Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Remote\s+Antennas\s+and\s+More\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Remote\s+Antennas\s+and\s+More\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Remote Antennas and More (score: 1): Author: bogus@does.not.exist.com (bogus@does.not.exist.com); Date: Mon Feb 7 15:22:45 2000; The "antennas connected by wire" rule was made to prevent dialing up a remote receiver, in say Germany, to help you, in the USA, to better hear the Europeans calling you. At the time the rule was wri; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-02/msg00031.html (8,448 bytes)
2. [CQ-Contest] Remote Antennas and More (score: 1): Author: neborsky@ior.com (Gary and Jane Nieborsky); Date: Mon Feb 7 23:05:14 2000; There is "pushing the contest envelope" but this goes well beyond the pale. Remote operating within a reasonable geographical boundary is technology utilized to advance our hobby......5A, 3C0 etc. vi; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-02/msg00033.html (8,085 bytes)
3. [CQ-Contest] Remote Antennas and More (score: 1): Author: wn3vaw@fyi.net (Ron Notarius WN3VAW); Date: Mon Feb 7 16:58:57 2000; It sounds like the wording of this rule may need tweaked to allow for modern technology. The spirit of the original rule & related rules, IMHO, was to restrict the operating station to one physical l; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-02/msg00035.html (10,651 bytes)
4. [CQ-Contest] Remote Antennas and More (score: 1): Author: kharker@cs.utexas.edu (Kenneth E. Harker); Date: Tue Feb 8 10:16:32 2000; I'm not sure I totally agree with this. Imagine a group of contesters pools together their resources and buys some property is a DX location, but one that happens to have an internet connection (i.e.; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-02/msg00037.html (10,091 bytes)
5. [CQ-Contest] Remote Antennas and More (score: 1): Author: k0hb@arrl.org (Hans - K0HB); Date: Tue Feb 8 10:50:17 2000; I agree absolutely! I am more than a little convinced that the salvation of the "inventive" side of amateur radio ("advancing the state of the radio art" and all that stuff) will be the competitive e; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-02/msg00038.html (8,128 bytes)
6. [CQ-Contest] Remote Antennas and More (score: 1): Author: bailey@integ.com (Mark Bailey); Date: Tue Feb 8 14:00:26 2000; On Monday, February 07, 2000 4:59 PM, Ron Notarius WN3VAW [SMTP:wn3vaw@fyi.net] wrote: Hmmm, What does this do for things like DXCC and multipliers? I wonder if we really want fully automated, remote; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-02/msg00039.html (7,733 bytes)
7. [CQ-Contest] Remote Antennas and More (score: 1): Author: wn3vaw@fyi.net (Ron Notarius WN3VAW); Date: Tue Feb 8 17:47:38 2000; Keeping in mind that we never will anticipate the unintended consequences... (or else they'd be intended, right?) 1) DXCC status would be determined by the physical location of the station. 2) Multip; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-02/msg00044.html (9,466 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]