Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+ARRL\s+VHF\s+Test\s+3\s+Band\s+Category\s+\-\s+long\s+rant\s+better\s+delete\!\!\s*$/: 17 ]

Total 17 documents matching your query.

1. [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: Terry Price <terry@directivesystems.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 15:50:03 -0500
This brings up a long time complaint about the ARRL/CAC or whomever decides rules and categories. I've only been VHF contesting since the late 70's, was too busy auto racing and motocross racing befo
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00056.html (9,999 bytes)

2. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Holmes" <tholmes@woh.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:12:00 -0500
Terry... Regarding taking people up, or down, the bands on FT8, W4ZST published a shorthand scheme in the 2020 SEVHF book that makes some sense and might be simple to implement. I'm sure you saw it,
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00057.html (13,649 bytes)

3. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: w5zn@w5zn.org
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 14:19:29 -0700
The original intent of the 3-band category was to entice the hams who owned an FT-847 or similar bare bones radio (no amplifier) they had purchased as an HF radio but never used it on 50, 144 and 432
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00059.html (13,820 bytes)

4. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Holmes" <tholmes@woh.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:29:21 -0500
Hi Joel.. Regarding " (hey we both have an amazing callsign suffix!)" I think you both missed having a great call sign suffix by a little . Tom Holmes, N8ZM --Original Message-- From: VHFcontesting <
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00062.html (15,002 bytes)

5. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: Pete K0BAK via VHFcontesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 21:35:58 +0000 (UTC)
I'm just a little guppy in the VHF contest world, and I haven't been out on a serious rove in a while, but amen to what you wrote. I keep opining that there's a simple solution to re-animating non-WS
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00063.html (12,859 bytes)

6. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: w5zn@w5zn.org
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 14:41:02 -0700
My good friend here in Arkansas, Earl N5ZM, would agree with you Tom!! ZN _______________________________________________ VHFcontesting mailing list VHFcontesting@contesting.com http://lists.contesti
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00064.html (16,162 bytes)

7. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Holmes" <tholmes@woh.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:41:52 -0500
Earl is now my new best friend! Tom Holmes, N8ZM From: w5zn@w5zn.org <w5zn@w5zn.org> Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 4:41 PM To: Tom Holmes <tholmes@woh.rr.com> Cc: VHFcontesting@contesting.com; 'VHFc
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00065.html (15,963 bytes)

8. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: Terry Price <terry@directivesystems.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:58:14 -0500
Well I certainly wasn't trying to blast any past or present members that are contesters, I'm sure they feel the same way albeit they may not be able to share their true opinion!!! Of course the easie
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00067.html (16,319 bytes)

9. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: Jay RM <w9rm@calmesapartners.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 15:26:05 -0700
Re: Distance based scoring - how's this going to work when guys are routinely using EME to pad their mults on 2 and 432 ?? Are we talking about sending EME Qs in VHF contests back to where they belon
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00069.html (19,072 bytes)

10. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: Ed Kucharski <k3dne@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 18:20:02 -0500 (EST)
Well said Terry! I'm with you 100% - maybe more. I too operate FT4, FT8 and MSK144. I almost have to, now that I've moved to a less vhf+ population dense area in SC (EM94). I can't tell you how many
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00074.html (16,986 bytes)

11. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 20:06:12 -0600
When I operate QRP Portable, I do not take a computer along. I log on paper and transfer the log to the computer when I get home. A computer is another thing to try to squeeze into a little car along
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00076.html (20,639 bytes)

12. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: Douglas Dever <dougdever@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 22:20:30 -0500
I get that long time hams hate FT8 and new hams can't understand why anyone would use anything other than FT8 because in a text message and Twitter world no one can have actual dialogue that makes an
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00079.html (14,405 bytes)

13. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: <twright@carolina.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 22:55:08 -0500
This sounds good! Tom N4HN --Original Message-- From: VHFcontesting <vhfcontesting-bounces+twright=carolina.rr.com@contesting.com> On Behalf Of Ed Kucharski Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 6:20 PM To:
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00080.html (18,402 bytes)

14. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Kabel <kabelj@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 21:22:19 -0800
I think that there are too many categories in the VHF contest. It makes it too easy to pick a category that doesn't have any competition and win, which doesn't seem that fun. I'd rather have a middle
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00083.html (21,202 bytes)

15. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: Herb Krumich via VHFcontesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 13:56:02 +0000 (UTC)
Jeff your spot onThis theory of everyone wanting a trophy is a jokeActually deters hams from making improvements in their station Stay SafeHerb at WA2FGK On Tuesday, January 19, 2021, 12:22:50 AM EST
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00085.html (22,351 bytes)

16. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: alex@kr1st.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 09:34:34 -0500
Hi Herb, I agree. These contests have been minimized in significance (cheapened?) to a level that they cannot be seriously considered competitive events anyway. I call them activity weekends. They ar
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00087.html (11,425 bytes)

17. Re: [VHFcontesting] ARRL VHF Test 3 Band Category - long rant better delete!! (score: 1)
Author: Gregory Winters <greg_winters@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 21:44:41 +0000
It does need to be fun (again).Theres no prize money, big prizes, sponsorships, free radios, that I'm aware of. Wish there was! A plaque or paper is all. I do wish we had more activity weekends. Not
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2021-01/msg00118.html (13,151 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu