Mail Archive Search: <+from:w4nti at mindspring.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:w4nti: 723 ] [ at (Too many documents hit. Ignored) ] [ mindspring.com: 1467 ]

Total 499 documents matching your query.

61. [SECC] 80 meters (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 14:57:36 -0500; I think a LOT of you guys out there remember when twenty meters was moved from 14.2 to 14.150....back in the 80s as I recall. I was on that particular time and the South Americans went nuts yelling w; /archives//html/SECC/2006-10/msg00116.html (8,303 bytes)
62. [SECC] [ACG] Pa QSO Party Log Format (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 20:12:44 -0500; They accepted my N3FJP log and it was in the .log .sum .dup format. Dan/W4NTI; /archives//html/SECC/2006-10/msg00124.html (7,549 bytes)
63. [SECC] [ACG] Request for Comments to CQWW Contest Committee About Catgories of Stations Participating in Real Time Scoreboards (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 18:36:30 -0500; IMHO if you use PACKET or TELNET DX CLUSTER you are ASSISTED. PERIOD. Dan/W4NTI; /archives//html/SECC/2006-10/msg00151.html (8,609 bytes)
64. [SECC] TI8M Again (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 18:42:54 -0500; You guys always have a good signal up here in Bama. Heck....it's supposed to be for FUN, right? See you in the pileups. Dan/W4NTI; /archives//html/SECC/2006-10/msg00152.html (7,292 bytes)
65. [SECC] [SEDXC] Cobb EMC RFI Help (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 19:15:46 -0500; Dave, And the Power Companies will continue to treat us like mushrooms...why? Because the FCC don't give a rip and ain't pushing the rules. RH told me flat out to leave him alone on the subject. He s; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00003.html (7,945 bytes)
66. [SECC] EPC PSK63 QSO Party 2006 (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:24:04 -0500; It's called experemental Dave. It will eventually settle down I am sure. Just curious, why did you get flack from the Pactor and Amtor guys? Dan/W4NTI; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00042.html (7,468 bytes)
67. [SECC] W4NTI Salmon Run Correction (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 20:32:24 -0500; Final score is 6560.....Whooooopppppeeeee ;-) Dan/W4NTI; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00066.html (6,095 bytes)
68. [SECC] Dunwoody Antenna (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:57:23 -0500; My experience "up North" is somewhat different. Which partially explains why I now live in Bama. We don't have problems with antenna's, we just shoot at each other over the backyard chicken coop.....; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00092.html (9,682 bytes)
69. [SECC] [SEDXC] PFFT! (Was: Texas QSO Party) (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 15:22:04 -0500; I think you have answered that age old question Jeff. I know when Jim (KC4HW) and I was looking to change the Alabama QSO Party weekend we spent a LOT of time checking who was doing what and when. An; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00094.html (8,940 bytes)
70. [SECC] [SEDXC] PFFT! (Was: Texas QSO Party) (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 18:49:53 -0500; Well Bill, and I'm NOT trying to antagonize you....but.....Just because it is authorized via a ARRL band plan that apparantly recieved FCC blessings, DOES NOT mean it is the right thing to do. I thin; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00106.html (8,843 bytes)
71. [SECC] CQ WW RTTY (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 18:54:02 -0500; And there-in are more problems on 80 and 20. 80 has bucco traffic nets in the segement BELOW 3.6. And some up above that but NORMALLY way above the old (I guess) RTTY segments. Which explains why I k; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00107.html (8,628 bytes)
72. [SECC] Not really a contest, but lots of fun (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 18:04:32 -0500; Classic Exchange "CX" September 24, 2006 ? AM and SSB October 1, 2006 ? CW Operating on 160-80-40-20-15-10-6-2 The CX is a no-pressure contest celebrating the older commercial and homebrew equipment; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00109.html (11,686 bytes)
73. [SECC] [SEDXC] Homebrew Amps (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 19:52:17 -0500; I have a SB-200, with new Taylor 572B's I get a good 700 out. Running on 220 volts. I also have a AL-811H, with 4 Taylor 572b's and I get 800 and a bit more on 220 volts. Of course the Ameritron is N; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00114.html (10,450 bytes)
74. [SECC] Texas QSO Party (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 16:37:01 -0500; Texas QSO Party Call: W4NTI Operator(s): W4NTI Station: W4NTI Class: Single Op HP QTH: AL Operating Time (hrs): 6.5 Summary: Band CW Qs Ph Qs Dig Qs -- 160: 80: 40: 20: 15: 10: 6: 2: UHF: -- Total: 3; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00119.html (6,843 bytes)
75. [SECC] Notes on 40 and SAC (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 21:31:19 -0500; I listened and heard one OH trying on 40 SSB but every time he moved another RTTY came right on his frequency. He was soon back on 20 but weak with flutter. Exact same thing happened to me SEVERAL ti; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00128.html (9,283 bytes)
76. [SECC] Notes on 40 and SAC (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:39:18 -0500; I was trying to show I had sympathy for both sides of this discussion. However to answer the question. Since I have been challenged to do so. Put the US Stations about 7075 or so. And run split....ju; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00150.html (10,180 bytes)
77. [SECC] Notes on 40 and SAC (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:40:52 -0500; Not a bad suggestion actually. Dan/W4NTI; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00151.html (8,054 bytes)
78. [SECC] Notes on 40 and SAC (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:52:24 -0500; After re-thinking things....your right Jeff. Why SHOULD CW move off just to accommodate the RTTY guys/gals. I was not aware of the European "Gentleman's Agreement". Now that puts a different light on; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00152.html (10,549 bytes)
79. [SECC] Frequency Allocation Discussion (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:03:34 -0500; The real reason that there is a problem NOW is because up till the RTTY contests started clobbering the prime CW area's of especially 40m......there wasn't a problem of major consequence. I don't kno; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00153.html (12,505 bytes)
80. [SECC] Frequency Allocation Discussion (score: 67): Author: w4nti at mindspring.com (Dan/W4NTI); Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:07:38 -0500; Move to 30Meters....Opps that was already mentioned... :-) Dan/W4NTI; /archives//html/SECC/2006-09/msg00154.html (8,397 bytes)

Current List: 61 - 80
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]