Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+160m\s+in\s+RTTY\s+Contests\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+160m\s+in\s+RTTY\s+Contests\s*$/: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "KL7RA" <kl7ra@ptialaska.net>; Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:53:57 -0900; Hi Ed Having operated RTTY in the WPX and WW and of course CW in all the topband contests I vote, "No". In fact I also vote to get rid of SSB on topband but that may be pushing my luck. 160 has a nar; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00333.html (7,892 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: Sam Morgan <k5oai.sam@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:02:50 -0500; ah come on, be a sport, don't you realize 'they' are the only ones that have a right to operate? we should get out of their way and let, the most inconsiderate operators of any available mode, totall; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00335.html (8,988 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: Art <k6xt@arrl.net>; Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:33:51 -0600; I operate RTTY. I'm very happy that RTTY contests exclude 160M for the simple reasons that: 1) I would never operate RTTY below 1850 out of respect for CW DX activity in that area. Many of these guys; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00336.html (8,217 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: alan eshleman <oakame@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:17:32 -0700 (PDT); Bad idea. Unless the contesting could stay well above 1900 kHZ, it would do little to advance RTTY contesting and a great deal to anger us Top Band DXers. And I *do* operate in RTTY contests. 73, Ala; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00337.html (9,711 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "LY2IJ" <ly2ij@qrz.lt>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 09:38:56 +0200 (EET); No, Working DX even on 80 is hardly possible on RTTY. Signals are here, decoding doesn't work. So 160 RTTy will be limited to very local contacts, which is a case on 80 already. Arunas, LY2IJ (both T; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00339.html (8,498 bytes)
6. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "Bo Soegaard" <oz8abe@tdcadsl.dk>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:32:50 +0100; Hi You can work DX on both 80 and 160 RTTY. I've worked 148 countries on 80 RTTY and semi rare stuff like 9V, 9K, P4 and VK on 160 RTTY at that time even without RX antennas. The Ukraine RTTY contest; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00340.html (9,816 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)" <w5uc@suddenlink.net>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 04:38:34 -0500; Greetings Ed & All: Ed I must vote NO! Some have suggested limiting the RTTY contest to the very upper portion of 160. History has shown that invariably contest operations quickly expand to engulf an; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00341.html (8,860 bytes)
8. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "G4GED Dave" <radiodave.g4ged@tiscali.co.uk>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:07:23 -0800; "Ed Muns" W0YK wrote>>> Hi Ed, As a RTTY and a 160m DX operator, sorry my vote is a resounding NO! IMHO there's already too many contests carving up the DX section of the band. But thank you for the; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00342.html (8,909 bytes)
9. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: Thorvaldur Stefansson <otradalur@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:34:04 +0000; I vote NO. I would like 160 meters to be completely free of contesting and SSB - CW only. 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. 73 Thor, TF4M http://tf4m.com/archives/tag/t; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00344.html (9,041 bytes)
10. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)" <w5uc@suddenlink.net>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:16:42 -0500; I will add my vote to that of Thor & Rick in that I would like to see 160 become a CW only band. I have a great deal of concern that the undisciplined no-code Extras may begin(continue?) to infest th; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00345.html (8,795 bytes)
11. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "w7mem@juno.com" <w7mem@juno.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:27:30 GMT; How about above 1950 to 2000 in the next rtty contest as a test Hi All Hi Rich and ALL Well if you don't want SSB to be interfering this is not the move. In the lower 48 more SSB Ragchews are from 1.; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00346.html (7,993 bytes)
12. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "Joe Wilkowski" <k8fc@k8fc.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:07:29 -0600; Ditto ! 73's _______________________________________________ Topband mailing list Topband@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00347.html (10,612 bytes)
13. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "Kenneth D. Grimm, K4XL" <grimm@sbc.edu>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:23:20 -0400; Art's comments echo my feelings exactly. I would not appreciate an RTTY contest on top band. Thanks for asking. 73, Ken - K4XL -- Ken K4XL k4xl@arrl.net ** BoatAnchor Manual Archive ** On the web at; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00354.html (10,108 bytes)
14. Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "F8BPN" <f8bpn@wanadoo.fr>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:20:47 -0800; Hi All with out any problem if I don't want to take part in these contests. I do operate RTTY sometimes too , but I prefer CW thousand times more, any way I can leave the band for these who have fun; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00359.html (7,711 bytes)
15. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "Glenn Wyant" <va3dx@sympatico.ca>; Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:36:19 -0400; IMHO This will be a domestic contest... Interferance to ssb and cw cant be avoided No matter what frequency range you decide on , someone countries will be left in the cold ( if and only if there was; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00360.html (8,589 bytes)
16. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "Jeff Le Fouler - F6AOJ" <f6aoj@orange.fr>; Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:59:44 +0100; Hi folks, it will be funny to run RTTY contest following IARU Band Plan, read here : http://pages.intnet.mu/ingepru/bandera.htm#B1715kf RTTY 1840 to 1842 Congratulation to IARU for this trash regulat; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00362.html (9,025 bytes)
17. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: John Bastin <bastinj@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:42:28 -0400; I'm not a "hard-core" contester, but RTTY is my favorite mode for contesting when I do participate (with CW a very close second). I agree with just about everyone here who has commented that RTTY con; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00380.html (9,212 bytes)
18. Re: Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "Tod - ID" <tod@k0to.us>; Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:25:28 -0600; I would prefer that RTTY contesting not be initiated on 160m. I think all of the cogent reasons for me having that preference have already been expressed by others. My general feeling is that it will; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00381.html (10,820 bytes)
19. Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: "Thomas F. Giella NZ4O" <nz4o@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:10:30 -0400; I'm all for RTTY contests on 160 meters. CW and SSB contests occur on 160 meters so why not digital?! I've been a regular operator on 160 meters for 20 years and have watched the band go from crowded; /archives//html/Topband/2009-10/msg00387.html (8,157 bytes)
20. Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests (score: 1): Author: IronmanY2k <IronmanY2K@triathlete.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:04:35 -0700; I agree with Tom. There is no reason not to have a RTTY contest or two each year on 160M. We all know that 160 Meters is a challenge and some of us look forward to the challenge of 160 Meter RTTY. I; /archives//html/Topband/2009-11/msg00007.html (8,339 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1]