Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:extraham@earthlink.net: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [VHFcontesting] Self Spotting Was: APRS? (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 08:53:52 -0400 (EDT)
Hi Jeff, I can understand you wonder about that. You are in FM19. But imagine yourself in a different grid, say EM92 for instance. :) Operating a contest in a flat area where some portions are even b
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2005-07/msg00034.html (9,118 bytes)

2. [VHFcontesting] A Halo 4 Stack for 70cm on the Cheap (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:33:24 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Hi there, I just finished a construction article for a cheap 70cm halo 4 stack and posted it on my web site. You can access this article through the following link: http://www.kr1st.com/70cmstack.htm
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2005-07/msg00087.html (7,101 bytes)

3. Re: [VHFcontesting] Rover limits KE3HT/R Gas $212 predicted forthis contest (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 09:35:22 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Nothing like good propagation to drive the cost per QSO down. :) Have you thought of billing everyone you contact? :) Thanks for posting the numbers. Very interesting. 73, --Alex KR1ST http://www.kr1
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2005-09/msg00005.html (7,324 bytes)

4. Re: [VHFcontesting] N2SLN/M 2m sprint (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 08:20:38 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Thanks for posting that. I must have missed the 2m Sprint Sprint announcement. Definitely point your antennas to the Charleston/North Charleston/Summerville, SC area. We've started a twice a week 2 m
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-04/msg00011.html (7,862 bytes)

5. [VHFcontesting] KR1ST 2M Sprint Results (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 10:37:21 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
I was on from 8 to 9pm and from 10 to 11pm and worked 7 QSOs and 6 grids. I can certainly understand the comments on how boring and lonely it can get, but we keep hanging in there. Someone's gotta st
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-04/msg00036.html (7,458 bytes)

6. Re: [VHFcontesting] [VHF] My 2 meter contesting ideas/opinions (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 11:50:31 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Hi John, Good post! Last night during the contest a new local ham answers my CQ. He was running an FT-100D and a vertical at 20 feet. I was so glad Skip, KH6TY, and I were there to work him. Now he k
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-04/msg00038.html (9,325 bytes)

7. Re: [VHFcontesting] Best contesting rig (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:25:51 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
"I Communicate On Mine" I was told it means. 73, --Alex KR1ST http://www.kr1st.com _______________________________________________ VHFcontesting mailing list VHFcontesting@contesting.com http://list
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-04/msg00208.html (8,248 bytes)

8. Re: [VHFcontesting] Best contesting rig (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:01:06 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Hey, I won my first CQ certificate with that lil' IC-718. :-) For $550 it may actually be the best HF contesting rig in that price range, although the HW-101 I just restored does a bang up job diggi
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-04/msg00216.html (8,726 bytes)

9. Re: [VHFcontesting] Mix W Rig Expert (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 11:01:42 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
We recently did some tests on 2 meters to see if the RigExpert would be any better than a regular old soundcard or even the built in sound chipsset you find in many PCs. We used simple line of sight
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-05/msg00038.html (8,245 bytes)

10. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL June VHF QSO Party W3SZ (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:00:34 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
I'm jealous! I just got an IC-275H and my biggest VHF antenna is only a rotatable 4 element beam at 34 feet and the doorbell started ringing the first week I used it. :-( If there would be more VHF i
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-06/msg00024.html (8,774 bytes)

11. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL June VHF QSO Party (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 07:34:54 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
I guess that's why the ARRL doesn't call it QRP. It would be inconsistent with HF rules where they do consider QRP to be a maximum of 5 Watts. Why is there no QRP category, anyway? What's wrong with
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-06/msg00051.html (7,849 bytes)

12. Re: [VHFcontesting] Banning The Use Of 144.200 MHz During Contests (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:19:29 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
This issue can be resolved in about two breaths. The issue is really made more complex then it has to be. Exactly. Although I'd drop the word exclusive and specify a frequency range like the .198 to
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-06/msg00161.html (9,201 bytes)

13. Re: [VHFcontesting] Banning The Use Of 144.200 MHz During Contests (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:01:18 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Right. And this is a problem for some, for what, 10 days out of the 365? Please, ya'll keep using .200 when you rotate your beams in our direction in search for contacts. With you rotating your beam
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-06/msg00167.html (9,443 bytes)

14. Re: [VHFcontesting] VUAC (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 07:55:16 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
In other words, you (the committee) are not representing the VHF/UHF community, but are representing the ARRL. There is a big difference. I guess that's where part of the confusion comes from. The co
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-06/msg00180.html (9,585 bytes)

15. Re: [VHFcontesting] VUAC (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:54:20 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
I agree fully! That's what he got, didn't he? I didn't realize it had to be all flattering 'n stuff. Heck, I even made a good suggestion of what to study. Something that can have a real impact in the
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-06/msg00195.html (9,133 bytes)

16. Re: [VHFcontesting] VUAC (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:17:31 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Hi Jim, Fair enough. Any group or committee represents those who set their agenda. So the VUAC is an ARRL representation to the V/UHF community and not the other way around. That's good. And I'm glad
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-06/msg00197.html (8,633 bytes)

17. Re: [VHFcontesting] 144.200 (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:05:31 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Changed digest subject line. I would love to introduce some of these folks on .52 FM to contesting during a contesting weekend when there's actually some activity. It's amazing how many people in my
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-06/msg00202.html (7,946 bytes)

18. Re: [VHFcontesting] Stacked Squalos? (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 07:14:51 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Halos, Squalos, and whatever cute name they come up with for these antennas do not have an omnidirectional pattern, no matter what they claim. (Yes, a local ham and I tested them.) In order for a hal
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-10/msg00010.html (10,795 bytes)

19. Re: [VHFcontesting] Stacked Squalos? (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 07:18:57 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
That's an excellent setup, David. Do you switch in the schack or remotely on the tower? 4 element yagis have a wide enough 3dB beam width to cover about 270 degrees with considerable gain over a dipo
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-10/msg00011.html (8,179 bytes)

20. Re: [VHFcontesting] Joel W5ZN ARRL President to speak at banquet!Microwave Update 2006 (score: 1)
Author: Alex <extraham@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 07:04:41 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
That's an interesting topic title. The typical ARRL attitude is well represented. A much friendlier title would be: "Amateur Radio's Technological Developments, and Why I Think Hams are Reluctant to
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-10/msg00028.html (7,695 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu