Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:ik3qar@gmail.com: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] 2007 CQWW SSB UBN Report Anomaly? (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:02:15 +0200
Hi Richard, yes, we have faced the same problem at IR4M. It seems, for the M/S category, that the "robot QSY rule" counted 11 minutes instead of 10. More, some of the cabrillo lines show a different
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-07/msg00100.html (9,641 bytes)

2. [CQ-Contest] CQWW 10 minutes M/S rule (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:37:18 +0200
Hi all, please look at this scenario, with only Radio1 for simplicity: - 1st QSO on 160m logged at 03.12 When can i made a QSO on a new band (example 80m) in order not to breaking the rules ? At 03.2
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-10/msg00198.html (6,649 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW 10 minutes M/S rule (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 20:46:33 +0200
Thanks very much Jim, Randy and Ken. I've just received the same answer also from Doug, KR2Q. I think the doubt wasnt just mine, looking at the various (current and past) questions on this reflector.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-10/msg00204.html (9,065 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] EZ4EBL (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:59:06 +0100
It sounds like you have a busted call. That's probably E74EBL. 73 Paolo IK3QAR _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesti
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00042.html (7,495 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Spotting Errors (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:09:17 +0100
It happened to me this week-end during my run at IR4M: we have been spotted with a wrong call and DUPES quickly started to arrive. Even if we always give the "TU IR4M" at the end of each Qso, when i'
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00045.html (11,471 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Error free RBN (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:47:19 +0200
Hi Barry, i tend to agree with Mark about the choice not to enable the CT1BOH algorithm, for two reasons: - A "little pistol" station (like I am), when propagation isn't wide open (e.g. on 10 and 15m
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-07/msg00180.html (16,743 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] CT1BOH error free RBN - its not about filtering its about quality tag (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 15:41:47 +0200
[..cut..] The purpose of CT1BOH error free RBN algorithm is to provide a "Quality Tag" next to each spot originating from RBN in order to have "later down the line" a clean band map [..cut..] The RAW
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-07/msg00191.html (9,158 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Counting uniques (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 07:56:38 +0200
Hope he doesn't get demoted, as he's the only station I worked in that contest. Hans, this *may* happen only if you don't submit the log to the committee. Otherwise no. 73 Paolo IK3QAR ______________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-09/msg00049.html (8,688 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] [DX-IS] RBN Announcement on FT8 Spotting (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:25:19 +0200
What would be an improvement for RBN is to actually make it possible to select a few skimmers, instead of selecting a continent's ALL skimmers, as the amount of spots now create huge data flows. This
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2018-06/msg00099.html (10,028 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] FT4 - Robotic Contesting (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 14:58:17 +0200
I have watched, as a spectator, to a few contacts between PCs in FT8. Contesting should be, above all, about operating skill. In my opinion, this mode is the opposite of it, and mixing the words "FTx
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-04/msg00096.html (10,123 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Black Sea Cup International Contest Log Submission (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 14:19:43 +0100
Results in official site are udated to 2017, and participation seems to be very low. I'm wondering if the contest is still alive at all... Paolo IK3QAR _______________________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2020-02/msg00013.html (7,831 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] SAC CW 18-19th September (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 09:29:22 +0200
Hi SAC Committee, in May a survey was launched on your site, in which there were some interesting questions, some of them suggesting the will to change rules to transform the contest to a WW (DX can
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2021-09/msg00039.html (9,519 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] SAC CW 18-19th September (score: 1)
Author: "Paolo, IK3QAR" <ik3qar@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 08:20:33 +0200
Hi Ron, I'm not asking the SAC Committee to change the contest rules, just wondering if there was a "result page" following the survey launched by the SAC Committee in April (May was the deadline). T
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2021-09/msg00053.html (12,353 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu