Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+ARRL\s+160M\s+and\s+1830\-1835\s+change\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: Tim Shoppa <tshoppa@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 09:35:53 -0400
Also as I review this years ARRL 160M rules... An earlier version of the rules (current in 2012) here http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Contest%20Rules%20PDFs/2012/2012-160M-Rules-V2.pdf says "6.1 The s
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00136.html (7,031 bytes)

2. Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: Jon Zaimes via Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:43:52 +0000 (UTC)
Also as I review this years ARRL 160M rules... An earlier version of the rules (current in 2012) here http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Contest%20Rules%20PDFs/2012/2012-160M-Rules-V2.pdf says "6.1 The s
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00137.html (9,017 bytes)

3. Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: Jorge Diez - CX6VM <cx6vm.jorge@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 11:49:46 -0300
this segment never was respected, so it is good to eliminate it to avoid yearly debate about that :-) 73, Jorge CX6VM/CW5W <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00138.html (10,244 bytes)

4. Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: Tim Shoppa <tshoppa@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 10:56:02 -0400
I think the 1.830-1.835 rule had been removed and reinstated at least once before (maybe back in the 90's?). While the ARRL contest portal is great, I'm not sure where to find archived copies of rule
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00139.html (9,535 bytes)

5. Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 11:59:23 -0700
It's long been outdated, and is from the days when intercontinental really meant "trans-Atlantic." My guess is that the QST reference was an cut and paste by someone ignorant of the rule change. What
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00146.html (8,236 bytes)

6. Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: GEORGE WALLNER <aa7jv@atlanticbb.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 21:31:34 -0400
If 1,830 - 1,835 is reserved for "intercontinental contacts", who will should CQ? The DX? He is not a DX on his own continent. These "DX windows" are not practical. 73, George C6AGU/AA7JV On Thu, 22
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00150.html (9,947 bytes)

7. Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: Tim Shoppa <tshoppa@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 21:42:02 -0400
George, in ARRL 160 the DX would *only* be looking for W/VE if CQing during the contest. So the DX Window concept has some value (if anyone ever respected it which they didnt). This is a fundamental
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00151.html (10,772 bytes)

8. Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: Stein-Roar Brobakken <post@lb3re.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 04:26:01 +0200
Hello This been into global bandplanning by IARU 80,40m also have contest free segments actually ! For those who want to run DX qso non contest 80m 3500-3510 KHz DX window 80m 3650-3700 Khz 80m 3790-
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00152.html (11,157 bytes)

9. Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: GEORGE WALLNER <aa7jv@atlanticbb.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 22:30:58 -0400
Tim, You are right. In theory the window could work. But the problem is that those (non-DX) who violate the rules suffer no consequences. Therefore, those with the cheek gain an advantage. But,.. A m
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00153.html (11,339 bytes)

10. Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: Larry via Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 03:18:26 +0000 (UTC)
george, i believe that those stations who have key clicks are truly not aware of their problems.  a private email to the offending station may cure the problem. i really cant conceive that someone wo
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00154.html (13,463 bytes)

11. Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: "Roger Kennedy" <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 11:26:02 +0100
I actually think that a Window during Contests to work DX stations is a good idea . . . It can be quite difficult to work NA stations in a Contest if they are being repeatedly called by other strong
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00155.html (8,775 bytes)

12. Re: Topband: ARRL 160M and 1830-1835 change (score: 1)
Author: Guy Olinger K2AV <k2av.guy@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 09:54:23 -0400
Im glad that rule is gone from the ARRL 160. THEORETICALLY that should have worked. What I observed year over year was that the ** DX ** didnt use it that much. Not altogether sure why. I suspect tha
/archives//html/Topband/2020-10/msg00156.html (10,446 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu