Search String: Display: Description: Sort:


References: [ 493 ]

Total 493 documents matching your query.

81. Re: [CQ-Contest] Assisted Low Power? (score: 1)
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 16:27:06 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
As the only station to get "beat" as an unassisted op by an assisted op for first place honors in the 6 "majors" listed for 2006, I believe that I can state my opinion on this subject. 1) I would lik
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-12/msg00590.html (9,625 bytes)

82. Re: [CQ-Contest] Improving Concentration (score: 1)
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 09:25:42 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Slow Period between EU Sinrise and US Sunrise? Yes, and no. For me, it is the time to vacuum up 160 - 40 to the south and west. It is the time to work mults that could be unworkable to a low power op
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00093.html (8,888 bytes)

83. Re: [CQ-Contest] The future of Contesting in 10 years (score: 1)
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 12:59:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
While I believe that technically, internet based remote contesting might be achievable (seems like delays are an inhibiter right now), I am predicting that the practice would regulated out by the Con
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-02/msg00022.html (7,489 bytes)

84. Re: [CQ-Contest] Going all the way.... (score: 1)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:56:10 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Some great comments by a number of top operators on this subject...I don't consider myself one of them, but I will speak for myself. I enjoy pushing my limits. It keeps me feeling younger and energiz
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-02/msg00362.html (8,284 bytes)

85. [CQ-Contest] WRTC Selection Criteria (score: 1)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:46:43 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Since we are skimming along the top of this subject right now and we know that "yes, RDXC will be used", then would someone mind sharing what ALL of the selection criteria will be? Is it going to be
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-02/msg00398.html (7,135 bytes)

86. Re: [CQ-Contest] ...are you changing your log (score: 1)
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 08:03:42 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Quoting from the ARRL Source that N0AX stated: "Furthermore, it is generally OK to make a quick pass through the log immediately after the contest looking for "obvious" typos such as entering CT as C
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-02/msg00415.html (8,690 bytes)

87. [CQ-Contest] How Many Hours are we Putting in Now? (score: 1)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 07:42:40 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Here is some interesting info on ARRL DX CW relative to how many hours we are putting in: Top 40 SOAB HP Unassisted Scores 40 hours + 7 35 - 39 11 30 - 34 7 25 - 29 3 10 - 25 12 Top 40 SOAB LP Unassi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-02/msg00444.html (7,742 bytes)

88. Re: [CQ-Contest] How Many Hours are we putting in now (score: 1)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:09:48 -0500 (EST)
FYI... The data I mentioned was simply taken from the current 3830 reports. The hours in just about every case is listed next to the information. 73 Ed N1UR __________________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-02/msg00467.html (6,907 bytes)

89. [CQ-Contest] Packet is the root of all evil but... (score: 1)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 13:17:26 -0500 (EST)
This topic has always facinated me. For a few reasons. The main one is this: If a remote station exists in KP4. All Transmitters and antennas are connected by wires within a 500m circle or property b
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-03/msg00159.html (8,396 bytes)

90. Re: [CQ-Contest] Remote Operations in Contest (score: 1)
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:56:31 -0400 (EDT)
Personally, I think this is a great idea to mitigate the HOA problem and contester/DXer needs in ham radio. More power to everyone doing it and hopefully, in years to come, there will not be a delay
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-03/msg00364.html (8,246 bytes)

91. Re: [CQ-Contest] JAs in Contesting (score: 1)
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:11:24 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
I can offer the following real time observations: 1) I operated C6ARS in 2001 CQ WW CW and was amazed how many JAs were calling me late in the contest. They were more interested in DXing, than contes
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-03/msg00603.html (8,112 bytes)

92. Re: [CQ-Contest] Realtime Scoreboard (score: 1)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 06:36:15 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
I have no issue with Rick's "call to arms" for the M/M category. In fact, I think anyone running assisted should use Gerry's excellent site (nice work OM). Personally, I don't use Gerry's site for a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00309.html (9,000 bytes)

93. [CQ-Contest] IARU - Join Us (score: 1)
Author: "Ed Sawyer" <>
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 07:59:58 -0400
There has been A LOT of discussion on this reflector about the "incapability" of many to be competitive in 48 hour marathon contests. The suggestion has been made that 36 or 24 hour "categories be es
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-06/msg00280.html (7,468 bytes)

94. Re: [CQ-Contest] RTTY "Listening" (score: 1)
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 13:03:08 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
I am not a RTTY op so I can't comment on the need to listen or not. But I am a low power CW Contester, and as such, I spend more than my fair share of time CQing between 7030 - 7080, 14060 - 14100, a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-06/msg00355.html (8,168 bytes)

95. Re: [CQ-Contest] The Fat Lady Sings at 2359Z (score: 1)
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 12:25:10 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Ev, Not many share your definition of: "The casual contester (my definition) will find "yeah, but..." loopholes. The contesting purist (my definition) will "put the pencil down" because "the test is
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-06/msg00402.html (8,565 bytes)

96. Re: [CQ-Contest] Delta Loop Feeding (score: 1)
Author: "Ed Sawyer" <>
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 08:07:55 -0400
Feeding at the top will result in Horizontal Polarization and with the apex only at 70 feet, not desirable results for DX/Contesting. In fact, I would argue that you would be better off with the inve
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-07/msg00034.html (7,308 bytes)

97. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW zero Point Qs (score: 1)
Author: "Ed Sawyer" <>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 06:27:27 -0400
I can certainly appreciate the concern of working 100s and 100s of Qs that are of no point or mult value for stations. It IS a question that deserves discussion. To me however, the 80% solution is so
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-07/msg00194.html (8,140 bytes)

98. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW CW 2007 Result W2/NP3D - I just did not (score: 1)
Author: "Ed Sawyer" <>
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 08:16:37 -0400
Andrei - I agree with Craig. I also was shocked the first few serious CQ WW contest I did in my second round of ham contesting starting in 1997 (first was 1977 - 1984). There is no harder NET score o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-09/msg00031.html (8,035 bytes)

99. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R In the Sprints (score: 1)
Author: "Ed Sawyer" <>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 20:09:57 -0400
I have never done a sprint contest so I will comment on this thread generically as an experienced but still improving SO2R operator. In my opinion, the CQ answer always gets the priority over working
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-09/msg00142.html (7,596 bytes)

100. Re: [CQ-Contest] Out of Band (score: 1)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:42:24 -0400 (EDT)
I disagree with the conclusion of the discussion by N2IC. It is the US hams responsibility to know where to transmit. It is not a foreign ham's responsibility to "not tempt US hams" out of band. If o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-11/msg00060.html (7,480 bytes)

This search system is powered by Namazu