Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:w8ji@w8ji.com: 132 ]

Total 132 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] Level Playing Field - my 2 cents (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 11:27:08 -0400
All this envy of the east coast puzzles me. Anyone else with any room and a good rural location in the SE could do as good as the east coast. I don't see a reason for a rule change when a little work
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-06/msg00227.html (8,782 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Level Playing Field - my 2 cents (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:55:34 -0400
I agree. Distance is NOT the only problem. There are propagation issues at work for different paths. K3LR is on the Ohio border!!! K3LR is not by any stretch of the imagination an east coast station.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-06/msg00247.html (10,663 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] engineering talent needed (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 19:39:37 -0400
Hey Barry, are you saying we are lids down here? I resemble that remark. If we can get the emotions and people out of this and use technology and logic, we can sort through potential improvements. I
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-06/msg00255.html (9,436 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Level Playing Field - my 2 cents (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 09:46:57 -0400
One thing about racing is people learn to take a licking without excuses. Whining and moaning doesn't go far. No one tolerates it, and that probably is why I have such a low tolerance for it. This i
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-06/msg00262.html (11,268 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Level Playing Field (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:45:22 -0400
It is woefully apparent the actual path in relation to magnetic poles makes as much or more difference than the path length does. Also I'm 100% sure distance is not a linear problem. A distance corr
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-06/msg00270.html (8,933 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Level Playing Field - my 2 cents (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:04:54 -0400
Approximate distances to Germany: Ma 3800 WPa (K3LR) 4150 Mn 4400 Wi 4400 IL 4500 Mid GA 4700 Doesn't seem like distance is the main issue to me. 73 Tom _____________________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-06/msg00271.html (9,365 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Level Playing Field - my 2 cents (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 21:15:33 -0400
This is how well thought out this has been. W9RE is around 300 miles closer to Germany than I am. I have vastly better propagation, but would get an edge over Mike. Why would anyone want that? The pa
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-06/msg00275.html (10,317 bytes)

8. [CQ-Contest] Distance scoring (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:22:07 -0400
I'm amazed this thing is being pushed so hard without any science to back the opinion that a distance problem really exists or that it can be corrected or reduced by some forced change in rules. This
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-06/msg00289.html (9,423 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Level Playing Field - my 2 cents (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 10:00:09 -0400
Exactly. Path is more important than distance, yet this has been illogically been driven by the incorrect assumption distance is the primary problem. Based on what happens here and looking at skimme
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-06/msg00290.html (9,519 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] arrl correction factor (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:01:40 -0400
Disclaimer, this is not what I usually work with so I am open to corrections by those more experienced. Martin, Distance, without things like path problems, is by the inverse of the square of distanc
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00003.html (10,721 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX "Leveling, Handicapping, Equalizing" (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 19:24:10 -0400
Any valid adjustment based on previous score data to level the field would require operators and antennas to be the same. There is a total lack of useful data to do anything based on previous scores,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00030.html (13,604 bytes)

12. [CQ-Contest] Why not do a test?? (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 10:34:29 -0400
Scores are a product of many factors that are entirely the responsibility of the person controlling the operation. We want to take propagation out of the equation. The only way to do that is to deter
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00042.html (11,005 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why not do a test?? (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 16:31:40 -0400
The existing transmitting beacons are useless unless they use standard antennas properly oriented at similar site types and they are in useful general locations in the USA. Reverse beacons with us us
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00052.html (15,108 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] path loss per hop (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 17:15:13 -0400
The two major problems with comparing two or three complex stations on one weekend, or even several weekends, is that none of us really know how those stations actually work. We might know how model
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00055.html (9,586 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why not do a test?? (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 17:26:25 -0400
Hi Bob, I don't think it is a problem to use anything that exists if it is useful and does not take more time. Is that system really useful? Are the beacons on all bands? Are they in the right locati
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00057.html (18,632 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX "Leveling, Handicapping, Equalizing" (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 21:37:29 -0400
That's a very good point Mike. The USA is just too big. Maybe it needs divided into different top ten zones. _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contest
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00061.html (19,305 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX "Leveling, Handicapping, Equalizing" (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2011 12:52:40 -0400
The oldest intentional or political trick in the book, and the most common accidental unintentional mistake, is to use statistics or data that at casual glance looks compelling to support some argume
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00067.html (20,530 bytes)

18. Re: [CQ-Contest] KR2Q - RX1CQ (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 09:40:11 -0400
I think we should mandate log errors for people who have abnormally accurate logs. Let's call it dyslexic based scoring. After all, we all know the reason for not succeeding always is with the person
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-08/msg00029.html (11,379 bytes)

19. Re: [CQ-Contest] Unending arguments... (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:39:00 -0400
It seems we are developing a universal policy. If we don't do well, it is always someone or something else's fault beyond our personal responsibility or control. Watch carefully and see how often th
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-08/msg00094.html (7,893 bytes)

20. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fw: [RRDXA] E73M - I have cheated (score: 1)
Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:00:58 -0400
If we did some planned tests, as I proposed in the great distance based score debate, it would get us some rough idea over time how dipoles (which are stable and easy to predict) compare from various
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-08/msg00171.html (12,239 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu