Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:aa4lr@radio.org: 99 ]

Total 99 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] IC-756PRO (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Thu Feb 17 11:57:51 2000
The absolute dynamic range of a 24 bit A/D converter is 72 dB. (3 dB per bit) Granted, you can put a controlled gain stage before the A/D, but that only allows you to move the span of the dynamic ran
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-02/msg00091.html (7,346 bytes)

2. [CQ-Contest] What's BUSTED ? (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Mon Mar 6 16:19:45 2000
Why can't we just teach people to LISTEN more carefully before calling? If you don't know what the DX callsign is on a packet spot, DO NOT CALL. I'm no longer afraid to ask a DX station for his calls
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00067.html (8,927 bytes)

3. [CQ-Contest] What's BUSTED ? (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Tue Mar 7 10:24:59 2000
I think the problem exists with some contesting software. Say someone spots BD2X, which would be a new multiplier -- so it shows up in the packet window. Someone else correctly spots 6D2X, who you've
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00084.html (8,572 bytes)

4. [CQ-Contest] Receiver specs (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Mon Mar 13 15:00:32 2000
[ snip ] Yes. The simpliest way to see if a "splattering" signal is likely coming from the transmitter, or is being generated in the front-end of your reciever is to put in 20 dB of receiver attenuat
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00182.html (7,562 bytes)

5. [CQ-Contest] CQ Listening time (Was Voice Keyer) (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Mon Mar 13 15:45:39 2000
I think it depends on the contest and the propagation at the time. Let's assume that you use the repeat CQ when there are no outstanding callers. (Otherwise, you'll call QRZ, your callsign, or just p
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00184.html (8,183 bytes)

6. [CQ-Contest] Re: Digital Voice keyer (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Tue Mar 14 10:30:05 2000
Baloney! If this is the sort of operating practice contestors promulgate, it's no wonder other amatuers despise contests.... Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@radio.org Quote: "Boot, you trans
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00194.html (7,675 bytes)

7. [CQ-Contest] New SS Category Proposal (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Thu Mar 16 11:59:02 2000
To which I would add -- We ALREADY HAVE a domestic contest which allows Qs and mults once per bad. It is called the North American QSO Party (NAQP), and runs every January and August for both CW and
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00229.html (8,672 bytes)

8. [CQ-Contest] "LAST 2" - Personal Experiences (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Tue Mar 28 10:52:32 2000
As a little pistol, I disagree. Ills of the last 2 aside, there's no way a CQing station is going to get a report from me until I'm reasonably sure he has my callsign right. Why? Well, it was hard en
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00287.html (10,816 bytes)

9. [CQ-Contest] "LAST 2" - Personal Experiences (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Tue Mar 28 11:50:56 2000
I don't think that's a great idea: Other(2): qsl Italy Fox Two Whiskey Tango Foxtrot 59 100 (whom you didn't hear) Other(n): .... So, the two or more Tango Foxtrots that reply (not to mention the Tan
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-03/msg00291.html (9,336 bytes)

10. [CQ-Contest] Doubts on the WPX Contest (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Tue Apr 4 14:16:54 2000
Except that the WPX rules for the last couple of years allow stateside to stateside to count as 1 point, although there is no doubling of points 40m and below. I suppose this turns the strategy sligh
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-04/msg00025.html (8,054 bytes)

11. [CQ-Contest] When and why did rules change? (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Wed May 3 14:38:31 2000
Yup, that's the category as it has always been defined. The 1998 results with "single wire" must have been a typographical error. See the official contest rules: <http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-05/msg00022.html (10,188 bytes)

12. [CQ-Contest] When and why did rules change? (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Wed May 3 17:39:49 2000
The quad probably wouldn't qualify, since there's more than one feedline. I would suppose the "single feedline" requirement is to prevent someone from putting up an interlaced monobander and calling
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-05/msg00027.html (10,303 bytes)

13. [CQ-Contest] When and why did rules change? (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Thu May 4 19:01:16 2000
The key element in the "quad" example was that the "quad" in question had multiple feedlines, which essentially eliminated it from the WPX definition of a tribander. As someone else pointed out, ther
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-05/msg00039.html (10,659 bytes)

14. [CQ-Contest] When and why did rules change? (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Fri May 5 10:42:28 2000
Right! It's interesting to note that a Rhombic or V-Beam would be allowed, since they are single-element, but a OWA dipole would not. Which raises an interesting question -- is a multi-band dipole (i
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-05/msg00041.html (8,899 bytes)

15. [CQ-Contest] When and why did rules change? (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Fri May 5 12:04:33 2000
But you just said that the rule doesn't consider the electrical characteristics of the antenna, only its physical characteristics. QED. Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@radio.org Quote: "Boot
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2000-05/msg00045.html (9,282 bytes)

16. [CQ-Contest] N0UU software to record the contest using SB board (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Sun Apr 25 00:10:38 1999
Well, let's think about this a second. First of all, communications audio is roughly 300-3000 Hz. There's no reason, therefore, to sample at a rate much higher than about 6 kHz, since that extra band
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-04/msg00227.html (9,241 bytes)

17. [CQ-Contest] S&P Procedure (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Mon May 3 09:07:39 1999
When I've recognised this happening, I'll skip 5-10 kHz up the band, putting myself ahead of the "competition." It seems to work well, and it beats getting beat out on practically every call. Contest
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-05/msg00017.html (7,354 bytes)

18. [CQ-Contest] SS from KP4 (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Fri May 14 13:51:54 1999
Well, there's no huge geographical advantage from KP4 for SS. Typically, someone in the midwest wins SS, not KP4. Indeed, KP4 can be fraught with dangers. In 1989, I won division leader for low power
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-05/msg00260.html (7,586 bytes)

19. [CQ-Contest] Matching Speeds is Good -- Constant speeds is good -- Good keying is good (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Wed Jun 2 16:38:12 1999
I had the good fortune to be the third-string CW op at the NQ4I multi-multi station this weekend. (Thanks, Rick!) As the slowest CW op, I got to operate at odd times, but managed to squeeze in plenty
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-06/msg00024.html (8,816 bytes)

20. [CQ-Contest] cutnose, EFFICIENCY? (score: 1)
Author: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Tue Jun 8 10:27:09 1999
I'm not going to pick nits with you Jim. I understand your sense of frustration when you're running a pileup at a good clip, and happen to have a QSO that completely upsets your rhythm. Been there, d
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-06/msg00108.html (8,744 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu