Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:john_grimm1450@hotmail.com: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [RTTY] K5D RTTY logging (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 19:43:19 -0500
I was fortunate enough to work K5D on 30 meters on 2/15 at 0652. The next day I checked the online log, and was surprised to see both that QSO and another QSO that I supposedly had on 2/13 at 1600. C
/archives//html/RTTY/2009-02/msg00369.html (8,558 bytes)

2. [RTTY] Whoops: K5D RTTY Logging (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:24:35 -0500
My mistake - I glanced at the online log page and didn't immediately realize that the "first QSO and last QSO" info was the last log update and not my specific QSO data. Still don't know why they wer
/archives//html/RTTY/2009-02/msg00372.html (6,814 bytes)

3. [RTTY] Dupes in Sprint (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 16:40:45 -0400
Spent a few minutes on my first Sprint last night and enjoyed the format. I had several stations work me (dupes) on the same band, and thought that the rules were revised such that only one qso per s
/archives//html/RTTY/2009-10/msg00067.html (6,920 bytes)

4. Re: [RTTY] Update on WX4TM info (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:04:31 -0500
I had the privilege of working Tom over 30 times through the years, and would simply like to pass along my most sincere condolences to his friends and family. I will miss seeing his call sign on the
/archives//html/RTTY/2010-11/msg00076.html (6,789 bytes)

5. Re: [RTTY] RTTY WAS (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:26:58 -0400
Anyone know what the typical tat is for a LOTW WAS application?  I've had one in since January 4 of this year and it hasn't budged.  I e-mailed several times to follow up and haven't heard a thing ba
/archives//html/RTTY/2011-03/msg00168.html (8,032 bytes)

6. Re: [RTTY] 7O6T on RTTY? (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2012 11:14:18 -0400
I was sitting at my desk working watching T88RF run on 15 meters the other day, and some W8 worked him with a 3x3 calling 7O6T. After a few back and forths Kan finally gave up and moved on. So at lea
/archives//html/RTTY/2012-05/msg00024.html (7,133 bytes)

7. [RTTY] Rig Control Problem (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 15:24:58 -0400
I recently went from serial port to USB operation and am having one problem with the new setup, which is 756Pro3, Writelog10.76, Microham Microkeyer, Win7Pro 64 bit. After I send *some* exchanges, th
/archives//html/RTTY/2012-10/msg00150.html (7,117 bytes)

8. Re: [RTTY] ARRL attack on current RTTY users (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 10:37:45 -0500
Just FYI I started a thread on this subject in the digital forum on e-ham awhile back in an attempt to widen this issue's audience and get more feedback and perspective. I myself have been trying to
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-11/msg00166.html (8,333 bytes)

9. Re: [RTTY] ARRL attack on current RTTY users (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 17:09:27 -0500
I am in the process of drafting my comments. Like Jim, I would appreciate even a bullet list of topics/issues which are deemed important to include in those comments. This would be very helpful to me
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-11/msg00199.html (9,297 bytes)

10. [RTTY] Why 150W LP in Roundup? (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 12:26:44 -0500
Is there a reason that the LP limit in the Roundup is 150W or less? Wouldn't simply defining LP as 100W or less make infinitely more sense? Is there a legacy rationale for 150W? HNY to all. John / K0
/archives//html/RTTY/2013-12/msg00215.html (7,105 bytes)

11. Re: [RTTY] Rebuttal comments filed to objections to RM-11708 (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2014 12:43:26 -0500
I haven't seen the word "specious" used in years, but alas have seen it now in several instances originating from the same side of the debate. Hmmm... I have lost a ton of respect for the ARRL for th
/archives//html/RTTY/2014-01/msg00015.html (7,799 bytes)

12. Re: [RTTY] Response to ARRL request for inputs for new Band (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 17:21:31 -0400
I'm still befuddled as to why the ARRL NOW wants my opinion on the issue. Isn't it supposed to be READY-AIM-FIRE and not FIRE-READY-AIM? Seems to me like the trigger's already been pulled. John / K0Y
/archives//html/RTTY/2014-03/msg00142.html (7,170 bytes)

13. Re: [RTTY] Wider JA RTTY bands (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 12:26:25 -0500
That's really great news, especially for contests like JARTS and especially for 80 and 40M. John / K0YQ _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://li
/archives//html/RTTY/2014-12/msg00094.html (7,061 bytes)

14. [RTTY] Sprint log submissions? (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 09:54:20 -0400
Anyone else having a problem submitting Sprint logs? I'm getting a bounce back stating that they're not yet being accepted for October 2015. Thanks, John / K0YQ ______________________________________
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00043.html (6,514 bytes)

15. Re: [RTTY] Sprint log submissions? (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:17:03 -0400
And of course Ed's message shows up in my digest email an hour later. Sorry all. :) John _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00046.html (6,903 bytes)

16. Re: [RTTY] JA RTTY on 80 during the CQWW (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:31:33 -0400
Can't speak for 80 but it was GREAT being able to work so many JAs above 7045 on 40M. _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00129.html (6,946 bytes)

17. Re: [RTTY] How I worked VK0EK from NA on 15M RTTY this morning (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 20:09:26 +0000
Pretty amazing but I don't know of *any* station in CO that has worked VK0EK above 20 meters. None. And very few have been able to work them on RTTY. Tough sledding for sure. ________________________
/archives//html/RTTY/2016-04/msg00023.html (7,475 bytes)

18. Re: [RTTY] DXA says VK0EK on 40 RTTY (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 18:29:29 +0000
They certainly had a lot more business last (local) night running RTTY on 30M than they've had on CW where I think they ran the demand well dry. I was very lucky to work them right after Ed and befor
/archives//html/RTTY/2016-04/msg00064.html (6,953 bytes)

19. [RTTY] Stupid QTC question (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 17:55:42 +0000
If I jump into the WAE contest late, I realize I'm constrained from sending QTC traffic by the number of QSOs I've made. But is there any legal limit to how many QTCs I'm able to receive from others?
/archives//html/RTTY/2016-11/msg00047.html (6,717 bytes)

20. Re: [RTTY] Stupid QTC Question (score: 1)
Author: John Grimm <john_grimm1450@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 15:55:07 +0000
Good stuff and thanks all. But if you've only made (say) 6 QSOs, you can receive up to 60 QTCs but only send 6. So you're better off being a bucket! Not that it really matters but I originally just w
/archives//html/RTTY/2016-11/msg00060.html (8,313 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu