Hey,again nice condx in DL today.Not much activity but it is a goodforecast
for the next weekend and Stew PerryI hope to work much NA as DR5X.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9slv-p6yzgo
This was the loudest signal today here in DL.
73 Andy DL8LAS
www.dl8las.com
On 3/9/2021 3:50 PM, Martin Kratoska wrote:
SECOND - am I allowed to differ between a QSO between living operators
(possibly friends) and two machines?
Martin,
As has been said of some American politicians, we are certainly entitled
to our own opinions, but we are not entitled to our own
Ah but, there used to be an RTTY DXCC (which I have) that has now been
bastardized into "Digital". They should have maintained the (traditional) RTTY
award and added an award for the digital stuff. Since they have not seen fit to
do this, I am forced to carefully avoid applying for LoTW
And you decide whether any of us deserve to follow our own preferences!
We don't need you as a dumb ass wanna be leader.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 9, 2021, at 18:25, Martin Kratoska wrote:
>
> Glenn (VA3DX),
>
> BRAVO, I applaud!
>
> So you claim the privilege to decide who should leave
Good news! The ARRL already does differentiate this. There is CW DXCC, PHONE
DXCC, DIGITAL DXCC and MIXED DXCC. Everyone's QSL's/LOTW credits* count for
only two of these maximum. You can do a little math and gloat to your heart's
content!
And if someone only has MIXED DXCC, you can assume
Jim,
FIRST - thank you so much for your excellent technical references. It
helps a lot, I highly appreciate your unparalleled performance.
SECOND - am I allowed to differ between a QSO between living operators
(possibly friends) and two machines?
If yes, allow me, please keep the difference
Glenn (VA3DX),
BRAVO, I applaud!
So you claim the privilege to decide who should leave and who is allowed
to stay. And you will do it for ALL members of the list. You are a
brilliant character. The life with you must be a marvel.
Stay safe, 73
Martin, OK1RR
Dne 09. 03. 21 v 21:23 Glenn
I should have said the so the 4.5 dB noise figure is certainly not
unreasonable.
Sorry for the typo.
73,
Don (wd8dsb)
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 6:20 PM Don Kirk wrote:
> A couple of weeks ago there were a lot of postings about my portable flag
> for radio direction finding (for tracking down
A couple of weeks ago there were a lot of postings about my portable flag
for radio direction finding (for tracking down RFI), and someone asked
about the DX Engineering preamp that was designed for use with my portable
flag and specifically what the noise figure was for this preamp. Tim
(K3LR)
On 2021-03-09 3:30 PM, Wes wrote:
> He said, "or machine."
And there he just blew up his own argument. The "machine" (computer)
actually copies the callsign(s) in an FT4/FT8/JT9/JT65/FST4 QSO just
as it does with RTTY (MMTTY or 2Tone) or PSK##, Olivia, MFSK### (fldigi,
DM780, etc.) or a
Well DX Propagation on 160m seems to have improved a lot over the last
couple of days . . .
So for those of you who still prefer to have QSOs on CW, hope you'll make an
effort to come on the band tomorrow night !
73 Roger G3YRO
_
Searchable Archives:
Hi Dave, Long time no talk.
I am not a certificate hunter either, but I keep track of DXCC's and Zones
in a book.
That being said, I am hoping you'll receive the answers you seek, as I too,
would like to work
that corner of the world on 160m (on CW) as well.
GL Neighbour !
Mike
Yes, but all this was still HEARING signals on the radio.
Sounds coming from the speaker...
When I signed up to this list 15 years ago almost every day I was reading:
"if you can't hear them you can't work'em"...
On FT8 you can not hear what you work.
This is the essential difference and it's
And Martin there is no need for you stay here.
Obviously you don't need us , you are so much better than us ft8 Cw ssb rtty
etc etc ops
Glenn VA3DX
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 9, 2021, at 11:40, Martin Kratoska wrote:
>
> Bob et al,
>
> all these rules can be preprogrammed into SV5DKL's
He said, "or machine."
On 3/9/2021 12:49 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
On 3/9/2021 10:56 AM, Preston Smith wrote:
RTTY,
Pactor, Amtor etc) the operator or machine must actually copy
the call sign of the station being worked.
