Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Re\:\s+Digital\s+Voice\s+keyer\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Re\:\s+Digital\s+Voice\s+keyer\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Re: Digital Voice keyer (score: 1): Author: k4sb@mindspring.com (K4SB); Date: Mon Mar 13 15:18:53 2000; Fellows, I need a new one. Has anyone used the new MFJ? In truth, I know little about them, but want one which can be programed directly from the mike in whole increments ( such as "CQ Contest" ). Wo; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00167.html (7,558 bytes)
2. [CQ-Contest] Re: Digital Voice keyer (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Mon Mar 13 11:40:42 2000; Interesting ... I normally use 3-4 seconds between automated CQs, and don't recall ever being bumped off a frequency as a result. I wonder what the general consensus is? BTW the Ctl-Q facility in TRL; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00172.html (8,369 bytes)
3. [CQ-Contest] Re: Digital Voice keyer (score: 1): Author: k6ll@juno.com (k6ll@juno.com); Date: Mon Mar 13 09:52:29 2000; If you are using TR-Log Logging Software, and have a Soundblastercompatible sound card, SOUNDBLASTERDVP runs as a TSR and fully integrates with the program. It sounds great, and is free of charge. It; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00173.html (8,065 bytes)
4. [CQ-Contest] Re: Digital Voice keyer (score: 1): Author: ron.stordahl@digikey.com (Ron Stordahl); Date: Mon Mar 13 13:05:31 2000; in operated don't I don't even rank in the competition, but I don't need 3 seconds to listen for a reply to my CQ. I would guess a reasonable time would be 1.5 seconds. If you are Papa 40 Victor the; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00180.html (8,431 bytes)
5. [CQ-Contest] Re: Digital Voice keyer (score: 1): Author: miltj@dvec.org (Milt Jensen); Date: Mon Mar 13 13:59:09 2000; in the operated don't seconds. Milt, N5IA replied: It depends on the band, conditions and your station configuration. Example: I do a lot of 160 Meter contesting and I normally set the repeat delay; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00185.html (9,116 bytes)
6. [CQ-Contest] Re: Digital Voice keyer (score: 1): Author: n6ki@juno.com (Dennis Vernacchia); Date: Mon Mar 13 21:29:30 2000; Hi Ed, Our group, San Diego Contest Club, had one of the original MFJ DVKs and we had nothing but grief with it and after a year of trying to get it working right we finally returned it for a refund.; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00193.html (8,927 bytes)
7. [CQ-Contest] Re: Digital Voice keyer (score: 1): Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR); Date: Tue Mar 14 10:30:05 2000; Baloney! If this is the sort of operating practice contestors promulgate, it's no wonder other amatuers despise contests.... Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@radio.org Quote: "Boot, you trans; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00194.html (7,675 bytes)
8. [CQ-Contest] Re: Digital Voice keyer (score: 1): Author: kh6nd@lava.net (kh6nd@lava.net); Date: Tue Mar 14 07:45:21 2000; Baloney, Bill? I think not. My main concern for waiting too long between CQ's would be too many potential contacts tuning past my frequency without hearing me. We're on the air only a handful of wee; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00195.html (8,062 bytes)
9. [CQ-Contest] Re: Digital Voice keyer (score: 1): Author: RGelber@compuserve.com (Richard L Gelber); Date: Tue Mar 14 18:00:20 2000; Although 3 seconds is not a horribly long delay, IMHO, the figure I use, after years of experimenting, is 2.2 seconds (on a band that is not totally dead). Why is it important in any way what non-con; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00200.html (7,925 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]