CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Non-Assisted vs. Assisted

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Non-Assisted vs. Assisted
From: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:24:47 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Plus my station you do not know what freq I was on (only if the other station says exact freq) because my old boat anchor rigs are not computer controlled so I say 20 meters CW and thats about all ya get.

Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 1/30/2013 3:21 PM, RT Clay wrote:
From: Martin , LU5DX <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Non-Assisted vs. Assisted
To: "Rex Maner" <k7qq@netzero.net>
Cc: "Joe" <nss@mwt.net>, cq-contest@contesting.com
Date: Wednesday, January 30, 2013, 2:20 PM
Be sure that is NOT how cheaters
proceed.
They turn on the cluster probably in a different PC via
remote desktop in
some distant country or QTH, even in their smart phones.
The still manually scan the band up and down following the
same pattern
unassisted ops follow.
I am really not following this whole assisted/unassisted debate, but just have one 
small comment (for those who analyze frequencies in logs): Don't assume all 
unassisted ops follow a linear search pattern. When I operate S&P (unassisted) 
for example I pick out stations on a SDR panadapter most of the time rather than 
turning a knob. So the qso's I make may sometimes hop around the band and not be in 
any particular frequency order.

Tor
N4OGW

_______________________________________________
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>