Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW

To: "Steve Katz" <stevek@jmr.com>, "Dave M" <slash_dot@msn.com>, <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW
From: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 19:53:00 -0500
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
Better still, a crybaby award for whoever got that silly rule rammed thru.

Carl
KM1H


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Katz" <stevek@jmr.com>
To: "Dave M" <slash_dot@msn.com>; <amps@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 6:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW


> Why not just establish an "illegal power" class?
> 
> -WB2WIK
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amps-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:amps-bounces@contesting.com]
> On Behalf Of Dave M
> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 3:37 PM
> To: amps@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [Amps] our amplifier in 2010 CQWW
> 
> 
> And yet another consideration would be to create a new class of
> operation , perhaps based on ERP , call it "Elite Class" or something
> similar , most of the world class contest stations would scramble to
> qualify for it and they would be left to compete among them selves
> leaving us "Lower Class" stations to compete on even ground  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>