Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:dougw9wi@gmail.com: 121 ]

Total 121 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [CQ-Contest] Statio inspections (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 08:10:34 -0500
Might one consider the opposite possibility -- that the inspections are intended to prove that most of the winners are NOT cheating? There is a certain impression outside contesting that certain sign
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00259.html (7,558 bytes)

42. Re: [CQ-Contest] Log Analysis. (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 12:08:33 -0500
I think what he's getting at is that it appears the run QSOs on 14.099 and the S&P QSOs on various other frequencies may have been logged on two different computers: Note that the time jumps backward
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00362.html (8,398 bytes)

43. Re: [CQ-Contest] Techniques of Ye Olden Days (score: 1)
Author: doug smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 17:57:46 -0500
I would suggest that the best operators of the 1970s would have trouble keeping dupe sheets without a computer today. The thing is, the number of prefixes, especially for U.S. stations, has skyrocket
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00463.html (9,278 bytes)

44. Re: [CQ-Contest] Techniques of Ye Olden Days (score: 1)
Author: doug smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 17:18:49 -0500
Man, do I remember that! I remember a contest (CQ WW CW, I think it was) operated at K4VX. Spent the day after the contest at Dave Patton (NN1N)'s apartment checking for dupes and marking them in the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00018.html (10,196 bytes)

45. [CQ-Contest] TNQP log deadline approaching (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 07:35:22 -0500
Once everyone's wound down from the California QSO Party... It's time to make sure you got your log in for the September 6th *Tennessee* QSO Party. The log deadline is this Thursday, October 8th. See
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-10/msg00022.html (6,648 bytes)

46. [CQ-Contest] TNQP entry deadline (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 10:46:49 -0500
Final reminder... Deadline for Tennessee QSO Party logs is *today*. Logchecking begins tomorrow. Thanks for the support! -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View, TN EM66 ____________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-10/msg00062.html (6,458 bytes)

47. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self-Spotting (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:24:22 -0500
Is not self-spotting frowned upon *by the Cluster node operators*? (if for no other reason, because of the fear that self-spots by not-rare-enough-that-anyone-else-will-spot-them W stations will ove
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-10/msg00296.html (7,392 bytes)

48. Re: [CQ-Contest] Deleted ARRL sections (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:35:47 -0600
In 1935... Utah-Wyoming was a single section. MDC was a section -- but it was really MDDC (or MDDDC?) because Delaware was part of it too. The West Indies indeed included PR, USVI, Cuba, and the Isle
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00125.html (8,271 bytes)

49. Re: [CQ-Contest] 40m "new" approach to staying in the band? (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 16:54:55 -0600
True, but I did once receive an OO report for operating USB on 14150.5. The guy argued that lower sideband suppression is not adequate and one should never operate below 14153 (suppressed carrier fre
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00177.html (9,147 bytes)

50. Re: [CQ-Contest] Deleted ARRL sections (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:08:43 -0600
IMHO you're comparing apples and oranges. ARRL Sections and DXCC Entities have completely different purposes. DXCC Entities exist for the purpose of the award. Maintaining a list of "deleted entitie
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00178.html (10,257 bytes)

51. Re: [CQ-Contest] Thank those guys in the rare sections! (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 06:49:31 -0600
In a rather casual operation I worked 76 sections. Got three North Dakotas, two Alaskas, and VY1EI called me on 20 meters. (thanks!) The missing: NL VE5 NNY **KANSAS**??!! (and the last section I did
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00241.html (9,283 bytes)

52. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS Musings... (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:46:43 -0600
Actually I *do* do that.. I've found that when things are slow, even a modest reduction in speed can bring out a noticeable increase in callers. So I'll be running at something like 22-24wpm when som
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00294.html (8,954 bytes)

53. Re: [CQ-Contest] 1977 vanity calls (was Watch your dits this weekend) (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:31:56 -0600
I clearly remember the "gates". I was in the second group. My first two choices (W9CW and W9DS) went in the first gate; I got choice #3. (and am VERY happy I didn't get #2!) A few years ago at Dayton
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00540.html (9,923 bytes)

54. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW 10 cw (score: 1)
Author: doug smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 15:22:10 -0600
Hmmm. I operated CQWW in the SOABNP category. (NP = "no power". Radio Shack DX-398 cheap portable receiver w/built-in whip, no transmitter available, sitting on the easy chair at Mom's place in Milwa
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00010.html (8,071 bytes)

55. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW Scoring Rules? (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 20:25:00 -0600
Problem is, nobody knows what their six-character square is. Heck, I'd bet a pretty large proportion of the casual participants don't even know their *four*-character square. Most people know their C
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00352.html (10,682 bytes)

56. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW Scoring Rules? (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 21:47:49 -0600
I guess my question is, just how important are the VERY casual participants? It would be interesting to know what proportion of the stations in large logs (like 6Y1V!) are regular contesters. For exa
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00356.html (11,665 bytes)

57. Re: [CQ-Contest] Did I cheat in the NAQP CW? (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 19:25:09 -0600
A few years ago, for the Tennessee QSO Party, we received a Cabrillo file in which the received exchange field (should contain the state/province/DXCC entity of the station worked) contained the enti
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-01/msg00148.html (7,688 bytes)

58. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL Rookie Contest (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:33:59 -0600
That's not a minor downside. I think sometimes those who have broadband take it for granted. It's not universally available, and not universally adopted where it is available. I would imagine ~98% of
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-02/msg00096.html (9,844 bytes)

59. Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL Rookie Contest (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:04:40 -0600
I'm curious, what the real-time entry protocol is here? (I mean, from an IT standpoint) It looks like getscores.org is involved; has there been an extension to the real-time score reporting protocol
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-02/msg00153.html (9,613 bytes)

60. Re: [CQ-Contest] Computer Controlled Rigs. (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith <dougw9wi@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 20:26:04 -0600
I might mention, many older Kenwood rigs also required an external level converter. (and often didn't come with all the necessary *internal* parts for a computer interface) -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasan
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-02/msg00272.html (8,420 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu