Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+M\/S\s+questions\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+M\/S\s+questions\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: n4vhk@summitschool.com (HENRY ); Date: Wed Nov 5 09:33:58 1997; <It does not matter how many operators and/or transceivers they used. What <does matter, though, is that they were not transmitting with more than <one TX at a time, other then for multiplier purpose; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00085.html (8,836 bytes)
2. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: will.roberts@cplc.com (Roberts, Will); Date: Wed Nov 5 10:11:01 1997; Be careful about this: Multi/single rules are different, depending on the contest. Your comment would be correct in the ARRL DX contest, but not CQ DX contests for example. In CQ contests, it is perm; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00087.html (8,664 bytes)
3. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: dieven@email.msn.com (Dick Dievendorff); Date: Wed Nov 5 16:15:09 1997; Henry: Yours is not the common interpretation. The applicable part of the CQWW rules reads: C. Multi-Operator Categories (all band operation only). 1. Single Transmitter, only one transmitter and one; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00092.html (10,488 bytes)
4. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: k5na@bga.com (Richard L. King); Date: Wed Nov 5 16:03:52 1997; 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; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00093.html (8,621 bytes)
5. Fwd: [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: Ve3bmv@aol.com (Ve3bmv@aol.com); Date: Wed Nov 5 12:31:08 1997; << 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. >> Yea, wouldn't it; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00096.html (9,082 bytes)
6. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: dl8obc@db0bm.ampr.org (Felix J. Riess); Date: Thu Nov 6 01:24:21 1997; Hello Contesters! After reading the claimed scores of some of the major Multi Single entries of the CQ WW Contest's SSB part, I can understand the frustration of ZL1ANJ. First of all, I am sure that; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00109.html (10,779 bytes)
7. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: TOMK5RC@aol.com (TOMK5RC@aol.com); Date: Wed Nov 5 20:24:10 1997; << 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. Richard; I'm sure y; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00110.html (8,999 bytes)
8. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: w2xx@cloud9.net (w2xx@cloud9.net); Date: Wed Nov 5 20:49:54 1997; Hello Felix: I beg to differ with your above statement. The KE2NL station, winner of the USA M/S category in CQWW SSB last year (call used KF2ET) and the CLAIMED winner this year (call used W2A) is e; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00113.html (9,224 bytes)
9. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (T A RUSSELL); Date: Thu Nov 6 07:41:04 1997; You hit the nail on the head Richard! It's a shame there is no place for two or three aging contesters to get together at an average home station to enjoy the CQ WW contests. The ARRL M/S and M2 cate; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00119.html (9,155 bytes)
10. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: w2up@itw.com (Barry Kutner); Date: Thu Nov 6 08:46:49 1997; Hey guys. Times have changed and technology has changed. First, who said a bunch of guys can't have fun operating the "old fashioned" M/S. True, you won't win, but you can still have fun. It's not a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00122.html (9,219 bytes)
11. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: DougKR2Q@aol.com (DougKR2Q@aol.com); Date: Thu Nov 6 08:59:17 1997; << It's a shame there is no place for two or three aging contesters to get together at an average home station to enjoy the CQ WW contests. >> Oh come Tom. How can you say this? 2 or 3 aging conteste; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00125.html (9,571 bytes)
12. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: w2xx@cloud9.net (J.P. Kleinhaus); Date: Thu Nov 6 16:12:01 1997; Absolutely!! We have lot's of fun...wouldn't do it otherwise. No sense getting into this without that attitude! 73, J.P. W2XX (W2A) -- == J.P. Kleinhaus, W2XX (fdba AA2DU) E-mail: w2xx@cloud9.net As; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00132.html (8,951 bytes)
13. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: k5na@bga.com (Richard L. King); Date: Thu Nov 6 22:45:32 1997; 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; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00133.html (11,231 bytes)
14. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: k4lt@fuse.net (Douglas L. Klein, K4LT); Date: Thu Nov 6 20:28:59 1997; Well, I have to put in my two cents worth on the "you need a true M/S in CQWW" thread. I've been enjoying the M/S category in CQWW (with two transmitters) for 20 years and have never been in a winnin; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00137.html (8,704 bytes)
15. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (T A RUSSELL); Date: Fri Nov 7 01:00:09 1997; CQ WW DX Contest Categories - de N4KG Several years ago, K1AR amazed the world with what he could do with a SINGLE TRANSMITTER and hundreds of ASSISTANTS (electronic spotters on packet). Since he did; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00143.html (12,176 bytes)
16. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: trey@kkn.net (Trey Garlough); Date: Thu Nov 6 23:01:17 1997; So if the new Multi-One category is exactly the same as Single-Op Assisted except with multiple ops, then does this mean the category will continue to have no ten minute rule? --Trey, N5KO -- CQ-Con; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00145.html (8,901 bytes)
17. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: gswanson@arrl.org (Swanson, Glenn, KB1GW); Date: Fri Nov 7 10:47:00 1997; Greetings, Interesting discussion--about M/S and all. Not much to add here, save for some personal thoughts: Sure, I certainly can whine with the best of 'em--just ask my friends! :-) However, I do *; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00154.html (10,813 bytes)
18. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: TOMK5RC@aol.com (TOMK5RC@aol.com); Date: Fri Nov 7 13:57:26 1997; I did not want my comments about CQ WW M/S category to be construed as "whining." The K5RC/K5GA crew spent ten years refining it to an art form. I spent most of my time with sneakers on, running betw; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00165.html (8,939 bytes)
19. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: n4kg@juno.com (T A RUSSELL); Date: Sun Nov 9 08:06:25 1997; .......................................... Try KENTUCKY ! 1973 #2 USA in CQ WW CW M/S (multi-op/single-tx) from K4GSU - N4AR 1974 #1 USA in CQ WW CW M/S from K4GSU - N4AR 1977 #1 USA in CQ WW CW M/S; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00206.html (8,642 bytes)
20. [CQ-Contest] M/S questions (score: 1): Author: k5na@bga.com (Richard L. King); Date: Sat Nov 8 15:43:57 1997; 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; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1997-11/msg00223.html (9,149 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]