Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+Re\s+Skimmers\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+Re\s+Skimmers\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] Re Skimmers (score: 1): Author: "Phil Cooper" <pcooper@guernsey.net>; Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 21:22:55 +0100; Hi all, Just for your info, take a look at the skimmers earlier this evening at spots on 20m RTTY. FT4JA was on 14090 listening up, and there were loads of spots coming from most of the skimmer clust; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-03/msg00320.html (7,514 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] Re Skimmers (score: 1): Author: "Ian White" <gm3sek@ifwtech.co.uk>; Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 21:55:23 +0100; There is something seriously wrong with a large number of skimmers at the moment, because *nobody* in that pileup was sending "CQ" either before or after their callsigns. But it wasn't the skimmers w; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-03/msg00321.html (7,201 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] Re Skimmers (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith N4ZR <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:18:29 -0400; Alex is actively experimenting with several variations on the RTTY Skimmer Server. There are RBN nodes currently running several different versions for statistical comparisons. Please be patient.+ 73; /archives//html/RTTY/2016-03/msg00322.html (8,373 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]