RE: [DX-CHAT] VU7LD
Of Popkingram fame (or infamy)? If you're a stamp collector, he's almost worth getting an OO notice from... he uses stamps I haven't seen in circulation in 35-40 years! I took my Extra before the FCC in Huntington, WV; ironically, this was the next-to-last exam in the region (there was another one scheduled 2 months later in Monroeville PA just outside of Pittsburgh; I was signed up for that one too, but never needed to go obviously). Stayed in the motel where the test was being given the night before. Marched in at 8:00 AM to take my code test; ended up passing it by 7 out of 10 on the fill-in-the-blank (found out later that I also had over 2 minutes of solid copy). Started working on the theory as soon as I was notified I'd passed the code; during which time the 13 WPM code testers came in. Finished my exam about, oh, 9:30 or so and waited. And waited. And waited... seems the examiner was grading each test off the top of the pile -- and as you turned in your test, it too got put on the top of the pile, and I was too scared to say anything or leave the room! Finally, around 11:45, the father son I drove down with poked their heads in to see what was going on, since I had to check out at noon! The Examiner left the room for a moment -- found out that he personally called the front desk to say it was his fault, and asked them not to charge me a late fee (they didn't). Finally, around 12:15 or so, I get called up, he gives me a strange look, and says you know, you made it by the skin of your teeth! I had just passed the Extra theory with no margin for error! I was in a VERY good mood on the way home! ...the irony of this is that I barely studied the theory -- I had concentrated on the code test, figuring I could get the code in WV, with Monroeville as last resort on that, and that I'd have 2 months to study the theory. But you think I complained? 73 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Larry Alkoff Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 3:26 PM To: Norm Gertz Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Ron Notarius W3WN; DX-Chat Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] VU7LD Correction that was David Popkin. Norm Gertz wrote: Lou and Bill.I think that the FCC in those days hand picked the examiners.they were usually unsmiling and quite menacing to the young applicants. Most of the time the field office was a smelly, musty space; many cigarette smokers at that time. I dont think any of those things worked as a detriment; most passed their tests in those days. 73 Norm K1AA - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Ron Notarius W3WN ; DX-Chat Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 10:22 AM Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] VU7LD Hi Lou- Yes, I know who you are talking about. The old buzzard must have been there for ages, I'm just about 61 now. I had to take my general/advanced in NYC in the 70's. I think everyone was scared of the old guy. But he was fair and accurate. Saw him fail a priest on my visit. 73 Bill W2PKY - Original Message - From: lmecseri -KE1F Date: Saturday, December 23, 2006 10:12 pm Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] VU7LD To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Ron Notarius W3WN , DX-Chat Guys, To get my Extra, I had to demonstrate my CW sending skill in downtown Manhattan to a very old FCC officer. (I will be 70 in January) :-( I love CW, I do only CW and RTTY contesting, I don't do phone. I don't have mic connected to my HF radio. Merry Christmas/Happy Holiday and a Happy New Year. 73s Lou KE1F [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Ron- Have operated most modes but still come back to CW. Enjoy nailing a big DX station in a pile up! Says it all! Bill - Original Message - From: Ron Notarius W3WN Date: Thursday, December 21, 2006 8:46 pm Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] VU7LD To: DX-Chat Sorry you feel that way Lou. However, I think you're grossly mistaken. If anything, I think the opposite will occur. Those who continue to operate on CW will do so because they enjoy it, not because they're trying to get their code speeds up to pass a test. It follows then that if it is enjoyed, it will maintain at least some modicum of popularity. CW is an acquired taste. Not everyone acquires it. It took me a long time to really settle down and enjoy it. I actually find that lately I spend much more time cruising the exclusive CW sub-bands for DX and ragchews than I do the Phone 'bands. Never in a googleplex of nanoseconds thought that would happen! 73 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] BehalfOf lmecseri -KE1F Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 6
RE: [DX-CHAT] Orders for NEW IRCs
So much for neither rain, nor SNOW, nor gloom of night... g 73 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Charlie, W0YG Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 4:40 PM To: DX-Chat Subject: [DX-CHAT] Orders for NEW IRCs For those that have ordered IRCs from me, 37 inches of snow has stopped the mail service dead in its tracks. I haven't received mail since Tuesday last however some did make it through today. Be assured as soon as I get your payment, the IRCs will be in the mail to you. Thanks for your patience. 73, Charlie, W0YG.. 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] VU7LD
Sorry you feel that way Lou. However, I think you're grossly mistaken. If anything, I think the opposite will occur. Those who continue to operate on CW will do so because they enjoy it, not because they're trying to get their code speeds up to pass a test. It follows then that if it is enjoyed, it will maintain at least some modicum of popularity. CW is an acquired taste. Not everyone acquires it. It took me a long time to really settle down and enjoy it. I actually find that lately I spend much more time cruising the exclusive CW sub-bands for DX and ragchews than I do the Phone 'bands. Never in a googleplex of nanoseconds thought that would happen! 73 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of lmecseri -KE1F Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 6:50 AM To: Shelby Summerville Cc: DX-Chat Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] VU7LD clip But since CW is no longer a requirement for a HAM license the mode CW is not and will not be popular. clip 73s LouKE1F Shelby Summerville wrote: On 12/19, I wrote: I thought I worked VU7LD/VU3ELR, 12/16, 1455Z, 20 SSB. Now, according to the online log, I DID work VU7LD/VU3ELR on 12/16! My apologies to anyone that I may have caused not to work VU7, as I again worked VU7LD/VU3RSB, yesterday. I assure y'all that I'm NOT a DX hog, nor do I have any desire for that reputation! Happy Holidays 73, Shelby - K4WW 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
[DX-CHAT] Portable Tower Antennas
For the last year and a half, my local club (spearheaded by our incoming President N3ZK... go to www.n3sh.org for details) has been raising funds to purchase a mobile tower/trailer. We arbitrarily divided the project into three phases -- Phase 1 was for the tower itself (we got a really good price on a 30' crankup from Tashjian Towers -- formerly known as TriEx), Phase 2 for the trailer, and Phase 3 for the antennas and related stuff (coax, rotors, etc.) We completed the fund raising for Phase 1 over a month ago, and the tower is now enroute. This weekend saw us meet the Phase 2 goal, and the trailer itself will be delivered in about 2 weeks. So, now we're on the Phase 3: The antennas etc. Anyone have any good suggestions for HF VHF antennas that are both: (a) lightweight and (b) easy to assemble/dis-assemble for quick transportation? We had originally hoped to work something out with Lightning Bolt Bob, but Lightning Bolt Antennas went out of buisness last year. And we have a Hex Beam, but that's not neccesarily what we want to keep permanently with the tower. Anyone have any other suggestions? Oh -- I should mention that there will be wire antennas (some dipoles, some long wires, etc.) stored with the trailer. What we're looking for is something a little more directional. (Sadly, my old Butternut HF4B, given to the club a few years ago, got nailed by a tree branch courtesy of Mother Nature and was not salvageable... or so I'm told, anyway). And coax itself shouldn't be a problem as we have a large stock of that in the Field Day hoard. 73, ron w3wn 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: That Darn ARRL Did It Again!
