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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+CQ\s+160\s+weird\s+ideas\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: Tree <tree@kkn.net>; Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:57:13 -0800; All - one of the more frustrating aspects of the 160 meter contests is the congestion in the 1810-1850 kHz segment of the band. I understand that there are many loud (and wide) European signals in th; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00144.html (6,630 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "Herbert Schoenbohm" <herbs@surfvi.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 09:44:33 -0400; signals from the USA west coast arer just lost inbetween them. somewhere Tree..Split freqency was the way we had some DX in the 60's especially JA's and also due to LORAN restrictions. Indeed today w; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00145.html (10,500 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "Dave Sharred" <g3nkc@yahoo.co.uk>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:39:31 -0800; Tree I think that your idea is a bad one, if you don't mind me saying so ! The flaw with splits like this is that you might hold your run freq, since there is no-one else there; but you will never ho; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00146.html (8,612 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: GEORGE WALLNER <gwallner@the-beach.net>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 09:17:26 -0500; Tree, Nothing weird about it! Years ago, when JA-s had to be worked split (you had to listen around 1910), I could easily work 10 to 20 JA-s in a contest. Now that they are mixed-in with everybody el; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00147.html (8,470 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "Kenneth D. Grimm, K4XL" <grimm@sbc.edu>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 09:31:56 -0500; Since you asked..... How about limiting North American stations to "search and pounce" below 1.850 and CQing above 1.850? That ought to significantly reduce the QRM that bothers the West Coast workin; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00148.html (9,240 bytes)
6. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "kl7ra" <kl7ra@ptialaska.net>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 09:59:02 -0500; My first thought is the Europe stations hearing Europe calling on your receive freq but can't hear you and of course a few might try calling anyway. When the band is really crowded going split "up 1; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00149.html (8,653 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "on4ww" <on4ww@pandora.be>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:02:08 +0100; Brrr....this will cause even more havoc... Suppose u start listening on 1815, and there's S59A calling cq... Suppose I can hear u in between his CQ's, but he doesn't hear you 'coz no propagation betw; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00150.html (7,705 bytes)
8. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: Ralph Matheny <mathenyr@marietta.edu>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 12:14:36 -0500 (EST); I think "split" and contesting just do not mix very well. Especially on 160, I think you will just double the amount of space consumed by a given QSO, and double the chance that you will suffer QRM.; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00151.html (8,526 bytes)
9. Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: doktorij@bellsouth.net; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:02:59 +0000; Hi Tree, I didn't notice it as much this year, but in previous year's ARRL 160, I worked a fair amount of EU DX above 1870 (where ever there wasn't any AM or SSB activity). Signals were good enough h; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00153.html (7,382 bytes)
10. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "Milt, N5IA" <n5ia@zia-connection.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:12:14 -0700; And can you and the other CW guys live with the SSB in "YOUR/THEIR" portion of the band below 1.843 at the end of February? It's a 2-way street. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Not; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00154.html (8,647 bytes)
11. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "Lars Harlin" <lars.harlin@one.se>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:25:48 +0100; Tree and others, generally I dont think, as someone else also said, that split mix well with contesting. Maybe it would be a good idea to restrict the numers of contest on topband to the biggest, iee; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00155.html (8,143 bytes)
12. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: vhfplus@bmg50.com; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:32:04 -0800 (PST); As a relative newcomer to 160 contesting I have been astonished and disappointed at the number of well-known calls I have heard running in the window over the past 3 years. I've never worked EU on t; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00156.html (7,815 bytes)
13. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:43:41 -0800; I strongly agree, and I won't work a station who is working split mode in a contest EXCEPT when there are national frequency allocation issues that require the split (like 40M SSB). VP6DX was working; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00157.html (8,961 bytes)
14. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "f8bpn" <f8bpn@wanadoo.fr>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:24:52 -0800; Hi Tree, Hi all, Agree with Mark ON4WW, for the same reasons I don't think it is a good idea to use split . And about what was suggesting Ken K4XL : How about limiting North American stations to "sea; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00158.html (9,383 bytes)
15. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: lew <lew@dsl-only.net>; Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:06:08 -0800; Yo, Rejecting operating split while contesting may remove 1 tool which may be a legal, effective way to increase a score. The ability to effectively operate split is largely determined by installatio; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00162.html (8,565 bytes)
16. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: RK <midnight18@cox.net>; Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:50:11 +0000; Greetings Top-Banders, Regarding the posts in the last two issues may I offer the following: Most has been done or tried before. Top Band is unique and at rare times the noise will be low enough, the; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00163.html (10,310 bytes)
17. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "n4is" <n4is@bellsouth.net>; Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 09:24:38 -0500; Hi topband lovers. Let's face the reality, what makes the band almost impossible to work DX on 160m international contests? It is a large number of local stations calling CW for hours with only few l; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00165.html (9,268 bytes)
18. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: Herb Schoenbohm <herbs@surfvi.com>; Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 13:53:02 -0400; JC, If I recall correctly one of the key hopes of the founding fathers (CQ WW 160) in this case Charlie O Brian, W2EQS and W1BB, Stew Perry was to increase both domestic and DX participation in a sig; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00170.html (10,338 bytes)
19. Re: Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: lew <lew@dsl-only.net>; Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 22:56:37 -0800; I'll pass that thought along to the Operators at places like P5AT or VP8TAT when they open up on 160 during a contest. Those silly Ops might figure the non selfish thing to do would be to work as man; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00173.html (8,907 bytes)
20. Topband: CQ 160 weird ideas (score: 1): Author: "LA5HE Ragnar Otterstad" <la5he@otterstad.dk>; Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:39:43 +0100; A penalty for keyclicks and other bad things could possibly help with the Eastern Europe problemd. Some of the QRO clubstations are really bad ! ( none mentioned- none forgotten ! ) 73 rag LA5HE ____; /archives//html/Topband/2009-01/msg00198.html (8,247 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]