I really like QRP, I've done a lot of it, and I'd jump at the chance to participate in a contest, national or international, limited to five watts. I sincerely doubt that operating skills would be im
That's an odd comment coming from you, Paul. Rules are rules until they get changed and it's hardly up to the participant to decide when a rule is "outdated" enough to just ignore. I can understand s
Paul, I don't think you understand the origins of this particular contest. It rather evolved out of the traffic handling system where message formats and headers are very specific, and the required e
I really enjoy contests with a strong domestic content (SS, NAQP, CQ WPX, etc), but the single biggest reason I avoid most state and regional QSO parties is the ridiculous non-uniformity of county ab
Gee whiz ... Steve tries to encourage folks to utilize all the bands and keep an eye out for additional openings, and you guys do just the opposite. How is the sport well served by saying 10m is wort
Keep that in mind late on Sunday afternoon when you're trying to rake up a few more contacts. Steve simply suggested keeping an ear perked for 10m openings, and that seems to me to be a worthwhile co
1. Just because you think your 600 watts should be loud in Germany doesn't mean that you were louder than whatever European QRM DD4B might have been experiencing. It seems kind of presumptuous of you
No, Steve ... I think it is you that is missing the mark. Art, by his own admission, didn't just submit a log without those contacts because he was afraid of getting dinged for a NIL ... he submitted
Sorry, but I think that suggestion is a rathole. I'll bet there are a hundred similar geographical inequities around the world that could be identified without much effort. Trying to create a level p
Where on earth did you get that? Please provide a reference that backs that statement up with some figures. All you have to do is look at the number of submitted logs and the number of unique callsig
Exactly, and it doesn't work for domestic consumption either. That's why so many people over here are constantly debating the intent behind the rule, how to interpret it, and how it should apply to u
Sorry, but I don't think you managed to clarify the rule at all. In fact, I think it got less clear, and from the outside it indeed looks like you changed it. The way it was previously written it sou
Not really. I could easily envision combination CW decoder/rig control software that not only decoded the callsign of the station you were working (i.e., in your normal receive passband) but also sim
Wow ... you just significantly added to the mess. CW Skimmer per se is NOT disallowed by the newly revised rules. An unassisted operator can still use CW Skimmer in narrow band audio mode as a single
It's a horrible contest rig, for either CW or SSB. I still keep mine as a backup (my regular rig is now a K3), but during contests the AGC pumping on CW and the "growling" on SSB drove me crazy. The
Well, he asked about the 756Pro. The ProIII is a considerably better rig, and even the ProII is a step up from the original Pro. I'll say it again ... the 756ProI is a very poor contest rig. 73, Dave
And if I decide to visually decode CW off a good waterfall display, I'm pretty certain that would meet anyone's definition of unassisted operation as well. Dave AB7E _________________________________
That was my point. I think the term "by ear" is just as careless a rule definition as some of the others here have been. 73, Dave AB7E _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest maili
I regularly use the waterfall display of CW Skimmer in Blind Mode and 3 KHz Audio Mode (actually only about 300 Hz bandwidth) for unassisted operation in CW contests because it has great resolution a
Count me as one who is not in favor of weird names for NAQP. They slow things down for everyone in what is normally a pretty rapid rate contest and are remembered mostly for the confusion/irritation