Are you telling us that you can copy RTTY, Pactor, Amtor with your own
I think "illegal" might be a little strong but I agree the JT modes should have
separate awards. I also understand this discussion began talking about CQ
awards, something I've never pursued.
That said, one of my DXCC certificates says. "RTTY" on it. I understand that
ARRL has decided to
On 3/9/2021 10:56 AM, Preston Smith wrote:
RTTY,
Pactor, Amtor etc) the operator or machine must actually copy
the call sign of the station being worked.
Are you telling us that you can copy RTTY, Pactor, Amtor with your own
ear/brain? WOW! I do a lot of RTTY in contests and I've never
On 3/9/2021 8:04 AM, ok1tn wrote:
FT4 FT8 is just a computer game. It's not a ham radio
Oh -- so my 100 ft Tee with 70+ radials, two 500+ ft reversible
Beverages and phased VE3DO loops, and my 60 years of studying
propagation don't matter? BS!
73, Jim K9YC
_
Searchable
On 3/9/2021 6:36 AM, Martin Kratoska wrote:
Oh, FT8 should be proclaimed as illegal for DXCC (WAZ, WAS etc.) in
mixed categories.
This "mode" should be counted completely separated from traditional
modes like CW or SSB.
Why? I'm a VERY old dog who can still copy CW in my sleep, but who is
On 2021-03-09 1:56 PM, Preston Smith wrote:
In the JT modes with weak signals the program copies a portion of the
call and completes the call by comparing the partial call to a call
sign data base.
*THAT IS NOT TRUE* you need to study Joe Taylor's modes/code more
carefully. Joe Taylor's
Hi Bob,
Probably I am not qualified for ham radio...
73
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces+dj7ww=t-online...@contesting.com] On
Behalf Of Chortek, Robert L.
Actually, it is ham radio.
Have you spent any time with the mode?
NO
For example,
1. Have
Note: Below I refer to the various modes developed by K1JT
and his team as JT modes.
Yes the JT modes should have their own categories for awards
and NOT be mixed with traditional modes. Reason being that
all the JT modes (FT4/8, JT65, JT9, FST4 and others) are
unlike traditional modes. In
Andy you were coming in head over heels above any other Euro last
night. I CQ'd but all my RBN reports were on the weak side. So maybe
it was a bit of one way skip.
However, this morning at SR I was getting good signal reports from
HL/VK. So westerly signals were doing better than easterly ones?
Yes I have been on FT8. I simply do not enjoy FT8. I was first licensed in 1959
and am basically a CW OPERATOR.
I well remember when AM operators bashed the SSB operators.
73,
John, W4NU
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 9, 2021, at 11:36 AM, Lloyd - N9LB wrote:
>
> Will someone please
Thank you.
I think you should put some of the complainers on "moderate mode". That is,
we must pre-approve all posts in the future from them. But depending on how
often they post, that might take a lot of time; so a ban —that increases in
length for each future infraction— would be more
Why is it that this has to turn into an FT8 debate AGAIN???
This is not a productive use of this channel.
Some people like FT8, some people don't. To each their own.
This is not the channel to discuss that. OK1RR - this means you.
Tree
_
Searchable Archives:
That's just what Hal, an old FRC contest mentor said when he saw us operating
at W3FRY multi-op CQWW CW back in the day with Electronic keyers (oh, the
mendacity) and CT contest logger (horrors! a computer in the RADIO shack).
What's wrong with paper logs and bugs? (though REAL HAMS used
Bob et al,
all these rules can be preprogrammed into SV5DKL's robot which can "do
the QSO". Otherwise I can tell my dog where to paw, he would be possibly
a better FT8 "operator" than mine.
There is no need of ears, hands, brain or any knowledge. All the task
can be robotized. This does
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021, 10:36 AM Lloyd - N9LB wrote:
> Will someone please start an "I Hate FT8" group and move all this
> unproductive chatter off of the Top Band reflector.
>
Thank you, Lloyd! I couldn't agree more.
The full moon must be waking the curmudgeons from their coffins. Enough of
this
Will someone please start an "I Hate FT8" group and move all this unproductive
chatter off of the Top Band reflector.
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces+lloydberg=tds@contesting.com] On
Behalf Of ok1tn
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2021 10:05 AM
To: Chortek,
Actually it is NOT ham radio!!
Can you handle emergency traffic??
Can you have a conversation??
Do you really get a feeling of accomplishment
working an ATNO?? Etc, etc.
K2QMF
On 3/9/2021 11:19:26 AM, Chortek, Robert L. wrote:
Actually, it is ham radio.
Have you spent any time with the mode?
Actually, it is ham radio.
Have you spent any time with the mode?
For example,
1. Have you identified a country you need for a bond slot or ATNO?
2. Have you determined the best time of year, time of day, and band to see if
a station from that country is on?
3. Have you searched the decodes
Hi Dave
I will disappoint you
- R8WF is in zone 16.
---
Nick, UY0ZG
http://www.topband.in.ua
David Olean писал 2021-03-09 15:29:
I am not a certificate hunter, but I was curious to see how many CQ
zones I had worked on 160 meters. Getting all 40 zones on 160 is a
challenge. My list
FT4 FT8 is just a computer game. It's not a ham radio
OK1TN
--
73 Slavek Zeler
-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Chortek, Robert L.
Komu: Joe Subich, W4TV
Datum: 9. 3. 2021 16:31:21
Předmět: Re: Topband: CQ Zones
"THANK YOU JOE! That pretty much captures the debate.
73,
Bob/AA6VB
THANK YOU JOE! That pretty much captures the debate.
73,
Bob/AA6VB
Robert L. Chortek
> On Mar 9, 2021, at 7:27 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>
> [External Email]
>
> Oh PLEASE! You sound just like AM phone operators when SSB came
> along. And spark operators when CW started to replace it.
Oh PLEASE! You sound just like AM phone operators when SSB came
along. And spark operators when CW started to replace it.
The first DX was nothing more than single letters ...
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 2021-03-09 10:10 AM, Karel Matousek wrote:
I agree wit Martin OK1RR.
I cannot endorse
I agree wit Martin OK1RR.
I cannot endorse FT4, FT8 for the ARRL DXCC Program.
IMHO, this should NEVER be allowed unless qualified in a separate rules
category!
Karel OK1CF
__
Od: "Martin Kratoska"
Komu: topband@contesting.com
CQ Awards are not run by the ARRL.
If you don't like FT/X then don't use it.
Killing the hobby? Hardly. Changing it, certainly.
W0MU
On 3/9/2021 7:50 AM, Hans Hjelmström wrote:
AGREE 100 % with you Martin /OK1RR.
This FT 8 PC to PC playgame is just killing our hobby,at least as I see it.
AGREE 100 % with you Martin /OK1RR.
This FT 8 PC to PC playgame is just killing our hobby,at least as I see it.
Take care and enjoy,and I am SURE ARRL will never listen to your
feelings.
Hans SM6CVX
> 9 mar 2021 kl. 15:36 skrev Martin Kratoska :
>
> Oh, FT8 should be proclaimed as illegal for
Oh, FT8 should be proclaimed as illegal for DXCC (WAZ, WAS etc.) in
mixed categories.
This "mode" should be counted completely separated from traditional
modes like CW or SSB.
73,
Martin, OK1RR
Dne 09. 03. 21 v 15:16 Ian Fugler napsal(a):
Hi, Dave
Zone 23 - JT5DX will be your man. He is
Hi, Dave
Zone 23 - JT5DX will be your man. He is active in contests and puts out a good
signal.
Zone 24 - will be more of a challenge. I have worked XX9D and a couple of BY
stations. But you may need to use FT8 for the BY stations, since they seem
strongly to prefer that mode.
73 and GL!
I am not a certificate hunter, but I was curious to see how many CQ
zones I had worked on 160 meters. Getting all 40 zones on 160 is a
challenge. My list includes 38 of the 40 CQ zones, and only zones 23
and 24 are still unworked.. My question is how to nab these last two?
Part of my
On FT8 160m now using Helium Balloon antenna, 40m high & 200w only (amp
getting repaired).
vk4tux
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
43 matches
Mail list logo
