One approach that has been successful in the past is to have the CPC offer to handle all verification and QSL duties on behalf of the station. This proved to be very successful in obtaining DX Tests simply because it removed the burden from the station.
We further would take the lead on producing test materials (CW Morse Code ID’s, sweep tones, phonetic voice identifications, etc.) and providing that as an MP3 file, or on a CD. At the end of the test, the CPC would verify reception reports and send out QSL’s. The station personnel received a detailed report showing all receptions (often plotted on a map using Google Earth) The CPC Chairman is often more familiar with DXing, and better able to judge any questionable reception. This approach allowed us to obtain DX Tests for a number of smaller stations, with limited resources. Another tactic we employed as to produce :60 long “Test Material” that could be run by a station during the overnight hours at the TOH as their ID. No change in transmitter power, pattern, etc…just distinctive test material that could cut through clutter. All that was required was for the station to insert the material into their inventory. These often ran for weeks at a time during the overnight hours. These too resulted in a lot of “new ones” going into the logs. I’m sure there are other innovative approaches that could be successful as well. The key is to acknowledge that times change. We have to change our tactics as hobbyists if we want to remain successful. 73, Les Rayburn, N1LF 121 Mayfair Park Maylene, AL EM63nf Member WTFDA, IRCA, NRC. Former CPC Chairman for NRC & IRCA. Elad FDM-S2 SDR, AirSpy SDR, Quantum Phaser, Wellbrook ALA1530 Loop, Wellbrook Flag, Clifton Labs Active Whip. > On Jan 7, 2017, at 2:21 PM, Patrick Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > > Rick, > > Anytime people could always cheat. There were reports from back in the > 50s with faux reports. I like sending a cassette, reel to reel tape, > or now CD of what I heard so the CE could tell the reception quality > as well as it being accurate. But to give up totally on DX Tests > because of of a faux report or two, it ruins it for the rest of us. I > love catching the rare stations that could never be heard without a > test. One issue we are having is the reluctance of station personnel > to reply to any reports now. Even e mail replies are hard to obtain. > Even though I get fewer QSLs these days, I still go after them. But DX > Tests should still be viable in our hobby. We do not get many these > days as stations do not sign off like they did. I still look forward > to them when we get them. > > Patrick > > On 1/6/17, Rick Dau <[email protected]> wrote: >> Sorry, DXers of the world, but it's high time that DX tests be done away >> with.... >> >> >> >> Back in the day, some unscrupulous participants in the hobby made it a >> practice of waiting about 2-3 weeks after tests were conducted, looking >> through the pages of DX News, DX Monitor, and other print publications, >> jotting down the details of what OTHERS were hearing, then sending their own >> faux reports based from those details off to the testing stations. Very >> often, engineers would happily mail back QSLs to the offenders, totally >> unaware of what was going on. Fortunately, a select few DID get wise to the >> shenanigans being perpetrated and then began conducting tests with the >> caveat that reports had to be mailed within a scant few days (say, within a >> week or so) after the test, or they would simply not reply to the report. >> This was, in effect, to curtail the cheating. >> >> >> >> But with the progress of technology comes a downside. Through reflectors >> such as these, along with message boards, DX chatrooms (WHEN they work), and >> other means of instant communication, the cheaters are once again seeing the >> information that others are posting without making their OWN efforts to hear >> the stations. DX tests were fun while they lasted, but, IMHO, they need to >> be put down. >> >> >> >> 73, >> >> Rick Dau >> >> South Omaha, Nebraska >> >> ________________________________ >> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of >> [email protected] [ABDX] <[email protected]> >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 5:48 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [ABDX] Re: Rackley on Synchronous AM Boosters >> >> >> >> To answer Todd`s question about anyone hearing KKOB Santa Fe, recently >> in my reports and DXLD: >> >> Also, I have repeatedly called for a DX test to be arranged on Santa Fe >> only, turning off the main Albuquerque transmitter, however briefly (without >> of course, trying to set it up, myself; maybe I would if I still lived in >> ABQ) And now there is no CPC chairman. Glenn >> >> __._,_.___ >> ________________________________ >> Posted by: [email protected] >> __,_._,___ >> > _______________________________________________ > The 37th edition of the AM Radio Log is now shipping! > Info: http://www.nrcdxas.org > _______________________________________________ IRCA mailing list [email protected] http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: [email protected]