I've been asked to repost this over here on DX-CHAT by the Powers That Be. (Of course, please keep in mind that the here referred to wasn't CHAT) I've done some minor editing to fix one small factual error and clarify an acknowlegement or two, otherwise it's just as originally posted. 73 -Original Message- From: Ron Notarius W3WN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2006 2:55 AM To: Subject: That Darn ARRL Did It Again! So, based on what I've been reading here, and actually for some time now since the phone band expansion was announced a few months back, let me see if I've got this all straight. The ARRL pushed through the No Code HF license to increase membership and therefore increase revenue. No, on second thought, the ARRL is impotent with the FCC because they have no money to influence the FCC and therefore is to blame for not stopping this. No, no, the ARRL is in bed with the FCC to screw amateur radio operators. No, no, no, the ARRL is just clueless and has no idea what side of the bread is buttered. Ah, shucks, now I've got it, they're just a bunch of back stabbers. Nope! They represent the special interests and sold out the CW ops for the digital ops. No, make that the CW Digital ops for the Phone ops. No, still wrong, they sold out the coders in favor of the no coders. I think. But they sold out. Or sold somebody out. Or something. Well, they sold something, anyway. No, no, no, wait, now I've got it. The ARRL pushed this through so that they could increase the number of tests given and reap all their money from those! Oops! Still wrong. Actually, the FCC is run by politicians and political hacks (imagine that) who are in league with the League. Or is it that they ignore the League? I keep getting confused. Oh yes, and all the people posting on this DX list and other lists are almost universally against dropping the CW test. Too bad the FCC doesn't read this list and the others and listen to us! My goodness, do they actually expect us to file petitions in this day and age of message boards and reflectors? -- Meanwhile, back at the Ranch, Fred and the boys at No Code International must really be thrilled. Not only have they finally got their agenda pushed through, but they got the League to take the heat on it from all sides. With one or two rare exceptions, haven't read about anybody complaining about their actions... and weren't they the ones who've been filing the petitions on this in the first place? Come to think of it, haven't heard anybody praising them, either. Interesting. -- We have to face an unpleasant truth: Outside of Amateur Radio, the use of the International Morse Code as a regular, routine, and accepted method of communications has virtually disappeared. Outside of beacon and repeater ID's and the like, it's gone. (Tangent: Going to work on the T the other day, I heard the Port Authority's repeater ID in CW. The LRT driver muttered 'I wonder what all those beeps mean, I hear them all the time.') So, once the ITU determined that Morse proficiency was a skill the rest of the communications skill didn't need, and dropped it as a mandatory requirement for HF access by Amateur Radio operators, the rest was inevitable. I also think it is unfair to blame the ARRL for being ineffective in stopping this. It's not a question of them being impotent (although Mal N7MAL does have a good point about the $$$ behind lobbying). I don't think the FCC paid any attention to ANY of the comments filed. Again. Someone in the FCC was given the task of writing up the NPRM, and it sailed through almost unscathed -- because, IMHO, the decision was made to take the path of least resistance and simply eliminate Element 1 BEFORE the NPRM was filed. So all those comments were, IMHO, for naught. Every single one. Why should this surprise you? BPL is technically flawed and an obsolete technology as currently being implemented, yet the FCC is pushing it. Why? Because the politicians running the FCC have friends in the industry who are dangling money. This is a surprise? As I recall, when 220 - 222 was taken away, didn't one of the Commisioners very soon after quit and take a job with one of the firms that lobbied for it? Nah, that couldn't be a payoff... and before anyone says it, that happened when the Other Party had their people in charge of the Gov't, not the Current Party. Political payoffs are, er, non-political in that respect. So what do we do? Well, first we take the only group that has any reasonable hope of dealing with the FCC, gripe about them constantly, fail to fund them, fail to support them, leave them with few tools (including $$) at hand, and then when they fail to succeed at a near impossible task, assess blame, quit, turn others against them, threaten to form a new group and split our ranks further, and leave them is worse shape to continue the fight or fight the next one. Yeah, that makes
RE: [DX-CHAT] Some hams just don't get it
Tell someone that they have tomato sauce on their face, and sooner or later, someone will take offense that you're making a derogatory remark about their character and/or background because they ate something from an Italian cuisine for lunch. It makes as much sense as if they were talking in Ishkabibil (Sid Ceaser, where are you when we need you?) There's nothing you can do about someone who's determined to pick a fight or take offense. This sounds like one of those cases. 73 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jim Reisert AD1C Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 4:59 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] Some hams just don't get it Saturday morning the VU7 was on 14260 listening up. A KP4 ham and someone else were trying to have a QSO on the frequency, they must have been asked to move when the VU7 showed up. I didn't hear that part of the conversion, but I heard one of the chatters say something like, 'We were probably asked to move because we were talking Spanish, so people must assume we are illegal immigrants.' The logic here escapes me. But both parties could have done better: - the Spanish-speaking folks were chatting on the international IOTA calling frequency. Surely there was a better place to have a ragchew. - whoever tried to move them off the frequency probably didn't explain about the IOTA frequency, VU7 being weak, listening for North America, etc. Just something to think about... 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.ad1c.us 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] H8A
Anyone know offhand if DL6MYL is still issuing cards for the H8A debacle back in 2002? I've sent in direct requests twice now, plus one via WF5L, and to date, nada. Just hate to throw away more shekels if it's a black hole... 73, ron w3wn 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] 4O3T
I've heard that some EU ops have received their cards, but to date, nothing reported received in NA. Hopefully they're not on the proverbial slow boat and are on their way... The only other thing I recall hearing or reading about 4O3T was some indirect comments regarding the operation in that email from YZ5W over on DX-QSL, back in early October, primarily concerned with the YU6AO DXCC eligibility questions. 73 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of harris_ruben Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 8:15 AM To: dx-chat List Subject: [DX-CHAT] 4O3T It's 4 months now. Any word on cards from these guys? -- No trees were harmed in the sending of this message, however a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 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] 4O3T
Correction! Don W0DM had a post last night on DX QSL that he HAS received the 403T QSL card via PA5O! So there's at least one out loose in NA! 73 -Original Message- From: Ron Notarius W3WN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 6:00 PM To: dx-chat List Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] 4O3T I've heard that some EU ops have received their cards, but to date, nothing reported received in NA. Hopefully they're not on the proverbial slow boat and are on their way... The only other thing I recall hearing or reading about 4O3T was some indirect comments regarding the operation in that email from YZ5W over on DX-QSL, back in early October, primarily concerned with the YU6AO DXCC eligibility questions. 73 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of harris_ruben Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 8:15 AM To: dx-chat List Subject: [DX-CHAT] 4O3T It's 4 months now. Any word on cards from these guys? -- No trees were harmed in the sending of this message, however a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced. 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] 3E1A qsl???
There's an on-going discussion on this over on the DX QSL Reflector. A few people have indicated that they have received their 3E1A QSL, others are still waiting for that one and for others from DJ7AA. Those receiving cards indicate both direct and via buro cards were answered. In addition, it appears that the HP1/DJ7AA operation from several years ago was not accepted for DXCC, and that the 3E1A operation originally was not but is now. I also worked HP1/DJ7AA both before and during the contest. When I print my next batch of cards, I'm planning to route that one via WF5E. And not hold my breath. FWIW; YMMV; VWPBL(STn). 73, ron w3wn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Don Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 9:22 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] 31EA qsl??? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Harpole Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 8:31 PM Has anyone received a 3E1A QSL through DL6MYL??? I saw some snipes on the packet cluster (example---1826.5 HP1/DJ7AA Was 3E1A and don't QSL ...) while he is operating from HP during this weekend's contest -- seems like a lot of dissatisfied QSLers (and I may be one too after two direct (one $$ one SSAE) requesting QSL. Emails sent direct have been ignored. A google search of 31EA QSL turned up only instructions where to QSL, unlike other operations where such a query turned up QSL received) Maybe no one has? If someone has received one, please let all of us know (before I try one more time...I don't want to fatten his wallet. The German Post Office does NOT lose that many letters...and its been long enough to get the QSLs printed...) As always we must believe the best in people, until proven otherwise. If anyone has received a QSL it would reinforce the former...lack of anyone coming forward would seem to indicate the opposite Best regards Don AC7ZG 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 Clubs in the Northeast?
Not all of them make that big a splash. I know that you also have both the North Jersey South Jersey DXA's -- SJDXA also covers part of SE PA (Philly area). Both have web sites you can check into for more info. The Western PA DXA start dissolving a little less than 2 years ago, for a variety of reasons. Myself and a few others have been thinking of organizing a replacement, but life is taking priority. We haven't give up hope yet, though. 73 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Jerry KellerSent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 12:27 PMTo: (Reflector) dx-list (ORIGINAL); (Reflector) DXList (NEW); (Reflector) DX-CHATSubject: [DX-CHAT] DX Clubs in the Northeast? There's Northern and Southern California DX Clubs, and there's the Southeastern DX Club out of Atlanta. There's even the Western Washington DX Club. There's the International DX Association and many DX Clubs in other countries.But are there any DX clubs here in the Northeastern USA any more? Any that cover eastern PA? I know of Contest Clubs... like YCCC and FRC and PVRC and supposedly they are also DX clubs, but nearly all their activities are primarily contest-oriented, and their active membership is pretty much restricted to a circle established for Contest purposes.What happened to the DX Clubs?73, Jerry K3BZ
[DX-CHAT] Off Base?
Bear with me a moment on this one, gang. I know some of you are also on the CQ-Contest reflector, where I've been involved the last few days (since the end of CQ WW) in a sometimes heated discussion over operating practices on 40 meters. The crux of the disagreement revolves around the actions of some SSB stations regarding operating below 7020 kHz. Some of these are North American stations (mainly some US big-guns) who announced they were listening at 7012, 7010, 7007, even 7001 kHz; some of these are various DX stations who were transmitting from the same region. Now... I'm not trying to re-argue the situation here. Suffice to say, IMHO this is poor operating practices to try and have an SSB contest effectively control the entire 40 meter band (to say nothing of the long-term effect of ticking off CW ops pushed out of the way and making them anti-contest). I've had several counter-arguments, two amateurs (one US, one VE) in particular. I'm being told things like the band is crowded so we go where we have to, if it's not strictly illegal it's allowed, the contest operators can't impose band limits, if the contest operators try to limit things that aren't illegal they open themselves up to litigation, non-contesters should use the WARC bands, a run frequency is more important that a 5 WPM Extra talking across town, CW is dying anyway, band plans are voluntary, and my personal favorites, it only happens two weekends a year, CQ WW ARRL DX (what about CQ WPX and IARU and WAE and...) so deal with it, and CW is being abandonded by administrations around the world so nobody cares. Amongst many others, but you catch the drift. I've also had a small group encourage me -- privately, few in public posts. The vast majority? Silent. So... am I wrong here? Now granted, a big-gun I'm not and probably never will be, especially from the new QTH (I'm just glad the vertical kinda WORKS right now! Well, it's been 3 1/2 years since the last permanent QTH...). My operating time was very limited due to family obligations. But I was just floored by some of the 40 meter listening frequencies I saw on the cluster on Saturday night (ET). And I heard a lot of CW activity that got squashed by people calling or responding to a CQ CONTEST. So, I figured that there'd be some griping about it. But only one person did (my participation started as part of the response), and he quickly got told to go fishing if he didn't like it. Am I off base in finding this situation unpalatable? Am I in the minority, or are most just shrugging and putting up with this because they don't think anything can be done? 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] thanks for the replies
Jim is absolutely right. Too many people gripe about the League when they have a specific issue with a staffer or a department in Newington. [And some of those gripes are very legitimate, I'm not trying to put them down]. And then you have the induhviduals like W9WHE and W1WY and a few other trolls on eHam and QRZ and a few other sites who seem to delight in putting down the League and proclaiming all sorts of nasties and half-truths about the organization. While HQ is the staff in Newington, and they do have a big job running the organization and all of it's parts (like DXCC, QST, the QSL bureaus, the web site, the books, and on and on and on), they are NOT the League. WE are the League. Without the members, the League would not exist. Now I can't speak for the other divisions, but in all the years I've lived here in Pittsburgh and been active or semi-active, I have personally met and chatted many times with the various Atlantic Division Directors... including Hugh W3ABC and Kay N3KN (or whatever her call is today! g) back in their days... and just about all of the WPA Section Managers. ALL of them have been willing to talk, LISTEN, and explain. They may have asked someone to keep it brief because of time constraints, or others waiting, etc., but they have ALL spent time to LISTEN and communicate. And that's just what I saw in person, they also have all been very active with correspondence (to this day, I think W3ABC still groans when he gets a note from me, I used to write him on a regular basis and probably drove him half nutz!) I've heard stories about how aloof other Division Directors and SM's were. Can't say, I didnt/don't know them, and outside of seeing some of them at Dayton, haven't interacted with them. So, as they say, YMMV, VWPBL(STn)... and if you have an aloof DD or SM, maybe you should try and do something about that. Now... I do know of stories where some DD's and SM's won't talk, or talk for long, to non-League members. This is understandable to a point, because if you're not in the League, they often feel you're not part of the solution. So, if you're not a League member and this has happened to you, consider joining so that they DO have to listen to you -- and if they don't, so that you're in a position to do something about it. I'm not saying that by joining the League that you have to agree with every position, every policy, for that matter everything, that they've done. (On principle, I'm not too thrilled about the change of direction on Swain's Island, for one thing -- for one example). But if you're not a member, you have no say in modifying or even changing those positions. Consider that. Jim mentioned the BPL situation. Remember that the BPL lobbyists are very anti-League because the League has had the audacity to question the technical aspects... that is, ARRL has managed to remind everyone that to do it right costs a lot more money that to do it quick, dirty cheap, and so what if some hams CB'ers cops firemen have some noise on their radios? Every time some troll writes the FCC with a put-down of the League (justified or not -- and most aren't) it chips away at the League's credibility. We have GOT to fight the monied interests behind BPL, the ones who are intent in pushing a flawed technology in the interests of recouping their investments (and making a ton of money off the poor slobs who buy the systems off of their hands). We have GOT to get the FCC to acknowledge that in those areas that really want BPL (with WiMax coming, how many?) it has to be done RIGHT. Establishing this attitude -- which is not anti-BPL, it's anti-bad technology or anti-bad applilcation -- is what the League is best at. Even if you don't care for a lot of other things the League is doing or has done (and after 40+ years, can we give the Incentive Licensing war a rest? please?), the BPL fight alone is reason alone to join. (You can always leave when it's over) It's time to be a part of the solution. End soapbox. You can start throwing the tomatoes now. 73, ron w3wn 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] query quad companies adr
Yes, Lightning Bolt ceased operations about a year ago. We don't expect them back. And they made some great antennas, more's the pity. 73 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Charles Harpole Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 3:12 AM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] query quad companies adr I am having little luck finding GEM quad company email address. Anyone help? Apparently Lightning Bolt is permanently out of business correct? Norm must have transferred his Cubex quad business to another man... email address anyone? Getting quad spreaders to Thailand may be a real hard job? And, yes, I did search via google and metacrawler to vy limited success. Thanks for any help 73, Charles Harpole, HS0ZCW [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] 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. 73 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/13 Fri AM 07:46:40 CDT To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] After effects Just 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 Emerson 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] After effects
Very true Gerry, and that's why I was surprised that the FCC went as far as they did on 80. I think the Law of Unintended Consequences will cause us some grief until it's all sorted out. From: Gerry [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/13 Fri AM 09:15:14 CDT 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/ - 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. 73 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/13 Fri AM 07:46:40 CDT To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] After effects Just 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 Emerson 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] Waiting on the Other Shoe
In reviewing comments made about the FCC changes, one thing that kept popping up was that the FCC allocated more (sometimes much more) space for voice operations than was initially asked for. For example, the original ARRL proposal was for an extra 25 kHz of phone on 75. The original FCC NPRM was for the same. Many of the comments that I read (and I did not read all of them) indicated that of those in favor of this change, 25 kHz wasn't thought to be enough; most of those that I saw proposed 50, 75, even 100 kHz more. No one expected a 150 kHz expansion of phone on 80! Why? Or to put it another way, what does the FCC staff know that we don't (yet)? My suspicion... and this is only idle speculation at this point based on an extrapolation of the data at hand... is that at some point in the next 6 to 18 months, the other shoe is going to drop. Namely, the long awaited and anticipated (pro or con) removal of Element 1 as a requirement for HF access. (Whether for some or most or all license classes, I have no idea) So... logic dictates that if you no longer need Element 1 for HF access, you have little reason to not give SOME HF access to the current crop of VHF-only Technicians, who have passed the same theory as the Tech-Plus (aka Tech w/HF, etc., you know what I mean) licenses. And obviously, giving them CW only access when they officially don't know CW would be rather silly. Catch my drift? When they become effective sometime next month, enjoy the extra elbow room on 75, 40, and 15, my friends, especially you Generals. I have a hunch that it won't be too long until those bands get very, very crowded! [Now, is that a good thing, or a bad thing? THAT is a different topic of speculation, my friends!] ...or am I way off base here? 73, ron w3wn 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] Omnibus After Effects, or, The Day After
OK, so now that the FCC has finally released the omnibus, which will take effect sometime around the middle of November... where do things stand? You can't really get a good handle on that by reading the posts on eHam and especially QRZ, as the code/no-code and the pro/anti-ARRL groups have sharpened their metaphorical hatchets and are going at each other again. Here's my thoughts on some of the high points: (1) Expanded the phone sub-bands in the 75 and 40 meter bands Needed because the phone sub-bands on both 75 40 where often very crowded during prime time, between fighting off the BC'ers on 40 and the established I own the frequency *burp* bubba-nets on much of 75. I hadn't expected that big a change on 75, but I think it will pay off in the long run. How this affects the digital modes remains to be seen. It also removes the N/T+ CW subbands. I havent seen the explicit language specifying what Novice Tech+ ops are allocated as of the effective date, but it appears that they will have the same CW-only allocations as Generals and Advanced. I dont see this as a bad thing, as the days of the Novice band as a learning ground have passed -- this is not to say we dont need to help train new hams we do. We just dont need a special slow code segment to do so (insert obligatory wise crack about slow code here). (2) permitted auxiliary stations to transmit on portions of the 2 meter band Looks like Kenwood finally gets to implement SkyCommand! (3a) permitted amateur licensees to designate a specific Amateur Radio club to receive their call sign in memoriam (3b) prohibited an applicant from filing more than one application for a specific vanity call sign There have been some creative end-runs around the intent, if not the letter, of the Vanity program. These changes are needed and should be welcome. Now, if you want someone to get your call after you QSY to a higher frequency, you at least have some say in the matter. And the days of filing 100+ applications by one individual for a particular vanity call thats not an exaggeration, its happened to throw the lottery in his/her favor are over. About time! (4) eliminated certain restrictions on equipment manufacturers The end of the 10 meter amplifier ban at last! Well, almost. (5) deleted the frequency bands and segments specified for RACES stations Never understood why they did that in the first place, a long overdue technical correction (6) deleted the requirement for public announcement of test locations and times Makes it easier to schedule a test session on the fly without resorting to public announcements to meet the legal requirements. So who loses? On paper, certain CW and digital ops have less exclusive spectrum to deal with. But in reality, most of the frequency spectrum reallocated to phone on 40 75 have been virtually vacant for years. Yes, the CW bands will be a little more crowded, but I suspect not that much. After all, there hasnt been that much use by those in the N/T+ segment as it is. Some may become more active when moved in with the mainstream, at long last, but I suspect will continue to (not) operate as they have been prior to the change. If theres any other downside, I fail to see it. Im sure someone will, though Thoughts? 73, ron w3wn 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: [DX-NEWS] Changes to FCC SSB allocations
I'd expect the DX Window to move, probably down 100 kHz. But will it even be neccesary, once the new rules take place? Part of the reason we had the DX Window was to provide a clear spot, but with the phone band expansion on 75/80, plus a bigger overlap between existing non-US allocations and the new US band... well, it will be interesting, that's for sure... 73 From: Barry [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/11 Wed PM 02:45:59 CDT To: dx-news@Njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-NEWS] Changes to FCC SSB allocations Wonder how that will affect the 75m DX Window... Barry W2UP Jim Reisert AD1C wrote: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-149A1.doc bandGeneral AdvancedExtra 75m 3800-4000 3700-4000 3600-4000 40m 7175-7300 7125-7300 7125-7300 15m 21275-21450 (no change) (no change) Lots of other small changes -- see the document. Part 1, Part 2 and Part 97 of the Commission's Rules ARE AMENDED as specified in the Appendix, effective [30 days after publication in the Federal Register]. 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.ad1c.us -- 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 -- -- 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
Re: [DX-CHAT] IRC's For Sale
Bob's post on about-to-expire IRC's just got me thinking... How do QSL managers handle incoming IRC's GS's? In other words, when I send a manager an envelope containing a request, is it opened right away and any cash or IRC's removed (and duly noted, of course), or are the $$ etc. left in place until the actual processing of the requested QSL card? I know this may sound like a dumb question -- and yes, I know every manager has their own way of doing things, so YMMV VWPBL(STn) -- but the upcoming expiration date on the 1st Generation New IRC's makes me wonder. I don't want to put Bob (or another QSL manager) to the trouble and bother of selling sending me IRC's if, by the time the receiving QSL Manager gets his hands on them to exchange for postage, they will have already expired. OTOH, it beats arguing with the local bank branch about needing more than 1 or 2 $2 bills at a time... or at least crisp $1 bills... especially when sending to a manager that wants 2 IRC's or US$3 for postage due to currency exchange fluctuations... (you wouldn't believe how many teller lectures I've gotten over the years on the dangers of sending cash through the mail. *sigh*) Thoughts? 73, ron w3wn From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/06 Fri AM 10:00:15 CDT To: dx-news@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-NEWS] IRC's For Sale REDUCED CLOSEOUT PRICE FOR IRCS: N2OO has a limited number IRCs for sale. All are large-sized IRCs which expire Dec 31, 2006. $1.05 each. Minimum quantity: 10. IRCs will be sent postpaid USA (regular mail). PayPal accepted. Contact Bob N2OO mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] for more information. 73! Bob N2OO 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:[2][DX-CHAT] IRC's For Sale
Well, let's be honest with ourselves... we've all known this day was coming for 5 years now, since the first issuance of the new IRC. And we'll be going through it again in another 5 years or so, unless the bureaucracy relents (hah!) In my case, since I have a small number of cards to go out that have been sitting awhile, I should be OK getting a small quantity of IRC's from Bob and getting them out -- immediately. I suspect things will get VERY interesting come late November and December, and frankly, I don't envy QSL managers who have to deal with procrastinators (like me), or people who don't bother to read the coupons, or people trying to pull a fast one... I wonder if managers still get brown surface IRC's from time to time? (Considering all of the odd stuff they get, I wouldn't be at all surprised!) 73, ron w3wn From: Jim Reisert AD1C [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/06 Fri PM 12:04:08 CDT To: Ron Notarius W3WN [EMAIL PROTECTED], dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] IRC's For Sale This is a great and timely question, since I'll be sending out a batch of the expiring IRCs sometime this month. That gives the manager only a couple of months to cash them. I don't want to stiff the manager, but I also don't want to take a loss on each IRC I'm holding (pay $1.20 but redeem for 0.84). 73 - Jim AD1C --- Ron Notarius W3WN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bob's post on about-to-expire IRC's just got me thinking... How do QSL managers handle incoming IRC's GS's? In other words, when I send a manager an envelope containing a request, is it opened right away and any cash or IRC's removed (and duly noted, of course), or are the $$ etc. left in place until the actual processing of the requested QSL card? I know this may sound like a dumb question -- and yes, I know every manager has their own way of doing things, so YMMV VWPBL(STn) -- but the upcoming expiration date on the 1st Generation New IRC's makes me wonder. I don't want to put Bob (or another QSL manager) to the trouble and bother of selling sending me IRC's if, by the time the receiving QSL Manager gets his hands on them to exchange for postage, they will have already expired. OTOH, it beats arguing with the local bank branch about needing more than 1 or 2 $2 bills at a time... or at least crisp $1 bills... especially when sending to a manager that wants 2 IRC's or US$3 for postage due to currency exchange fluctuations... (you wouldn't believe how many teller lectures I've gotten over the years on the dangers of sending cash through the mail. *sigh*) Thoughts? -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.ad1c.us 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] W4PL
Might be. The Tennesse Valley DXA simply states in their March '06 newsletter we now have a club call but no further explanation. 73 From: Bill Hawkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/09/29 Fri AM 10:45:45 CDT To: DX Chat Reflector dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] W4PL I see postings for W4PL.Is this a commemorative call honoring the old W4PL, Ben White?I remember working traffic with Ben on RN5 eons ago.He always as there, had a great signal and one of, if not the best fist I ever heard in the days before electronic keyers. Bill W5EC 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] and another new one... (or even two...)...conclusion!!
Unless I'm mistaken, and if I am I'm sure I'll quickly be corrected, FS FJ are currently one and the same DXCC entity, separate from FG for DXCC purposes. For DXCC purposes, what is the current parent entity? France or Guadeloupe? (Not that it has mattered until now since the current entity is grandfathered in under the old pre-DXCC 2000 rules). My question is, will this change be enough to consider one (probably FS) the surviving DXCC entity the other (FJ) a new DXCC entity? Or are they too close together (what is their distance apart?) to be considered separate entities even after this political change? Is there someone with vaster knowledge of DXCC than I able to answer this? 73, ron w3wn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of P. Buijserd Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 3:17 PM To: dx-news@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-NEWS] and another new one... (or even two...)...conclusion!! From the reactions sofar, I conclude that FS and FJ will become separate entities as soon as they will be listed on the U.S. Department of State's list of Dependencies and Areas of Special Sovereignty. Both FJ and FS easily meet the 800km distance criterium from the parent (France). FS and FJ now are part of the french département d'outre-mer of Guadeloupe (FG). Following a 2003 referendum FJ and FS will both (apart, not together) get another political status (collectivité d'outre-mer), probably in early 2007. This is the same status as other french territories like FO, FH, FW and FP. These four are all listed on the U.S. Department of State's list: http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/10543.htm So keep a close watch on new issues of this list ! 73 Peter PB1TT. - Original Message - From: P. Buijserd To: dx-news@njdxa.org Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 9:04 PM Subject: [DX-NEWS] and another new one... (or even two...) Surfing through Wikipedia I found the following: Guadeloupe currently includes Saint-Barthélemy and Saint Martin, who have voted to become separate collectivités d'outre-mer in 2003; the change will be implemented in early 2007. This suggests that Saint-Barthélemy could become a new entity next year. maybe even the current FS could be deleted, and also Saint Martin would be a new one... Any comments or firm dates ? 73 Peter PB1TT 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] and another new one... (or even two...)
