Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+6M\s+Dominant\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+6M\s+Dominant\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: "Steve Tripp $K1IIG$" <stephen.tripp@snet.net>; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:33:51 -0400; I try and stay out of the "Rules Game" and any blogs about our contesting aliments but I must agree with KR1ST, Chris, who suggests removing 6m from the ARRL VHF/UHF contest. My suggestion is not to; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00207.html (8,120 bytes)
2. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: "John AA5JG" <aa5jg@lcisp.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:40:48 -0500; Just remember that it was only a year or so ago that the VHF/UHF contest committee recommended removing the higher bands from the June VHF contest. I think removing 6m from the June contest would kil; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00208.html (9,711 bytes)
3. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: jcplatt1@mmm.com; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:56:21 -0500; Snip >I try and stay out of the "Rules Game" and any blogs about our contesting aliments but I must agree with KR1ST, Chris, who suggests removing 6m from the ARRL VHF/UHF contest. My suggestion is n; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00214.html (8,655 bytes)
4. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: Zack Widup <w9sz@prairienet.org>; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:01:40 -0500 (CDT); No, I don't like that idea. Six is too much fun when it opens! If no one ever gets to the higher bands in June, then they probably will in the September contest. Having a six-meter contest could be v; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00217.html (9,520 bytes)
5. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: "David Olean" <k1whs@metrocast.net>; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:43:42 -0500; HI Steve, I some parts of the country, six meters is it. The higher bands including 144 are so sparsely populated that they pray to the propagation Gods and even provide offerings to the deities, so; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00225.html (10,769 bytes)
6. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6M Dominant (score: 1): Author: jon jones <n0jk@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 21:15:04 +0000; 6 is not always dominant... How quickly people forget. Last year 6 Meters stank - one of the worst June contests for Es. We were blessed with good 6M conditions this year. The ARRL has the UHF contes; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00233.html (8,976 bytes)
7. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6M Dominant (score: 1): Author: Zack Widup <w9sz@prairienet.org>; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:00:43 -0500 (CDT); CQWW VHF was a total blast two years ago because 50 MHz was so open. Don't count this contest out. It's a lot easier on Hilltoppers and Rovers too - only two bands to concentrate on! 73, Zack W9SZ __; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00239.html (8,941 bytes)
8. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: Dan Evans <dan.evans@insightbb.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:10:56 -0400; Yep, that's a pretty good way to sum it up:-) 73 Dan -- K9ZF /R no budget Rover **QRP-l #1269 Check out the Rover Resource Page at: <http://www.qsl.net/n9rla> List Administrator for: InHam+grid-loc+; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00242.html (8,402 bytes)
9. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6M Dominant (score: 1): Author: Dan Evans <dan.evans@insightbb.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:26:24 -0400; Yep, I really had a blast in the CQ-VHF last year. I'm looking forward to this year as well. I would personally prefer a 4 band limit as opposed to the current bottom two in this 'test. But I have t; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00244.html (8,895 bytes)
10. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: "Mike (KA5CVH) Urich" <ka5cvh@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:28:17 -0500; Are you on drugs? 50 MHz is the perfect band to get the newbie with their tech ticket on the air with an inexpensive basic station and get involved. Obviously this is some New England elitist attitud; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00245.html (8,790 bytes)
11. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: "Bob K0NR (email list)" <list@k0nr.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 19:36:47 -0600; Besides, we already have that contest (no 6M), it is called the ARRL UHF Contest (August). Generally boring as all heck (per my interests...your mileage may vary :-) 73, Bob K0NR ____________________; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00252.html (9,328 bytes)
12. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: Zack Widup <w9sz@prairienet.org>; Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:46:14 -0500 (CDT); Yeah, it can be boring when I run across stations that have only one or two bands. When I find someone who has equipment for everything thru 10 GHz, then it gets exciting for a while. My microwave tr; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00258.html (9,906 bytes)
13. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: "Ron Hooper" <w4wa@alltel.net>; Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 06:56:23 -0400; Steve, I Feel your PAIN but would never remove 6 meter from the contest. I still found time to work 6 meters and 6 other bands during the contest. Some years 6 does not open very well in June and as; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00259.html (11,244 bytes)
14. Re: [VHFcontesting] 6m Dominant (score: 1): Author: "Anthony Rick" <asrick@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 13:51:57 -0500; What a strange conversation... I remember seeing at least a dozen posts describing what a disappointment the 2007 June contest was because 6m never really opened up. Several people expressed their fr; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2008-06/msg00288.html (10,653 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]