In the 1970s, as K5PFL, I set up for three radio contesting. The stations were Collins KWM2/75S3B ==> Henry 2K4 Drake B-line ==> SB220 Drake C-line ==> Henry 2K4 (a second one) It took two desks and
In the 1970s, as K5PFL, I set up for three radio contesting. The stations were Collins KWM2/75S3B ==> Henry 2K4 Drake B-line ==> SB220 Drake C-line ==> Henry 2K4 (a second one) It took two desks and
Tom, the peer pressure you mentioned doesn't exist unless you are willing to name the station/operator you observed. Otherwise it is just a whisper in the wind that will be ignored. How about it? Who
Tom, the peer pressure you mentioned doesn't exist unless you are willing to name the station/operator you observed. Otherwise it is just a whisper in the wind that will be ignored. How about it? Who
Tom, the peer pressure you mentioned doesn't exist unless you are willing to name the station/operator you observed. Otherwise it is just a whisper in the wind that will be ignored. How about it? Who
Tom, the peer pressure you mentioned doesn't exist unless you are willing to name the station/operator you observed. Otherwise it is just a whisper in the wind that will be ignored. How about it? Who
Tom, the peer pressure you mentioned doesn't exist unless you are willing to name the station/operator you observed. Otherwise it is just a whisper in the wind that will be ignored. How about it? Who
Tom, the peer pressure you mentioned doesn't exist unless you are willing to name the station/operator you observed. Otherwise it is just a whisper in the wind that will be ignored. How about it? Who
This is so true. I have often wondered why the CQWW does not have a real multi-single category. Their M/S category is definitely not a multi-single no matter what they call it. There are many station
Doug, I sure hope these are only your opinions because your answers are just blowing smoke to detract from a real need in the CQWW. Why would you say that a one transmitter station should go M/M if t
Hi Doug. I agree because I happen like the two transmitter multi-single. We even won it at K5NA once on CW once (1991 I think). We won it using four full stations, four towers, and a lot of serious t
Wrong again J.P.!!! The right way to do a CQWW multi-single (really Limited Multi) is to have 8 operators and a station capable of supporting a six-band multi-multi. Six of the operators will be sele
Hi Rich. I always thought the objective was to "win". Not to hand out as many friendy QSOs as possible. We won the 1991 CQWW M/S CW category using four stations connected with fiberoptics and the sam
Wasn't there once a rule in SweepStakes that said the two points for each SS QSO was the sum of one point for correctly receiving the data and the other point for correctly sending the data? I don't
There are too many categories now and it appears that most of the old ones were created to satisify small groups of people who have influence with the CQWW committee. Who asked for, and got, a QRP 10
I am posting this to both TowerTalk and CQ-Contest because it is germane to both lists. Yesterday Susan (K5DU) and I (K5NA) finished putting up a full-sized 6 element inverted vee yagi pointed to the
Doug, I sure hope these are only your opinions because your answers are just blowing smoke to detract from a real need in the CQWW. Why would you say that a one transmitter station should go M/M if t
Wasn't there once a rule in SweepStakes that said the two points for each SS QSO was the sum of one point for correctly receiving the data and the other point for correctly sending the data? I don't
There are too many categories now and it appears that most of the old ones were created to satisify small groups of people who have influence with the CQWW committee. Who asked for, and got, a QRP 10
Doug, I sure hope these are only your opinions because your answers are just blowing smoke to detract from a real need in the CQWW. Why would you say that a one transmitter station should go M/M if t