Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 10:58:43 -0800
Yes, those are the contests I was thinking of. The ARRL sponsored the VH/UHF Spring Sprints from 1983 to 1998, when they dropped the contest for lack of participation. The Contest Scores Database has
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 15:00:17 -0700
50 MHz Sprint Contest Dates : 12-May-07, 13-May-07 Callsign Used : K5TR Station : K5TR Operator : WM5R Category : Single Operator Country : United States Section : South Texas (STX) BAND Raw QSOs Val
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 05:30:54 -0700
It is not clear to me from the original post whether the complainant was someone who was operating on 50.125 or some other "frequency cop" who was not actually making contacts on any frequency, but j
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 07:47:19 -0700
This may or may not be true, depending on the level of activity in your part of the country. In parts of the country where the population density on VHF+ is not so dense, the QRM from sharing a chann
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 11:26:00 -0700
I agree - it was by far the worst six meter propagation I've experienced in the 10 years I've done this contest. don't have the log in front of me to double-check) to Florida in the first hour of the
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 07:48:03 -0700
Actually, the change from Cabrillo 2.0 to Cabrillo 3.0 was at least mentioned on this reflector back in January: http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2007-01/msg00066.html http://
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 07:26:50 -0700
Today is the deadline for ARRL June VHF Contest log submissions: http://www.arrl.org/contests/rules/2007/june-vhf.html -- Kenneth E. Harker WM5R kenharker@kenharker.com http://www.kenharker.com/ ____
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 10:13:20 -0700
I don't think those of us opposed to your ideas necessarily fail to understand them. This is a bad idea if there's a network of nodes that repeats the information on to those stations that would not
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 07:09:06 -0700
Yeah - it's all pretty crazy, isn't it? That's why we should outlaw the use of all spotting systems in contests. -- Kenneth E. Harker WM5R kenharker@kenharker.com http://www.kenharker.com/ __________
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 05:25:27 -0700
I guess a place to start would be to ban the prearrangement before the contest period of scheduled contacts. If you find someone on the air and want to run through the bands, or decide to try the hig
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 12:22:35 -0700
Reminds me of the "long distance cordless telephone" problems of 2001: http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter/01/0601/ -- Kenneth E. Harker WM5R kenharker@kenharker.com http://www.kenharker.com/ ____________
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 14:32:52 -0700
For new radios, the Elecraft K2. You can buy/build the QRP version of the radio (no need for 100W on HF), and depending on the options you get, it will be under $1000/radio, smaller form factor, supp
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 16:04:12 -0700
If size is a consideration, you can buy Kenwood TS-50s for ~$400-$450 used. You might have to use a DEMI AOS-28 or something to interface them to transverters, though. I can't think of anyone I know
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:07:28 -0800
That depends. The "HF Contesting - Good Practices, Interpretations and Suggestions" document release by the Contest Advisory Committee covers this in section 7: http://www.arrl.org/contests/hf-faq.ht
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 09:49:34 -0800
This is ridiculous. There is nothing shameful in operating M/L and doing well. Stations in Chicagoland or Texas, for example, will never be able to compete for victory in the M/U class simply because
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 16:21:55 -0800
The separation of the rovers into two classes is a very recent (as in this month) change in the rules. In previous contests, there was only one rover category. It's not an afterthought - it's a very
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 07:31:45 -0800
Your subject line is quite prescient - too many turn to the internet during contests because it's easier than actually using the radio. Except for the EME contest (and I think that was a deplorable r
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 08:50:13 -0800
... Actually, this is being debated rather vigorously on the CQ-Contest reflector this month (see various discussion threads about getscores.org): http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/CQ-Contes
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:31:40 -0800
My understanding is that part of the reforms in contest coverage/promotion that have already begun (see the February, 2008 QST) within the ARRL Contest Branch will be to do just that. The rules were
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 05:45:18 -0800
Let me see if I've translated this properly - we need more VHF QSO fodder, just not those filthy HFers (who seem to have figured out how to get a lot more people operating their contests with all tho