Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:plaws0@gmail.com: 353 ]

Total 353 documents matching your query.

261. [RTTY] Dupes in log? (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2015 17:54:17 -0600
I forget - do we just leave those in or do we remove them? -- Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train! _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00037.html (6,273 bytes)

262. Re: [RTTY] Dupes in log? (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2015 18:11:38 -0600
That's what I thought I remembered but it wasn't mentioned in the rules one way or the other. Thank you! -- Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train! ___________________________________
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00039.html (7,348 bytes)

263. Re: [RTTY] RU macros (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2015 18:14:11 -0600
By half? I'm slipping, clearly. I'm confused. It's impossible to write a script to help users transition because the config file changes daily. Makes sense. But it's not a beta release? I'm confused
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00040.html (9,019 bytes)

264. Re: [RTTY] Lids running RTTY on the JT65 Frequency (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 15:37:06 -0600
Leaving aside the whiners ... I avoid 070 - 075 because, while not invisible, I learned that those funny spikes were actually PSK and not my thermostat (or TV or ..). No problem, I don't go there. Wh
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00079.html (10,424 bytes)

265. Re: [RTTY] Scott & David Rude (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 13:57:40 -0600
Well, some people have thinner skin than others. Whatever. Now, about not working people, that is something I'd like to be able do (unless they are operating from P5). Is there a way, in MMTTY and/or
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00108.html (7,983 bytes)

266. Re: [RTTY] Scott & David Rude (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 09:04:11 -0600
Nah. They're too narrow. Besides, each band will soon be a PACTOR 4 channel - Channels 12, 17, and 30. -- Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train! _____________________________________
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00127.html (8,254 bytes)

267. Re: [RTTY] Lids running RTTY on the JT65 Frequency (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:15:23 -0600
Um, yeah, no. Dumb idea as you say. However, I must quibble with "make everyone aware of the JT65 band plan" ... no one is actually doing that. As I've said before, if I can't hear them, they aren't
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00133.html (10,824 bytes)

268. Re: [RTTY] LIDs (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:32:04 -0600
You mean this? http://www.arrl.org/a-1-op I sympathize to a point. As long as it stays here on the series of tubes that make up the interwebs, it just "is". Services like Gmail provide extremely flex
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00134.html (8,188 bytes)

269. Re: [RTTY] Contest QRMing of other digimodes (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 16:23:43 -0600
I only have a 10 m dipole up right now (and a WARC trap dipole that I probably could have loaded ..) so I was only on that band. Cabrillo rounds your frequency so there is, in reality, more variation
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00137.html (8,734 bytes)

270. Re: [RTTY] Contest QRMing of other digimodes (ARRL BOD) (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:20:41 -0600
As an aside from your aside, this last bit strikes me as silly and says to me that the ARRL needs to appoint Yet Another Ad Hoc Committee to study license classes. If you are going to give Technician
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00140.html (9,038 bytes)

271. Re: [RTTY] Contest QRMing of other digimodes (ARRL BOD) (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 22:40:40 -0600
Y'all obviously haven't looked at the General test lately. If you got over about 30-32 on Element 2, you can pass Element 3 with a glance through the Q&A pool. We've had many, many candidates ace the
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00150.html (9,440 bytes)

272. [RTTY] US License Classes (Re: Contest QRMing of other digimodes (ARRL BOD) (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 16:19:22 -0600
For years I've thought of: Novice (limited privs in many bands) -> General (everything) -> Amateur Examiner (same, but you can give tests). Regardless, what we have now makes less and less sense as t
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00159.html (7,216 bytes)

273. Re: [RTTY] List of Experimental Licenses Reveals Interesting HF Data Comm Experiments (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 14:40:23 -0600
Some of these bands ... so familiar ... where have I seen them? Ah, yes. Here we go: I suspect that this will "kill" amateur radio in the way that the NWS' 70-cm vertical wind profilers did. -- Peter
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00181.html (9,236 bytes)

274. Re: [RTTY] List of Experimental Licenses Reveals Interesting HF Data Comm Experiments (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 15:32:27 -0600
Understood. However, since 1800-2000 kHz is not listed, I think the answer to the question that was posed to you would be "no". And for the list bands that overlap Part 97 allocations, the answer is
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00183.html (7,950 bytes)

275. Re: [RTTY] ARRL BOD minutes published (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 21:13:09 -0600
Leaving aside the RM-11708 fiasco, why on earth would anyone want to *increase* Technician privileges? The word "incentive" still excites some hams (fewer and fewer each year given the demographics)
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00234.html (9,368 bytes)

276. Re: [RTTY] ARRL BOD minutes published (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 09:09:37 -0600
I'm impressed with my ability to pass Element 1B. Not so impressed with my ability to pass Element 1C, however, given that I didn't. The one thing the ARRL learned about license classes is to never t
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00242.html (9,710 bytes)

277. Re: [RTTY] ARRL BOD minutes published (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 09:24:07 -0600
That's not been their history. Now, the FCC screwed up in 1991 because they simply deleted the Morse requirement for Technician. It took about a month for someone to say "Um, OK, but if I pass the co
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00243.html (11,361 bytes)

278. Re: [RTTY] ARRL BOD minutes published (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 09:25:37 -0600
True because, as it is, the HF bands are full of General and Amateur Extra class licensees running amok without the least care about who gets 'clobbered' by their transmissions. -- Peter Laws | N5UWY
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00244.html (9,705 bytes)

279. Re: [RTTY] ARRL BOD minutes published (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:53:12 -0600
I appreciate what you're saying but there are some 357k US Technician class licensees that would gain HF data privileges so you (and everyone else) would be affected. RM-11708 affects you, too. Nothi
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-01/msg00248.html (9,683 bytes)

280. Re: [RTTY] ARRL Request for Member comment on Proposed HF Band Plan Change (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 23:04:23 -0600
I'd say "follow the money" but the League's finances are opaque enough that you really can't. Guys in boats probably have money. -- Sent from Gmail Mobile ____________________________________________
/archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00202.html (8,182 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu