Actually Stan. The decision that the operator makes to log or not is made based on what the computer is telling them what it thinks happened. Having no more information than that, a decision to log i
Jeff, Sorry for confusion. RTTY is not in question here. FT-X is the topic. I totally agree with you that the RTTY contester wearing headphones is in a totally informed mode to make logging decisions
Jeff, I commend you for that. However, if the FT-x signal is not audible, then that becomes a problem. From what I gather, you are a in a very minor group listening to all the FT-X signals. Maybe oth
It's a fair question to ask about what are the actual costs of running the contest. The Director is a volunteer I believe. The website and log entry processing is supported by WWROF. The plaques are
Jeff, 150ft of separation is plenty for 100W and 40M/20M 2 radio operation. You will hear the 2nd harmonic on 20M when transmitting on 40M. But that harmonic shouldnt be higher than S9+40db and it sh
I would suggest that anyone who really wants to go to WRTC this round put a good effort in. What was before very unlikely for most of us is changing. If you take a look at the competition, or should
Ironically, no one using a remote in Maine looks to be currently going to WRTC 2020 based on the current standings. So while technically that argument sounds plausible, the reality is different. Ed N
Beyond just Region 1 restrictions on 1800 - 1810 there are also plenty of country specific restrictions on allowed 160M frequencies - JAs come to mind. It's the transmitting station's responsibility
Realize that to fully implement the "delete the Q if its not legal on both sides" policy, you have to know the 160M frequency allocations for every country on the planet. Really? If a ZS calls you 18
The fundamental problem is the slippery downward slope of rules in contest (allowing a remote receiver is a bad idea in my opinion - completely trashes decades of engineering and best practice in the
Jim, You have eloquently described the "dumbing down" of DXCC so that "even a caveman can do it". Granted, its way easier. But making things in life easier does not increase the satisfaction of the a
Dave, You have obviously never tried this. I am able to do SO2R partially with my beverage on site. Having a remote receiver 100km away or even 5km away would provide for full SO2R while transmitting
I think that the rule has some merit for the people who need it. As long as it stays out of the unassisted categories, its fine with me. Others who compete assisted may have a different opinion. I do
So is the corollary to this that when I tell the people screaming at me while I contest on the "accepted bands" that they should say "oh yes, you are right, we will shift to the WARC bands for our ne
That's surprising on TO4A since it was smooth and very easy copy at speed. I personally dont like the 1 x 1s because it seems like something is missing. The 1 x 2, 2 x 1, never feel that way. Ed N1UR
On my FT1000MPs, I back the RF Gain to about S9 to S9+10db depending on conditions but leave the AGC "on". It will limit anything above that but is blocked from being in use for all of the stuff at o
Shouldn't you be equally lower in signal strength on the 4 square as your ability to hear callers from the west? Not an alligator? In my case, I have a bi-directional array pointing NE/SW and I also
Just buy from McMaster. Ed --Original Message-- From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces+edwards=sbelectronics.com@contesting.com] On Behalf Of ShelbyK4WW Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 8:05 AM T
Ken, I agree with you for conventional contesting. But the FT4/FT8 protocol needs a confirmation of acceptance programmatically AND the QSO time is not short and snappy like CW or SSB. So I am not ce
Super loud and super SWR sensitive doesnt sound like good characteristics for an amp. Backing off at 1.3:1 doesnt leave one much play on 80 or 160M. Ed N1UR --Original Message-- From: CQ-Contest [mai