CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Cabrillo 3.0 vs 2.0

To: "'Pete Smith'" <n4zr@contesting.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Cabrillo 3.0 vs 2.0
From: "Robert Naumann" <w5ov@w5ov.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 06:52:20 -0600
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Rumors of rejections from CQWW due to version 3.0 are false. CQWW's robot
accepts both formats.

I recall hearing that the ARRL robot will begin accepting 3.0 with this
year's ARRL 160m contest.

73,

Bob W5OV

-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Smith [mailto:n4zr@contesting.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 7:27 AM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Cabrillo 3.0 vs 2.0

OK, how about a new topic?  I read about Cabrillo 3.0 and submissions to
CQWW being rejected because of the header changes since Cabrillo 2.0.  What
I'm not reading is any statement from major contest sponsors as to what they
expect.  

My SS CW log was just accepted by ARRL with a 2.0 header.  Will they also
accept 3.0 headers?  Inquiring minds want to know.  Same for CQ.

73, Pete N4ZR
The World HF Contest Station Database
Full details on 3226 contest stations
just updated at http://www.pvrc.org/WCSD/WCSDsearch.htm

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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