Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+path\s+loss\s+per\s+hop\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+path\s+loss\s+per\s+hop\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] path loss per hop (score: 1): Author: Rick Dougherty NQ4I <nq4i@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 11:30:56 -0400; The following consists of a short study of reverse beacon values generated during the ARRL CW test on 19 and 20 Feb 2011. The study compares NR5M and NQ4I for signal levels(read db or snr numbers) fr; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00040.html (11,546 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] path loss per hop (score: 1): Author: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2011 12:58:27 -0600; I would like to see a little more data, comparing NQ4I and K3LR to other well-equipped stations in the SE USA, such as: K5GO (M/2) NR4M (M/M) W4RM (M/2) N4WW (M/S) NY4A (M/M) K4TD (S/15) N4PN (S/15); /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00043.html (13,239 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] path loss per hop (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2011 16:23:42 -0400; Not taking sides in this debate, but the Reverse Beacon Network can't be used to make your case, because there are several variables that can very significantly affect the number of times that two st; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00051.html (9,341 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] path loss per hop (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 17:15:13 -0400; The two major problems with comparing two or three complex stations on one weekend, or even several weekends, is that none of us really know how those stations actually work. We might know how model; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-07/msg00055.html (9,586 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]