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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TRLog\]\s+cabrillo\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. [TRLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: jukka.kulha@nokia.com (jukka.kulha@nokia.com); Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 00:22:30 +0200; Hi all, What is the best way (simple) to change log.dat to cabrillo- format? 73 de Jukka OH2MA; /archives//html/TRLog/2003-01/msg00084.html (6,282 bytes)
2. [TRLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: ve3iay@rac.ca (Richard Ferch); Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 19:01:08 -0500; Take a look at http://www.wt4i.com/ (click on Cabrillo Converter). 73, Rich VE3IAY; /archives//html/TRLog/2003-01/msg00089.html (6,420 bytes)
3. [TRLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: geoiii@kkn.net (George Fremin III - K5TR); Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:12:24 -0800; POST will create a cabrillo file for many of the contests that TR supports. Also you might like the tool logconv http://www.qsl.net/ka5wss/logconv/ I have also found the BV QSL program to be very use; /archives//html/TRLog/2003-01/msg00090.html (6,787 bytes)
4. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: K5NZ@aol.com (K5NZ@aol.com); Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:11:39 EST; Is there a way in TR to convert a Cabrillo log back to a log.dat that TR will read? nz -- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts -- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --; /archives//html/TRLog/2002-12/msg00164.html (6,149 bytes)
5. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: k9mi@arrl.net (Mike Brown); Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:28:11 +0000; Unless you deleted your log.dat, it should be where you left it.=0D =0D 73 - Mike K9MI=0D =0D =0D =0D =0D --Original Message--=0D =0D From: K5NZ@aol.com=0D Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 9:11:25 PM=; /archives//html/TRLog/2002-12/msg00171.html (6,839 bytes)
6. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: w4pa@bellsouth.net (Scott Robbins); Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 22:11:28 -0400; Errr.....am I dense or did I miss something here? Does running POST and selecting the "ARRL recommend format" for processing a log in v6.50 not output logs in Cabrillo? Or is it only available for a; /archives//html/TRLog/2000-07/msg00071.html (7,275 bytes)
7. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: geoiii@kkn.net (George Fremin III - K5TR); Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 20:09:38 -0700; Choose POST C for cabrillo logs. -- George Fremin III Johnson City, Texas "Experiment trumps theory." K5TR (ex.WB5VZL) -- Dave Leeson W6NL geoiii@kkn.net 830-868-2510 http://www.kkn.net/~k5tr -- FAQ; /archives//html/TRLog/2000-07/msg00072.html (7,167 bytes)
8. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: N7DR@arrl.net (D. R. Evans); Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 22:52:53 -0600; FWIW this is all documented much more clearly in the upcoming version of the manual than it has been in the past. Doc N7DR --BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-- Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60 Comment: Key obtain; /archives//html/TRLog/2000-07/msg00073.html (7,860 bytes)
9. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: toms@inconnect.com (Thomas M. Schaefer); Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 13:38:42 -0700; This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --=_NextPart_000_0045_01BF883A.73EDFAC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Is the Cabrillo in 6.48; /archives//html/TRLog/2000-03/msg00024.html (7,948 bytes)
10. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: n6tr@teleport.com (n6tr@teleport.com); Date: 7 Mar 2000 21:05:14 -0000; I think so. Cabrillo isn't required yet anyway and once again, this is a situation where the guy writting the checking software is the same one that wrote POST. Just make sure that it shows all the; /archives//html/TRLog/2000-03/msg00025.html (7,099 bytes)
11. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: Clive_Whelan@compuserve.com (Clive Whelan); Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 18:04:25 -0500; Is the Cabrillo file as produced by POST really a full and acceptable file for CQ WW submission. I can't see how the dupes are visible to the checkers , but the score is certainly the same as results; /archives//html/TRLog/1999-11/msg00005.html (6,953 bytes)
12. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: n6tr@teleport.com (n6tr@teleport.com); Date: 2 Nov 1999 00:13:37 -0000; Maybe - probably. I haven't written the software that reads the file yet, but I don't think there will be any issues (for those who don't know - I write the software used by the CQ WW Contest commit; /archives//html/TRLog/1999-11/msg00007.html (7,228 bytes)
13. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: gbaron@home.com (Gilbert Baron); Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 10:49:39 -0600; NO DUP penalties for electronic logs, since when? I never heard that? Why would there be none? Is it because the contest administrators can throw them out automatically? Is it because by definition; /archives//html/TRLog/1999-11/msg00018.html (8,615 bytes)
14. [TRLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: Clive_Whelan@compuserve.com (Clive Whelan); Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 18:21:36 -0500; << Maybe - probably. >> I see. However I note that the cover sheet does not state the power used as required by the rules, nor is there a signed declaration. I wish I had more confidence. A definitiv; /archives//html/TRLog/1999-11/msg00019.html (6,987 bytes)
15. [TRLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: G3YXX@guildford-physio.demon.co.uk (DAVID W WOOD); Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 06:03:59 GMT0BST1,M3.4.0/02:00,M10.4.0/; Thanks all for the pointers -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/trlogfaq.html Submissions: trlog@contesting.com Administrative requests: trlog-REQUEST@contesting.com Problems: owner-trlog@contes; /archives//html/TRLog/1999-10/msg00079.html (6,343 bytes)
16. [Trlog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: "Mike Wetzel" <mjwetzel@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 21:33:59 -0400; I just sent in Cabrillo logs for the Indiana and NE QSO parties and noticed the Cabrillo is correct (I think) as opposed to the Florida one that didn't have the RST's shown. Now I am not sure which t; /archives//html/TRLog/2009-05/msg00004.html (6,754 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 16
Page: [1]