[SECC] NAQP CW

[Scott Redd K0DQ]

Minor clarification. . . I (K0DQ) haven't lost a log using TR although I
recall someone else saying they had.  My experience related to the need (in
my opinion) for a bit of "sailor proofing" of TR.  It's a great program with
an incredible number of features, but it's complex to master and late in the
contest when fatigue sets in I find it easy to make mistakes of the variety
which require several key strokes and significant angst to correct.

Scott K0DQ / A92Q / P40Q

> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 10:02:25 -0500
> From: "John T. Laney, III" <k4bai@worldnet.att.net>
> Reply-To: k4bai@worldnet.att.net
> To: secc@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [SECC] NAQP CW
>
> I think I replied directly to whoever started this thread, but it
> appears that everyone wants to know what the others are using, so I will
> post this to the reflector.
>
> I use NA for everything that I can get a NA template for, including
> GQP.  I use CT for a few contests that NA doesn't cover, such as WAE..
> I have used CTFOC and CTJ in the past for the FOC Marathon event.  Not
> sure what I will do about that this year, which will be very much a
> part-time effort.  I have purchased two versions of TR, including the
> latest, but have never had the courage to try it on the air.  I really
> don't like it and don't trust myself with it not to loose a log like
> K0DQ did recently.
>
> 73,
>
> John, K4BAI.
>