Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+FT8\s+not\s+allowed\s+in\s+Winter\s+Field\s+Day\?\s*$/: 24 ]

Total 24 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [CQ-Contest] FT8 not allowed in Winter Field Day? (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Stai <wk6i.jeff@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 11:38:51 -0800
The ARRL didn't have to change the rules for the Roundup either, but they provided advice to ensure that entrants followed the overall rules properly (eg Fox&Hound would not have been within the rule
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-01/msg00115.html (28,415 bytes)

22. Re: [CQ-Contest] FT8 not allowed in Winter Field Day? (score: 1)
Author: Richard Ferch <ve3iay@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 17:08:16 -0500
There is an underlying technical issue here. The FT8 data protocol is very tightly packed, and there is no room in it for arbitrary exchanges (other than the 13-character "free text" messages, which
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-01/msg00117.html (8,899 bytes)

23. Re: [CQ-Contest] FT8 not allowed in Winter Field Day? (score: 1)
Author: Bob Burns W9BU <w9bu_lists@rlburns.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 06:57:19 -0500
I think this is a poor example. The NAQP SSB contest is advertised as an SSB contest. The organizers also sponsor an NAQP CW contest and an NAQP RTTY contest which are also specific to those modes. B
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-01/msg00120.html (11,678 bytes)

24. Re: [CQ-Contest] FT8 not allowed in Winter Field Day? (score: 1)
Author: ktfrog007--- via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 16:37:16 +0000 (UTC)
Has anyone asked the Winter FD sponsors to explain their position?  That would seem simpler than all this random discussion. FT8 v2.0.0 doesn't support Winter FD exchanges (e.g., 1O EMA).  Nor do any
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-01/msg00124.html (17,549 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 24
Page: [1] [2]
This search system is powered by Namazu