Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Fwd\:\s+\[wsjtgroup\]\s+WSJT\-X\s+2\.1\.0\-rc6\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 11:49:55 -0700
-- Forwarded Message -- Subject: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 14:32:20 -0400 From: Joe Taylor joe@Princeton.EDU [wsjtgroup] <wsjtgroup-noreply@yahoogroups.com> Reply-To: Joe Tay
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00000.html (11,429 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: Paul O'Kane <pokane@ei5di.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 10:06:54 +0100
Great - we have yet another data mode.  There is no single data mode that is "best" in all respects.  It's always a compromise between time, signal rate, bandwidth and number of discrete channels or
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00004.html (8,826 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: Chuck Dietz <w5prchuck@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 11:25:45 -0500
I dont have any idea what you are saying here. Are you just bad mouthing digital modes? Chuck W5PR _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com ht
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00005.html (9,873 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: "Stephen Bloom" <sbloom@acsalaska.net>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 09:23:26 -0800
RTTY Contesting is decades old. There is an *art* to digital contesting, especially in non error correcting modes. The entry cost as compared to cw in terms of being able to participate is of course
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00006.html (10,039 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 12:44:10 -0700
You're talking to a wall.  Paul always does this stuff ... if you don't view ham radio the way he does you aren't doing ham radio. What Paul is never able to grasp is that "ham radio" covers a much b
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00009.html (15,004 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: Paul O'Kane <pokane@ei5di.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 00:22:46 +0100
You're talking to a wall. This "wall" listens, and has opinions, and explains the reasoning behind itsopinions. Insofar as my opinions deviate from "generally perceived wisdom" (my quotes), they are
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00011.html (20,261 bytes)

7. [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 18:52:47 -0400
Thank you, Dave. Good to see there is still some common sense around here. I went to Dayton/Xenia this year not knowing what to expect. I was delighted by the fact that the acrimony we frequently see
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00012.html (9,554 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 15:38:42 -0500
"Slices and dices it to bits" ... nice pun, Dave! :-) The original Morse telegraph (and others) worked by imprinting the dots and dashes on a paper tape and then decoded by reading it. Imagine doing
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00013.html (10,650 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 20:33:56 -0700
It's radio, right? Assuming you're not a boxtop operator, there's skill in building a station, including the antennas, switching, and so on. And there's propagation too. The operator needs to know wh
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00014.html (9,408 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: Jim Rhodes <jim@rhodesend.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 04:38:08 -0500
Paul, if I am sitting at the keyboard deciding what to send when, and what to respond to there is no "automated machine to machine contact". That is like saying "using a bug instead of a straight key
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00015.html (21,796 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: ku8e <ku8e@ku8e.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2019 12:27:58 -0400
Why are people talking about some digital mode on a reflector that's supposed to be for contesting? It's never going to be the dominant mode for contesting... at least I hope not. If you're getting e
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00018.html (19,462 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 11:54:18 -0700
Personally, I hope that modes like FT8 and FT4 (I've never operated either, by the way) do NOT reduce the amount of contest activity for CW, but if it does it certainly is worth discussing here.  AM
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00021.html (10,773 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [wsjtgroup] WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc6 (score: 1)
Author: Ken K6MR <k6mr@outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 01:00:50 +0000
Why are people talking about some digital mode on a reflector that's supposed to be for contesting? It's never going to be the dominant mode for contesting... If I was a betting man I would posit tha
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-06/msg00026.html (21,020 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu