Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Radio\s+Laws\s+of\s+Propagation\.\.\.\.Have\s+they\s+been\s+re\-invented\?\s*$/: 11 ]

Total 11 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: Herb Schoenbohm <herbs@vitelcom.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 20:46:26 -0400
This is my first post on this reflector and I do so with caution but extreme concern that contests at least stay somewhat competitive in all categories. I must admit in 50 years of enjoying contests
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00296.html (12,301 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 22:20:18 -0600
Hi Herb, Good to see you here! I just checked my logs. I worked KP4KE on three bands. On all three bands he sent me the power level of 100. 73, Zack W9SZ _____________________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00301.html (13,411 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 21:25:01 -0500
Without weighing in on the merits, for or against, Herb's concern, I would like to point out one thing: The posts to the 3830 Reflector are voluntary and not official. Only the information entered in
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00302.html (13,482 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 07:39:05 -0600
Yes, good point, Paul. I was just indicating that he wasn't sending 42 in the contest. 73, Zack W9SZ _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00305.html (9,556 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 07:51:31 -0600
Another thing is that I've received all sorts of oddball power levels from people in the ARRL DX contest over the years. 999, 995, 763, 155, 37 ... I have often had a passing thought about how they m
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00306.html (11,010 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith N4ZR <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 10:11:06 -0500
And then, of course, there are the guys who think they are supposed to send serial numbers, a la WPX. 73, Pete N4ZR Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at reversebe
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00310.html (12,513 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 08:58:44 -0700
The conversation of what power number to use is as frequent as what check is ok in SS. Does it really matter what you sent as long as it was the same number the entire contest and actually claim the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00312.html (14,237 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:51:06 -0500
I took great interest in Herb's post. As a competitive Low Power competitor, this issue is very important to me. I thought I would share my observations. I routinely use RBN history after a CW contes
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00323.html (13,140 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: Luc DXBrasil <py8azt@dxbrasil.net>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 09:13:57 -0300
Cheater dont have ethical issues. He does not cheat once, he repeats this bad behavior over and over until be exposed. Then, he pretend to be a victim of an unfair judgement. I've seen enough of this
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00333.html (9,823 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: RT Clay <rt_clay@bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 06:22:25 -0800 (PST)
I don't have any comment on KP4KE/NP2P, but I would like to make some comments re using the RBN data to compare stations: The procedure of picking two SINGLE skimmer spots at similar times is never a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00337.html (16,420 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio Laws of Propagation....Have they been re-invented? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 12:33:05 -0500
Thanks Tor and I agree with you analysis. It still ties to my conclusions. In the case of K1LZ vs N1UR, the difference is the amplifier but not much more. But it should be more based on the antennas.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00338.html (11,989 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu