RE: [DX-CHAT] one more no buro manager
Art, I have no access to a buro so you will need to send direct.. as postage costs are getting worse you will require 2 ircs or $4usd or $4euro for postage for the package. Address is below. That's what I have lately got in reply to my e-mail request for buro QSL. Since there is 2 USD step, as I see, who will be the first one requesting 6 dollars or 6 Euros for a confirmation? Is the postage in Australia THAT expensive? And does VK-buro work THAT bad? Whoever sent you this should be reported to ARRL as being unsportsman- like. Looking at the Australian Post Office web site reveals that the tariff for international air mail (letter to 50 g) to most of the world is 1.80$ (AUD). Looking at www.oanda.com, the current conversion rate between the USD and AUD is 1.336 ... thus the cost is about $1.35 US to mail three or four cards from Australia to anyplace in the world (one IRC or two GS should be sufficient). As to the bureau ... in much of the world, those who are not members of the national society do not have access to the bureau. Quite frankly, as slow as it may be, every QSL manager should still be required to be a member of his/her national society and respond to bureau cards (even if it takes a couple years) ... particularly with demands like this! Conclusion: LoTW rules. Absolutely! Of course, there are the managers/expeditions that are not putting QSOs on LotW until they receive the card (even though their logs have been available for the on-line searches since day one! That also runs counter to the spirit of LotW. 73, ... Joe, W4TV (ex K4IK) Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] QSL costs
Charlie, I think any US ham should send any DX ham FIVE US DOLLARS freely if he wants a card back. Can we be so cheap otherwise? No one is gonna get rich at ham radio, believe me. If u disagree with me, please walk in the shoes of DX ops of modest means; then decide. 73 I doubt that anyone is going to complain about a little bit extra to help out needy hams in the most underdeveloped countries. However, this thread started because a VK manager refuses to handle bureau cards and is asking for a $2 premium above the $2 (actually $1.35 US at current exchange rates) is actually costs to return a card. For managers in Europe, VK/ZL, the USA, VE ... even some of the leading developing nations of South America to behave that way is unacceptable. Not every DX-er is made of money - many even in the USA are retired and on fixed incomes. The round trip cost of a traditional QSL (card, two envelopes, postage, two green stamps) is more than $3.00 and that's not a throw away for some. 73, ... Joe, W4TV (ex K4IK) Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] Australian QSL costs - some clarifications from VK3QI
K3BZ asked of VK3QI One question you wrote: Comments have also been made about the LoTW. Unfortunately, until LoTW is able to be accepted and accessed at no cost by Awards Managers outside of the U.S.A., the requirement of hard copy qsl cards will remain a necessity. What are the costs for a manager outside the US to accept and access LOTW? Does the ARRL make you pay to use LOTW? Arrangements have not, as yet, been made between ARRL and any other awards sponsor although discussions have supposedly been held with both CQ and IOTA. ARRL charges a fee for use of LotW credits for DXCC ... there has been no announcement of support for other ARRL awards but I have been told that WAS and VUCC are in the works. It is my expectation that ARRL will have a per credit charge similar to DXCC for WAS and VUCC. Still, I do not know if or how ARRL expects to charge for credits used for other award programs ... I do not believe there is even an API in place to support outside awards programs although the station location information does include information necessary to support both the CQ and IOTA awards. 73, ... Joe, W4TV (ex K4IK) Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] Why use IRCs?
Barry, There are many countries where $1.00 is not enough and $2.00 is overkill but 1 IRC covers the return. For most of those countries, the mint postage brokers are charging far more than $1.30 (in some cases more than the cost of a new IRC!). In addition, there are countries in which it is illegal to posses foreign currency, countries where it is difficult to know if $1.00 will cover the cost, and countries with non-convertible currencies. One IRC is usually a safe alternative for all of those situations. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barry Sent: Monday, December 26, 2005 1:23 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] Why use IRCs? Just wondering why anyone in the US still uses IRCs. In most countries, a greenstamp covers it. Secondary market IRCs are ~$1.30 and they expire and can't be recirculated forever like the old ones. Countries where postage is more than $1 typically require more than 1 IRC for airmail return to NA. Inquiring minds want to know... 73, Barry -- Barry Kutner, W2UP Newtown, PA Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] [DX-NEWS] [CQ-Contest] LotW Support by ARRL Officials Officers ...
Bud, Maybe if they had used the system and experienced the frustrations you complain about, they would have approved the resources necessary to fix those problems! 99 and 44/100th percent of the complaints about LotW could be resolved by fixing software problems, improving the end-user documentation, increased marketing/awareness of LotW domestically and internationally and providing better ways to handle DX sign-ups. ARRL Officials Officers should be supporting/promoting LotW as much as they are out there talking about Spectrum Defense, the Big Idea, and other programs. To dis their own product does not set a very good example. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of W2RU - Bud Hippisley Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 11:21 AM To: Joe Subich, W4TV; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: dx-news@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] LotW Support by ARRL Officials Officers ... Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: It is a sad commentary to see several well-known and active amateurs who can't even support Logbook of the World enough to upload their own logs. Perhaps this indicates why LotW has still not received the resources necessary to properly promote it outside the US and integrate awards beyond DXCC (and now WAS in part) on a timely basis. The following 26 ARRL officials are NOT using LOTW (Please remember them in your votes): Perhaps they have suffered the same frustrations trying to use it that some of us out here have O:-) Bud, W2RU ___ CQ-Contest mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest -- Archives http://www.mail-archive.com/dx-news@njdxa.org THE DXR is sponsored by the North Jersey DX Association. Please visit our website: http://www.njdxa.org/index.php scroll to bottom for subscribe/unsubscribe options -- Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] FW: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert - LOTW User Update
-Original Message- From: Terry Gerdes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 4:28 PM To: Terry Gerdes; Joe Subich, W4TV; 'FireBrick'; 'RTTY List' Cc: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert - LOTW User Update RTTY ops, I need to update my post on ARRL Officials that do not use the LOTW. It turns out that Central Director: George R. Isely, W9GIG does use the LOTW and is listed in the HB9BZA LOTW user list. I made a typo when I searched the HB9BZA list looking for W9GIG's call. Sorry George. That bring the total ARRL officials using LOTW to 14 and the ones not using LOTW to 25. If anyone forwarded my original post to any other reflector, please forward this correction as well. Thanks. 73 Terry - AB5K - Original Message - From: Terry Gerdes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Joe Subich, W4TV [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'FireBrick' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'RTTY List' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 8:41 AM Subject: Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert Hi all, I find it very alarming that 66 percent of out ARRL officials do not use LOTW. Even the ARRL Chief Technology Officer: Paul Rinaldo, W4RI is not a LOTW user. Are these folks no longer hams? Are they too busy? Either way, perhaps they should not ne representing our interests at the League. Here are the details: Source of ARRL Officials: http://www.arrl.org/divisions/ Souce of LOTW users: http://rchalmas.users.ch/lotw/ The following 13 ARRL officials are using LOTW: President: Joel Harrison, W5ZN First Vice President: Kay C. Craigie, N3KN Chief Executive Officer: David Sumner, K1ZZ Chief Operating Officer: Harold Kramer, WJ1B Atlantic Director: William C. Edgar, N3LLR Great Lakes Director: Jim Weaver, K8JE Midwest Director: Wade Walstrom, W0EJ Midwest Vice Director: Bruce Frahm, K0BJ New England Director: Tom Frenaye, K1KI Roanoke Director: Dennis Bodson, W4PWF Southwestern Vice Director: Edward J. Ned Stearns, AA7A West Gulf Director: Coy C. Day, N5OK West Gulf Vice Director: Dr David Woolweaver, K5RAV The following 26 ARRL officials are NOT using LOTW (Please remember them in your votes): Second Vice President: Rick Roderick, K5UR International Affairs Vice President: Rod Stafford, W6ROD Treasurer:James McCobb Jr., K1LU Chief Financial Officer: Barry J. Shelley, N1VXY Chief Development Officer: Mary Hobart, K1MMH Chief Technology Officer: Paul Rinaldo, W4RI Atlantic Vice Director: Tom Abernethy W3TOM Central Director: George R. Isely, W9GIG Central Vice Director: Howard S. Huntington, K9KM Dakota Director: Jay Bellows, K0QB Dakota Vice Director: Twila Greenheck, N0JPH Delta Director: Henry R. Leggette, WD4Q Great Lakes Vice Director: Gary L. Johnston, KI4LA Hudson Director: Frank J. Fallon, N2FF Hudson Vice Director: Joyce Birmingham, KA2ANF New England Vice Director: Mike Raisbeck, K1TWF Northwestern Director: Jim Fenstermaker, K9JF Northwestern Vice Director: William J. Sawders, K7ZM Pacific Director: Bob Vallio, W6RGG Pacific Vice Director: Andy Oppel, N6AJO Roanoke Vice Director: Rev Leslie Shattuck, K4NK Rocky Mountain Director: Warren G. Rev Morton, WS7W Rocky Mountain Vice Director: Brian Mileshosky, N5ZGT Southeastern Director: Frank M. Butler Jr, W4RH Southeastern Vice Director: Sandy Donahue, W4RU Southwestern Director: Richard J. Norton, N6AA 73 Terry - AB5K Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] The KP5 matter is going bad
Why is it that everyone immediately demands an extraordinary show of facts when it comes to situations like the KP5? It is clear that the KP5 operation was cut short by external pressure. The DXCC desk has examined the documents and determined that the two operators originally had permission to be on the island ... and as US territory the operators were licensed to operate there. That is all anyone is entitled to know. If the operators care to release any further data they are welcome to do so but if it impacts their employer and/or the contacts with FWS that allowed them to receive the landing permission in the first place there is no reason that they should be forced to do so just to satisfy the curiosity of others reading this. W3UR has posted, for his subscribers only, details of the external intervention. I hope that Bernie or some other individual will eventually release the details of that intervention as that is the real crime here and anyone involved in the intervention that cut short the KP5 operation should not only be banned from DXCC for life but they should be required to reimburse the cost of the operation in full. 73, ... Joe, W4TV Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] QSL info
Title: Message Why can't the ARRL make LOTW information available via a 'read-only' search engine. Quite simply, the ARRL does not want anyone "trolling" for QSOs. Either the information uploaded by both stations matches or it does not. To allow unrestricted searching would invite the followingabuse: W4TV searches for unconfirmed QSOs with: K4TV, W4TU,W4NU,W3TV, W3TU, W3NU, W4EV, W3EV on CW and W4TB, W4TD, W4TE on phone. Onfinding an entry that is "needed" sends the station/manager a card with a note claiming to have been the one to have made the the QSO "but QRM or QRN must have effected what you heard." There is an API available to award sponsors who wish to accept LotW confirmations. It is easy for them to submit an inquiry to LotW and get a confirmation or rejection. The ball is in their court ... 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of N7MALSent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 1:09 PMTo: N7MAL; DX ChatCc: Mills, Wayne N7NGSubject: Re: [DX-CHAT] QSL info I have received several emails reminding me LOTW is, at best, only available for ARRL DXCC WAS. WHY??? Why can't the ARRL make LOTW information available via a 'read-only' search engine. Logbook search engines are a 'dime-a-dozen', the technology is readily available and does not have to be re-invented. There is nothing secretive about the fact I worked station XYX on 20m CW. Making QSL information readily available, to anyone,would not compromise anything. Awards like IOTA, for example,could then establish their own guidelines for how/when this information could be used in lieu of the hard/impossible to acquire QSL cards. The LOTW system is, I think we all agree,very secure and very accurate because of the way it was designed, implemented and managed. I think the next step is to use LOTW to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. c.c. Wayne Mills ARRL LOTW MAL N7MALBULLHEAD CITY, AZhttp://www.ctaz.com/~suzyq/N7mal.htmhttp://geocities.com/n7mal/Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.It's already tomorrow in Australia - Original Message - From: N7MAL Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] QSL info Seems to a simple minded person, like me, the solution is LOTW. With all the talent/influence on this mailing list something could be worked out. MAL N7MALBULLHEAD CITY, AZhttp://www.ctaz.com/~suzyq/N7mal.htmhttp://geocities.com/n7mal/Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.It's already tomorrow in Australia Thanks for the update on webpage and news report. I have tried to comfirmwith Joca since 2003 ZW0S and later QSO's with no luck . Well over 50 bucksin postage, registered mail,plus green stamps and IRC's. I have been inemail with Joca and know his problem exists other than in his hands. I donot have Peter Paul Rocks comfirmed yet. I have just about given up, howmuch should it cost for a confirmation? Since most do participate in theDXCC program, maybe the logs could be emailed directly to Bill at ARRL andthey can be confirmed that way, or a stateside manager, or something..whoknows at this point. I honestly would like it confirmed but can't afford itanymore. Depressing. I hope they catch the postal crooks and beat there assgood. 73 Pete NA2P
RE: [DX-CHAT] new rule??
Although I'm quite good at Geography, I don't have the foggiest what will become a candidate, however. Any guesses out there? One other reflector I'm a member of suggested Swain's Reef (supposedly out near Saipan). Looking over the Department of State list, it appears that American Samoa and the Northern Marianas would move from point 2 entities (geographic separation) to point 1 entities (political entities). As such, the distance requirement for separation by water drops from 800 km to 350 km. This change may qualify Swain's Island (attached to American Samoa) but one source gives a separation for 320 km from Tutuila (location of the capital, Pago Pago). I have not looked closely enough at Northern Marianas to see if there are any outlying islands that might qualify there. As far as I can tell, all of the other entities on the Department of State list either already qualify as Political entities ... or fail to meet the local administration test. 73, ... Joe, W4TV Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] new rule??
Yoshi, It would appear that Mauritius (3B8) is the Political Entity (point 1). Because St. Brandon (3B7) is more than 350 km from 3B8 it qualifies as a separate entity under point 2 (separation). However, since Agalega (3B6) is not 800 km from 3B7, it does not qualify as separate from either 3B7 or 3B8 and is considered part of the nearest entity (3B7). Neither Agalega or St. Brandon is listed on the US Department of State Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty list. If St. Brandon was listed, it would qualify as a Political Entity and Agalega would then be eligible based on separation of more than 350 km. If Agalega was included on the Dept. of State list, it would qualify for inclusion as a political entity. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Takeshi Yoshida Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 11:00 AM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Cc: Zack Widup Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] new rule?? I think I owe you an apology, because I'm not so good at English and I may have wrong understanding about the rules. Anyone know if my word of 3B7/St.Brandon status is correct or not? Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] new rule??
Peter wrote: Personally, I wish they'd re-write the DXCC criteria entirely to get rid of stuff which, if proposed today, wouldn't qualify (the 4U1UN/ITU versus 4U1WB / 4U1VIC, etc); probably Scarborough Pimple would fit into that category as well. Personally, I love the challenge of having some hard-to-work places out there, but it really should be equitable across the board--not one set of rules for old-timers' sake and one for everyone else. I've NEVER been a fan of grandfathering anything to anybody. This new rule probably makes sense in that it recognizes essentially self governing indigenous populations. However, DXCC needs to be rationalized ... the list needs to be cleaned and entities that do not qualify based on the current rules should be removed. The criteria for entity status need to be further tightened: 1) any entity that does not have a permanent, indigenous (non- military) population should not be a country. 2) any territory that is privately owned, e.g., Swain's Island, Cocos (Keeling) Island, Palmyra, etc. should not be eligible for country status 3) any territory that controls access beyond normal, sovereign (passport and visa) entry requirements should not be eligible. 4) any entity subject to jurisdictional dispute (e.g. the Spratley Islands) should not be eligible for inclusion until sovereignty has been settled by the World Court or UN. Yes, I realize it will reduce the number of entities ... I'll lose far more than I would gain. However, this will return DXCC much closer to the original idea of the program. DXCC was never intended to encourage amateurs to take the extraordinarily high risk involved in landing and operating on a 10 sq meter rock in the middle of a reef or hitting the beach in a war zone. 73, ... Joe, W4TV Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] Desecheo I. mess
I believe he should be banned from DXCC for life for unsportsmanlike conduct. I know some people take DXCC very seriously, but a hit man is a little much :.) He should be treated like the gold old boys in West Virginia treat those who stick their nose in where it doesn't belong ... either shot or pushed down an abandoned mine shaft never to be heard from again. For this fool, whoever he is, to waste as much of out tax dollars as was wasted on the Club Fed report on a private vendetta is obscene. 73, ... Joe, W4TV Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
Urb writes, Am I the only one who is concerned that the ARRL is determining what others may put up on their website? I understand their position but don't we all have the right to post legal information on our websites without censure or repercussions by a third party? I don't know that ARRL is determining what you may or may not post on your web site. What they are saying is that if you choose to post full details of QSOs (specific times), your action can contribute to cheating and as such, it violates he rules of the DXCC program. I don't see this as any different than a business listing the name, address and account numbers of its customers on a public web site. As long as the business does not publish the credit card and social security numbers it's probably not technically illegal but the information may well be enough to enable a less than honest person to get the credit card and social security numbers of those customers. 73, ... Joe, W4TV Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] QSL's to UA4WHX?
Title: Message I hope he's answering QSLs ... haven't received anything after several tries over the last two years. With the current crop of IRCs expiring, maybe that will speed things up. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim HegerSent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 10:23 AMTo: dx-chat@njdxa.orgSubject: [DX-CHAT] QSL's to UA4WHX? I just found information that UA4WHX doesn't want U.S. dollars for qsling, only IRC's or bureau. This is after qsling 4 previous operations over the last two years, and no QSL's received. Anyone know if I can ever expect a reply? Or would it be better to QSL again with IRC's?Tnx, Tim - N3XX
RE: [DX-CHAT] After effects
Title: Message Gerry, With the large amount of space between 3600and 4000 - even though there will be US signals there - forthe Canadians to move below 3600 would be very bad form. The density of US phone activity should be much less than the present and considering the essentially local character of the band, proximity should allow Canadians to operate successfully within the 3600 - 4000 area. Anyone who moves down on top of digital activity is simply looking to cause intentional interference to digital users. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of GerrySent: Friday, October 13, 2006 10:15 AMTo: dx-chat@njdxa.orgSubject: Re: [DX-CHAT] After effects Ron, All this discussion centres around US use of the bands. As you push down your phone band, hams in countries like Canada will move some of their phone operations down as well. Your example on 80 with phone down to 3600 and digital below that may well be more like US phone to 3600 and Canadian phone down to 3575 with digital and CW squeezed into the last 75 khz. This will no doubt lead to competition for space as now happens on 40 around 7050-7060 between Canadian and DX SSB and US CW. Canada does not have sub-bands and should we choose, we can operate any mode anywhere. We use the bands based more on a "gentleman's agreement" (no, it's doesn't always work well)and would hope these new US assignment will work themselves out for all users of the bands. GerryVE6LB/VA6XDXARRL DXCC Card CheckerVE/VA6 QSL Bureau Team(403) 251-6520ve6lb (at) rac.cawww.qsl.net/ve6lb/ - Original Message - From: Ron Notarius W3WN To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:52 AM Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] After effects Good question.Relatively Simple answers: (a) this 'omnibus' ruling combined a lot of petitions and NPRM's, and there are are many parts that some aren't aware of(b) the FCC did some things unexpected, such as expanding the 80/75 phone band all the way down to 3600 kHz, where most expected it to only go down to 3650 kHz (which, as a practical matter, would have left a 50 kHz area for digital modes and 100 kHz for CW only)(c) the FCC left some things unclear, at least to those of us who are neither lawyers nor bureaucrats... like exactly where do Novices and Tech+'s operate CW on 80, 40, 15 now? (I'm sure it's buried in there somewhere, but I haven't had a chance to dig out the specific language yet)and let's not forget:(d) some people ignored most or all of this or didn't expect (or hoped) some or all of this wouldn't happen, and now they have to figure out what to do next. 73From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Date: 2006/10/13 Fri AM 07:46:40 CDTTo: dx-chat@njdxa.orgSubject: [DX-CHAT] After effectsJust wondering- with a couple years to comment to the FCC -before- it was adopted, why all the discussion now. I guess the boat was missed if there were any real concerns.73,Duane, WV2B"The reward of a thing well done is to have done it."- Ralph Waldo EmersonSubscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chatTo post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.orgThis is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] After effects
Gerry, Digital cannot move up. Under the rules and regulations, digital is not permitted areas where Phone and image are authorized. 73, ... Joe, W4TV --Original Message- From: Gerry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 12:21 PM To: Joe Subich, W4TV; dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] After effects Joe, There is more than enough bad form to go around now. Might be a thought for digital to move up in all this large amount of space you mention (3600-4000). Gerry VE6LB - Original Message - From: Joe Subich, W4TV To: 'Gerry' ; dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 9:27 AM Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] After effects Gerry, With the large amount of space between 3600 and 4000 - even though there will be US signals there - for the Canadians to move below 3600 would be very bad form. The density of US phone activity should be much less than the present and considering the essentially local character of the band, proximity should allow Canadians to operate successfully within the 3600 - 4000 area. Anyone who moves down on top of digital activity is simply looking to cause intentional interference to digital users. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gerry Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 10:15 AM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] After effects Ron, All this discussion centres around US use of the bands. As you push down your phone band, hams in countries like Canada will move some of their phone operations down as well. Your example on 80 with phone down to 3600 and digital below that may well be more like US phone to 3600 and Canadian phone down to 3575 with digital and CW squeezed into the last 75 khz. This will no doubt lead to competition for space as now happens on 40 around 7050-7060 between Canadian and DX SSB and US CW. Canada does not have sub-bands and should we choose, we can operate any mode anywhere. We use the bands based more on a gentleman's agreement (no, it's doesn't always work well) and would hope these new US assignment will work themselves out for all users of the bands. Gerry VE6LB/VA6XDX ARRL DXCC Card Checker VE/VA6 QSL Bureau Team (403) 251-6520 ve6lb (at) rac.ca www.qsl.net/ve6lb/ Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] Re: N8S Online Logs
Jim, Three or four days into the operation asking if anyone knows what is up with the on-line logs - since the function is there - is not out of line. Even for an experienced DXer it is nice to have the confirmation so those who have worked them can get out of the pile-up and let some of the weaker signals, antenna challenged and less experienced operators have a chance! 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Reisert AD1C Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 6:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; DX, Chat Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Re: N8S Online Logs At 05:03 PM 4/6/2007, John - WB8RFB wrote: Is it even remotely possible that the post about on-line logs came from someone new to DX'ing who was simply asking a question that he/she didn't know the answer to? No, it came from a DXCC card checker, according to his signature. 73 - Jim AD1C Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] Stupid countries (formerly BS7H thoughts)
Barry wrote: For me, it's not a question of danger. It's a question of does it make any sense? Here we have a few rocks sticking out of the ocean and the only way to inhabit them is to build scaffolding. This is a stupid country. How is it different from Okino Torishima (aka Baldwin's folly?) Agreed ... where it s not possible to even set up a table for operating without first building a platform to create a level surface, that entity certainly fails any test of common sense. I cannot see how this is any different than Okino Torishma, Sealand - or granting country status to oil and gas EP platforms. BS7H should be removed from the DXCC list as failing to meet any reasonable standard for acceptance - it should have never been added under any objective rule set. 4u1un 4u1itu - both for obvious reasons. Otherwise add every embassy and American Indian casino. That's a little different - 4U1UN and 4U1ITU met objective criteria when accepted. The criteria (separate administration) was later deleted just to prevent turning DXCC into worked all embassies and reservations. Swains - a privately owned island becomes an instant country due to a rule change (brings up the frequently bantered topic of a few prominent DXers making countries.) Agreed ... again private islands and sanctuaries where public access is not permitted have no business being made countries. The same should be said of Palmyra now that it s privately held (The Nature Conservancy). 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barry Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 8:48 AM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] Stupid countries (formerly BS7H thoughts) For me, it's not a question of danger. It's a question of does it make any sense? Here we have a few rocks sticking out of the ocean and the only way to inhabit them is to build scaffolding. This is a stupid country. How is it different from Okino Torishima (aka Baldwin's folly?) Off the top of my head, there are other stupid countries, created by stupid rules. This is not meant to be all inclusive. I'm sure there are others: 4u1un 4u1itu - both for obvious reasons. Otherwise add every embassy and American Indian casino. Swains - a privately owned island becomes an instant country due to a rule change (brings up the frequently bantered topic of a few prominent DXers making countries.) When the stupid rule is corrected, the stupid countries should not remain on the list. To me, it doesn't matter if a country is removed or deleted. The all-time DXCC list is a showing of how old someone is, nothing more. 73, Barry, W2UP P.S. In case you're wondering, I have them all and didn't need BS7 (except on RTTY.) Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] Stupid countries (formerly BS7H thoughts)
Where it is not possible to set up an operating table and chair on the surface of the entity, it should not be an entity. Whether shelter is required is not the question - it seems I saw canopies for shade on BS7H. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Zimmerman N3OX Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 5:00 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Stupid countries (formerly BS7H thoughts) Agreed ... where it s not possible to even set up a table for operating without first building a platform to create a level surface, that entity certainly fails any test of common sense. 3Y0X on Peter I. first had to set up tents before they set up tables so the ops wouldn't get buried in snow and freeze to death. Should we delete it too? Dan Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] Gitmo
Rag, that is doubtful. There are those for whom hating the US is a hobby rather than a matter of principal. Radical Islam will have to be in control of western Europe before they figure it out, and then it will be too late. Sad. As has been said before - those who fail to learn from history will be condemned to repeat it. Those who refuse to actively oppose Radical Islam are just like the collaborators and the rest who failed to speak out against Nazism and the final solution in the 1940's. If the US had not stepped forward when it did, the National Socialist domination of continental Europe would have extended from the Urals to the Atlantic and the Arctic to the Cape of Good Hope. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike(W5UC) Kathy(K5MWH) Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 11:18 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] Gitmo At 08:01 PM 6/22/2007, LA5HE Ragnar Otterstad wrote: It would most certainly improve USA's standing in the rest of the world. 73 Rag la5he Rag, that is doubtful. There are those for whom hating the US is a hobby rather than a matter of principal. Radical Islam will have to be in control of western Europe before they figure it out, and then it will be too late. Sad. 73, Mike, W5UC Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] 7O
Hans, The DXCC Desk has publicly said in multiple forums that the 7O1YGF group has NEVER presented any documentation other than a few pictures showing the group in some Arab country. If written documentation - license, permission to operate and stamped passports - exist, scan it an post it on the web site for the rest of the world to see and evaluate. If you can't or wont post it, the ARRL statement remains unchallenged. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hans Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 2:26 PM To: Ron Notarius W3WN Cc: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] 7O Sir, thats exactly what I didnt tell YOU. Asking you again to withdraw what you wrote under point 2. You are guessing and it is not the truth. Ron Notarius W3WN schrieb: Sir, If it is not true, then what was submitted, to whom, when, and where? -Original Message- From: Hans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 1:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] 7O Ron just to clarify. I'm a member of the 7O1YGF team. I ask you kindly that you withdraw what you wrote under point 2, as it is NOT TRUE! Hans, one of 7O1YGF Ron Notarius W3WN schrieb: Well, I don't know about 7O7AA or 7O8AA (and yes, Osten, I do recall your email from back in March, obviously you have more information at your disposal than I do). Things may have changed after those licenses were issued, and especially after the two Yemens merged back into one country. Or the Aden Branch may have had the authority at one time and does not anymore. Or they overstepped their authority the first time or two and was approval from the Saana may have come retroactively, something they no longer wish to do. I could continue to speculate, but we may never know. As far as the documentation problem with 7O1YGF goes, remember two things: (1) The 7O1YGF team advertised quite often prior to the DXpedition that they had a license. Or at least that they had permission. This was re-iterated during and after the DXpedition... but the elusive license or permission to operate never appears to have either (a) been put on paper, and/or (b) been seen in the light of day by anyone outside of the DXpedition. (2) The 7O1YGF team has never submitted ANY documentation to the DXCC desk to have the operation approved for DXCC credit. Just some photos that were given to N7NG at Friedrichshafen. Let us all also bear in mind that this has happened before. There are more than a few operations by EU ops from Central America that have not been approved due to lack of documentation. It does make one wonder... And yes, I recall the story about Vlad too. Funny that they would tell him no license had ever been issued except the one to the Sultan of Kuwait, yet we know of licenses (or at least permission to operate -- same thing but technically not quite? Are they hair splitting?) that have been issued, such as 7O/OH2YY. So one wonders what the real story is... again, we may never know. 73 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Osten B Magnusson Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2007 1:41 PM To: Zack Widup; dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] 7O As far as I know the no good license for 7O1A was issued by the Aden Branch of The Yemen Telecom, and the head office in the capital Saana said that the Aden Branch was not authorized to issue licenses. BUT also the 7O8AA and 7O7AA operations took place from Aden (according to the information I have). Maybe also 7O1AA. Can the documentation problem for 7O1YGF be as simple as they also had authorization only from the Aden Branch? Vlad, UA4WHX, was in Saana in early 2005 but did not operate as he could not get a license - he told us that the ministry said that only one license had been issued, for The Sultan of Kuwait, but he never used it. Search Google UA4WHX + Yemen and you will find a lot of information. 73/DX de Osten SM5DQC[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Zack Widup [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2007 7:08 PM Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] 7O I really don't know much about that country's government. Are there different factions struggling for power, or claiming authority in different areas? Is it possible some faction claims it can issue licenses, but in fact it isn't considered the real agency who issues licenses? 73, Zack W9SZ On Sat, 11 Aug 2007, KR4DA wrote: If you visit the Yemem tourist center just about anybody can go there. They have 5 star hotels etc.. But what I don't get is who
RE: [DX-CHAT] LBOTW
There's a very simple solution. If and when a replacement for the Regulation by Bandwith petition is submitted, just include an exception limiting private mailbox robots (be they PACTOR III or anything else) to a small sub-band segment. The Headquarters decision makers will never stand for that. I was a member of the first ad hoc committee on digital operation - the committee Headquarters hand picked to propose the framework for the rules concerning automatic digital operation on HF. In spite of the objection by half of the committee members, we were told in so many words, that automatic operation would not fly unless the so called semi-automatic stations were exempted from any restrictions on their operation. That meant they did not have to operate in the narrow segments assigned for automatic stations and did not need an operator present to make sure they did not QRM other operations on the frequency. The individuals pushing semi-automatic operation are the same intervals who are behind the Winlink, Airmail, and other PACTOR, etc. systems that are abusing the amateur service for quasi- commercial purposes. ARRL's EMCOMM staff is pushing Winlink protocols with PACTOR III bandwidths for permanent deployment as an Emergency Communications Resource. I know one of the individuals who is working on the hardware control protocols, professionally, for the joint FEMA ARRL network. Don't give me the it ain't so crap - I've seen it first hand for more than 10 years. Only when ARRL proposes to the FCC that semi-automatic stations be subject to the same rules as any other automatically controlled station will your denials have any validity. 73, ... Joe, W4TV Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] 1b1ab
Simply put, Mt. Athos became a separate entity under the old rules of separate administration which were removed many years ago. However, once added to the DXCC list an entity cannot be removed so long as it continues to meet the criteria under which it was accepted. TRNC is not accepted because it is a rebellious state - simply put, it is in rebellion against the legitimate and internationally recognized government. This is the same reason that amateur operations by 4O4 and 4N4 calls were not recognized for the last several years in T9/E7, that operations from Karen State in Myanmar were not recognized several years ago and operations by rebels Cambodia were not recognized before that. amateur radio prefix is 1B. 1B is not an official prefix (ITU does not issue the 1AA-1ZZ call block). If TRNC were to obtain an official callsign block and amateurs in TRNC were to have a national society recognized by IARU, TRNC would then become a candidate for addition to the DXCC list. However, until the state of rebellion status is resolved, I doubt that TRNC will achieve recognition sufficient to obtain either. As far as I can determine, TRNC is not recognized by any nation except Turkey and the status of TRNC is one of the issues that has effected the entry of Turkey into the EU. I find it odd that Turkey can endorse rebellion for ethnic Turks in TRNC and suppress it ruthlessly for ethnic Kurds in their quest for a Kurdish national identity. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of C McGowan Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 10:13 AM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] 1b1ab Posted by Soyer 1B1AB into NL13289's blog: This is one subject that puzzles me for many years, I am sure DXCC panel must have a good reason before they include any entity to DXCC list. Can anyone explain why Mount Athos (The peninsula of Holy Mountain Athos) in DXCC list, those who live there are monks living the monastic life. For children and women forbidden, only some men can pay visit to monastery with very special permission there is no residence other then monks yet it has a DXCC entity, same time has no prefix of they own announcement by any SV amateur SV/A MOUNT ATHOS good enough for DXCC !. Since monks never gone become amateur radio operator why have DXCC entity? YET HERE IS. TURKISH REPUBLIC OF NORTHERN CYPRUS (TRNC) WITHOUT DXCC ENTITY. The Turkish Republic of North Cyprus (TRNC) was formed on 15th November 1983. It is a parliamentary democracy under the President. It covers an area of 3.355 sq km and has a population of just over 256,000, predominantly Turkish-speaking though English widely used in the main cities and resorts. The currency is Turkish Lira, traffic drive on the right, laws are base on to English and Turkish code of laws, amateur radio prefix is 1B. Because of the commercial importance of its geographical situation in the Mediterranan,the island of Cyprus has, throughout history, been subject to colonisation. It was accupied consecutively by Egyptians, Hittites, Phoenicians, Assyrians, Persians, Romanians, Byzantines, Lusignians, Venetians and, finally in 1571, Turks. In 1878 the island was rented to Britain and in 1923, as part of the Peace Treaty of Lausanne, Turkey accepted the annexation of the island to Britain who, 1925. pronounced it a Crown Colony. Greek Cypriots in Cyprus started agitating for the cessation of British governance in 1931. As a result of continuing violence, a Republic of Cyprus was created in August 1960; Britain, Greece and Turkey were guarantors of its independence. From the outset, however, the Greek-dominated administration aspired to unite the whole island with neighbouring Greece, with the subsequent forced removal of Turkish Cypriots. In 1974, after years of increasing oppression and violation of human rights of the Turkish population, the Turkish Government exercised its rights under the 1960 Treaty to despatch a military force to Cyprus to protect Turkish Cypriots. The subsequent conflict resulted in a military stalemate, and in November 1983 the division of the island was formalised by the creation of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Attempts to reconcile differences and reunite island as a federation of two states have been made ever since, the latest initiative being the UN Annan Plan for reunification In an island-wide referendum, however, 76% of Greek Cypriots rejected the Plan, while it was approved by 65% of Turkish Cypriots. Efforts to find a solution continues, without any encouragement from Greek part of the island, still 76% of Greek Cypriots opposing unity of North and South Cyprus. 73s de 1B1AB Soyer Ecesoy NL13289's blog: http://www.nl13289.com/ (7th
RE: [DX-CHAT] How do you view new DXCC countries?
If it's an exotic location, I can understand the excitement. However, when new DXCC entities are created out of relatively common, easy to work entities, due to political changes (YU, PJ, etc.) I view it as more of a pain in the a** having to work them and collect QSLs to maintain my position on the Honor Roll. I would much rather see new entities created due to political changes in inhabited areas like YU, PJ, etc. than see another new entity on a 25 square foot rock in the middle of nowhere or an island owned entirely by a private party who can restrict access. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barry Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 10:30 AM To: DX Chat Reflector Subject: [DX-CHAT] How do you view new DXCC countries? If it's an exotic location, I can understand the excitement. However, when new DXCC entities are created out of relatively common, easy to work entities, due to political changes (YU, PJ, etc.) I view it as more of a pain in the a** having to work them and collect QSLs to maintain my position on the Honor Roll. What's your view? 73, Barry W2UP Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms
Well, if you happened to stay around long enough to work both stations, this would be causing somewhat less angst. Well ... more people might have worked the second station if they had operated on other bands (15, 30, 160) or modes RTTY instead of following FJ/OH2AM from band to band. Anyone notice that the second station disappeared as soon as FJ/OH2AM went QRT? The whole thing stinks. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary Danaher Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 8:56 AM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms Well, if you happened to stay around long enough to work both stations, this would be causing somewhat less angst. Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms
Yes. The CEPT license will allow any OH with a license class L, P, T, Y to operate in any CEPT country including FJ. Of course BOTH OPERATORS hold class Y licenses. It also appears that one of the operators may, in fact be trustee of the club callsign used. What's the beef other than a case of sour grapes from a few Frenchmen who were too late to the party and missed le nouvelle Beaujolais? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of GERRY Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 9:17 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms Bill, Yes. The CEPT license will allow any OH with a license class L, P, T, Y to operate in any CEPT country including FJ. There is no mention of the C class OH license. It's certainly one for the DXCC Desk to sort out. Gerry VE6LB - Original Message - From: Bill To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 6:55 PM Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms Wouldn't it be what type of license FJ allowed, not OH ??? Bill - Original Message - From: GERRY To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 8:18 PM Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms It's clear that OH2AM is a club call and therefore Class C. [EMAIL PROTECTED] email OH0B OH0R OH2R OH0AM OH2AMOH-DX-Ring RyPL 7302381ESPOO C http://oh-callbook.sral.fi/?call=oh2amname=addr=zip=city=; class=lang=EN It's clear that the CEPT regulations does not include class C in their OH allowed CEPT users. Appendix 2: http://www.ero.dk/doc98/Official/Word/TR6101E.DOC Gerry VE6LB - Original Message - From: Zack Widup To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 5:00 PM Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] FJ Can of worms On Fri, 28 Dec 2007, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: A very interesting document. I noticed that one item appeared to be missing... when the first complaints surfaced, one of the charges was that of possibly illegal entry to FJ via a privately chartered boat, as I recall. No mention of that in the letter. As a certain fictional television character used to say, Fascinating. The charge over the alleged misuse of the club callsign for the DXpedition is probably the most serious complaint. But as meticulous as Martti usually is on planning his jaunts, I find it hard to believe that this detail was overlooked. And, of course, nobody's perfect, so it may have been a true oversight on his part. I wondered about that myself. As you said, Fascinating! But... was a license issued, and if so, what call was on it? If FJ/OH2AM was on the license -- does that make the operation invalid? I'm sure that's one of the things the DXAC and DXCC desk will get to iron out, a task I don't envy them. I was under the impression that as a CEPT country, anyone from another CEPT country could just go there and operate. I could just go and operate as FJ/W9SZ. The main contention seems to be now about the callsign used after the FJ/. Having said that... I've got to tell you, gang, that this is one of a string of disturbing precedents that we've seen over the last few years. Sort of a DX'ing version of NIMBY. Recall all the complaints from the HP hams over the H8A trip a few years back, for one (specifically over the actual call on the license)? And there have been others along the same lines, which many of you know much more about than I ever will. I can't blame some of the resident FJ hams from feeling that their triumph got trumped, that their own plans to inaugurate the new entity in their own way got pulled out from under them. Under similar circumstances, I might feel the same way. But whatever happened (I ask rhetorically) to good sportsmanship? 73, ron w3wn So where are they? Why aren't they doing a similar operation when they know how much in demand the entity still is? 73, Zack W9SZ Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems
RE: [DX-CHAT] IRC's not valid/accepted in Lebanon
Every time I've sent G$$ to Puzant I've gotten a card back. You're lucky. Two tries a year apart (latest being seven months ago) with G$$ and not a thing. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Dougherty Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 8:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] IRC's not valid/accepted in Lebanon At 07:50 PM 1/9/2008, Don wrote: OD5NH informs me that IRC's are not valid in Lebanon. Which is why, I'll bet, there are so many complaints from people who don't get a card. He's had that on his QRZ.com page forever and how much do you want to bet that a lot of people send them anyways. Every time I've sent G$$ to Puzant I've gotten a card back. Cheers, Peter, W2IRT Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] Concern (long)
My FJ/G3TXF contact has not been confirmed in LoTW. LoTW will not grant certificates for St. Barts yet. None of the FJ operations has been able to upload logs yet because of that. My YU8/G3TXF contact has. YU8/G3TXF is confirmed as Serbia, not as Kosovo. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Zimmerman N3OX Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 8:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Concern (long) My FJ/G3TXF contact has not been confirmed in LoTW. My YU8/G3TXF contact has. Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] On-Line Logs
If you have to go to an on-line log to know whether you worked the station or not, you DIDN'T ... Hardly, I had a QSO with one of the recent DXpeditions where the operator originally called N4TV, I corrected them, they acknowledged the correction and the operator made an additional comment to me by name ... and that QSO is still not in the on-line log. On-line logs are helpful to avoid dupes (and panic about missing band/modes) but they are not perfect. Still, when last QSO posted is nearly 24 hours old when the log is posted, the on line log is practically useless. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 9:28 AM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] On-Line Logs If you have to go to an on-line log to know whether you worked the station or not, you DIDN'T ... ... and the analogy is similar to the DX nets wherein the net control bleats out good one! My anti-flame suit is on. So don't waste bandwidth. You won't be in the log. 73. It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money Finance. Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] Country definition ...
Does anyone else think it is time to update the DXCC criteria to specify a combination of the US Department of State Independent States in the World list http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/4250.htm plus the list of Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/10543.htm? The two lists plus the minimum separation standards are a rather clear and objective criteria for political entities. 73, ... Joe, W4TV Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] Very well justify quote
DXCC rules prohibit recognition of states that are in rebellion. Those rules have denied DXCC accreditation to operations in Karen State (Burma/Myanmar), by rebels in Cambodia (XU1SS), rebels in Chechnya and many others over the years. TRNC is such a rebel area - in this case one with a local government established by action of the military of a foreign state in opposition to the internationally recognized government of Cyprus. TRNC is, in effect occupied territory. If TRNC had any legitimacy, ITU would issue a callsign block as they have for other entities (Palestine, Vatican, etc.). Instead, TRNC receives as much status and legitimacy as a would be given to Little Havana in Miami if the Castro regime in Cuba were to declare it independent of the United States. As to some of the other entities questioned: S0 Western Sahara is on the UN list of Self-Governing Territories 1A SMOM is a legacy entity that was on the DXCC list prior to the last rules update. Much like The Spratleys, Scarborough Reef, Mt. Athos, etc. it would probably not be eligible for entity status under the current rules BV Taiwan, VR Hong Kong and XX Macau are all legacy entities from the pre-2000 DXCC list. Hong Kong and Macau are both on the US Department of State list of dependencies. Taiwan is recognized on the Department of State Independent States in the World list. Hong Kong and Macau both qualify under current rules and it is debatable whether the Independent States of the World list should be added to the DXCC rules as another option for qualification. Any entity that is created on the soil of and declared independent from an internationally recognized government by the action of an outside power as in the case of TRNC has no legitimacy in the international community. For the Turkish government to promote an independent TRNC while suppressing the legitimate desires of the Kurds for self-determination is a crime against humanity. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of soyer ecesoy Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 8:27 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] Very well justify quote QUOTE FROM EI3IO,G3SDL I'd like to discuss a few additional issues in respect of some of the information already provided. Firstly the DXCC list itself is a political list; just look at the principal requirements for DXCC status; UN recognition, ITU call-sign series or inclusion in (a) the U.S. Department of State's list of Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty as having a local Administrative Center, or (b) the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Now what constitutes inclusion on the State Department's List, as TRNC would seem to qualify? - the politics and foreign policy of a powerful, important and sovereign nation. Now lets look at this illegal call-sign prefix 1B. The ITU Radio Regulations (Article 19 and Appendix 42) do not provide for any call-sign which starts with the figure 0 or 1 or where a single letter followed by a figure forms the national identifier; in this case the second character is never 0 or 1. There is therefore a clear problem for 1B BUT now lets consider some call-signs which we know and love, which are also a problem but no one raises even a whisper of concern about them. 1A - a DXCC entity listed as an unofficial call-sign in the DXCC list - note in this case the word 'illegal' or 'unauthorised' call-sign is not used. Then there is S0 another disputed territory but not as disputed as TRNC; again it is not using a call-sign series conforming to the Radio Regulations of the ITU. S0 is also listed as an unofficial call-sign in the DXCC list. So are some of us not being just a little hypocritical when complaining about the use of 1B by TRNC as an illegal call-sign? In terms of problems of recognition TRNC has similar problems to Kosovo, Palestine, Taiwan and Western Sahara. In amateur circles we've already seen stirrings of discontent with the disputed (by some) independence of Kosovo in recent times. However in the case of TRNC, no one can dispute that the United Nations Security Council issued two resolutions (541 and 550) proclaiming that the Turkish Cypriot declaration of independence was illegal and requested that no other sovereign state should recognise the legality of the declaration and asked for its withdrawal. So once we get into the world of politics and human relations things get blurred. Let us accept there are always international political problems in the World, whether its the politicisation of Antartica, who owns the Falklands/Malvinas, whether Macedonia should have a new name or whether the British Isles should be called the Western European Isles. I for one wish the 1B licensees well - I understand that they are operating under difficult
RE: [DX-CHAT] Beam Headings
Urb, Yes, I'm seeing lat/lon of 0.00/0.00 when running the application with a zip code with either Firefox 3.0.6 or IE 7.0.5730. 73, ... Joe, W4TV -Original Message- From: kf...@njdxa.org [mailto:kf...@njdxa.org] On Behalf Of Urb LeJeune Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 3:14 AM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Cc: w7...@cox.net Subject: [DX-CHAT] Beam Headings I ran a list both ways--using zip code and then actual coordinates. I think there is a problem, apparently with the zip code version. For example, the zip code version (85749 is my zip code) shows Fiji as being 173 degrees and 11,246 miles away. The coordinate version (32.25 N, 110.69 W) shows Fiji as being 246 degrees and 5805 miles. The latter seems correct. I ran the program using your data. Take a look at the following. [] The last entry is me. I see that you ran the program twice entering a zip code of 85749 which produced a latitude and longitude of 0.00 and 0.00. I'm trying to isolate why it worked for me and not for you. What browser (Firefox, Internet Explorer, etc) and version number are you using. With your browser open, click on Help on the Menu Line (it says something like File, Edit, View, Favorites, Tools, and Help.) When you click on Help on of the options will be About Internet Explorer or whatever your browser's name. Click on that option and it will tell you the name of your browser and it's version. Is anyone else having the same problem? Urb, W2DEC --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---2009-02-22_03-06-51-925.png
Re: [DX-CHAT] Warning-Get Ready
Climate change is not a myth! That is not an appropriate topic for this e-mail list. However, since you opened the door, climate change is an unproven theory backed by junk science and made up data. Only serious and independent research will prove the theory. Until such time as the theory has been completely vetted and proven, there is no basis for using it to set public policy or drive legislation either parochially or globally. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 6/16/2010 10:39 AM, David Yarnes wrote: I think it was pretty obvious that GM4FDM's comment was tongue in cheek. You seem to take everything literally, as evidenced by your subsequent commentary. About the only cogent comments you made were that you don't have a good energy policy there (we sure don't either on this side of the pond!), and that your infrastructure is lacking in storage capacity. Climate change is not a myth! Nor is the value of wind, solar, and other non-fossil fuel energy devices. What it is, is underdeveloped! That's partly due to the lack of a good energy policy, which we all seem to be without. If we don't start pushing hard on technological advancement, which will surely lead to cost reduction over time, we will be saddled with high alternative energy costs. That's obvious too, as it is with anything that doesn't get sufficient attention and investment in order to develop cheaper and better versions. Just about anything you own cost a lot more initially when it was in its infant state of development. Cell phones, computers, radios, TV's,--everything! You can front end a bunch of development money with some significant benefit, but the real benefit will come when demand, either natural or mandated, stimulates the developers to compete more effectively as to cost, etc. The more they sell, the more they can invest in technology, and the cheaper it will get (at least in constant currency terms). Even at this rather early stage of solar panel development, we are starting to see this effect. The same goes for battery technology. It's not just the politicians and non-scientists that are pushing this eco stuff either. Most of the scientific community is as well, at least those with the true expertise in these matters. Indeed there are naysayers, and some of them have credentials, but they are a definite minority. Unfortunately, many of these so called experts are being paid by energy companies to refute the claims of climate change, and most of them will do anything for money. As bad as you think your energy policy is, it's nowhere near as bad as ours! Ours is loaded with the effects of graft and greed. Our politicians have been effectively bribed, and there is no effective oversight. That has to change! Maybe more damaging is the incredible amount of bad information that is being circulated. People just won't take time to really get the facts! By the way, I don't subscribe at all to the ignorance that tends to have the current criticism of BP extend to the U.K. in general. That's nonsense! BP is an international company, and there is just about as much investment by U.S. investors as there is U.K. investment. Even the chinese have a big stake now. At one time BP might have been more british, but the world has changed dramatically since then. Also, some years ago, BP merged with Atlantic Richfield, a very large U.S. company, and immediately became a hybrid genetically. And BP is no better or worse than a bunch of other big companies, many of which are perhaps more U.S. in nature. They all are cutting corners, and that needs to stop! The oceans between us don't mean much anymore. We need to better understand that, and try and get into the same boat philosophically. What's good for you is almost certainly good for us, and vice versa. I realize that you, as someone who apparently is more directly involved in the energy industry, may feel you are being hurt more specifically by all of this, but that totally ignores the big picture, and the population as a whole. Besides, a good energy policy should deal with this, and do so effectively, to mitigate any such effect. Also, even if we really get serious about doing something, things aren't going to change overnight, or anything close to it! What seems clear to me is that, instead of pouring money into oil wars, we need to commit that money and effort into regaining our independence! It has to be obvious by now what fools we are to allow mid-east oil to control our lives and destiny! Dave W7AQK - Original Message - From: DAVE WHITE To: bhw...@hughes.net ; DX-CHAT ; thomaswy...@sky.com Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 12:53 AM Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Warning-Get Ready I think to be fair that the Telegraph is a British newspaper so reports from a British point of view. However. After the absence of any sensible energy policy for about the last 25 years, Britain will have plenty of blackouts coming, and not related to solar flares - merely
[DX-CHAT] Re: Unbelievable!
Ron, You and only you, to my knowledge, is claiming a lesser calculation (799.6 km change) according to the WGS84 spherical calculation, which has never before been used. You and only you are demanding that the DXCC use this allegedly more precise calculation. Other ARRL awards, specifically VUCC require the use of WGS84 so it is only logical that the more accurate standard be applied to DXCC. DXCC rules have traditionally applied a standard that the requirements must be met *unambiguously* and WGS84 certainly shows ambiguity if nothing else. With all due respect Joe, since the DXCC Desk has not announced their reasoning, it is premature at best to start railing at them for thumbing their noses at the DXCC rules. It's certainly not premature ... the DXCC Desk has had months to announce what they would do and under what circumstances they would do it. There are at least a half dozen expeditions in the field right now ... some of which are redundant even under the current decision. The rules are clear, everyone knew this day has been coming for more than a year although nobody knew that everything would finally fall into place until a couple months ago. The whole process should have been conducted in the daylight with plenty of time to review the decision tree and confirm the facts. Your outrage and point that you vehemently disagree with the decision, even though you haven't heard the reasoning behind it yet, is duly noted. It's not just me although I'm being the most vocal. I have received several e-mails from former DXCC staff and DXAC members saying that the decisions in the current matter are just plain wrong and fly in the face of the rules on several points. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 10/13/2010 8:44 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: (Discussion moved to DX Chat as per NJDXA reflector rules) With all due respect Joe, since the DXCC Desk has not announced their reasoning, it is premature at best to start railing at them for thumbing their noses at the DXCC rules. Distance is not the only criteria involved. And for that matter, you yourself admitted on the CQ Contest reflector that the Great Circle distance between the closest points on Bonaire and Saba was 801 km change. That IS the criteria that has been used for distance in the recent past, and it IS (barely) more than enough. You and only you, to my knowledge, is claiming a lesser calculation (799.6 km change) according to the WGS84 spherical calculation, which has never before been used. You and only you are demanding that the DXCC use this allegedly more precise calculation. Come to think of it, you have been setting yourself up to gripe about this for weeks if not months. I do believe you made more than a few announcements on CQ Contest that if the DXCC Desk did not do as you demanded, you were going to raise holy heck. Well, they didn't, and sure enough, here you are. And I don't want another Baldwin's Reef, or another Romeo or Dr. Don Miller type operation, anymore than anyone else. Comparing this decision, a decision that we all knew for years was eventually coming, to those is hyperbole that goes way over the top. Your outrage and point that you vehemently disagree with the decision, even though you haven't heard the reasoning behind it yet, is duly noted. Now why don't we wait and see what the reasoning is before you tar and feather everyone who disagrees with you? 73 -Original Message- From: kf...@njdxa.org [mailto:kf...@njdxa.org] On Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 5:00 PM To: dx-n...@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-NEWS] Unbelievable! The DXCC Desk have chosen to thumb their noses at the DXCC rules and announced four (4) new ones effective 10/10/10. See: http://www.arrl.org/news/dissolution-of-netherlands-antilles-creates-four-n ew-dxcc-entities Since the rules no longer seem to apply, what will be the next Baldwin's Reef? Will we see more out of country operations like those of Romeo and Don Miller? 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 10/12/2010 3:07 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: Well, it's official, the Department of State has only listed St. Maarten and Curacao as Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty. Since the separation between Bonaire and Saba is less than the required 800 km when calculated using the more accurate WGS84 standard, the BES Islands *should* qualify as a *one* entity. The bed has been made ... if ARRL follow the rules, there will be *three* new ones. We'll see how important the rules are. 73, ... Joe, W4TV --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-news or subscribe dx-news This is the DX-NEWS reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe
Re: [DX-CHAT] If a country sinks beneath the sea, is it still a country?
There isn't one factual statement Talk about lack of facts - these are facts that the media and Global Warming alarmists simply ignore since they are not easy to explain away and disprove the hypothesis concerning a correlation between human development and global temperatures, 1) Atmospheric CO2 levels are lower than the average level through geologic time (fact). 2) If atmospheric CO2 levels caused global warming we would be in an ice age as CO2 levels are currently lower than in either of the last two major ice ages 3) Global temperatures have shown far greater swings through geologic history - *before* industrialization and urbanization - than the cumulative two or three degrees C over two to three decades that the Global Warming Alarmists are obsessing over. 4) The largest contribution to increases in global CO2 levels has been in deforestation in the developing world - China, India, Brazil and large parts of Africa. 5) NASA space based global temperature records show less than 1 C change in nearly 30 years of data. Does anyone filter this crap? Don't like it? Don't contribute to the fiction ... otherwise use your delete key. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/8/2010 8:18 AM, Don Berger wrote: There isn't one factual statement in the message below nor has it anything to do with DX, ham radio, electronics, etc. Does anyone filter this crap? Don K1VSK - Original Message - From: Doug ve...@sasktel.net To: jjreis...@gmail.com; 'DX CHAT' dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 1:32 AM Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] If a country sinks beneath the sea, is it still a country? Everyone is entitled to their opinion. In my opinion the United States of America can do essentially nothing to effect climate change/global warming. Haven't you heard ... this supposed global warming caused my man made CO2 emissions is a scam. I repeat ... scam, fraud. Man made emissions effect on climate change is a paltry 0.25%. Besides, India and China are the big polluters. Ignorance can be fixed, but you can't fix stupid. Doug Those Island days are always on my mind, Someday soon I leave it all behind -Original Message- From: kf...@njdxa.org [mailto:kf...@njdxa.org] On Behalf Of Jim Reisert AD1C Sent: December 7, 2010 6:26 PM To: DX CHAT Subject: [DX-CHAT] If a country sinks beneath the sea, is it still a country? Editorial (New York Times) The Urgent Islands Published: August 29, 2010 If a country sinks beneath the sea, is it still a country? That is a question about which the Republic of the Marshall Islands - a Micronesian nation of 29 low-lying coral atolls - is now seeking expert legal advice. It is also a question the United States Senate might ask itself the next time it refuses to deal with climate change. According to the world's leading scientists, sea-level rise is one of the greatest dangers of global warming, threatening not only islands but coastal cities like New Orleans and even entire countries like Bangladesh. In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change conservatively predicted a 20-inch sea-level rise by the end of this century if current trends were not reversed. Because of various uncertainties, its calculations excluded the melting of the Greenland and West Antarctica ice sheets. Some academic studies have suggested that rises of four to seven feet are not out of the question. Officials in the Marshall Islands - where a 20-inch rise would drown at least one atoll - are not only thinking about the possibility of having to move entire populations but are entertaining even more existential questions: If its people have to abandon the islands, what citizenship can they claim? Will the country still have a seat at the United Nations? Who owns its fishing rights and offshore mineral resources? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/opinion/30mon4.html -- Jim Reisert AD1C, jjreis...@alum.mit.edu, http://www.ad1c.us --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] How do LOTW-only DXCC submissions fit into the processing schedule?
Barry, Only one of the RTTY QSOs is listed as being creditable towards Mixed. It appears that the LOTW/DXCC software will only credit the first QSO made. Once you have logged into the award account you can go back into the QSOs/QSLs screen and select or deselect some QSLs. However, there are still problems in the application screen where the user can not force Challenge *and* mode credit if the LotW software has selected a QSL from different mode on a given band. Fortunately, I have been able to simply *not select* the QSL the software has identified for band credit and select only the one with the mode I want. The DXCC desk will award the band credit automatically in that situation. Still, the LotW software does a terrible job or producing the most efficient (lowest cost) submission. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 3/19/2011 1:14 PM, Barry wrote: Thanks for the quick reply, Wayne. I submitted on Mar 11 and it's not credited yet. Perhaps, it's because I included a Comment that my submission needs some hand processing due to their screwy software: I submitted the 4 PJs to credit my RTTY and Mixed DXCCs (the only DXCC awards I've ever submitted). Only one of the RTTY QSOs is listed as being creditable towards Mixed. It appears that the LOTW/DXCC software will only credit the first QSO made. However, it's silly that I should need to submit 3 additional QSOs when the ones I submitted are perfectly OK. Barry W2UP On 3/19/2011 10:54 AM, Wayne Mills wrote: Barry, Reports by The Daily DX indicate that */LoTW-only/* applications are handled very quickly. There appears to be no backlog -- and for good reason: There is no manual data entry. An application can be completed one day and the results show up on the standings Web page overnight. 73, Wayne, N7NG Jackson Hole -Original Message- From: kf...@njdxa.org [mailto:kf...@njdxa.org] On Behalf Of Barry Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 10:45 AM To: Dx-Chat Subject: [DX-CHAT] How do LOTW-only DXCC submissions fit into the processing schedule? I don't see my call listed in the applications received list at arrl.org. Do LOTW applications take as long as the mail applications? How do they fit into the processing backlog? Tnx, Barry -- Barry Kutner, W2UP Lakewood, CO --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] New country as of this morning
Nothing changes for DXCC until either S. Sudan becomes a member of the UN or ITU assigns a call block. Most recent word was that the UN General Assembly was expected to accept S. Sudan on July 14. Thus July 14 it expected to be the start date for DXCC purposes. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 7/9/2011 7:15 AM, Jack wrote: http://www.voanews.com/english/news/africa/South-Sudan-Celebrates-Independence-125260809.html Jack Hartley K4WSB / VP2MSB DXCC Honor Roll QCWA OOTC Celebrating over 1/2 century in Ham Radio --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] South Sudan
When they were united , we worked Germany again. No, the former West Germany remained as the counter for the unified Germany. I wonder if we are going to have to work both Sudans again. Only the DXAC knows. Just the new South Sudan. DXCC 2000 rules do not allow a deleted country to ever be undeleted - the new entity must be new even if it represents the same territory and same government as the entity that was deleted. Another case of rules not reflecting reality (just like 800 miles not meaning 800 miles). 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 7/9/2011 6:34 PM, Jim Abercrombie wrote: I remember when Germany-East and West was counted as one country. Then they were counted as two and we had to work them both again. When they were united , we worked Germany again. I wonder if we are going to have to work both Sudans again.Only the DXAC knows. --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] South Sudan
ST0 is a different country before and after they split. What if you worked ST0 and they were operating from what is now South Sudan (but which was Sudan before)? Which country did you really work, Sudan or South Sudan? Not in this case ... ST0 was a self-governing territory within Sudan. It was deleted when the Sudanese central government and the regional government reached an agreement to change status. That change in status agreement included the right to a referendum for secession after a period of time. The result of the referendum was an overwhelming vote for independence in the south. The government of the new South Sudan is the same government that participated in the reconciliation and referendum process and the new S. Sudan covers the same area as the former autonomous region. Except for the fact that the DXCC rules say (Section II, DXCC List Criteria): Entities deleted from the List may be returned to the List in the future, should they qualify again in the future under these criteria. However, an entity that does qualify again in the future does so as a totally new Entity, not as a reinstated old one. the secession of Southern Sudan from Sudan would simply mean the reinstatement of the old (deleted) ST0. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 7/10/2011 9:25 AM, Ryan Jairam wrote: It's not a matter of catching the same fish twice. ST0 is a different country before and after they split. What if you worked ST0 and they were operating from what is now South Sudan (but which was Sudan before)? Which country did you really work, Sudan or South Sudan? DXCC doesn't keep track of exact location within an entity, just that you worked a particular entity. If the entity changes from what it was, you'll need to work it again because that old entity no longer exists. Let's say Texas annexes Northern Mexico and secedes from the USA. If you worked USA contacts in Texas or northern Mexico, will they now be part of the USA? No, they will not. Should you get credit for working those entities? No because they did not exist as DXCC entities at that time. Your total entity count does not go down, but the number on the current list does. And it's the number on the current list that determines eligibility for HR and #1HR. Ryan, N2RJ On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Fred Stevens K2FRDk2...@mac.com wrote: Yes, Bernie, there are several explanations for catching the same fish twice. In my own world as a wildlife biologist, it's called catch-and-release and mark-and-recapture; the fish (or other wildlife such as rabbits, deer, mice, insects, crustaceans, whatever) is caught, then tagged before release. Subsequent catches of the tagged fish or other animals are measured against catches of the same species which are not tagged. After a certain number (N) are caught and again released, a formula called the Lincoln-Peterson Index is applied to determine population numbers. Now, one might reasonably ask, how does a Lincoln-Peterson Index apply to recapture of a long gone, then reappearing DX entity such as South Sudan, I have no idea, at least not yet. Working on it... I'm still trying to recapture QSLs from QSOs in the early 1990s. For example, I made contact with only a single station from Rhode Island during my 2001 and 2004 mini-dxpeditions to VO2 despite repeated efforts. This one station responded to my CQ RI but never responded to my repeated QSL requests (I sent him SASEs, green stamps, even $5 GS, and letters) but no response thus denying me WAS from VO2. Using the Lincoln-Peterson Index (N=1), I would calculate that Rhode Island no longer exists, has gone extinct, HF-wise. Yet, QRZ.com insists that RI has a ham population of 2263. Such are the vagaries of both wildlife and ham radio populations and contacts. You win some, you lose some, but you keep playing the game. 73 de Fred Stevens K2FRD Previously VO2/K2FRD VO2FS to be QRV in summer 2012 At 7:00 PM -0400 9/7/11, Bernie McClenny, W3UR wrote: Professor Cass taught before the DXCC 2000 rule change, but I suspect there must be something that explains catching the same fish twice. The man was a genius! Guess I'll have to re-read the book, again! Bernie Bernie McClenny, W3UR Editor of The Daily DX, The Weekly DX and How's DX? Get a free two week trial of The Daily DX and The Weekly DX http://www.dailydx.com/trial.htm -Original Message- From: kf...@njdxa.org [mailto:kf...@njdxa.org] On Behalf Of Don Berger Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2011 6:18 PM To: ke...@verizon.net; dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] South Sudan I still have all the West /Coast DX Bulletins but couldn't find the reference to catching the same fish twice! 73 K1vsk --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA
Re: [DX-CHAT] What ever happened to FR5DX?
I worked FR5DX, and, prior to that, FR0FLO a total of four times between 1983 and 1994. Like Les, I worked FR0FLO many times in the early 1980's. No matter if it was IRCs or $$$, mailing via France and multiple mailings, I received QSLs for only one of nine QSOs spread across what looks to be four major contests and a couple non-contest QSOs. So far as I am concerned he was a problem. Agreed! Although I hate to see any station in a rare location give up, in this case it's probably for the best. If any station knows there is a problem, he owes it to the community in general to use a QSL manager or arrange for a secure mail drop and mail forwarding. Even 30 years ago it would not have been that difficult to arrange for someone with reliable mail service to accept mail. forward a list of requests, place cards (shipped in bulk) in return envelopes, mail them and forward the net proceeds through secure channels. Even if the problem is unreliable mail, a rare DX has no excuse for ever getting a reputation as a green stamp collector. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/2/2011 6:30 PM, Les Kalmus wrote: Since I was one of the early complainers, let me clarify. I worked FR5DX, and, prior to that, FR0FLO a total of four times between 1983 and 1994. I QSLed him each time I worked him and never got a response so I repeatedly QSLed some of those QSOs. I sent him $ via direct, via France and there was one other way which I can't recall at the moment. I never got a reply. The last time I worked Herik I even asked him where my QSLs were and he said they're on the way. I use special airmail envelopes that fit inside one another and are security printed on the inside. I never put any call info on the outside of these envelopes and money or IRCs are always between the QSLs and the inner envelope, impossible to see. I can understand some mail not getting through but not all mail and not if sent the various ways he suggested. So far as I am concerned he was a problem. Les W2LK On 12/2/2011 6:02 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: I worked FR5DX four times, all contest QSOs, between 1998 2000. 2 QSOs on 15, 2 on 20. I QSL'd him once for each band got those cards. According to my old notes, I did sent the requests using the via France address. So at least at the time, he was a good QSL'er. But I have to agree with Paul on this one. It is very, very easy for us to sit back and kvetch about the rotten DX that take our IRC's and Green Stamps and never reply. I've heard the same gripes about a good many DX stations, including a well known, semi-rare active V5 op, plus OD, FM, PZ; and much more common ones in OA, PY, EA6, EA8, and many other areas as well. So how come I can get cards from those stations or those areas and others can't? I follow the mailing/routing directions when given. I don't put calls on the envelopes. I use a manilla envelope (tough to see through) or security envelopes. And yes, I sometimes use WF5E for some of the tough ones, and it's thanks to Joe W3HNK that I got my UA2 confirmations for 80 meters, even though they weren't his clients. No, I don't get a 100% return. Yes, there are stations who pocket the green stamps or IRC's; yes, there are managers who demand reimbursement well over above what return postage reasonable costs would cover. And yes, there are certain DX stations, including some in the tough areas, who ought to use a QSL manager, but for a variety of reasons (including ego naivety for two) will not use one. I'm not naive enough to deny that these things go on. I'm just not ready to use the broad brush so many use so readily to blame the DX so easily. 73 -Original Message- From: kf...@njdxa.org [mailto:kf...@njdxa.org] On Behalf Of Paul M Dunphy Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 12:15 PM To: DX CHAT Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] What ever happened to FR5DX? At 12:27 PM 12/2/2011, Jack Shirley wrote: FR5DZ knows him and told me he is still residing in Reunion. If you hear him on, you may ask... N8DX To be a bit positive, he was my first FR on a number of bands and I did get QSL cards from him for all contacts. I recall all of the negativity, and I think I sent at least twice for some of them. However, I do have FR5DX QSLs. If I recall correctly, he was a police officer or in the militia . . . something to do with law and a uniform, anyhow. I also heard that one of the reasons he is now QRT is because of discussions like this. Deserved or not, I heard he became disgusted with Ham radio because he was constantly being insulted left and right on the Internet for not QSLing. Maybe the mail to/from Reunion, at the time, was rife with theft. Maybe he was getting it all and only answering 1 out of 10. We will never know. 73, Paul VE1DX --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the
Re: [DX-CHAT] -LOTW
One could argue that LotW is the electronic equivalent of a bureau card but it does not require printing, handling, or shipping. Since LotW requires no processing ... LotW should reasonably be available within six weeks or so after the end of the DXpedition to allow the team to return home and submit the necessary paperwork for approval of the operation and LotW certificate. The extent to which one agrees with the upload quickly camp depends on the degree to which one believes that QSLing is a profit center for the DXpedition. However, at $2.00 per card there is not a lot of net profit in direct cards after printing and postage. An SASE to/from an in country manager is a net loss to the DXpedition. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/22/2011 10:23 AM, Boris Knezović wrote: Mike, Some people want LoTW confirmations immediately after DXpedition is over without any contribution. I guess their next move should be requesting free LoTW confirmations at ARRL. 73's Boris E73Y -Original Message- From: kf...@njdxa.org on behalf of Mike(W5UC) Sent: čet 22.12.2011 13:39 To: wn3...@verizon.net Cc: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] -LOTW On 12/21/2011 5:56 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: Oh yes Rag, you've made more than a few points. But let's stick to the important one... I am positive that the ST0R logs will be on Logbook of the World at some point. I'm not going to spend time combing their web site to find out when they plan to do that. The group has done several other trips in the past, including E4X Palestine, that have been uploaded in the past... why would they change now? Good morning Ron all: For what it's worth, I'm not sure how the ST0R folks are making the decisions about uploading to LOTW, but I was quite late in requesting a card. I used the method on their web site that sent the minimum $ via Pay Pal. Very quickly I received a paper QSL, and somewhere in the same time frame a confirmation showed up in my LOTW account. Yesterday I sent for it and several other LOTW credits, and zip-pop, it was done. No Sweat, new one confirmed. 73, Mike, W5UC --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: Vedr: [DX-CHAT] Are your HK0NA CW contacts showing up in the online log?
13 of my 14 contacts are showing so they must have been uploading mostbu now. Now it is going to be interseting to see when LOTW is uploaded. It looks like they have lost a day of logs from OP A. All of my QSOs between 17:00 2012/1/24 and 05:00 2012/1/25 is missing. That period includes 12 CW, 15 CW/RTTY, 20 SSB, 40 SSB and 80 CW. VP6T is fantastic ! But G3TXF is quite somebody !! I understand conditions at HK0NA are tough and it's a difficult, dangerous trip between operating positions but contrast the performance of HK0NA with that of VP6T who has *confirmed via LotW* contacts within 15 minutes on multiple occasions. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 1/28/2012 3:30 AM, ragnar otterstad wrote: Fra: dxis@Emne: Re: [DX-CHAT] Are your HK0NA CW contacts showing up in the online log? Thanks for the replies, guys. Jay, the dates were the 24th and one early on the 25th. It seems other Ops are missing Qs in this time frame as well. Glad to see it isn't just me. I'll hold off on trying to rework them as it's just band fills now, and I'm sure others still need them for a brand new one. 73 es gl, Mike, K2CD 13 of my 14 contacts are showing so they must have been uploading most bu now. Now it is going to be interseting to see when LOTW is uploaded. VP6T is fantastic ! But G3TXF is quite somebody !! 73 Rag LA5HE --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] Missing QSO'
From N2OO on ClubLog: We do realize that there are some log gaps and the team is doing everything they can to correct the situation. The gaps seem to be related to a software issue with their logging program. These gaps should not reoccur since the log collection process has been changed. At this time we cannot guarantee that we can recover the missing log data. We hope that this is not the case. But we probably will not know for sure until well after the DXpedition is over. If you have any missing QSO's from before January 27, we suggest that you try to work them again. The HK0NA team apologizes for the inconvenience. As inexpensive and small/light as WiFi hardware has become these days and since it is integrated into most new notebook/netbook systems, why are all of the computers not networked to a central server with all QSOs logged both on the operator's computer and the central server? Central logging would prevent missing data and the local copies would provide a level of back-up in event of a problem. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 1/28/2012 3:16 PM, Peter W2IRT wrote: Two of my RTTY contacts (12m and 40m, both Jan. 25) are also missing. - pjd From: kf...@njdxa.org [mailto:kf...@njdxa.org] On Behalf Of Jose E. Ribeiro Sa Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 1:08 PM To: 4...@prtcnet.com; dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Missing QSO' Don't worry JIm, I'm sure all QSOs are there, Hi! My HK0NA 160 SSB, 20 CW and 12 CW+RTTY are all missing and I worked them in the 24th late night and 25th of January. 73 Jose CT1EEB --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] LOTW Error ?
When I received confirmation from LOTW , The entity was listed as United States of America. The zone was # 7. This probably means that K2PLF requested a certificate for the United States or possibly signed the TI5/K2LPF logs with a US certificate and the correct station location. I do not know if LotW can remove the upload/match but you will certainly need to contact K2LPF and him him get/user the correct certificate. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 2/29/2012 8:02 AM, Mark Horowitz wrote: Did anyone work TI5/K2PLF ? When I received confirmation from LOTW , The entity was listed as United States of America. The zone was # 7. I'll try to email ARRL and let them know. 73, Mark..K2AU --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] DX-PEDITIONS FOR US POOR FOLKS?
On 5/20/2012 9:14 PM, Crownhaven wrote: However, any operator has the right to set his own rules for QSL cards, etc. And the rest of us have a choice as to whether we want to abide by those terms. Absolutely not! No operator has a right to discriminate in his QSL policy or hold the QSL hostage in return for a contribution in excess of the cost of mailing that QSL. To do so is de facto grounds for disqualification under DXCC Rules (12 d): d) Blatant inequities in confirmation (QSL) procedures. Continued refusal to issue QSLs under certain circumstances may lead to disqualification. Any large DXpedition can - and should - seek individual contributions before the operation. I would argue that they have a right to cancel an operation if the support goals have not been met. However, the policy of not uploading logs to LotW for six months or a year after a DXPedition, not sending bureau QSLs for six months to a year after a DXPedition and policies of not mailing QSLs to non-contributors until after the end of the calendar year should be loudly and roundly denounced. Given the ease of uploading QSOs to LotW - after all it is no more difficult in uploading the raw logs to ClubLog daily which has become standard practice for most major DXpeditions - there is *no* valid reason for not uploading the raw logs immediately after the operation if not daily during the operation. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 5/20/2012 9:14 PM, Crownhaven wrote: I'm thinking we all can make the choices we want to make. In terms of DXpeditions costing a lot of money, if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen?? However, any operator has the right to set his own rules for QSL cards, etc. And the rest of us have a choice as to whether we want to abide by those terms. Let's call it free enterprise. We're beginning to sound likeI won't say it here. Steve, N4JQQ Zack Widup wrote: First off, great presentation Don! I thought it gave a great perspective of what these icebreaker DXpeditions and others to exotic places cost. Someone has to pay for them. The operators on some DXpeditions often bear a great deal of the cost themselves. I know a few people who have gotten involved in a DXpedition without knowing what it would cost them personally. They put forth an amount of money that hurt them personally financially, hoping they could get at least some of it back. Some didn't - they have not been on a DXpedition since. Live and learn, I guess. And our loss when a fine operator can't or won't go on another DXpedition. I know some of the people who were on the VP8ORK DXpedition. Some of the fees they had to pay were downright weird - and sounded exorbitant to me. But what are you going to do? Refuse to pay a fee to get your equipment out of storage? You would be in a bad position thousands of miles from home, trying to meet an expedition timetable and unable to speak the language of the country, trying to negotiate with those people. If you want the DXpedition, if you want it there for you to work, it seems only right to me that you voluntarily contribute what you can. Not that it has to be $5 per QSO, but every little bit helps. None of the DXpeditions I wished to have confirmed recently have demanded any fees for QSL'ing. But I do voluntarily send them something. I hope it helps just a little. If enough people do that, it increases the chance that they will go on another DXpedition to a rare place in a few years. And I agree - if the DXpedition so chooses to send out confirmation to contributors first, that is their choice and it doesn't mean that non-contributors are not going to get their confirmation. If you had to wait for 20 years for an entity to be put on the air, what's a couple extra months waiting for the confirmation? 73, Zack W9SZ On 5/20/12, Don Greenbaum d...@aurumtel.com wrote: Who is demanding any fees for a QSL? Name one DXpedition that refuses to answer bureau cards? Or a major DXPedition that doesn't post their logs to LOTW (most within 6 months). Most foundations require that in return for funding. Just because someone who donates $5 gets his card first does not translate into extortion for those who opt out of supporting dxpeditions and wait for the slow method. 73 Don N1DG At 06:45 PM 5/20/2012, Don wrote: Go or don't go. But demanding a fee for a qsl is still extortion in the true sense of the term Sent from my iPod On May 20, 2012, at 6:31 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN wn3...@verizon.net wrote: Lou, Once again, context is important. Don's presentation was not talking about the casual DXpedition that might cost one or two people a few thousand. Yes, this was mentioned, but it was not the main focus. And within THAT context only, if I can't afford to go on a vacation to the Caribbean that happens to include a radio op for $5K, I'm not going to go either. If I do go, I'm not going to expect to recoup my vacation costs from those who worked me, either. But -- that's not what
Re: [DX-CHAT] DX-PEDITIONS FOR US POOR FOLKS?
On 5/21/2012 7:21 AM, Crownhaven wrote: When was the last time a DX operation was disqualified for QSLing practices? Seriously. Maybe some should be. However, I doubt that the DXCC Desk has the balls to disqualify a high profile DXpedition organizer. Seriously! 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 5/21/2012 7:21 AM, Crownhaven wrote: When was the last time a DX operation was disqualified for QSLing practices? Seriously. Steve, N4JQQ Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: On 5/20/2012 9:14 PM, Crownhaven wrote: However, any operator has the right to set his own rules for QSL cards, etc. And the rest of us have a choice as to whether we want to abide by those terms. Absolutely not! No operator has a right to discriminate in his QSL policy or hold the QSL hostage in return for a contribution in excess of the cost of mailing that QSL. To do so is de facto grounds for disqualification under DXCC Rules (12 d): d) Blatant inequities in confirmation (QSL) procedures. Continued refusal to issue QSLs under certain circumstances may lead to disqualification. Any large DXpedition can - and should - seek individual contributions before the operation. I would argue that they have a right to cancel an operation if the support goals have not been met. However, the policy of not uploading logs to LotW for six months or a year after a DXPedition, not sending bureau QSLs for six months to a year after a DXPedition and policies of not mailing QSLs to non-contributors until after the end of the calendar year should be loudly and roundly denounced. Given the ease of uploading QSOs to LotW - after all it is no more difficult in uploading the raw logs to ClubLog daily which has become standard practice for most major DXpeditions - there is *no* valid reason for not uploading the raw logs immediately after the operation if not daily during the operation. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 5/20/2012 9:14 PM, Crownhaven wrote: I'm thinking we all can make the choices we want to make. In terms of DXpeditions costing a lot of money, if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen?? However, any operator has the right to set his own rules for QSL cards, etc. And the rest of us have a choice as to whether we want to abide by those terms. Let's call it free enterprise. We're beginning to sound likeI won't say it here. Steve, N4JQQ Zack Widup wrote: First off, great presentation Don! I thought it gave a great perspective of what these icebreaker DXpeditions and others to exotic places cost. Someone has to pay for them. The operators on some DXpeditions often bear a great deal of the cost themselves. I know a few people who have gotten involved in a DXpedition without knowing what it would cost them personally. They put forth an amount of money that hurt them personally financially, hoping they could get at least some of it back. Some didn't - they have not been on a DXpedition since. Live and learn, I guess. And our loss when a fine operator can't or won't go on another DXpedition. I know some of the people who were on the VP8ORK DXpedition. Some of the fees they had to pay were downright weird - and sounded exorbitant to me. But what are you going to do? Refuse to pay a fee to get your equipment out of storage? You would be in a bad position thousands of miles from home, trying to meet an expedition timetable and unable to speak the language of the country, trying to negotiate with those people. If you want the DXpedition, if you want it there for you to work, it seems only right to me that you voluntarily contribute what you can. Not that it has to be $5 per QSO, but every little bit helps. None of the DXpeditions I wished to have confirmed recently have demanded any fees for QSL'ing. But I do voluntarily send them something. I hope it helps just a little. If enough people do that, it increases the chance that they will go on another DXpedition to a rare place in a few years. And I agree - if the DXpedition so chooses to send out confirmation to contributors first, that is their choice and it doesn't mean that non-contributors are not going to get their confirmation. If you had to wait for 20 years for an entity to be put on the air, what's a couple extra months waiting for the confirmation? 73, Zack W9SZ On 5/20/12, Don Greenbaum d...@aurumtel.com wrote: Who is demanding any fees for a QSL? Name one DXpedition that refuses to answer bureau cards? Or a major DXPedition that doesn't post their logs to LOTW (most within 6 months). Most foundations require that in return for funding. Just because someone who donates $5 gets his card first does not translate into extortion for those who opt out of supporting dxpeditions and wait for the slow method. 73 Don N1DG At 06:45 PM 5/20/2012, Don wrote: Go or don't go. But demanding a fee for a qsl is still extortion in the true sense of the term Sent from my iPod On May 20, 2012, at 6:31 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN wn3...@verizon.net wrote: Lou, Once again, context
Re: [DX-CHAT] Leaderboards - good or bad?
I think KQ8M's first comment in response to G7VJR's editorial is on point. Clublog's Leaderboards should be modified to stop counting at 11 band slots. 11 (or 12 if the operation works six meters) allows a station to work the operation on each band plus pick up QSOs on CW, Digital, and voice. Quite frankly, in spite of falling prey to the seduction of high leaderboard numbers a time or two myself, anyone who shows up with more than 14 or 15 band slots is simply a DX HOG. There is simply no excuse for such behavior. N1DG's presentation at Dayton clearly showed the DX HOGs do not provide increased support (contributions with QSL) relative to the number of band slots worked ... even the more QSOs mean more revenue argument falls flat. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 6/5/2012 2:54 PM, Paul M Dunphy wrote: G7VJR's point of view (ClubLog creator and T32C participant): http://g7vjr.org/2012/06/expedition-leaderboards-good-or-bad/ 73, Paul VE1DX --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] Leaderboards - good or bad?
On 6/5/2012 4:39 PM, Ryan Jairam wrote: I don't really buy that argument. In the last days of a DXpedition, they're usually begging. You obviously did not attempt to work 7O6T on RTTY. The Europeans monopolized the few available RTTY band slots and even chased 7O6T off RTTY many times in the last days of the DXpedition. Quite simply, Leaderboards as currently structured encourage rampant DX Hoggery and have no place in radiosport. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 6/5/2012 4:39 PM, Ryan Jairam wrote: I don't really buy that argument. In the last days of a DXpedition, they're usually begging. Those who couldn't make a QSO probably couldn't make a QSO on a completely clear band anyway. There is only so much you can work with a dipole and 100 watts. And finally, DXing is competitive.You can be a good sport but you don't have to put yourself at a disadvantage to make others feel better. Ryan, N2RJ On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Joe Subich, W4TVw...@subich.com wrote: I think KQ8M's first comment in response to G7VJR's editorial is on point. Clublog's Leaderboards should be modified to stop counting at 11 band slots. 11 (or 12 if the operation works six meters) allows a station to work the operation on each band plus pick up QSOs on CW, Digital, and voice. Quite frankly, in spite of falling prey to the seduction of high leaderboard numbers a time or two myself, anyone who shows up with more than 14 or 15 band slots is simply a DX HOG. There is simply no excuse for such behavior. N1DG's presentation at Dayton clearly showed the DX HOGs do not provide increased support (contributions with QSL) relative to the number of band slots worked ... even the more QSOs mean more revenue argument falls flat. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 6/5/2012 2:54 PM, Paul M Dunphy wrote: G7VJR's point of view (ClubLog creator and T32C participant): http://g7vjr.org/2012/06/expedition-leaderboards-good-or-bad/ 73, Paul VE1DX --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] A new entity?
It is moot as far as DXCC is concerned - San Andres and Providencia (the Colombian San Andres Province) are already a separate entity (HK0-S) for DXCC. Although the decision impacts maritime rights it does not appear to involve a change in control of any land area (islands or cays). From the article: Based on evidence presented by lawyers for both nations, Colombia and not Nicaragua has sovereignty over the islands, the court's President Peter Tomka told delegations from both sides. There is certainly not 800 km separating the four smaller islands from the rest of the archipelago. Since there is no intervening Nicaraguan *land*, the intervening land or islands language in rule 2 b) iii is not applicable. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 11/19/2012 10:14 PM, Peter FORBES wrote: I suspect not Lou. The distance from San Andres Island to the Nicaraguan coast is only 300 Km, much less than the required 800 Km in the DXCC Entity rules. Cheers Peter VK3QI -Original Message- From: kf...@njdxa.org [mailto:kf...@njdxa.org] On Behalf Of KE1F Lou Sent: Tuesday, 20 November 2012 12:57 PM To: dx-chat Subject: [DX-CHAT] A new entity? Is this ruling mean a new entity to DXCC? http://news.yahoo.com/world-court-disputed-islands-belong-colombia-144849746 .html My map is not good enough to measure distances. 73 Lou KE1F --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] LOTW cannot possibly catch up
Barry, The reported backlog is simply the time between upload of the last processed file and the reporting epoch. It is a backward looking statistic and not predictive. If you want predictive, look at the number of QSOs in the queue - which continues to increase - and apply an value for processing rate derived from the QSOs/time watching the home page or calculated based on processing time for some of the uploads in your activity from your own account. I use a factor of 360 QSOs/minute which makes the predictive delay for new uploads about 25,000 minutes or 17 days, 6 hours. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/14/2012 9:29 AM, Barry wrote: Perhaps this is a fluke, but if not, something is seriously wrong with the system. I'm looking at the lotw stats at http://www.arrl.org/logbook-queue-status 2012-12-14 11:02:10 28,382 8,932,232 3,874,028,579 2012-12-04 16:13:53 (9d 18h 48m 17s ago) 2012-12-14 10:02:27 28,370 8,960,484 3,884,882,489 2012-12-04 15:58:15 (9d 18h 04m 12s ago) Note that the number of QSOs to be processed dropped by ~28000 and the data to be processed dropped by about 10 Meg. The backlog increased by 44 minutes. Hmm... Barry W2UP --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] LOTW cannot possibly catch up
Go to the LOTW site and read carefully. There is a discussion that tells, in part, that new hardware is on order, and is expected to arrive in 6-8 weeks. THEY ARE WORKING ON IT!!! That is if you *believe* the claim that the hardware will fix it. With a very large database, decreases in throughput can just as easily be due to reaching a tipping point in the database structure (the point at which the indexing fails). Since there has been no diagnostic data reported to support the hardware hypothesis, users are left in a trust me position while the processing delay vaults past ten days as of approximately 16:30z today - on its way to 20 days by the end of the month. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/14/2012 11:42 AM, Mike(W5UC) Kathy (K5MWH) wrote: Go to the LOTW site and read carefully. There is a discussion that tells, in part, that new hardware is on order, and is expected to arrive in 6-8 weeks. THEY ARE WORKING ON IT!!! RELAX!!! Constantly getting your shorts all in a wad is uncomfortable, and bad for your health. It raises your blood pressure. 73, Mike, W5UC On 12/14/2012 9:08 AM, Charlie Wooten NF4A wrote: I wish you guys would quitcherbitchin about LOTW.give em a chance to fix the problem.don't sit there and criticize something that is allowing you to get DXCC confirmations in lightning speed compared to 10 years agotake off your computer expert hat and let the league's staff deal with the problem.. NF4A --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org ---
Re: [DX-CHAT] LOTW cannot possibly catch up
LOTW even at 20 days is a tremendous tool. I'm not concerned about 20 days for a confirmation. My concern is 20 days (or more) even before the initial transaction is processed and I get confirmation that the QSOs are safely in the database. I'm confident they'll figure this out, it's probably not a hardware issue only, but the database bogging down under the mountain of data. I'm confident that it's not a hardware issue - the same hardware could process 100 QSOs/minute when LotW first went online according to info I've received privately from those who were there at the time. I would bet the storage hardware has not been properly maintained and tuned as the application changed. New storage hardware is a band-aid ... nothing more. LotW will have gone from 200 million QSO records in January 2009 to more than 470 million by the end of this year - that's over 3,000 QSOs/per hour. In the last 19 days more than 4.6 million new QSO records have been added to the database - that's more than 191,000 per day (3,200/hr). Now if LotW did not have a problem with 3,000 QSO/s per hour average (other than an occasional one or two day backlog around CQWW and ARRL DX) why does it suddenly have a 20 day delay? The issue is that ARRL's IT department and management have ignored the warning signs. Work should have been in full swing for some time to upgrade the entire program - not just a storage subsystem on an emergency basis and patch the tQSL interface - with something designed to handle the size and scope of a modern LotW. As it is, Newington still seems to have its collective head buried in the sand. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/15/2012 8:35 AM, Donald Greenbaum wrote: Remember the days when you mailed in cards to the league and it took 3 months. to process? I'll take 10 days over that anytime. It used to take 6 years to get your cards back from Box 88. Now I see even our Russian friends are on LOTW. And I had my PT0S 160 Qso confirmed in days. LOTW even at 20 days is a tremendous tool. I'm confident they'll figure this out, it's probably not a hardware issue only, but the database bogging down under the mountain of data. These things aren't as easily managed and scaleable as they appear to people not in the IT world. I don't understand the angst over a backlog of processing data during the end of the year rush. Unless the world really is going to end in a week like the Mayans predicted. 73 Don N1DG At 12:24 PM 12/14/2012, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: Go to the LOTW site and read carefully. There is a discussion that tells, in part, that new hardware is on order, and is expected to arrive in 6-8 weeks. THEY ARE WORKING ON IT!!! That is if you *believe* the claim that the hardware will fix it. With a very large database, decreases in throughput can just as easily be due to reaching a tipping point in the database structure (the point at which the indexing fails). Since there has been no diagnostic data reported to support the hardware hypothesis, users are left in a trust me position while the processing delay vaults past ten days as of approximately 16:30z today - on its way to 20 days by the end of the month. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/14/2012 11:42 AM, Mike(W5UC) Kathy (K5MWH) wrote: Go to the LOTW site and read carefully. There is a discussion that tells, in part, that new hardware is on order, and is expected to arrive in 6-8 weeks. THEY ARE WORKING ON IT!!! RELAX!!! Constantly getting your shorts all in a wad is uncomfortable, and bad for your health. It raises your blood pressure. 73, Mike, W5UC On 12/14/2012 9:08 AM, Charlie Wooten NF4A wrote: I wish you guys would quitcherbitchin about LOTW.give em a chance to fix the problem.don't sit there and criticize something that is allowing you to get DXCC confirmations in lightning speed compared to 10 years agotake off your computer expert hat and let the league's staff deal with the problem.. NF4A --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- --- To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to imail...@njdxa.org In the message body put either unsubscribe dx-chat or subscribe dx-chat This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org --- - N1DG--Licensed since 1962 EX-WB2DND, A61AD (GUEST OP, QSL MGR), A52DG, /KH9, /BV, /VS6, /4X, /9V Pilot: VU7RG, 3Y0X, VK9ML, D68C, VK0IR, K8XP/KH9, 9M0C, ZK1XXP, ZL9CI Webmaster: VP8ORK, K4M, BS7H, K5K, A52A, VK0IR, 9M0C, ZK1XXP, WB2DND/KH9, BQ9P