Peter, If this occurs as you suggest, I suspect that Saint Barthelemy would become a new entity, but Saint Martin would remain as the existing entity. I think this may depend on exactly how politically separate they are as of the implementation date, and whether the separation is enough to invoke the appropriate DXCC rules regarding entities; I'm not an expert on that. So best to defer to the DXCC desk for a ruling. 73, ron w3wn -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of P. BuijserdSent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 3:04 PMTo: dx-news@njdxa.orgSubject: [DX-NEWS] and another new one... (or even two...) Surfing through Wikipedia I found the following: " Guadeloupe currently includes Saint-Barthélemy and Saint Martin, who have voted to become separate collectivités d'outre-mer in 2003; the change will be implemented in early 2007." This suggests that Saint-Barthélemycould become a new entity next year. maybe even the currentFS could be deleted, and also Saint Martin would be a new one... Any comments or firm dates ? 73 Peter PB1TT
[DX-CHAT] Administrivia
Just a quick reminder to all that your are kindly requested to NOT double-post the information to DX-NEWS and DX-CHAT. This is, and has been, against the rules of the reflector since day one. And there is a simple reason for that. News information items belong on DX-NEWS, and discussion or commentary on them belong on DX-CHAT; this is done so that those who only wish news, not commentary, can get them. More to the point, if you are a member of CHAT, you are also a member of NEWS (which is not always true the other way around), so double-posting news etc. to both reflectors means you're making a redundant post to people who are on both lists. Thanks! 73, ron w3wn administrator, dx-chat 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] LOTW second callsign
You can apply for another certificate (using the TQSLCert program) for additional calls, old or new. Creating the actual request for the extra certificate is quick, simple, and once the cert request is generated, it can be uploaded or emailed to the server. And, as I found out last weekend, the requests are manually processed or reviewed during regular business hours, so you have all weekend to generate and upload the file, and the ARRL LotW folks will have the new certificate to you on Monday or Tuesday. Your on-line log will show all QSO's and also under which call they were generated. 73, ron w3wn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom Johnson Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 8:00 PM To: Chat Subject: [DX-CHAT] LOTW second callsign I am trying to sign up for LOTW. So far, I have gotten N4TJ ok, but wish to add my pre 1977 callsign. How do I go about adding it? Thanks. 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] LotW Certificate
I got my answer already... Certificates are manually signed, so I won't get it back until sometime tomorrow. IE: The Human element strikes again! Thanks to all who replied! 73, ron w3wn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ron Notarius W3WN Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 9:37 PM To: DX Chat Reflector Subject: [DX-CHAT] LotW Certificate Anyone in the group request an additional Logbook of the World certificate (specifically for an additional call) lately? I'm a little puzzled. When I renewed mine last year, the server automation took care of things in a relatively short time (about an hour or so, as I recall, but don't hold me to that). But I put a request in Friday night for an additional certificate for the new call, and I haven't gotten anything back yet. I'm wondering if something is up with the server, or if it's just something that requires human oversight and no one's working over the weekend... 73, ron w3wn 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] distaste for America especially after 9/11
Once again, this thread is crossing the line on what is considered acceptable on this reflector. Please discontinue further comments on it. Thank you. 73, ron w3wn administrator, dx chat 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 METHODS
The confirmed perecentage for Logbook of the World will go up in time, as more amateurs use it. There is a perception that signing up for LotW is extremely difficult, and certain parties berate everyone on this score. (I think the biggest complaint is that signing up for LotW is considered, right or wrong, to be more difficult than getting on-line access to your bank or credit card accounts. Which I think says more about the lack of security on too many banking and credit systems, but that's another story). While the sign-up procedure could be streamlined, I never found it onerous. Many DX stations complain that they dislike having to send the ARRL proof of license, something not required of US amateurs -- but that's because the US amateurs are listed in the ULS, and many overseas government licensing authorities don't maintain a system anywhere near as detailed or effective as the FCC ULS is. And, of course, some DX don't have access to the Internet, or even a computer system, both of which make LotW a moot point for them. (And yes, there are many volunteers to act as QSL managers for these stations, or to help them upload their logs, but that's getting off the main point). Funny thing is, many of these stations have AG status on the eQSL.cc system, which also requires sending in proof of license... makes you wonder, how come it's no problem when it's someone else's system, but a big problem when the system belongs to the ARRL? (And by funny coincidence, many of these complaining are firmly in the anti-ARRL camp, but I guess we're not supposed to notice that? Ooops, I'm digressing, there I go again...) The thing is, once you've signed up for LotW, you're done. You just have to renew the certificate periodically (currently every 3 years, I believe), all of which can be done electronically or on-line. Give it time. 73, ron w3wn -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of John MaikischSent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 8:42 PMTo: dx-chat@njdxa.orgSubject: [DX-CHAT] [dx-chat] QSL METHODS I was just sending out some DX QSL cards and did some quick calculations on percent return for my effort. Now these are my numbers and my opinion and certainly may not reflect the ham community in general. The terms I use are: PRICE = what it costs me to get a card USAGE = my uninformed guess at how many DXhams use this method TIME = how long it takes me to get a confirmation CONVENIENCE = how easy it is for me to use this method % QSO's CONFIRMED = how many of my total DX QSO's have been confirmed by this method By the way, I QSL 100% all DX QSO's. All by the Bureau and also LOTW. Direct only for those I deem important for some reason and I include SASE, postage and contribution when appropriate. The numbers are: LOTW - price= cheapest, usage = not many, time = fastest method, convenience = OK but could be better, % QSO's confirmed 10% BUREAU - price = reasonable, usage = most, time = years, convenience = easiest to use, % QSO's confirmed ~ 33% DIRECT - price = very expensive (but if you need the card?), usage = most DX will respond to a direct request, time = weeks to months but never years, convenience = a lot of work, % QSO's confirmed = I get return on 99% of cards I send out direct Maybe this is not worth the bandwidthIused but as N2ERN says I am just wasting a few electrons not some trees. I know that a lot of DX stations do not like LOTW for some reasons but it sure can makes my life easier. 73, John - K2AZ
RE: [DX-CHAT] distaste for America especially after 9/11
Yes, there is no place for this part of the thread on this reflector. Please discontinue further discussion of this. 73, ron w3wn administrator, dx chat -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of nick cominos Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 10:20 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] distaste for America especially after 9/11 clip However, and I know this is no place for this, his comment about America having little standing in the rest of the world clip 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] DXpedition support
Didn't this used to be a pet peeve of KH2D's? Seems I've heard this complaint before... Problem is, there's DXpeditions and then there's DXpeditions. If someone is planning a nice two week jaunt around the Caribean or similar area, operating in between applications of sun screen at the hotel pool, well no, I don't feel real obligated to help pay for the trip. Return postage for the card is one thing, but the trip? That's your holiday or vacation, it should come out of your pocket. But then there's trips like K1B, 3Y0, VX0LIX, etc. These aren't vacations. These are truly expeditions to the remoter reaches of the globe, to activate these rare spots for The Deserving (and the rest of us poor schlubs too). I don't mind helping out with the costs of these with a small donation, when I can. Where do you draw the line? Aye, there's the rub. 73, ron w3wn - Original Message From: Charles Harpole [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Wednesday, 23 August, 2006 9:55:15 AM Subject: [DX-CHAT] DXpedition support The remark about a guy wanting hams to pay for his vacation via DXpedition donations, brings me to a comment I have thot abt for a long time: Today, much of DXpeditioning is only for the rich... rich enuf to finance the trip, and enuf to be off work (or retired) for the duration. That is a sad situation because I have encountered several possible wanted entity DXpeditions that could not happen because the key person(s) could not afford to spend personal funds to make the trip. So, much as I dislike funding someone's vacation, there is often a difference and I fully understand that some of us hams are in a vy gud position (via contacts or location or whatever) to go to some highly wanted entities, but simply lack the funds to do so. I know that I feel somewhat ashamed to ask for donations, loaner gear and other help for my DXpeditions, but it is do that or not activate the entity.. I do not know the answer but hope a small discussion about this matter can bring out some good ideas. tnx and 73 Charles Harpole [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article
Fred, I got errors on the complete link you showed, but once I went to the home page itself [http://www.computingunplugged.com/], I could see all the articles, including the one you cited. Interesting. Nice op-ed piece from N3OH explaining the other side of things, too. Of course, in the editor's controversy heats up piece, he has to include a few put-downs. Weird antennas, strange call signs, and my favorite, some of them claim broadband over powerline radiates. Now let's think about that one for a moment... we're get knocked for pointing out that the Emperor is wearing no clothes? But no, the editor isn't BIASED or anything. We were prepared to mock the ham radio operators as being so last century. If you can win them over on the facts, humiliate them until they shut up and go away? Grrr. 73, ron w3wn From: Fred Stevens K2FRD [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/08/14 Mon AM 10:06:55 CDT To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article I think any ham who is concerned about the future of our hobby should read this article in Computing Unplugged Magazine on Broadband Over Powerline (BPL). http://www.computingunplugged.com/issues/issue200608/1818001.html . Be sure to click onto home http://www.computingunplugged.com/ to view the other BPL articles. While the series' intent is to present a fair and balanced summation of the controversy, it has to date been somewhat one-sided on the side of BPL and needs more input from ham radio's viewpoint. I have already submitted a lengthy message-article to the editor, received a favorable response from him, and will now have to update, clarify, and document my article for possible future publication. I am certain there are others who are far more technically oriented than I who might also think to submit a well-written letter (email message) to Computing Unplugged Magazine, especially if you have had firsthand experience with BPL interference. -- 73 de Fred Stevens K2FRD, VO2FS http://homepage.mac.com/k2frd/K2FRD.html 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] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article
Well, it is early in the day yet. I plan on writing something to the editor; I just don't want to do it right now while my dander is up. Can't very well expect the editor/author to stick to fair and balanced reporting unless I try to do it myself... What's really sad is the implication, on face value, of his libel (and that's what it is, IMHO): The primary, if not sole, reason that the ARRL is opposed to BPL is because they must have been paid off to do so by BPL's commercial competitors. So if we're not for you, we must have been bribed to be against you? Oh, as far as the lobbyist thing goes, I thought the League did have someone in DC to represent our interests. But I don't recall the details, and hesitate to comment further without them. (Hopefully someone more in touch with that than I am can get you more specific and accurate information). By the way, do take note that the author/editor indicates at one point that he was once interested in amateur radio and getting a license. Makes one wonder why he didn't, and whether or not he has some ulterior motive in his little smear there. 73 - From: Fred Stevens K2FRD [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/08/14 Mon PM 02:52:45 CDT To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article The Follow The Money section incensed me and was the basic inspiration for my long email to the Editor. His innuendoes and insinuations were way out of line, so I answered them point by point and took him to task for making such accusations which border on libel. As it turns out, the Editor responded in a very positive manner to my message, requested permission to publish it which I granted with the proviso that he may do so if I clarify, update, and document some of my statements (I needed to confirm that the ARRL does not have any fulltime lobbyists nor office in DC and to track down the League's grassroots program which I have done, among several other things including the fact that BPL CAN be made to be interference-free as evidenced by the Motorola BPL installation at League HQ) and that the ARRL's Annual Report is online showing that it does not receive funds from DSL and cable providers. I have until Wednesday to finish the document, so have dropped a few projects to concentrate on the article. It won't be my best work since I usually spend weeks on articles for publication. However, the Editor is also very active in Boy Scouting (with which I compare the ARRL's non-lobbying efforts and general lack of political influence and controversy). I had presumed Computing Unplugged would be swamped by ham responses to his article and am still hoping that others with more expertise and different perspectives than I will send more technical and debate information. I am also going through recent back issues of QST looking for buzzwords, position papers (there's a good one by Frank Fallon N2FF and the League's grassroots lobbying effort) and additional information along with an emphasis on the politicalization of BPL at the FCC and NTIA levels. Oh, the original link may have unwrapped resulting in a 404 error. Here it is again: http://www.computingunplugged.com/issues/issue200608/1818001.html . Back to work. 73 de Fred K2FRD At 10:50 AM -0500 14/8/06, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: I no longer have any doubt that the editor of this publication is biased. The following paragraph was on the page right after the comment box ... willing to look at, and print, both sides. Fair reporting at its best. And I quote [see Why are we giving BPL all this coverage from http://www.computingunplugged.com/]: Follow the money We're still trying to figure this one out. From all we know of the FCC and their desire to protect the radio spectrum, I have some trouble accepting the claims of the ham operators. It seems to me that it's likely to have been doubtful that the FCC would approve this technology if it was broadcasting as intensely as the hams claim. Whenever there's a dispute this strong, I always look to where the money interests are. We know where the interests of the BPL advocates are. After all, they have chips, equipment, and services to sell. They have a clean, apparent reason for pushing their agenda. I'm not so sure about the ARRL. The ARRL is a membership organization, but it's also a very well-connected political organization as well. How many of the ham radio operators who contacted us experienced problems on their own and how many just read the lobbying documents provided by the ARRL in the organization's magazine? Who's funding the ARRL? Do the cable providers and DSL providers have an interest in this debate? After all, BPL is a direct competitor to cable modems and DSL services. Or is this truly the case of one technology interfering with another? Frankly, if it were just ham radio operators unable to play with their toys, this debate would
Re: [DX-CHAT] Needed band-countries
Offhand, I don't know of anything... and it's something that may vary from
DX'er to DX'er anyway.
The closest thing that comes to mind is the DX Bulleting annual survey showing
the 100 most wanted, overall and by regions. But by bands too? I don't recall
if it shows that.
Perchance the best thing to do is to publish a tentative schedule, saying about
when you plan to be on which bands. Which of course won't satisfy DX'er X when
he tells you that band Y is open from you to him RIGHT NOW, so drop the pileup
and QSY to take care of his needs NOW.
Enjoy the trip anyway. And if I can get the antenna up at the new QTH in the
next few days, I'll work you anyway no matter where you are... I need FP under
the new call everywhere! g
73, ron w3wn
(PS to all: yes, I know my old WN3VAW QSO's still count, or would if I ever get
around to submitting the cards; that was supposed to be a little levity!)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/08/01 Tue PM 12:02:28 CDT
To: dx-chat@njdxa.org
Subject: [DX-CHAT] Needed band-countries
Hi folks,
Is there any information published anywhere for DXCC countries regarding what
band/modes are needed to different places? Or is just the overall need for an
all time new one all that is available?
Going to a not-so-rare country, the question arises- Operate on 20 where I can
get lots of contacts but hardly anyone really needs it, or call cq till blue in
the face on other bands where it is needed, but no one tunes? I hate to be
asked a million times on twenty- when are you going to be on?, but then when
you are there are no callers.
Just thought it would be nice to be able to tell where the actual need is.
73,
Duane, WV2B {FP/WV2B soon}
The reward of a thing well done is to have done it.-
Ralph Waldo Emerson
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] How do we make better DXers?
Why do they do it? Two reasons: (1) Some don't know better. They were never shown the ropes, or they've learned by observing, and unfortunately, they've observed bad examples. (2) It works. I've been in too many pileups, over the years, where the DX has said the Alpha Whiskey or the W N 3 only, several totally unrelated calls have come back, and he WORKED them instead of trying for me (or whomever) again. So the learned behavior is to call on any partial call, even unrelated, because too many DX will work the loudest signal coming back. Oh yes, there's a third reason. It has to do with the inherent nature of certain DX hogs themselves, but in order to accurately describe this type, I'd have to use language that isn't permitted on this reflector. 73, ron w3wn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jim Reisert AD1C Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2006 11:21 AM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] How do we make better DXers? It was frustrating and sad to listen to the KH8SI and 4O3T pileups this weekend (mostly SSB). When the DX station says, The station with 7 in the call, ending in Germany why do unrelated calls from all over the country continue to call? When the DX station comes back to a full callsign, why does the pileup size diminish only by half, rather than all but one? It makes it impossible for a better DXer to find the station being worked because so many others are still calling. The rate of these DX stations is being hindered by out-of-turn callers. When the rate is hindered, fewer people can work the DX station. Especially limited-time operations like KH8SI. It made me sad to be a DXer this weekend. My QSO with KH8SI on 17 meters took THREE go-arounds because they could not get my call (presumably because of all the people still calling). That's TWO MORE possible QSOs that were wasted by the out-of-turn callers. OUT-OF-TURN CALLERS ARE SETTING A BAD EXAMPLE, RUINING IT FOR THEMSELVES AND EVERYONE ELSE! 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.ad1c.us 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] Why the new DXCC rule
Under the existing DXCC rules (aka DXCC 2000), there was originally a rule that permitted recognizing a new or existing entity if there was an existing IARU society. The purpose of that rule, IMHO, was to keep Hong Kong and Macau on the list once administration of those two territories were turned back over to the People's Republic of China. As it turns out, ironically, Hong Kong and Macau remain pretty much autonomous (although not 100% so), so if that was the purpose of the rule, it was unneccesary. The unintentional side effect was the creation of several new entities by creation of an IARU society -- Ducie for one comes to mind, which followed from the creation of the Pitcairn Is IARU society. Consider that at least one of these IARU groups was created solely to in turn create a DXCC entity, and appear to otherwise be inactive groups (if not total shams). So I for one was not upset when the rule in question was removed. However, as you will recall, the previous KH8SI group was more than a little upset, since they were in the process of trying to set up their American Samoa ARA to be another IARU society... which in and of itself is another story. So now we have another rule change which permits redefinition of certain entities into political entities. Did we need this rule change? I don't know... I never heard any discussion of a rule change either, it was just suddenly announced, and there it was. And almost simultaneously, application is made for Swain's Island to be a new one, it's approved, and here comes the KH8SI team for another go. Coincidence? I have nothing per se against a new entity. It's the process that bothers me. I'm in favor of open discussion and debate. Now I'm not saying that anything wrong was done... but I dislike an appearance of impropriety, and right now, there is (IMHO) such an appearance. In the future, I believe open discussion of rules changes should be undertaken prior to new rules being adopted. 73, ron w3wn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Barry Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 6:42 AM To: Dx-Chat Subject: [DX-CHAT] Why the new DXCC rule Just wondering why DXCC changed the rules to seemingly create one new country for JA1BK. I didn't hear anything about rule change discussion until rules were changed. Reminds me of the Okino Torishima situation... 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] Why the new DXCC rule
Oh? I find that interesting. I never saw anything online or in print about it until it happened. Visalia is a very small subset of active DX'ers. So are Dayton attendees for that matter. As far as the DXAC, well, I couldn't tell you the last time I _ever_ heard a peep from the Atlantic Division DXAC rep, and I've been DX'ing for close to 30 years. That is another story. 73 -Original Message- From: David Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 2:38 PM To: Ron Notarius W3WN; Dx-Chat Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Why the new DXCC rule This rule has been discussed many times. At the Visalia DX Convention for example, Wayne Mills talked about it at length before a very large crowd of DXers. He even ask for a show of hands from those who would like to see some new additions to the list. The response was overwhelmingly positive. Rule changes are one reason we have a DX Advisory Committee made up of every day good DXers. The DXAC was in favor of this rule change. Maybe those who are unhappy should contact their DXAC member. Dave - K4SSU - Original Message - From: Ron Notarius W3WN [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Dx-Chat dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 10:13 AM Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] Why the new DXCC rule Under the existing DXCC rules (aka DXCC 2000), there was originally a rule that permitted recognizing a new or existing entity if there was an existing IARU society. The purpose of that rule, IMHO, was to keep Hong Kong and Macau on the list once administration of those two territories were turned back over to the People's Republic of China. As it turns out, ironically, Hong Kong and Macau remain pretty much autonomous (although not 100% so), so if that was the purpose of the rule, it was unneccesary. The unintentional side effect was the creation of several new entities by creation of an IARU society -- Ducie for one comes to mind, which followed from the creation of the Pitcairn Is IARU society. Consider that at least one of these IARU groups was created solely to in turn create a DXCC entity, and appear to otherwise be inactive groups (if not total shams). So I for one was not upset when the rule in question was removed. However, as you will recall, the previous KH8SI group was more than a little upset, since they were in the process of trying to set up their American Samoa ARA to be another IARU society... which in and of itself is another story. So now we have another rule change which permits redefinition of certain entities into political entities. Did we need this rule change? I don't know... I never heard any discussion of a rule change either, it was just suddenly announced, and there it was. And almost simultaneously, application is made for Swain's Island to be a new one, it's approved, and here comes the KH8SI team for another go. Coincidence? I have nothing per se against a new entity. It's the process that bothers me. I'm in favor of open discussion and debate. Now I'm not saying that anything wrong was done... but I dislike an appearance of impropriety, and right now, there is (IMHO) such an appearance. In the future, I believe open discussion of rules changes should be undertaken prior to new rules being adopted. 73, ron w3wn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Barry Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 6:42 AM To: Dx-Chat Subject: [DX-CHAT] Why the new DXCC rule Just wondering why DXCC changed the rules to seemingly create one new country for JA1BK. I didn't hear anything about rule change discussion until rules were changed. Reminds me of the Okino Torishima situation... 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 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] 4O3T
DSL? Oh no, I'm sorry, I should have been more specific. I had DSL for a year 2 years ago. Then Verizon rewired the local area for fiber, so I've been on FIOS for the last year. Now Verizon has it's faults -- boy, does it have it's faults! -- but in my DSL package, I got 4 line filters. Come to think of it, when I installed Business DSL at a couple of insurance firms last year, they got a bunch of line filters too, even though they didn't end up needing them. Sounds like SBC doesn't have their act together. The line filters are needed for DSL because they piggyback (for lack of a better term) the DSL digital signal on your phone line. (Think of them as a low pass filter! g) Without the filters, you WILL have carrier hum on the phone line. Then there's a separate (high pass) filter that separates the data signal from the analog phone traffic. Actually, if you can do it, the best thing to do is to put the two filters at the demark box. That way, you can filter the DSL out of your phone system right at the start, and you can then run a separate data stream from the same point. The only advantage to doing it the other way -- ie a filter on each phone and at the data jack for the router -- is that you can easily move the computer to another room without major rewiring. Funny thing about the two Verizon techs yesterday. Both seemed to be nice guys, very knowledgable. I had DirecTV over at the same time to move that service, the Verizon guys bent over backwards to work with him -- even drilled him a new hole for the dual-RG6 feed cables, loaned him some drill bits, helped him route his cables. But they wouldn't run an Ethernet cable up to the computer. Also wouldn't mount the wireless router on the wall were I wanted, instead put it on a desk (that's moving as soon as I get a chance to rearrange the basement) about 3 feet lower and 4 feet farther than where I wanted. Oh well, I'll just have to move it myself! If SBC is being a pain, screw'em. But get a broadband connection as soon as you can. Compared to our old dial-up service (FYI Networks), the cost difference is roughly $10 a month, we get more mailboxes, faster connections, and 24/7 access. It's actually cheaper for the FIOS service than it was for a 2nd phone line, like we had at the old house years ago. Of course, they've had DSL capabilities for years, and could charge a heck of a lot less if they wanted to, but don't get me started on THAT rant! 73, ron w3wn From: Tom Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/07/25 Tue AM 08:20:53 CDT To: Ron Notarius W3WN [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] 4O3T Ron: GL on the DSL. I had SBC DSL for one day last spring and they so messed up both my phone lines with the DSL hum or whatever it is that I had them take it out the next day and got 0 help from their technical service people, like somehow I caused the problem. They said if I wanted any filters I had to buy them they weren't going to do anything about it. Then after returning everything in THEIR return box and shipping label they tried to accuse me of stealing their modem, etc. I told them to check with their returns department because I sure as heck didn't have it and if they continued to send me letters, make accusations, put it on my monthly phone bill, etc. I would see them at the courthouse or at least file a complaint with the Public Utility Commission or the FCC.The PUC or FCC complaint probably wouldn't do any good, but at least one of their attorneys would have to answer it, maybe. 73 de Tom, WW5L Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: GL on your end of the trip Tom. With any luck, I'll have an antenna operational at the new QTH by then! That is, once I find where the coax was buried (in amongst the boxes, that is), get a desk cleared off, unbury the rig... ...hey, at least Verizon was here today to get my Internet connection back up running. Now, you could say the techs were lazy... instead of running an Ethernet line from the basement demark to the computer, they gave me a wireless USB adapter for the computer. OK, so it's Part 15 802.11b, but RF is RF, right? g 73, ron w3wn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom Anderson Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 5:58 PM To: Russell Kellam Jr Cc: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] 4O3T Russell: I'm scheduled to be one of the 4O3T ops the last week of operation. 4O3T with a Texas accent hi hi. I'll try to listen well up in the general class band when I operate. Just listen for 4O3T with a Texus twang. Ghee haw! 73 de Tom, WW5L Russell Kellam Jr wrote: Nice of the 4O3T guys to stay outside thge General Class portion of the bands on 40 20 meters. Luckily I got them on 17 meters very easily. 73 Russ W4UBC Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] 4O3T
GL on your end of the trip Tom. With any luck, I'll have an antenna operational at the new QTH by then! That is, once I find where the coax was buried (in amongst the boxes, that is), get a desk cleared off, unbury the rig... ...hey, at least Verizon was here today to get my Internet connection back up running. Now, you could say the techs were lazy... instead of running an Ethernet line from the basement demark to the computer, they gave me a wireless USB adapter for the computer. OK, so it's Part 15 802.11b, but RF is RF, right? g 73, ron w3wn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom Anderson Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 5:58 PM To: Russell Kellam Jr Cc: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] 4O3T Russell: I'm scheduled to be one of the 4O3T ops the last week of operation. 4O3T with a Texas accent hi hi. I'll try to listen well up in the general class band when I operate. Just listen for 4O3T with a Texus twang. Ghee haw! 73 de Tom, WW5L Russell Kellam Jr wrote: Nice of the 4O3T guys to stay outside thge General Class portion of the bands on 40 20 meters. Luckily I got them on 17 meters very easily. 73 Russ W4UBC 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
RE: [DX-CHAT] 4O3T
Ummm... I'm not so sure. I never had problems on 20 (or any other band for that matter) at either of my past 2 QTH's from the network. Granted, at the old house, I was running 10Base-2 (that's supposed to be RG-58, as you know... I ran RG-8X, got more than one argument from some other IT pros that you can't do that, it can't possibly work but that's another story) from the shack upstairs and 10Base-T everywhere else. My TS-140 is a touch flaky on 20, but I think that's a rig issue, not a networking issue. Funny thing, they put the wireless router in the basement, about 15 feet diagonally away from the computer (the computer is in a 2 room addition on the back of the house, but the previous owners didn't bother to extend the basement). Granted, there's some walls and such there, but I'd still have expected better than a 42 throughput. N3ZK had offered to come over and help me do some wiring in the house. Had hoped to do it before the move-in, but neither of our schedules permitted. Randy doesn't have a problem with crawl spaces, unlike the Verizon guys. I'd rather run the wiring anyway... for that matter, almost all of my Ethernet cards are Etherlink III 10BaseT combo cards, so I can always go back to a coax run for the network. Now in which box did I stash those terminators and BNC T connectors? g 73, ron w3wn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Peter Dougherty Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 11:53 PM To: Ron Notarius W3WN; dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] 4O3T At 11:36 PM 07/24/2006, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: GL on your end of the trip Tom. With any luck, I'll have an antenna operational at the new QTH by then! That is, once I find where the coax was buried (in amongst the boxes, that is), get a desk cleared off, unbury the rig... ...hey, at least Verizon was here today to get my Internet connection back up running. Now, you could say the techs were lazy... instead of running an Ethernet line from the basement demark to the computer, they gave me a wireless USB adapter for the computer. OK, so it's Part 15 802.11b, but RF is RF, right? g Actually, they probably did you a big favour, to be honest. Networks using unshielded Cat-5 can do some fun stuff to 20m, especially right around 14212 14273 at this QTH. If I ever get abmitious here I'll go 802.11g throughout the house and just hope I don't have to do massive file transfers any more. 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
[DX-CHAT] Fw: CW operators needed.
Here's an interesting little email that just crossed by desktop. Not quite sure what to make of it... Incidently, this came to me via the WASH and WACOM club reflectors, where it got cross posted from the Skyview RS reflector, and apparantly it first went out to the Greater Pittsburgh VHF Society reflector. 73 -Original Message- From: Juan Manfredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Jul 12, 2006 11:08 AM Subject: CW operators needed. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dear Mr. Colwell: I am a medical student at the University of Pittsburgh, who is currently conducting a summer research project in the laboratory of Dr. Fiez. She is a professor in both the Psychology and Neuroscience departments. A focus of our lab involves gaining a better understanding of language and memory processing. We have recently turned to Morse code as a potential investigating tool due to its unique linguistic properties. Consequently,our lab is examining the differences between processing Morse code and speech in a simple memory task. As you may already know, it is not easy to find people who are proficient in Morse code. For this reason, we believe that the Greater Pittsburgh VHF Society may be a valuable resource that can help us recruit people with this rare skill. Your involvement would create a unique opportunity to investigate this unexplored area of research. We would greatly appreciate it if you would circulate this information to all of your members. Participants will be compensated 25 dollars, and will also be refunded for parking. They will be asked to hear and remember letters. The duration of the study is approximately one hour and thirty minutes. If there is interest, we can discuss any further details. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Dalia Balsamo 718 LRDC 3939 O'Hara Street Univ. of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA 15260 412-624-6898 (phone) Balsamo, Dalia [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Juan J. Manfredi, Chair Department of Mathematics University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA 15260 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] License
Most ARRL VEC VE test sessions will process a renewal at no charge. Your renewal form goes in with the batch and on to the FCC. [Unless it's a Vanity call, in which case you have to pay the next 10 year Vanity fee, right now $21.90.] However: You can log on to the FCC ULS web site (I don't have the URL handy but it's accessible from www.fcc.gov) and take care of everything on-line in a few minutes. Very streamlined. I had to wait a few hours (less than 4) to have my password reset, then I got my Vanity app inputted within about 3 minutes. Change of address last week didn't even take that long. However: If I remember correctly, you have to wait until about 90 days out before renewing, so you don't have to worry about it until November. As far as some outfit in Texas goes, or anyone else for that matter, why pay anything for literally a few moments of logging in and checking a box or two? (I wonder sometimes if the former owner of that outfit, if it's the one I think it is, ever gets bothered by what gets done in his name, er, call... they had a rather outrageous ad, er, news post on QRZ.COM a few weeks ago which offered to sell available vanity calls for somewhere around $40-50 bucks a pop. Which only proves that PT Barnum was not only right but way ahead of his time) 73, ron w3wn this way to the egress! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of WC7N Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 8:05 PM To: DX-CHAT Subject: [DX-CHAT] License WOW just noticed that my license expires in February... It seems to me, by the by am an old f..., that last time I got an e-mail from some outfit in Texas that for a few bucks took care of it all for me. Now, new generation, how does it work ? Rod WC7N 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] Desecheo I. answers
Whoa! Until some solid information comes forth that the KP1-KP5 project had a connection with the last KP5 trip, let's NOT drag them into this! All we know is that someone, an amateur, complained. We do NOT know who it is. We do NOT know where she or he actually lives. We do NOT know their connection, if any, to the congress-gonif. We do NOT know whether or not they are an active amateur. We do NOT know if they are an active DX'er... or anything else besides the propensity to kvetch. And most importantly, we do NOT know if they have ANYTHING to do with the KP1-5 project. For all we know, if that project ever merits some success, this schmuck will complain about them too! Enough poor souls are going to get dragged through the mud as it is. Let's not add the innocent until and unless we KNOW that innocent they ain't! 73 From: Peter Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu Jun 29 08:45:16 CDT 2006 To: Scott Manthe [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charles Harpole [EMAIL PROTECTED], dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Desecheo I. answers At 09:22 AM 06/29/2006, Scott Manthe wrote: Like it or not, our politics drive our actions. And unfortunately, I didn't bring politics in to this, Rep. Rahall did and whoever complained to him did. A short Google of Nick Rahall reveals he is a Congressman from West Virginia. The Desecho Island ops said that someone from West Virginia complained to their congressman. Does anyone besides me see a connection? Does anyone else think this is one of the real issues here? If there was no jealous, complaining ham, there would be no mention of ham radio in the report. I suppose that someone with a lot of time on their hands could ascertain the ZIP codes contained in the WV 3rd congressional district, do a Buckmaster or similar search and see if any known DXers with ties to the KP1-KP5 project come up 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
