Mail Archive Search: <+from:aldermant at alltel.net>

Results:

References: [ +from:aldermant: 359 ] [ at (Too many documents hit. Ignored) ] [ alltel.net: 366 ]

Total 194 documents matching your query.

121. [SECC] GQP - April 8 and 9 (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 18:23:41 -0500; The members of the SECC and SEDXC have really come through on plaque sponsorship for this years GQP. We have 10 new plaque sponsors and 5 sponsors who have come through again to sponsor their plaque; /archives//html/SECC/2006-03/msg00136.html (9,410 bytes)
122. [SECC] WRTC 2006 Brazil (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 04:28:11 -0500; Congratulations John. As one of the BEST contesters in this country, you certainly deserve this honor. Tom - W4BQF; /archives//html/SECC/2006-03/msg00164.html (7,678 bytes)
123. [SECC] ARRL DX 06 (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 21:45:36 -0500; Spent most of the week getting up a new 20m wire EDZ yagi. Did not finish the switching until after the contest started and was just too bushed to do any contesting Friday night. The wire yagi worked; /archives//html/SECC/2006-02/msg00068.html (7,749 bytes)
124. [SECC] GQP rules (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 11:25:33 -0500; Not sure how that could make much difference? 1800Z = 1 pm EST local time or 2 pm EDST local time Using GMT/UTC/Z is pretty much universal for all contest. Tom - W4BQF; /archives//html/SECC/2005-12/msg00007.html (7,719 bytes)
125. [SECC] GQP Plaques (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 15:10:13 -0500; Yes. The plaque that you sponsored, 1st Place, USA/VE QRP, was sent to WA4PGM for the highest score in that category. I hope you will sponsor that plaque for the 2006 GQP? Tom - W4BQF; /archives//html/SECC/2005-12/msg00031.html (6,651 bytes)
126. [SECC] GQP changes (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 08:36:38 -0500; Savage, et al, You have a good point about requiring a minimum number of participants per class/category. And I agree with changing the minimum number of participants to setting a minimum number of Q; /archives//html/SECC/2005-12/msg00076.html (11,223 bytes)
127. [SECC] GQP Rules (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 10:53:08 -0500; I vote YES for this. I vote YES for this. I vote YES for this. Great work Mike... 73, Tom - W4BQF; /archives//html/SECC/2005-12/msg00143.html (10,792 bytes)
128. [SECC] [SEDXC] More Notes on 40M (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:43:52 -0500; This certainly seems to continue for this year also. Between about 6:30 to 7:15 am, I have been working both Asia and some western Eu stations with pretty decent regularity for the past three to four; /archives//html/SECC/2005-12/msg00171.html (9,900 bytes)
129. [SECC] [SEDXC] More Notes on 40M (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 18:13:22 -0500; Nope, didnt hear the 9Y1. Here is a partial list of 40m QSO's in the 1100 to 1200 UTC time range over the past two weeks: LR5U - HS1 - HS0 - G0 - SM3 - TF3 - 9N7JO - UN9 - UA9, etc. They are not very; /archives//html/SECC/2005-12/msg00173.html (11,569 bytes)
130. [SECC] '05 SS (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 20:32:44 -0500; No excuses. SCORE SUMMARY == SCORE = 96792 POINTS = 1308 MULTIPLIERS = 74 BAND QSO'S DUPS POINTS SCORE -- -- -- -- -- 160 0 0 0 0 80 59 0 118 118 40 274 0 548 548 20 321 0 642 642 15 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00054.html (6,349 bytes)
131. [SECC] Info: SS (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 13:49:29 -0500; '05 SS Time = 14 hours SOHP Tom - W4BQF; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00071.html (5,831 bytes)
132. [SECC] Discussion: GQP (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 20:00:02 -0500; This is to invoke some discussion about the GQP and not intended as a proposal nor to usurp the club officers agenda. I have taken over obtaining and distribution of the GQP contest plaques from Jay/; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00078.html (8,626 bytes)
133. [SECC] GQP rules (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 14:00:24 -0500; Members, Please ignore my inappropriate email concerning the status of the GQP rules. I have mistakenly forgotten the GQP is now in the hands of a proven and capable leader. When a discussion about t; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00099.html (6,123 bytes)
134. [SECC] Circle AGAIN! (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 19:51:02 -0500; I really hate to bring this subject again. Where can I find the information on what SECC circle is used for which contest? Thanks. Tom - W4BQF; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00119.html (6,743 bytes)
135. [SECC] SECC Circle (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 21:34:42 -0500; Thanks Andy and Ed. Before asking the question, I did go back and read the constitution and the by-laws, but that is basically why I asked the question. There is nothing, that I can find on the web s; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00124.html (6,382 bytes)
136. [SECC] Circle AGAIN! (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 12:38:12 -0500; Thanks John. Tom - W4BQF; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00129.html (8,810 bytes)
137. [SECC] 2005 SS Question (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 10:46:43 -0500; Since I was not 'in the circle' this year for CW SS and I submitted my cabrillo log with SECC as the club, should I resubmit it with SECC deleted? I don't know how that works with the ARRL bots? Tom; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00182.html (6,169 bytes)
138. [SECC] CQ WW (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 21:16:21 -0500; Not a good time to 'play'! My 80m dipole worked like a wet-noodle this year. Tried 'assisted' category for the first time, but should not have in this contest as I had better rates on 20m running rat; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00274.html (6,765 bytes)
139. [SECC] CQ WW and such (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 13:44:02 -0500; Maybe my little 80m dipole was not acting like a 'wet noodle' after all? Reading about everyone's experiences seems like I was right in there with you! I only managed one good run on 20m Sunday morni; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00289.html (7,710 bytes)
140. [SECC] K4LW Post (score: 99): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 17:23:40 -0500; BE CAREFUL!!!! The post by K4LW may have a virus in it. That 'zip' file included with his post should NOT be opened. Best thing to do is delete it, without opening it, from your hard disk! It looks v; /archives//html/SECC/2005-11/msg00295.html (7,063 bytes)

Current List: 121 - 140
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]