Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:w2ev@arrl.net: 243 ]

Total 243 documents matching your query.

101. [VHFcontesting] 2m Fall Sprint Tomorrow night! -- Thanks! (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 19:31:29 -0400
Hi folks, I've been straightened out. The answer is "Yes", it's tomorrow. 7-11pm. For what it's worth...I'll be putting my 4x Halo's to work with higher power than I ran in the September VHF contest
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-09/msg00110.html (6,948 bytes)

102. [VHFcontesting] Ready for January VHF SS? (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:18:34 -0500
If not...maybe this will help: http://VHFGroup.RochesterNY.org | Downloads Broadband users should try the "Medium" bandwidth version. Dial-up users should try the "Low" bandwidth version. This is str
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00005.html (7,154 bytes)

103. [VHFcontesting] Stupid Categories [was:Are you ready for the JanuarySS??] (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:28:42 -0500
Folks, The wrong thing to do is create ANY category that restricts the number of bands one may use to compete with. U-s-e i-t o-r l-o-s-e i-t. This is absolute truth. Don't sell the entire hobby away
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00015.html (8,301 bytes)

104. Re: [VHFcontesting] Re: [Rover] Stupid Categories [was:Are you ready forthe January SS??] (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 19:00:11 -0500
Exactly...but here's the problem with the category: It's basic premise is that it is MULTI-OPERATOR. If you limit anything, it should be the number of operators, not the number of bands. Limited Mul
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00019.html (9,151 bytes)

105. Re: [VHFcontesting] Re: [Rover] Stupid Categories [was:Are you ready forthe January SS??] (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 19:04:41 -0500
When UPS took 220-222 MHz, they cited ARRL contest summaries as proof of the overall lack of use of the frequencies. When I decide what bands to add to my station, I use ARRL contest summaries to de
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00020.html (8,729 bytes)

106. [VHFcontesting] Re: [Rover] Stupid Categories [was:Are you ready for the January SS??] (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 19:29:03 -0500
Hi Dave, I think you are selling yourself short. You are one of the most driven (pun, I know) rover advocates that I know. Surely you realize that -- just like our counterparts in Track and Field, it
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00021.html (9,260 bytes)

107. [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes [was: Stupid Categories ...] (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 20:22:06 -0500
The solution can be trivial to implement...try this on for size: A categorizing system based upon an ERP-factor as follows: o Antenna: number of elements o RF Output: PEP output Multiply (number of e
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00022.html (10,465 bytes)

108. Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes [was:Stupid Categories ...] (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:09:22 -0500
Yes, of course you're right but it's easier to count antenna elements than it is to remember the length of a boom (and is much more auditable by simple independent observation). Additionally, element
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00025.html (10,188 bytes)

109. [VHFcontesting] Idita-Rover....Brilliant! (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:53:55 -0500
I've often wondered what could be accomplished by someone who took the "Snowbelt to Sunshine Turnpike" in January. Now THAT would be an adventure! Shameless plug: Imagine having your laptop (or Palm)
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00026.html (7,932 bytes)

110. Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:31:11 -0500
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't follow this. How would I be discouraged from building a better antenna system? I'd see it as making sure that the station was well-tuned for the antenna syste
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00031.html (9,508 bytes)

111. Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:58:01 -0500
Dana Rawding asked: Easy...how many elements were you USING? Multi-band L-P's are typically viewed as 3-element beams, right? The "most resonant element" + the "one behind and one in front" is the ru
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00032.html (9,802 bytes)

112. Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 21:52:57 -0500
Duane, for what it's worth...you are an AWESOME force in Wisc! Even without being HP! According to the June VHF QSO Party 2003 and January VHF SS 2003 results...you beat all other single operator sta
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00036.html (10,094 bytes)

113. Re: [VHFcontesting] Creating new categories for rovers (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 22:40:42 -0500
Bravo, Bill! More bands = more score. More bands = more protection against band-loss to other interests. Well thought out rules should encourage the use of more bands...not artificially limit partici
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00039.html (7,508 bytes)

114. Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 23:09:40 -0500
Hi Jim, As you've pointed out with one example, there are many things that can affect outcome. The point of my proposal is that the present way to categorize LP/HP SingleOps is seriously flawed (exam
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00041.html (8,536 bytes)

115. Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for ERP-based EntryClasses[was:Stupid Categories ...] (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:43:22 -0500
Yet, RF output is the wrong way to calculate entry category. It must be ERP based. Under today's rules... o 201-watts into a 4-element beam is HP o 199-watts into 4x 18xxx is LP This is the wrong way
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00067.html (10,350 bytes)

116. Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:49:20 -0500
It's about making the categories more meaningful (see my previous email that shows how flawed the present power-only system is). A secondary benefit is that of assuring one's system is as tuned up as
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00068.html (11,606 bytes)

117. Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes [was:Stupid Categories ...] (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:57:26 -0500
You really need to spend more time *not* impuning my motives, Kenneth. I am not "trying to encourage people not to invest in big antenna systems". I am offering a fairer way to categorize HP and LP
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00069.html (9,079 bytes)

118. Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:12:05 -0500
Considering 8-watts of 3456 energy into 448 elements is certainly a LOT of ERP, then I'd say that one deserves to be categorized HP. On the other hand, if one wanted to be categorized LP, then simply
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00070.html (10,828 bytes)

119. [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for Limiting MultiOps [was: A suggestion for ERP-basedEntry Classes] (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:22:29 -0500
And this is the wrong message to be sending when the ARRL is expending a significant amount of effort in trying to protect our uWave bands. Think about this: o Donate to the spectrum defense fund o C
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00071.html (9,420 bytes)

120. [VHFcontesting] Encouraging uWave activity [was:A suggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes] (score: 1)
Author: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:54:32 -0500
Ok, Kenneth...let's take a different tack on this...you said... You operate from South Texas. According to the ARRL, theis is the activity above 432 MHz for each contest above in 2002/3: January 4 of
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-12/msg00072.html (10,383 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu