WW3S" <ww3s@zoominternet.net>; Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 18:10:17 -0500; _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-01/msg00145.html (8,137 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] RTTY RU - poor band condx (score: 1): Author: "Don Hill AA5AU" <aa5au@bellsouth.net>; Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 18:11:32 -0600; Actually at 0546Z on the 5th it was SFI=215 A=6 K=1 and by the end of the contest it was SFI=218 A=4 K=1. So on Sunday prime time, propagation "should" have been good on 10 and 15 meters. As Jay ment; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-01/msg00156.html (9,586 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] RTTY RU - poor band condx (score: 1): Author: David Cole <dave@nk7z.net>; Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 09:49:17 -0800; Big earth facing flare underway is why... -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setups and reviews see: www.nk7z.net for MixW support see; http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mixw/info for D; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-01/msg00183.html (8,820 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]