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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+one\s+call\s+sign\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: "James Neiger" <n6tj@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 17:38:50 -0800; In response to a K3EST note here on 1 December re: exception to the long standing rules allowing A61AJ operators to all sign this call while operating on several single-bands, I submit the following:; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00323.html (10,662 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>; Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:57:58 -0800; On a slightly related note, I noticed that one USA single band entry in the CQ WW SSB contest had an unusually high multiplier count. Still less than the M/M's but much higher than other single band; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00325.html (12,714 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: K3BU@aol.com; Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 21:59:36 EST; justifies an "extraordinary circumstance", just doesn't cut it either, in my opinion.<< Different countries have different rules and licensing regulations. Some issue callsign to the station, some to; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00326.html (9,462 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: "Tonno Vahk" <tonno.vahk@mail.ee>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:49:39 +0200; A good question. I have done only a few Single Band entries but it seems natural that doing 80 or 160m Single Band you would roam around on high bands during day to arrange low band sceds. I have nev; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00333.html (15,147 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: "Timo Klimoff" <timo.klimoff@dnainternet.net>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:39:51 +0200; But now rereading the CQWW rules I found: All entrants must operate within the limits of their chosen category when performing any activity that could impact their submitted score. Is that sentence b; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00334.html (9,387 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:34:54 +0100; I'm not so sure, or better to say I disagree. Any qso made on different bands with the purpose to increase contest score is obviously out of SB rule, and this independently by the used call. But also; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00335.html (9,829 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: "Timo Klimoff" <timo.klimoff@dnainternet.net>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:21:31 +0200; -- Original Message -- From: "i4jmy" <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com> To: "Timo Klimoff" <timo.klimoff@dnainternet.net> Cc: <cq-contest@contesting.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 12:34 PM Subject: Re: [; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00336.html (10,286 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: "Tonno Vahk" <tonno.vahk@mail.ee>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:36:54 +0200; So the outcome of this is quite funny situation where e.g. it would be allowed to make one SB entry from a M/M contest station and then 5 stations operate under the same call on the other bands but s; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00337.html (11,931 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: W0UN -- John Brosnahan <shr@swtexas.net>; Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 08:04:05 -0600; SINGLE BAND QSO SOLICITATION It has always seemed clear to me that soliciting QSOs in a contest via the telephone or internet is not within the rules for an unassisted effort, in just the same manner; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00338.html (9,970 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <eu1sa@belsonet.net>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:11:49 -0000; Gents, Isn't it obvious that the check-log QSOs on other bands are OK unless they are made in order to SOLICIT contacts on your entry band? 73, Vladimir EU1SA stations (as say single other could now; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00339.html (12,800 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: i4jmy <i4jmy.mauri@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:38:21 +0100; Do qsos made on different bands give direct and indirect helps when the used call is the same? If the answer is Yes, then the permission to work other bands is only a virtual permission and basic rul; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00341.html (10,176 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: "Timo Klimoff" <timo.klimoff@dnainternet.net>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 16:49:52 +0200; What a difficult world! 73, Mauri I4JMY But on the other hand. Let's not make this question too difficult: I have myself operated several times in the single band class from the station where same ti; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00342.html (9,336 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: "Alexander Teimurazov" <at@at-communication.com>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:04:53 +0300; Rules need to be rules and rules need to be the same for everyone Like I say I personnally dont have any problem with A61AJ operation but way how decision is made is wrong and rules need to be change; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00343.html (10,195 bytes)
14. [CQ-Contest] one call sign (score: 1): Author: "Jim Cain" <cainjim@mindspring.com>; Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:07:03 -0600; John Brosnahan, W0UN's comments are right on, and I could not have said it better. I would add one thing: "Single Band" also should mean Single Mode. Nearly 30 years ago when I was competing in ARRL; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-12/msg00350.html (9,572 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]