Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:jcplatt1@mmm.com: 108 ]

Total 108 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [VHFcontesting] A question of altitude (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 11:41:46 -0600
Hi Steve. Good question, one that we rovers ask a lot. 6m is different than the higher bands because is almost HF and because most 6m rover antennas are within a wavelength (or closer) to ground, thi
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-03/msg00003.html (8,934 bytes)

42. [VHFcontesting] Microwave Update 2008 - Call for papers (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 11:48:44 -0600
MICROWAVE UPDATE 2008 CALL FOR PAPERS Microwave Update 2008 will be held on Friday, October 17 through Saturday, October 18 in Bloomington, Minnesota. Technical papers are currently being solicited f
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-03/msg00004.html (8,258 bytes)

43. Re: [VHFcontesting] A question of altitude (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 14:42:59 -0600
<snip> For instance, several of the places from which I transmitted in the last contest were close to drops. Look at a bridge. While the antenna may be 13' above the road on which the truck is parked
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-03/msg00013.html (10,484 bytes)

44. Re: [VHFcontesting] Contesting ethics for rovers (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:27:46 -0500
Hi Steve. Good questions. Before I put in my $0.02 worth, I would like to state the usual disclaimer that Sean provides the overall guidance on such questions. With that stated, and regarding the rov
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-03/msg00085.html (8,618 bytes)

45. Re: [VHFcontesting] Contesting ethics for rovers (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 08:27:02 -0500
Hi Tom. What you say was true in 2005, but the Rover rules have been changed and one of the changes was to enable the Family Rule. I am looking forward to working both you and Penny from the rover ..
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-04/msg00001.html (6,835 bytes)

46. Re: [VHFcontesting] Can of worms (formerly Contesting ethics for rovers) (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 09:09:36 -0500
Hi Steve. Again, just my $0.02 worth. The Family Rule says "3.5. A transmitter used to contact one or more stations may not be subsequently used under any other call during the contest period, except
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-04/msg00002.html (8,370 bytes)

47. Re: [VHFcontesting] inverters (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 08:20:56 -0500
My rover is also my commuter car, so my approach is somewhat different. I use the 13.8 vdc from the car's electrical system for all my equipment. No inverters, no generators, no computer logging (I a
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-04/msg00067.html (9,768 bytes)

48. [VHFcontesting] Rovers for June & APRS (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 09:16:43 -0500
Curious as to how many June contest rovers are planning on using APRS and/or how many Multi-ops are planning on using rover APRS data ? If you are using APRS, why ? If you are not using APRS, why not
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00047.html (7,360 bytes)

49. Re: [VHFcontesting] More K4GUN/R plans (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:26:50 -0500
Hi Steve. My experiences with using a "home" freq for roving has been VERY favorable. One key is that when you QSY up the bands that you use YOUR home freq's, NOT the other stations (so that you are
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00088.html (8,277 bytes)

50. [VHFcontesting] January Contest LCR reports (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:01:19 -0500
The League has released the January VHF Contest Log Checking Reports (LCR). The software used for report generation seems to have been updated to show LCR results by band thus making these reports mo
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00101.html (6,864 bytes)

51. [VHFcontesting] Rules for Single-Ops (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:12:31 -0500
Hi Paul, good to work you in the contest this past weekend. It my understanding that the general opinion supported by the League is that a Single-Op can not use any form of operator assistance by ext
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00192.html (9,280 bytes)

52. Re: [VHFcontesting] Rules for Single-Ops (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:39:33 -0500
Hi Chet. I understand your point, I don't disagree. Its my understanding that the League interprets this rule to apply to any situation where a Single-Op gains assistance by some external means other
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00201.html (9,428 bytes)

53. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:56:21 -0500
Snip >I try and stay out of the "Rules Game" and any blogs about our contesting aliments but I must agree with KR1ST, Chris, who suggests removing 6m from the ARRL VHF/UHF contest. My suggestion is n
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00214.html (8,655 bytes)

54. Re: [VHFcontesting] VHF/UHF Weak Signal Resources (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 08:34:45 -0500
Hi Kelly, great questions. UHF and microwave isn't for those who are looking for a good rag chew at any hour of the day, thats for sure. It is a different type of challenge with its own rewards that
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00269.html (10,786 bytes)

55. Re: [VHFcontesting] distance scoring (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:01:22 -0500
Perhaps a serious proposal, rather than a petition, is needed. 6m is a "problem" with distance based scoring. Also, what is the emphasis for working the higher bands ? There are details that need to
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00318.html (8,383 bytes)

56. Re: [VHFcontesting] 222 and 144 sporadic E in contest (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:46:26 -0500
That is awesome Paul. During the 2m E's I tried 222 twice with K5TR , EM00 to EN34, and on the first attempt I heard a "ping" of "5TR" that got me very excited. It may have been a meteor, it may have
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00335.html (7,038 bytes)

57. Re: [VHFcontesting] IC-706 Cross Mode Operation (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:43:42 -0500
Hi Tom. I am no help on the '706. Some radios use lower sideband for CW mode, hence the problem. I do know that the FT857/897 series uses USB which makes CW <-> SSB cross mode contacts much easier. T
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00396.html (7,251 bytes)

58. Re: [VHFcontesting] Compact VHF+ beams (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 08:31:23 -0500
Some great ideas ! Along the same lines of trying to get 6, 2 and 432 on one small boom antenna, here is the idea that I have been dabbling with. I have a partially working prototype. The antenna is
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00415.html (9,924 bytes)

59. Re: [VHFcontesting] Better late than never, K9ZF/R June VHF recap (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:46:32 -0500
Hello Nate, Dan and all. I have a similar problem (apparent oscillation & power output) with my FT897 in the rover on 6m. When we run 100 watts to a 6m antenna that is only 8 to 12' away from the rad
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-07/msg00101.html (8,401 bytes)

60. [VHFcontesting] ROVERMANIA V, its here !! (score: 1)
Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:35:06 -0500
I have said this once, I have said this five times, the ARRL UHF contest is the ultimate contest for roving. You can leave those big 6m and 2m antennas at home, awesome signals are often found on 222
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-07/msg00375.html (8,860 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu