Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+CW\s+slow\?\s+No\s+problem\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+CW\s+slow\?\s+No\s+problem\s*$/: 29 ]

Total 29 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW slow? No problem (score: 1): Author: GaryK9GS <garyk9gs@wi.rr.com>; Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 22:10:21 -0600; Great post Bob..thank you for stating So well 73, Gary K9GS -- Original message --From: "Bob Shohet, KQ2M" <kq2m@kq2m.com> Date: 11/30/17 10:01 AM (GMT-06:00) To: Adam Mercier <adam@kenbrio.com>, Ger; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-12/msg00027.html (16,560 bytes)
22. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW slow? No problem (score: 1): Author: Charles Harpole <hs0zcw@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2017 11:08:14 +0700; Two band occupiers, with one band being wasted with empty 40wpm CQs, are obvious. I operate LOUD , so I give the empty CQers ONE call, often only my prefix due to the short "listening time" between C; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-12/msg00028.html (10,900 bytes)
23. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW slow? No problem (score: 1): Author: "Bob Shohet, KQ2M" <kq2m@kq2m.com>; Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2017 08:39:23 -0500; Thank you Gerry! As you know, experience makes a big difference in contesting. Often a nuanced and more complex understanding of a contest situation is only gained through many years of operating con; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-12/msg00030.html (17,181 bytes)
24. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW slow? No problem (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2017 10:44:19 -0500; N6MJ did say something about adding a third radio into the mix... http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/3830/2017-11/msg05512.html John KK9A The next step is to CQ on SEVERAL bands at once. I ex; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-12/msg00034.html (8,356 bytes)
25. [CQ-Contest] CW slow? No problem (score: 1): Author: "Holger Hannemann" <holger@9h3m.com>; Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2017 09:53:24 +1300; I have to echo Charly here. It was absolutely annoying and a waste of time for many operators seeing SO2R stations blocking frequencies while the action was obviously on the other band. TI7W (please; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-12/msg00037.html (13,720 bytes)
26. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW slow? No problem (score: 1): Author: Jukka Klemola <jpklemola@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2017 22:53:49 +0200; Please take a look at a SO4R implementation https://www.qrz.com/db/LY4A 73, Jukka OH6LI _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-12/msg00038.html (9,341 bytes)
27. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW slow? No problem (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2017 13:53:42 -0800; I find operators from Eastern EU to be some of the worst offenders, and to be the least sensitive to conditions. Short path propagation from EU to W6 is over the N pole, and is sometimes subject to c; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-12/msg00042.html (9,772 bytes)
28. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW slow? No problem (score: 1): Author: "Bob Shohet, KQ2M" <kq2m@kq2m.com>; Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2017 17:13:09 -0500; Hi Holger, A = 22 K =4 Active geomagnetic cndx with aurora clearly present at the start of the contest. I even heard US signals with polar flutter! Tremendous absorption on the polar paths with ZERO; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-12/msg00043.html (10,624 bytes)
29. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW slow? No problem (score: 1): Author: Charles Harpole <hs0zcw@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2017 08:39:25 +0700; If an op is sending faster than he can copy, he is a LID and operator of Rotten Radio. Period. 73, Charly <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-12/msg00046.html (19,545 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 29
Page: [1] [2]