Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:wx4tm@tm-moore.com: 67 ]

Total 67 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the ADVANTAGE OF BIG ANTENNAS horse... (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 11:41:12 -0500
I have known many examples of wire antennas outperforming big beam antennas in certain contests, locations, and propagation conditions. For instance, even in the NAQP, a good wire antenna with multip
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00169.html (13,107 bytes)

42. Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the ANTENNA OVERKILL horse... (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 16:06:37 -0500
I have yet to see comments from anyone here proposing separate classes that seemed to be whining. To the contrary, its those who oppose the issue that seem to be doing the name calling, and personall
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00180.html (11,905 bytes)

43. [RTTY] Fw: SO1RSO2R (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:53:35 -0500
-- Original Message -- From: "der" <derosan@yahoo.com> To: <wx4tm@tm-moore.com> Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 1:33 PM Subject: SO1RSO2R Tom, Please read the attachment, and if you don't mind, post it
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00259.html (10,086 bytes)

44. Re: [RTTY] Joe's open letter to Shelby, K4WW (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 17:43:31 -0500
Joe, you're essentially saying: People who run in a separate HIGH POWER category are also contributing to: "If NCJ and ARRL allow this blatant discrimination it will mean than NCJ is no longer intere
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00301.html (12,036 bytes)

45. Re: [RTTY] SO2R vs. SO1R - a pertinent question (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 18:06:52 -0500
I'm glad you said "generally" because its a FACT that top SO2R ops with relatively small antennas running low power have often beat top SO1R HP scores. But then I'm sure you would say that the SO1R o
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00400.html (8,413 bytes)

46. Re: [RTTY] SO2R vs. SO1R - a pertinent question (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 19:50:26 -0500
but Joe, AA5AU and KI5XP and other top SO2R ops have specifically stated that SO2R was the significant advantage. How can you dispute them when you say they're the smartest, they know their capabilit
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00402.html (7,942 bytes)

47. Re: [RTTY] SO2R vs. SO1R - a pertinent question (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 20:31:23 -0500
No Barry, you're missing the point.. I'm not comparing those two to others. I'm comparing their intelligence and skills to apply and the difference in success, of SO2R vs SO1R. When all else is equal
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00406.html (11,147 bytes)

48. Re: [RTTY] SO2R vs. SO1R - a pertinent question (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 21:07:13 -0500
EVERY time? Not quite. I can show you where wire antennas outperform beam antennas in the central southern part of the country in the ARRL roundup. Not once but several times. Good high beams are low
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00410.html (10,726 bytes)

49. Re: [RTTY] SO2R vs. SO1R - a pertinent question (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 21:20:08 -0500
Okay, we're making progress here. You finally admit SOxR is an advantage. What I believe you're really saying then, is that to consider the SOxr or We've debunked the beam theory. We've debunked the
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00411.html (10,045 bytes)

50. [RTTY] Arrived Swains Island (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 14:28:58 -0500
Just flew 200 miles from Pago Pago in a Cessna Caravan Amphibian and landed at the lagoon on Swains Is. Trip took abt 1 hr 45 Mins.. Upon landing pilot said GPS read -11.3.37' S 171.4.79'W Take off w
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00550.html (6,396 bytes)

51. Re: [RTTY] Arrived Swains Island (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 14:58:54 -0500
Problem is that due to prior scheduled load and resultant weight restrictions, I was only able to bring the FT897D and a bag of wire antennas. They said the two 756ProIII's, 4 steppir ants and 2 Alph
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00551.html (8,622 bytes)

52. Re: [RTTY] Arrived Swains Island (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 16:20:35 -0500
ah hah, if I could simulate the QSO's, I could also simulate having the 756's etc.. hmmmmm... now that we've done that.. we'll simulate an on line, updated real time via satellite, internet log and w
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00554.html (8,755 bytes)

53. [RTTY] FT990 CAT problem (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 13:47:05 -0500
There was some earlier discussion/questions by me and others about CAT problems with the FT990. My wife's radio is an FT990 rv1.3 using a West Mountain Radio RigBlaster Pro and Logger32 The problem w
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00573.html (7,291 bytes)

54. [RTTY] RRU plaque (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 04:27:43 -0500
The ARRL RTTY Roundup is one of my favorite contests. Its obviously one of the most popular. Its exciting. It really gets the adrenlin pumping. Even when the props are poor, a great majority hang in
/archives//html/RTTY/2006-10/msg00216.html (6,699 bytes)

55. Re: [RTTY] Anarts exchanges (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 16:34:03 -0500
If we are to believe that the rules call for "RST, Time UTC, and CQ Zone" - in that order, with the UTC affixed, as listed by the rules, then it follows that we must "use Amateur bands 80, 40, 20, 15
/archives//html/RTTY/2007-06/msg00086.html (8,322 bytes)

56. [RTTY] Fw: SO1R Proclamation (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 11:51:08 -0500
Been gettin a bit personal out there on this issue.. Here's something to lighten it up a bit _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contest
/archives//html/RTTY/2007-09/msg00159.html (9,060 bytes)

57. Re: [RTTY] CQ-Contest SO2R (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:57:00 -0500
Please consider this: WHEN ALL ELSE IS EQUAL Take two identical, extremely competent, expertly skilled SO2R ops with identical SO2R stations in the same propagional locale (lets just say two AA5AU's)
/archives//html/RTTY/2007-09/msg00182.html (14,298 bytes)

58. [RTTY] TARA MELEE (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 11:26:23 -0600
The score submission form for the RTTY TARA MELEE is now available on the 3830 score submission page.. 73, Tom WX4TM _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.
/archives//html/RTTY/2007-12/msg00016.html (6,629 bytes)

59. Re: [RTTY] [CQ-Contest] RTTY Reflections (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:12:00 -0600
I have mixed thoughts on this issue because I fully understand and appreciate the fact that a hugh number of contest participants are not 'contesting' per se. They're in it for many other reasonable
/archives//html/RTTY/2008-01/msg00109.html (14,114 bytes)

60. Re: [RTTY] RTTY WPX ZC4LI SOSB/20 HP (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Moore" <wx4tm@tm-moore.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:09:46 -0600
The other side of that coin is that I had at least 10 or 15 'dupe' calls for which "I knew perfectly well" had called me earlier and acknowledged my report with my call correctly.. It really doesn't
/archives//html/RTTY/2008-02/msg00151.html (11,109 bytes)

Current List: 41 - 60
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]
This search system is powered by Namazu