Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+our\s+amplifier\s+in\s+2010\s+CQWW\s*$/: 81 ]

Total 81 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 13:52:50 -0500
Well, I know it was done here when the station beat the YCCC's chosen winner. Suddenly 3 of the members decided to visit and check things out back in 87. Carl KM1H ___________________________________
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00101.html (17,356 bytes)

42. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "David Cutter" <d.cutter@ntlworld.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 11:18:41 -0800
The wider use of reverse beacons will accumulate enough statistical data on transgressors to dissuade them or disqualify them, there for all to see. David G3UNA ______________________________________
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00102.html (8,759 bytes)

43. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 14:41:16 -0500
I dont see how unless the station is within walking distance. Propagation can vary huge amounts in a very short distance. Carl KM1H _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list A
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00103.html (9,330 bytes)

44. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "David Cutter" <d.cutter@ntlworld.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 12:16:51 -0800
I saw a demonstration at the RSGB HF Convention: lots of SDR receivers around the world are scanning the whole spectrum or parts of it giving relative signal strength readings and id for each station
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00104.html (9,573 bytes)

45. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "Sam Carpenter" <sam@owenscommunication.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 16:12:22 -0500
I wonder how you would account for propagation. The ionosphere is pretty nebulous and it is normal for ebb and flow of 10db during a single transmission. When it is not in that state, and there is st
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00105.html (11,595 bytes)

46. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "David Cutter" <d.cutter@ntlworld.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 13:22:17 -0800
Sam I appreciate and understand what you are saying; by the way, well done, I like your style. But, wrt propagation, if you have 2 transmitters in the same town, one of whom is known to be a goody we
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00106.html (12,236 bytes)

47. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "Sam Carpenter" <sam@owenscommunication.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 16:34:49 -0500
How 'bout an old fashioned bounty? In all honesty, I don't so much mind great big ol' overbuilt clean crisp amps. I do however hate the overdriven 1k amps that wreck the bands. If someone is running
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00107.html (12,964 bytes)

48. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: Alek Petkovic <vk6apk@bigpond.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 06:02:31 +0800
What? All of them? Who's gonna find them all and visit their stations all around the world, all on one weekend? Who's gonna book the flights and pay for the hotels, train tickets and taxis to send an
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00108.html (19,399 bytes)

49. [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "JOHN POWELL" <powell.john@xtra.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 11:05:18 +1300
Would not the power output indication be considered 2.5 KW PEP ?. If so does the power level meet the 1.5 KW maximum ?. I could only see the 2.5 KW level being achieved on voice peaks, not a continuo
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00109.html (8,542 bytes)

50. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: Rob Stampfli <rob@cboh.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:58:53 -0500
Hmm. So, do you deduct those points earned from everyone who worked them, too? Inquiring minds want to know. Rob / KD8WK _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contest
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00110.html (9,655 bytes)

51. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: Dave M <slash_dot@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 18:36:54 -0500
And yet another consideration would be to create a new class of operation , perhaps based on ERP , call it "Elite Class" or something similar , most of the world class contest stations would scramble
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00111.html (10,149 bytes)

52. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: Dave M <slash_dot@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 18:43:30 -0500
Well I dont know or would I care to guess the number of stations running 5kw or what in contests , but what I DO know is that a station running a 6 over 6 stack on 20m will certainly sound like mega
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00112.html (9,775 bytes)

53. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: donroden@hiwaay.net
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:45:55 -0600
A support group for people who abuse their amps. Ampanon Don W4DNR _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/a
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00113.html (7,327 bytes)

54. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "Steve Katz" <stevek@jmr.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:49:25 -0800
A support group for people who abuse their amps. Ampanon _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://l
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00114.html (7,711 bytes)

55. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "Steve Katz" <stevek@jmr.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 15:41:07 -0800
Why not just establish an "illegal power" class? -WB2WIK And yet another consideration would be to create a new class of operation , perhaps based on ERP , call it "Elite Class" or something similar
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00115.html (8,822 bytes)

56. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: donroden@hiwaay.net
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 18:44:06 -0600
Back "in-the-day", if you "put the L-network inline" , the driver was a 30L-1. Don W4DNR _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00116.html (9,717 bytes)

57. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 19:51:14 -0500
I used to run 4/4/4/4 Dave (-; Carl KM1H _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00117.html (10,771 bytes)

58. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 19:53:00 -0500
Better still, a crybaby award for whoever got that silly rule rammed thru. Carl KM1H _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00118.html (9,650 bytes)

59. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: "Roger (sub1)" <sub1@rogerhalstead.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:28:03 -0500
First, I'm not a contester and although I chase DX I have neither DXCC, WAC, or even WAS confirmed. BUT I am a computer professional with a degree in the field. I worked with data, laboratory analysi
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00119.html (12,882 bytes)

60. Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW (score: 1)
Author: Paul Decker <kg7hf@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:49:54 +0000 (UTC)
Nope, you deduct  10x for working them.   That sends a clearer message ;) Paul, kg7hf Hmm.  So, do you deduct those points earned from everyone who worked them, too? Inquiring minds want to know. Rob
/archives//html/Amps/2010-11/msg00120.html (8,526 bytes)

Current List: 41 - 60
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
This search system is powered by Namazu