Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:k1mk@alum.mit.edu: 78 ]

Total 78 documents matching your query.

61. Re: [CQ-Contest] Borrowing Callsign/Control Operator (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 21:46:37 -0400
The rule says, "regardless of the type of control". Wouldn't it be kind of hard to be "right there at the rig" when operating under remote control? The control operator is still required to "ensure t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00132.html (8,454 bytes)

62. Re: [CQ-Contest] FW: Borrowing Callsigns (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:26:13 -0400
It's not a primary station location; it's your mailing address. The FCC dropped station location from the license form back in 1993 <http://p1k.arrl.org/cgi-bin/topdf.cgi?id=89905&pub=qst> 73, Mike K
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00145.html (7,648 bytes)

63. Re: [CQ-Contest] Compilation of announced IARU HQ operations? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:03:58 -0400
That's last year's list Try this one <http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2009/07/06/10947/?nc=1> _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http:/
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00100.html (8,963 bytes)

64. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 20:36:53 -0400
Just to be clear, there's no "10-minute rule" or other band-change rule in sweepstakes. There is a "1 transmitted signal at any time" rule that makes a M/2 or M/M which uses a single transmitted sign
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00023.html (8,803 bytes)

65. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 22:37:08 -0400
Before making pronouncements about the spirit or intent of the M/S category, a look back at the history of that category might have been useful. The once and future "10-minute rule" being discussed o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00027.html (9,735 bytes)

66. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 22:59:35 -0400
If that were actually true wouldn't it have put a damper on a lot of Field Day operations by now? Or are you going to try to tell us that the FCC considers different modes to be different bands as we
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00029.html (8,994 bytes)

67. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 19:40:59 -0400
Well, for that contest and for WPX, WAE, AA, RDXC... Major contests in which one means two are fairly common. Maybe it's because the contests in which one doesn't mean two (in the M/S category) are m
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00048.html (10,231 bytes)

68. Re: [CQ-Contest] Re : Log Analysis. (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 09:13:48 -0400
If there's a problem here, I don't think it's a 2nd or "mult" station problem. Unlike all other categories, there's no explicit "one signal at any one time" or "one signal per band" rule for M/S in C
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00378.html (7,642 bytes)

69. Re: [CQ-Contest] Club Scores? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:54:22 -0500
Maybe that's because in CQWW the whole score from a multi-op is not credited to one single club but rather a pro-rated fraction of the score goes to the clubs to which each operator belongs. OTOH, AR
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00071.html (10,322 bytes)

70. Re: [CQ-Contest] Deleted ARRL sections (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2009 07:49:36 -0500
The South Carolina section was split off from the "GA-SC-etc." section in time for the 1937 Sweepstakes. (and yes, that's how that section was listed in the SS results in QST!) Georgia and West Indie
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00142.html (8,984 bytes)

71. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL sections in 1930 (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:29:36 -0500
In 1926, when the ARRL Board created sections as the field organization of the Communication Department, places that did not operate under United State or Canadian radio laws were included in the div
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00170.html (8,898 bytes)

72. Re: [CQ-Contest] Deleted ARRL sections (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 10:26:34 -0500
Okay, then how about the the Utah-Wyoming section? If Czechoslovakia ceased to exist then Utah-Wyoming must have ceased to exist as a section when it was split into two new section? According to that
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00171.html (9,782 bytes)

73. Re: [CQ-Contest] Whatever Happened to Don Miller? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:17:01 -0500
Don't know if it indicates that his image has been officially rehabilitated or not but check out "Piling On" in Correspondence in QST for Nov 2008 <http://p1k.arrl.org/cgi-bin/topdf.cgi?id=134982&pub
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-01/msg00159.html (8,590 bytes)

74. Re: [CQ-Contest] IARU log checking report (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Keane, K1MK" <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 18:30:14 -0400
Yeah, this topic aperiodically resurfaces as it is confusing. Bottom line is what we refer to as ITU zones in amateur radio, are not the official ITU HFBC CIRAF zones. The history behind this is that
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-06/msg00100.html (13,792 bytes)

75. Re: [CQ-Contest] IARU HF zones (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Keane, K1MK" <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 07:35:50 -0400
I'd thought this would be a recurring subject but not that it would recur quite so soon :-) See: <http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-06/msg00100.html> Once again the present c
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00092.html (19,599 bytes)

76. Re: [CQ-Contest] IARU HF zones (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Keane, K1MK" <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 07:45:47 -0400
In 1996, G4BWP of the RSGB's HF Committee made a proposal at the 1996 Region 1 General Conference Tel Aviv that a common set of boundaries be identified for the "ITU regions as used in amateur radio"
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00107.html (9,822 bytes)

77. Re: [CQ-Contest] History of Low Power Category (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Keane, K1MK" <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 19:00:53 -0400
Speaking of ARRL November Sweepstakes specifically, the chronology of the Low Category/Class goes like this: 1930 - In the beginning there were no power classes. 1934 - For the fifth running of Sweep
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-09/msg00150.html (9,923 bytes)

78. Re: [CQ-Contest] WWVB: What time is it? You mean now? (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Keane, K1MK" <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 09:13:50 -0400
I suggest that before going off half cocked on this that someone look at what CONGRESS has in their budget resolution! In the budget labyrinth, the "d/issemination of U.S. time and frequency via the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2018-08/msg00184.html (12,273 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu