[DX-CHAT] Question?

[Sherman Harrison]

I have all of my logs & a friends logs that I am a Qsl Mg'r 
fer.
My main purpose in ham radio is DXing which I dearly luv, having 7
programs on my computer: logging, bearings, etc.
None of my Dos-based programs will now open, as well as my TelNet program
which isn't dos.
Everything was great on my old computers wid Win 95 es Win 98.
But on my new computer, Win XP , every time I click on the Desktop Icon,
or access the.exe file to bring up the program(s), I get the
following:  NTVDM.exe error, closing down the program, sorry fer the
inconvenience, etc.
I've called the maker of my computer es their advice was no
good(uninstall es reinstall).
I called MSN es all they wanted to give me some needed advice was my
credit card # so they could give me sum paid fer advice.BTW, is
Gates that greedy?
Pse help if U knw how to help me.
There is a MSN web site that addresses this problem(s), but it is way
over my head.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;q314106&
73 es gd 
DXing,
SAH,K4KU
http://www.qsl.net/k4ku

[DX-CHAT] question?

[litwins]

I should know the answer to this but am not sure where to look, so I'll
ask...

This question is in ref to portable identifiers attached to call signs and
pertains to LOTW for additional call signs...such as, for my call when I go
to the Dom Rep to operate in the summer as hi9/k8wk  ---or--- as the license
was issued to me k8wk/hi9.  Which is the "correct" method?  hi9/k8wk or
k8wk/hi9.  I see and hear both and have used both but truthfully don't
really know what is correct.  Anybody knowledgeable and can help educate me?
73/dx
steve, k8wk
*



Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

[DX-CHAT] Question

[David Johnson]

Gentlemen DXers,
 
Here is a hypothetical situation and a 
question.  I am on a dxpedition to a top 10 entity and lets say I'm 
operating on 20 meters.  I'm transmitting at 14.195 and listening 200 to 
220.  I tune down to my transmit frequency and hear all kinds of 
intentional QRM.  It's so bad that I know the stations I am trying to work 
are having a bad time hearing me.  What would happen if I waited a few 
minutes then announced that I am no longer working split, please call between 
14.200 and 14.220 and I will work you on your transmit frequency?
 
If this has come up before, please excuse me.  
I will be very interested to read your comments.
 
Thanks,
 
Dave - K4SSU

[DX-CHAT] Question

[Ragnar Otterstad]

.

If I recall, 14195 became the DX frequency because it was a place
where DX stations could TX but that Americans could not (US
privileges started at 14200 for the longest time). Maybe it's time to
revive that tradition and make 14145 the new default DX frequency on
20 SSB. It could have the added advantage of EU/JA pileups down 5 to
15 and stateside callers up 10-20 or something like that.
---

Why not go back to what we had back in the " good old days ", when the rare
DX transmitted down around 14115-14125
and listened up.  That should help with some of the splatter we ,at least in
Europe, get from certain stations in the Med-area !

73  Rag LA5HE


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] Question?

[Ron Notarius WN3VAW]

Sherman,
 
"Is Gates that greedy?"  Well, to repeat an old cliche, 
"Is the Pope Catholic?"  
 
Without more information on the programs that no longer run 
(such as which ones) it's difficult to suggest a remedy.  But be aware that 
Micro$oft has been trying to discourage continued use of MS-DOS programs and 
will no doubt drop backward compatibility as soon as they think public opinion 
will let them get away with it.
 
In the interim, I'd suggest picking up a used older computer 
that is running Windows 9x (98SE preferable) and use that system for your logs, 
assuming that an upgrade path for your software and/or data is not 
available.  (I still keep my logs in dBase IV routines I wrote 10+ years 
ago, even though I'm also playing with Visual dBase 5.7, so believe me, I feel 
your pain!)
 
73, ron wn3vaw
 
When asked "If you had been in President Clinton's place, 
would you have resigned?", Republican Member of the House of Representatives 
Dick Armey replied:
 
"If I were in the President's place, I would not have gotten a 
chance to resign.  I would be laying in a pool of my own blood, hearing 
Mrs. Armey standing over me saying, "How do I reload this damn 
thing?"

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Sherman 
  Harrison 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 10:47 
  AM
  Subject: [DX-CHAT] Question?
  I have all of my logs & a friends logs 
  that I am a Qsl Mg'r fer.My main purpose in ham radio is DXing which I 
  dearly luv, having 7 programs on my computer: logging, bearings, 
  etc.None of my Dos-based programs will now open, as well as my TelNet 
  program which isn't dos.Everything was great on my old computers wid 
  Win 95 es Win 98.But on my new computer, Win XP , every time I click 
  on the Desktop Icon, or access the.exe file to bring up the program(s), I get 
  the following:  NTVDM.exe error, closing down the program, sorry fer the 
  inconvenience, etc.I've called the maker of my computer es their 
  advice was no good(uninstall es reinstall).I called MSN es all they wanted 
  to give me some needed advice was my credit card # so they could give me sum 
  paid fer advice.BTW, is Gates that greedy?Pse help if U knw 
  how to help me.There is a MSN web site that addresses this problem(s), 
  but it is way over my head.http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;q314106&73 es gd DXing,SAH,K4KUhttp://www.qsl.net/k4ku

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question?

[w9sz]

>
> In the interim, I'd suggest picking up a used older computer that is
> running Windows 9x (98SE preferable) and use that system for your logs,
> assuming that an upgrade path for your software and/or data is not
> available.  (I still keep my logs in dBase IV routines I wrote 10+
> years ago, even though I'm also playing with Visual dBase 5.7, so
> believe me, I feel your pain!)
>
> 73, ron wn3vaw
>

My computer is a 1000 MHz Pentium III with most of the goodies of newer
computers (large hard drive, 256 Mb of RAM, etc).  I suppose a 1000 MHz
computer is going to be slow by the current standards in a little while,
but it runs my bigger programs like Sonnet Lite pretty darn fast.

I specifically wanted Windows 98 SE on it.  Once I got some of the initial
bugs out of the way, I was able to run all of my older programs on it just
fine except for PROCOMM Plus 2.0 (a DOS program).  I found some replacement
programs for that which do exactly what I want in Windows 98 at around $25
(far cheaper than the cost of the PROCOMM 4.8).

I just got it going with my PK232, soundcard digital mode programs and
radio controller for my new TS-850SAT.  All is well.

73, Zack W9SZ



Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question?

[Bill Barr]

Sherman,
 
First let me say that I am not a software 
expert!
 
I just received the September 3 issue of "PC 
Magazine".  On the cover it has a big lead in title of:
"MAKE YOUR OLD SOFTWARE WORK ON WINDOWS 
XP".
 
The article  begins on page 75.  It is 
too lengthy to repeat here, but it does specifically address
running DOS programs.  It has detail 
instructions.
 
I think you should be able to find the magazine, 
but if not let me know and I will try to scan it in and send.  Good 
Luck.
 
By the way I bought an old PC with windows 98 
already installed and more power than I need for all of my Ham programs.  I paid $60!!
 
73
Bill N4NX

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Sherman 
  Harrison 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 10:47 
  AM
  Subject: [DX-CHAT] Question?
  I have all of my logs & a friends logs that I am a Qsl Mg'r 
  fer.My main purpose in ham radio is DXing which I dearly luv, having 7 
  programs on my computer: logging, bearings, etc.None of my Dos-based 
  programs will now open, as well as my TelNet program which isn't 
  dos.Everything was great on my old computers wid Win 95 es Win 
  98.But on my new computer, Win XP , every time I click on the Desktop 
  Icon, or access the.exe file to bring up the program(s), I get the 
  following:  NTVDM.exe error, closing down the program, sorry fer the 
  inconvenience, etc.I've called the maker of my computer es their 
  advice was no good(uninstall es reinstall).I called MSN es all they wanted 
  to give me some needed advice was my credit card # so they could give me sum 
  paid fer advice.BTW, is Gates that greedy?Pse help if U knw 
  how to help me.There is a MSN web site that addresses this problem(s), 
  but it is way over my head.http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;q314106&73 es gd DXing,SAH,K4KUhttp://www.qsl.net/k4ku

Re: [DX-CHAT] question?

[Art RX9TX]

 Hello dx-chat,

 Sunday, October 5, 2003 litwins wrote to [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

l> to the Dom Rep to operate in the summer as hi9/k8wk  ---or--- as the license
l> was issued to me k8wk/hi9.

l> Which is the "correct" method? hi9/k8wk or k8wk/hi9.

HI9/K8WK,  definitely.  I  think  it  is  one of IARU recommendations.
Europeans and JA's always use only that method.

-- 
 73...Art RX9TX05.10.2003 17:47 UTC

 "Better to light a candle than to curse the darkness."(Chinese Proverb)

Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

Re: [DX-CHAT] question?

[John and Mari Minke]

Art RX9TX wrote:
> 
> HI9/K8WK,  definitely.  I  think  it  is  one of IARU recommendations.
> Europeans and JA's always use only that method.

Actually, I think it would be what the license says. U.S. stations 
operating in Canada use their call appended by the proper Camadian
prefix and vice versa per agreement between both countries. In other
words if I operated from the Yukon it would be N6JM/VY1, not VY1/N6JM.

This whole problem was created by the computer age of logging where the
program could not recognize calls appended as such. Hopefully this new 
system can recognize the calls appended either way. In the latter case,
if I were to operate from Siberia it definitely would be RX9/N6JM.

73 de John N6JM

Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

Re: [DX-CHAT] question?

[Ron Notarius WN3VAW]

Steve,

I'm not sure what you mean by "correct" method.

Once upon a time YourCall/PortablePrefix was the way "everyone" did it, be
it a different domestic call area (ie K8WK/3 or F9ABC/8) or DX (ie
K8WK/VP9).  (Although in some DX entities, a "/p" to indicate portable was,
and is, also appened).

This began to change in the late 1970's and early '80's, as it started to be
noticed (especially in, but not exclusively in, contests) that some people
were missing the DX prefix when tacked onto the end... in other words, if
someone wanted to work you on Guam (ie K8WK/KH2), and weren't paying
attention, they'd tune out your call before you got to the prefix.  By
putting the prefix first (KH2/K8WK), you clearly indicate the DX entity
you're working from, thereby avoiding that problem.

So, while doing it either way is "acceptable," putting the prefix first is
better.

And I should note... if the government in question issues you a call with
the prefix first, then that's what you have to use (ie if K8WK/VP2M is on
the ticket, that's your call, even if VP2M/K8WK makes more sense).  I
believe the US/Canada automatic reciprocity treaty requires the prefix
appended after, not before, the call.  Also, if I'm not mistaken, I think
some of the other reciprocity agreements may either require or recommend the
order in which the prefix comes -- it's been a while since I reviewed the
details on CEPT and some of the others, so someone more in the know can
answer that one.

>From a computer loggging standpoint, it's certainly easier to program the
system (be it general logging or contesting) if the prefix is put first, but
a decent programmer willing to take the extra time can set up a routine to
parse the callsign inputted to extract the prefix.  Some programmers are or
were not willing to do that, but that's another story.

And I have had a few cases where I've put the portable DX in my logs as
prefix/callsign, and had a less than pleasant note on the QSL card
indicating that technically, I've logged the call incorrectly, as they sent
it the other way!  At least no one's rejected a QSL card on that basis...
yet.

73, ron wn3vaw

46th Annual Pennsylvania QSO Party October 11 & 12!
www.nittany-arc.org/paqso.html
Look for N3SH - Allegheny County, WA3SH - Fayette County, and NP2SH -- US
Virgin Islands!
For more information see www.washarc.org


- Original Message -
From: "litwins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2003 1:12 PM
Subject: [DX-CHAT] question?


I should know the answer to this but am not sure where to look, so I'll
ask...

This question is in ref to portable identifiers attached to call signs and
pertains to LOTW for additional call signs...such as, for my call when I go
to the Dom Rep to operate in the summer as hi9/k8wk  ---or--- as the license
was issued to me k8wk/hi9.  Which is the "correct" method?  hi9/k8wk or
k8wk/hi9.  I see and hear both and have used both but truthfully don't
really know what is correct.  Anybody knowledgeable and can help educate me?
73/dx
steve, k8wk
*



Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

Re: [DX-CHAT] question?

[Fred Stevens K2FRD]

At 11:21 -0700 05/10/03, John and Mari Minke wrote:
Art RX9TX wrote:
 HI9/K8WK,  definitely.  I  think  it  is  one of IARU recommendations.
 Europeans and JA's always use only that method.
Actually, I think it would be what the license says. U.S. stations
operating in Canada use their call appended by the proper Camadian
prefix and vice versa per agreement between both countries. In other
words if I operated from the Yukon it would be N6JM/VY1, not VY1/N6JM.
This whole problem was created by the computer age of logging where the
program could not recognize calls appended as such. Hopefully this new
system can recognize the calls appended either way. In the latter case,
if I were to operate from Siberia it definitely would be RX9/N6JM.
I went through this three years ago preparing for a mini-DXpedition 
to Labrador, whether to sign as K2FRD/VO2 or VO2/K2FRD. True, with 
the US as a signatory with various IARU and ITU treaties, the 
portable locator should go before the home callsign (e.g. VO2/K2FRD), 
but a reciprocal agreement between the US and Canada nominally has it 
after (e.g. K2FRD/VO2) in apparent contravention to the various IARU 
and ITU treaties. Since Canada's RICs aren't particularly clear on 
the issue and the FCC Rules leave room for interpretation, I chose 
VO2/K2FRD since it is the "industry standard" of ham radio and for 
the above electronic logging reason. In truth, probably neither 
government is going to invest a lot of time obsessing with which way 
a portable station signs as long as the information is present and 
correct.

--
73 de Fred Stevens K2FRD
Chenango Co. (NY) Assistant Emergency Coordinator
2004 Labrador VO2/K2FRD mini-DXpedition:
	http://home.stny.rr.com/k2frd/Labrador2004.htm
Foothills District, Otschodela Council BSA Committees
Otschodela Council (BSA) Amateur Radio Group KZ2BSA:
	http://home.stny.rr.com/k2frd/ocarg.htm
K2FRD Personal Adventure page:  http://home.stny.rr.com/k2frd/K2FRD.htm
Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

Re: [DX-CHAT] question?

[Ron Notarius WN3VAW]

It should also be noted that the US/Canada reciprocal agreement pre-dates
the now generally-accepted standard of prefix / homecall.

But having said that...  I have to agree with Fred that I really doubt that
anyone is going to bust his chops for signing VO2/K2FRD instead of
K2FRD/VO2 -- at best, if someone had really made an issue out of it, he
might have gotten a note from Riley saying something on the lines of
"naughty, naughty, don't do it again" and that would be the end of it.

73, ron wn3vaw

46th Annual Pennsylvania QSO Party October 11 & 12!
www.nittany-arc.org/paqso.html
Look for N3SH - Allegheny County, WA3SH - Fayette County, and NP2SH -- US
Virgin Islands!
For more information see www.washarc.org


- Original Message -
From: "Fred Stevens K2FRD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2003 6:57 PM
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] question?


At 11:21 -0700 05/10/03, John and Mari Minke wrote:
>Art RX9TX wrote:
>>
>>  HI9/K8WK,  definitely.  I  think  it  is  one of IARU recommendations.
>>  Europeans and JA's always use only that method.
>
>Actually, I think it would be what the license says. U.S. stations
>operating in Canada use their call appended by the proper Camadian
>prefix and vice versa per agreement between both countries. In other
>words if I operated from the Yukon it would be N6JM/VY1, not VY1/N6JM.
>
>This whole problem was created by the computer age of logging where the
>program could not recognize calls appended as such. Hopefully this new
>system can recognize the calls appended either way. In the latter case,
>if I were to operate from Siberia it definitely would be RX9/N6JM.

I went through this three years ago preparing for a mini-DXpedition
to Labrador, whether to sign as K2FRD/VO2 or VO2/K2FRD. True, with
the US as a signatory with various IARU and ITU treaties, the
portable locator should go before the home callsign (e.g. VO2/K2FRD),
but a reciprocal agreement between the US and Canada nominally has it
after (e.g. K2FRD/VO2) in apparent contravention to the various IARU
and ITU treaties. Since Canada's RICs aren't particularly clear on
the issue and the FCC Rules leave room for interpretation, I chose
VO2/K2FRD since it is the "industry standard" of ham radio and for
the above electronic logging reason. In truth, probably neither
government is going to invest a lot of time obsessing with which way
a portable station signs as long as the information is present and
correct.

--
73 de Fred Stevens K2FRD
Chenango Co. (NY) Assistant Emergency Coordinator
2004 Labrador VO2/K2FRD mini-DXpedition:
http://home.stny.rr.com/k2frd/Labrador2004.htm
Foothills District, Otschodela Council BSA Committees
Otschodela Council (BSA) Amateur Radio Group KZ2BSA:
http://home.stny.rr.com/k2frd/ocarg.htm
K2FRD Personal Adventure page:  http://home.stny.rr.com/k2frd/K2FRD.htm
Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

Re: [DX-CHAT] question?

[Jan Erik Holm]

Ron Notarius WN3VAW wrote:

Steve,

I'm not sure what you mean by "correct" method.

Once upon a time YourCall/PortablePrefix was the way "everyone" did it, be
it a different domestic call area (ie K8WK/3 or F9ABC/8) or DX (ie
K8WK/VP9).  (Although in some DX entities, a "/p" to indicate portable was,
and is, also appened).
This began to change in the late 1970's and early '80's, as it started to be
noticed (especially in, but not exclusively in, contests) that some people
were missing the DX prefix when tacked onto the end... in other words, if
someone wanted to work you on Guam (ie K8WK/KH2), and weren't paying
attention, they'd tune out your call before you got to the prefix.  By
putting the prefix first (KH2/K8WK), you clearly indicate the DX entity
you're working from, thereby avoiding that problem.
So, while doing it either way is "acceptable," putting the prefix first is
better.

Yes, however international recomendations, or is it regulations, (IARU) 
stipulates the prefix to come first. In my book that would be the way to go.

73 Jim SM2EKM



Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

Re: [DX-CHAT] question?

[Bob Nielsen]

On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 06:57:56PM -0400, Fred Stevens K2FRD wrote:
> At 11:21 -0700 05/10/03, John and Mari Minke wrote:
> >Art RX9TX wrote:
> >>
> >> HI9/K8WK,  definitely.  I  think  it  is  one of IARU recommendations.
> >> Europeans and JA's always use only that method.
> >
> >Actually, I think it would be what the license says. U.S. stations
> >operating in Canada use their call appended by the proper Camadian
> >prefix and vice versa per agreement between both countries. In other
> >words if I operated from the Yukon it would be N6JM/VY1, not VY1/N6JM.
> >
> >This whole problem was created by the computer age of logging where the
> >program could not recognize calls appended as such. Hopefully this new
> >system can recognize the calls appended either way. In the latter case,
> >if I were to operate from Siberia it definitely would be RX9/N6JM.
> 
> I went through this three years ago preparing for a mini-DXpedition 
> to Labrador, whether to sign as K2FRD/VO2 or VO2/K2FRD. True, with 
> the US as a signatory with various IARU and ITU treaties, the 
> portable locator should go before the home callsign (e.g. VO2/K2FRD), 
> but a reciprocal agreement between the US and Canada nominally has it 
> after (e.g. K2FRD/VO2) in apparent contravention to the various IARU 
> and ITU treaties. Since Canada's RICs aren't particularly clear on 
> the issue and the FCC Rules leave room for interpretation, I chose 
> VO2/K2FRD since it is the "industry standard" of ham radio and for 
> the above electronic logging reason. In truth, probably neither 
> government is going to invest a lot of time obsessing with which way 
> a portable station signs as long as the information is present and 
> correct.

The RAC web site  says essentially the same
thing.  At the time the US/Canada agreement was made, having it after
the callsign was the accepted practice.

Bob, N7XY
Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

RE: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Ragnar Otterstad]

 

  -Here is a hypothetical 
  situation and a question.  I am on a dxpedition to a top 10 entity and 
  lets say I'm operating on 20 meters.  I'm transmitting at 14.195 and 
  listening 200 to 220.  I tune down to my transmit frequency and hear all 
  kinds of intentional QRM.  It's so bad that I know the stations I am 
  trying to work are having a bad time hearing me.  What would happen if I 
  waited a few minutes then announced that I am no longer working split, please 
  call between 14.200 and 14.220 and I will work you on your transmit 
  frequency? 
   
  My experience is limited 
  to JW, where the JA pileups can be almost frightening 
  !
  The bad English adds to 
  the problem so working Ja phone pile-ups is really a 
  challenge.
  What I found to work in a 
  seemingly hopeless situation was frequency 
  hopping.
   
  I would say f ex  
  QSX  245. When that frequency become saturated I would say QSX 
  235.
  Not everybody is listening so I would get a 
  periode when callsigns can be made out. When the new frequency is hopeless I 
  would find a new free one  and say QSX  whatever that was.  
  
  By doing this I managed to keep the phone 
  pileups managable without spreading out all over a large 
  bandsegment.
   
  The same can be done on CW of course, but 
  morse is easier to copy with narrow filters and different 
  pitches.
  But I had to use this approach some years ago 
  on 30 meters. I guess it was the first time somebody did a real effort to work 
  30 meters from Svalbard and there was a  " wall-to-wall" pile-up . 
  By using the QSX-technique described above only those who listened properly 
  would know where to transmit ! I believe there is a moral in there !!!  
  hi
   
   
  73
   
  
  " RAG "  Ragnar Otterstad   
  LA5HE JW5HE OZ8ROLocated in Telemark - Home of skiing. 
   For more information about Telemark 
  take a look at : www.visittelemark.com for 
  more details.

RE: [DX-CHAT] Question

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

The problem is that then you would have no way to communicate with the pileup as a whole. Newcomers would not know your listening range and the pile would spread farther and farther, causing much problems with other users of the band. Chaos.
73,
Duane, WV2B "Nothing great is ever achieved without enthusiasm."- Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Gary Danaher]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


The problem is that then you would have no way to communicate with the 
pileup as a whole. Newcomers would not know your listening range and 
the pile would spread farther and farther, causing much problems with 
other users of the band. Chaos.


73,

Duane, WV2B


"Nothing great is ever achieved without enthusiasm."- Ralph Waldo Emerson.

You are assuming that folks will not be able to figure out where he is 
listening. In my experience, it is not impossible at all to figure out 
where the dx is listening. Often using a couple buttons I can find both 
ends of the qso and do it pretty quickly. The original question though 
dealt with the possibility that the dx is going to jump frequencies and 
actually call the deserving...


Gary
ab5rm

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] Question

[Zack Widup]

On Sat, 18 Mar 2006, David  Johnson wrote:

> Gentlemen DXers,
> 
> Here is a hypothetical situation and a question.  I am on a dxpedition 
> to a top 10 entity and lets say I'm operating on 20 meters.  I'm 
> transmitting at 14.195 and listening 200 to 220.  I tune down to my 
> transmit frequency and hear all kinds of intentional QRM.  It's so bad 
> that I know the stations I am trying to work are having a bad time 
> hearing me.  What would happen if I waited a few minutes then announced 
> that I am no longer working split, please call between 14.200 and 14.220 
> and I will work you on your transmit frequency?
> 
> If this has come up before, please excuse me.  I will be very 
interested to read your comments.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dave - K4SSU

I think that's a great idea as long as the people you're calling were 
there when you made your announcement.  It would be a good idea because no 
one could easily jam your transmissions, and there would be far less doubt 
in the minds of the stations you're woring that they're in the log if YOU 
call THEM on THEIR frequency.

The drawback is that every new person who shows up is going to sit on 
14195 saying "Where's the DX?" unless you go back there every few minutes 
and announce what you're doing.

73, Zack W9SZ


Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Assuming the Dx station moves around and answers callers on their own frequency, and does not work more than one caller on a particular frequency- The DX operator has no way to communicate to the pileup as a whole. They will be listening on their own frequency for the Dx to answer them, not listening for other qsos. As new stations find the pileup, or see it spotted, will likely begin spreading out farther and farther trying to be sure they are calling on a clear frequency. Even if the spread is mentioned in DX spots operators will likely try to push the edges hoping the Dx will go just a little higher to find them in the clear.
Although finding the frequency of the previous qso and calling there, or where the Dx will next be listening, is a pretty basic skill to DXing, I think you will find 90% of the callers are not doing this. They sit in one spot, or pick spots at random, and call their lungs out. If they are loud enough eventually they get the contact, but not with the satisfaction of getting it because they were able to listen and choose the best place and time to call. I have been able to very easily work weak JA callers from CY9 despite many loud US and European callers by finding a relatively clear spot in the listening spread and dropping hints to the pileup. Just say "203" for example. The good DXers are listening, and within a few seconds call on that frequency. You can work 6- 10 stations before the crowd listen long enough to catch on. When the bedlam starts, find another fairly clear spot and again just mention the frequency. The best Dxers get the contact easily, while many others blindly call barely taking a breath. I have put many good JA operators in the log this way. But- that was not the question.
Really, except perhaps in the biggest pileups, split would not be needed if operators were able to listen and use timing. Obviously, this is not possible. Stations simply cannot contain themselves enough to call when the DX asks QRZ or otherwise indicates he is ready for a call, and not transmit the rest of the time. But, too many stations must transmit all the time, even if the DX has identified another station and is trying to work it. They transmit when they are not the station identified, and often even while the Dx station is transmitting, hence split is needed. But, anyone who has been a Dxer for more than 5 minutes knows this.
What is the solution to the qrm on the DX frequency?  Well, if someone doesn't know the DX is woking split, or by accident is on the wrong VFO, or whatever, it would be no problem if ppeople had the smallest amount of self control. If the offending station is calling with proper timing, when the Dx says QRZ, or is otherwise ready for a call, calling on the DX transmit frequency is of no consequence other than a waste of time for the caller. The trouble is the lack of self control which requires many listeners to try to enlighten this individual. They are now transmitting when the DX is transmitting, rendering the DX inaudible to many. Is there a solution? Apparently not. These are likely not new or inexperienced DXers. Education hasn't worked, expecting people to change their personality or develop self control is a lost cause. The bedlam will continue.
What about intentional qrmers? Nothing short of direction finding and enforcement by Governments will have any effect on that, and that simply will not happen. What choice does the Dx have but to continue on the best he can, and work those fortunate enough to hear him through the bedlam? I have even monitored stations intentionally interfering with high seas rescue operations where lives hung in the balance. If people with transmitting equipment are sick enough to do that, how can we expect any less regarding Dx operations? There are many possible motives involved in qrming a particular Dx operation, and expecting the ones doing such things to somehow develop self control and concern for one's fellow man is not realistic. Can we somehow come up with new ways to circumvent the problem of qrm on the DX transmit frequency? Maybe, but I don't think answering callers on their own frequency is the way. I think this has been done before, resulting in massive chaos.
73 for now,
Duane, WV2B
"Nothing great is ever achieved without enthusiasm."- Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Norm Gertz]

Many times through the years when a DX 
station has asked for "up" several times and is ignored they have immediately 
gone QRT.look forward to this in the future also.
 
73   Norm   
K1AA

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: dx-chat@njdxa.org 
  Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 10:01 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question
  
  Assuming the Dx station moves around and answers callers on their own 
  frequency, and does not work more than one caller on a particular frequency- 
  The DX operator has no way to communicate to the pileup as a whole. They will 
  be listening on their own frequency for the Dx to answer them, not listening 
  for other qsos. As new stations find the pileup, or see it spotted, will 
  likely begin spreading out farther and farther trying to be sure they are 
  calling on a clear frequency. Even if the spread is mentioned in DX spots 
  operators will likely try to push the edges hoping the Dx will go just a 
  little higher to find them in the clear.
  Although finding the frequency of the previous qso and calling there, or 
  where the Dx will next be listening, is a pretty basic skill to DXing, I think 
  you will find 90% of the callers are not doing this. They sit in one spot, or 
  pick spots at random, and call their lungs out. If they are loud enough 
  eventually they get the contact, but not with the satisfaction of getting it 
  because they were able to listen and choose the best place and time to call. I 
  have been able to very easily work weak JA callers from CY9 despite many loud 
  US and European callers by finding a relatively clear spot in the listening 
  spread and dropping hints to the pileup. Just say "203" for example. The good 
  DXers are listening, and within a few seconds call on that frequency. You can 
  work 6- 10 stations before the crowd listen long enough to catch on. When the 
  bedlam starts, find another fairly clear spot and again just mention the 
  frequency. The best Dxers get the contact easily, while many others blindly 
  call barely taking a breath. I have put many good JA operators in the log this 
  way. But- that was not the question.
  Really, except perhaps in the biggest pileups, split would not be needed if 
  operators were able to listen and use timing. Obviously, this is not possible. 
  Stations simply cannot contain themselves enough to call when the DX asks QRZ 
  or otherwise indicates he is ready for a call, and not transmit the rest of 
  the time. But, too many stations must transmit all the time, even if the DX 
  has identified another station and is trying to work it. They transmit when 
  they are not the station identified, and often even while the Dx station is 
  transmitting, hence split is needed. But, anyone who has been a Dxer for more 
  than 5 minutes knows this.
  What is the solution to the qrm on the DX frequency?  Well, if someone 
  doesn't know the DX is woking split, or by accident is on the wrong VFO, or 
  whatever, it would be no problem if ppeople had the smallest amount of self 
  control. If the offending station is calling with proper timing, when the Dx 
  says QRZ, or is otherwise ready for a call, calling on the DX transmit 
  frequency is of no consequence other than a waste of time for the caller. The 
  trouble is the lack of self control which requires many listeners to try to 
  enlighten this individual. They are now transmitting when the DX is 
  transmitting, rendering the DX inaudible to many. Is there a solution? 
  Apparently not. These are likely not new or inexperienced DXers. Education 
  hasn't worked, expecting people to change their personality or develop self 
  control is a lost cause. The bedlam will continue.
  What about intentional qrmers? Nothing short of direction finding and 
  enforcement by Governments will have any effect on that, and that simply will 
  not happen. What choice does the Dx have but to continue on the best he can, 
  and work those fortunate enough to hear him through the bedlam? I have even 
  monitored stations intentionally interfering with high seas rescue operations 
  where lives hung in the balance. If people with transmitting equipment are 
  sick enough to do that, how can we expect any less regarding Dx operations? 
  There are many possible motives involved in qrming a particular Dx operation, 
  and expecting the ones doing such things to somehow develop self control and 
  concern for one's fellow man is not realistic. Can we somehow come up with new 
  ways to circumvent the problem of qrm on the DX transmit frequency? Maybe, but 
  I don't think answering callers on their own frequency is the way. I think 
  this has been done before, resulting in massive chaos.
  73 for now,
  Duane, WV2B
  "Nothing great is ever achieved without enthusiasm."- Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Peter W2IRT]

At 10:01 03/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


What is the solution to the qrm on the DX frequency?  Well, if 
someone doesn't know the DX is woking split, or by accident is on 
the wrong VFO, or whatever, it would be no problem if ppeople had 
the smallest amount of self control. If the offending station is 
calling with proper timing, when the Dx says QRZ, or is otherwise 
ready for a call, calling on the DX transmit frequency is of no 
consequence other than a waste of time for the caller.


If I recall, 14195 became the DX frequency because it was a place 
where DX stations could TX but that Americans could not (US 
privileges started at 14200 for the longest time). Maybe it's time to 
revive that tradition and make 14145 the new default DX frequency on 
20 SSB. It could have the added advantage of EU/JA pileups down 5 to 
15 and stateside callers up 10-20 or something like that.


The advice I'd give to anyone going to a top-10 entity and operating 
SSB would be to not use half the band and once in a while mention 
where you're listening. That means concentrating the pile between two 
hard limits ("listening 5 to 20 up") -- and staying within those 
limits. That in turn means you need an operator  on the DXpedition 
who can run a pileup that's very intense and concentrated. Most of 
the Peter1 guys were great, but a couple of their 40m CW guys would 
just keep going up up up up up. 30 kHz for a CW pileup is nuts, 
especially when you're not announcing where you're listening and just 
saying UP.




- 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

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Osten B Magnusson]

 
        >What 
about intentional qrmers?
 
These guys have now found another way to make it difficult for DX'ers in a 
"split" pile-up. They quickly find the station that's been answered by the 
DX-station and send a carrier over the caller instead  -  this also 
prevents the QSO to "be finished". 
 
Whatever we do, these intentional QRM'ers will be ahead of us!
 
73/DX de Osten SM5DQC    ( also SM5DXCC )    
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  or  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
- Original Message - 

  From: 
  Norm Gertz 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; dx-chat@njdxa.org 
  Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 4:39 
PM
  Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question
  
  Many times through the years when a DX 
  station has asked for "up" several times and is ignored they have immediately 
  gone QRT.look forward to this in the future also.
   
  73   Norm   
  K1AA
  
- Original Message - 
From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To: dx-chat@njdxa.org 
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 10:01 
AM
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

What about intentional 
qrmers? Nothing short of direction finding and enforcement by Governments 
will have any effect on that, and that simply will not happen. What choice 
does the Dx have but to continue on the best he can, and work those 
fortunate enough to hear him through the bedlam? I have even monitored 
stations intentionally interfering with high seas rescue operations where 
lives hung in the balance. If people with transmitting equipment are sick 
enough to do that, how can we expect any less regarding Dx operations? There 
are many possible motives involved in qrming a particular Dx operation, and 
expecting the ones doing such things to somehow develop self control and 
concern for one's fellow man is not realistic. Can we somehow come up with 
new ways to circumvent the problem of qrm on the DX transmit frequency? 
Maybe, but I don't think answering callers on their own frequency is the 
way. I think this has been done before, resulting in massive chaos.
73 for now,
Duane, WV2B
__SNIP by 
SM5DQC__

RE: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Ron Notarius WN3VAW]

Peter,

Hmmm.  Not a bad idea, but I'm not so sure how well it would work.
Remember, at the time that US Phone privileges started at 14.200, the 14.1 -
14.2 part of the band was filled with DX Phone.  Now, while a lot of the
region below 14.150 still has DX Phone, you're also finding more and more
digital modes in the same area.

More importantly, moving the unofficial calling frequencies won't solve the
fundamental problem involved.  Wherever the DX station listening "up"
transmits, on any band, you will always have the combined problems of:

1.  The DX'er who accidently forgets to put his rig in split and transmits 
on
top of the DX
2.  The lid who deliberately neglects to put his rig in split and transmits
on top of the DX
3.  The alleged DX'er who claims that they can't work split... sometimes
true, sometimes not
4.  The operator (sometimes DX'er, sometimes not) who hears the DX calling,
but doesn't hear or doesn't understand "listening up" who calls on the DX's
frequency
5.  The frequency cops, most of whom mean well, who transmit on top of the 
DX
to try and tell the aforementioned ops that they're QRM'ing the DX... and in
the process, QRM the DX
6.  The net or alleged net or sked or alleged sked that "always" operates on
or around this frequency and time, thus giving them hypothetical ownership
of the frequency range, who either demand that the DX move, the pile-up
move, or who blunder on with their QSO anyway
7.  The usually innocent QSO that suddenly gets QRM from the DX and/or 
pileup
due to propagation shift, who rather than move (if they can) try to blunder
on, either not knowing or not caring that they're now QRM'ing the DX &
pileup back

I can go on, and I'm sure someone will add a few, but you get the point.
Some of this can be solved by better operators... and better operators
happen when those of us who know them try to teach them or show them better.
Some of this is just, well, bad luck.  And some of this is caused by that
extremely small percentage of lids (and even smaller percentage of those who
make regular lids look good) who for their own reasons of ego, perceived
slights, general mean streaks, sadism, or mental illness (diagnosed or
otherwise) enjoy making life miserable for the rest of us.

73

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
Of Peter W2IRT
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 10:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; dx-chat@njdxa.org
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question


At 10:01 03/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


>What is the solution to the qrm on the DX frequency?  Well, if
>someone doesn't know the DX is woking split, or by accident is on
>the wrong VFO, or whatever, it would be no problem if ppeople had
>the smallest amount of self control. If the offending station is
>calling with proper timing, when the Dx says QRZ, or is otherwise
>ready for a call, calling on the DX transmit frequency is of no
>consequence other than a waste of time for the caller.

If I recall, 14195 became the DX frequency because it was a place
where DX stations could TX but that Americans could not (US
privileges started at 14200 for the longest time). Maybe it's time to
revive that tradition and make 14145 the new default DX frequency on
20 SSB. It could have the added advantage of EU/JA pileups down 5 to
15 and stateside callers up 10-20 or something like that.

The advice I'd give to anyone going to a top-10 entity and operating
SSB would be to not use half the band and once in a while mention
where you're listening. That means concentrating the pile between two
hard limits ("listening 5 to 20 up") -- and staying within those
limits. That in turn means you need an operator  on the DXpedition
who can run a pileup that's very intense and concentrated. Most of
the Peter1 guys were great, but a couple of their 40m CW guys would
just keep going up up up up up. 30 kHz for a CW pileup is nuts,
especially when you're not announcing where you're listening and just
saying UP.



- Peter

W2IRT

Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA
http://njdxa.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Norm Gertz]

This will never endthese intentional 
jammers are the equivalent of the "schoolyard bullies"...
whether from frustration or twisted 
philosophies they will sadly always be with us.
 
Norm   K1AA

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Osten B 
  Magnusson 
  To: Norm Gertz ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; dx-chat@njdxa.org 
  Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 10:53 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question
  
   
          >What about intentional qrmers?
   
  These guys have now found another way to make it difficult for DX'ers in 
  a "split" pile-up. They quickly find the station that's been answered by the 
  DX-station and send a carrier over the caller instead  -  this also 
  prevents the QSO to "be finished". 
   
  Whatever we do, these intentional QRM'ers will be ahead of us!
   
  73/DX de Osten SM5DQC    ( also SM5DXCC 
  )    [EMAIL PROTECTED]  or  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   
  - Original Message - 
  
From: 
Norm Gertz 
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; dx-chat@njdxa.org 
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 4:39 
PM
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

Many times through the years when a DX 
station has asked for "up" several times and is ignored they have 
immediately gone QRT.look forward to this in the future 
also.
 
73   Norm   
K1AA

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

  To: dx-chat@njdxa.org 
  Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 10:01 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question
  
  What about intentional 
  qrmers? Nothing short of direction finding and enforcement by Governments 
  will have any effect on that, and that simply will not happen. What choice 
  does the Dx have but to continue on the best he can, and work those 
  fortunate enough to hear him through the bedlam? I have even monitored 
  stations intentionally interfering with high seas rescue operations where 
  lives hung in the balance. If people with transmitting equipment are sick 
  enough to do that, how can we expect any less regarding Dx operations? 
  There are many possible motives involved in qrming a particular Dx 
  operation, and expecting the ones doing such things to somehow develop 
  self control and concern for one's fellow man is not realistic. Can we 
  somehow come up with new ways to circumvent the problem of qrm on the DX 
  transmit frequency? Maybe, but I don't think answering callers on their 
  own frequency is the way. I think this has been done before, resulting in 
  massive chaos.
  73 for now,
  Duane, WV2B
  __SNIP by 
  SM5DQC__

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Bill Hawkins]

And how about CW DX going back to 14001-14002?
Bill W5EC




Why not go back to what we had back in the " good old days ", when the 
rare

DX transmitted down around 14115-14125



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] Question

[David Johnson]

Ron,

I must add one more as I know this for a fact.  Now that we are near the 
bottom of this sunspot cycle, some of those Freeband Nuts in Europe and the 
US that have all that expensive ham gear can't use it much on 27 & 28 MHz. 
They are having "Big Fun" QRMing ham DXpeditions and braging about it on 
their web sites.


I will take this opportunity to thank all the "Gentlemen DXers" that have 
responded to my question here on dx-chat and direct.  It has been very 
informative.


Dave - K4SSU  (K4SSU/KP1)


- Original Message - 
From: "Ron Notarius WN3VAW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 11:05 AM
Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] Question



Peter,

Hmmm.  Not a bad idea, but I'm not so sure how well it would work.
Remember, at the time that US Phone privileges started at 14.200, the 
14.1 -

14.2 part of the band was filled with DX Phone.  Now, while a lot of the
region below 14.150 still has DX Phone, you're also finding more and more
digital modes in the same area.

More importantly, moving the unofficial calling frequencies won't solve 
the

fundamental problem involved.  Wherever the DX station listening "up"
transmits, on any band, you will always have the combined problems of:

1. The DX'er who accidently forgets to put his rig in split and transmits 
on

top of the DX
2. The lid who deliberately neglects to put his rig in split and transmits
on top of the DX
3. The alleged DX'er who claims that they can't work split... sometimes
true, sometimes not
4. The operator (sometimes DX'er, sometimes not) who hears the DX calling,
but doesn't hear or doesn't understand "listening up" who calls on the 
DX's

frequency
5. The frequency cops, most of whom mean well, who transmit on top of the 
DX
to try and tell the aforementioned ops that they're QRM'ing the DX... and 
in

the process, QRM the DX
6. The net or alleged net or sked or alleged sked that "always" operates 
on

or around this frequency and time, thus giving them hypothetical ownership
of the frequency range, who either demand that the DX move, the pile-up
move, or who blunder on with their QSO anyway
7. The usually innocent QSO that suddenly gets QRM from the DX and/or 
pileup
due to propagation shift, who rather than move (if they can) try to 
blunder

on, either not knowing or not caring that they're now QRM'ing the DX &
pileup back

I can go on, and I'm sure someone will add a few, but you get the point.
Some of this can be solved by better operators... and better operators
happen when those of us who know them try to teach them or show them 
better.

Some of this is just, well, bad luck.  And some of this is caused by that
extremely small percentage of lids (and even smaller percentage of those 
who

make regular lids look good) who for their own reasons of ego, perceived
slights, general mean streaks, sadism, or mental illness (diagnosed or
otherwise) enjoy making life miserable for the rest of us.

73

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
Of Peter W2IRT
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 10:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; dx-chat@njdxa.org
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question


At 10:01 03/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



What is the solution to the qrm on the DX frequency?  Well, if
someone doesn't know the DX is woking split, or by accident is on
the wrong VFO, or whatever, it would be no problem if ppeople had
the smallest amount of self control. If the offending station is
calling with proper timing, when the Dx says QRZ, or is otherwise
ready for a call, calling on the DX transmit frequency is of no
consequence other than a waste of time for the caller.


If I recall, 14195 became the DX frequency because it was a place
where DX stations could TX but that Americans could not (US
privileges started at 14200 for the longest time). Maybe it's time to
revive that tradition and make 14145 the new default DX frequency on
20 SSB. It could have the added advantage of EU/JA pileups down 5 to
15 and stateside callers up 10-20 or something like that.

The advice I'd give to anyone going to a top-10 entity and operating
SSB would be to not use half the band and once in a while mention
where you're listening. That means concentrating the pile between two
hard limits ("listening 5 to 20 up") -- and staying within those
limits. That in turn means you need an operator  on the DXpedition
who can run a pileup that's very intense and concentrated. Most of
the Peter1 guys were great, but a couple of their 40m CW guys would
just keep going up up up up up. 30 kHz for a CW pileup is nuts,
especially when you're not announcing where you're listening and just
saying UP.



- Peter

W2IRT

Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, dx-c

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[af2c]

Do you really believe that much of the same trash would be
eliminated?
Those who QRM now may hesitate to do the same on the frequencies used in
"the good old days."  However, that hesitation won't last
very long.  Some will use CW...Others won't care about what section
of the band they are using.
Check 4Øm when a rare DX station is working the U.S.A. using a wide
split.  One of the first evenings when Peter One came up on 4Øm SSB
to work the U.S.A. Pactor operators thought nothing of coming up on top
the 3YØ.
I guess we'll just have to live with it.
73,
Jay/AF2C

At 11:22 AM 3/19/06 -0600, you wrote:
And how about CW DX going back to
14001-14002?
Bill W5EC


Why not go back to what we had back in the " good old days ",
when the rare
DX transmitted down around 14115-14125




No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.5/284 - Release Date: 3/17/06

RE: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Peter W2IRT]

At 11:05 03/19/06, Ron Notarius WN3VAW wrote:
6.  The net or alleged net or sked or alleged sked that "always" 
operates on

or around this frequency and time, thus giving them hypothetical ownership
of the frequency range, who either demand that the DX move, the pile-up
move, or who blunder on with their QSO anyway
7.  The usually innocent QSO that suddenly gets QRM from the DX 
and/or pileup

due to propagation shift, who rather than move (if they can) try to blunder
on, either not knowing or not caring that they're now QRM'ing the DX &
pileup back


Well, going outside the US phone bands would certainly take care of 
these, from the North American end of things at least.


As for frequency cops, no, you'll never get rid of those cretins. For 
those who forget or have problems comprehending the term "split" and 
who tx out of band (I don't hear it too terribly on 40 SSB, just a 
couple here and there), well, just get Riley to stand by with a tape 
recorder and a pad of violation notices. Hey! What an idea! Have the 
FCC sponsor DXpeditions to Navassa and Desecheo, listen for the US 
lids to transmit out of band, fine' 'em all and have the national 
debt retired in two weekends flat!





- 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

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Jerry Keller]

We're giving the freebanders and intentional QRMers entirely too much 
attention and too much publicity. Going back 40+ years I can't remember a 
DXpedition that didn't get some QRM, though it's a lot more these days... 
but that just makes working the DX that much more of a challenge. Ignore 
those malicious QRMers. They only do it to irritate us, and when we get 
annoyed, they win.


Every time I hear one of the Deserving lose his cool and even acknowledge 
the existence of these jerks, I cringe... because some idiot QRMer just got 
what he wanted. We need to keep our focus on the DX, play the game our way, 
not their way, and work the DX right over them. Pretend they are not even 
there. That way, we win and they lose.


Something to think about.

73,  Jerry K3BZ


- Original Message - 
From: "David Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Ron Notarius WN3VAW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question



Ron,

I must add one more as I know this for a fact.  Now that we are near the 
bottom of this sunspot cycle, some of those Freeband Nuts in Europe and 
the US that have all that expensive ham gear can't use it much on 27 & 28 
MHz. They are having "Big Fun" QRMing ham DXpeditions and braging about it 
on their web sites.


I will take this opportunity to thank all the "Gentlemen DXers" that have 
responded to my question here on dx-chat and direct.  It has been very 
informative.


Dave - K4SSU  (K4SSU/KP1)


- Original Message - 
From: "Ron Notarius WN3VAW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 11:05 AM
Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] Question



Peter,

Hmmm.  Not a bad idea, but I'm not so sure how well it would work.
Remember, at the time that US Phone privileges started at 14.200, the 
14.1 -

14.2 part of the band was filled with DX Phone.  Now, while a lot of the
region below 14.150 still has DX Phone, you're also finding more and more
digital modes in the same area.

More importantly, moving the unofficial calling frequencies won't solve 
the

fundamental problem involved.  Wherever the DX station listening "up"
transmits, on any band, you will always have the combined problems of:

1. The DX'er who accidently forgets to put his rig in split and transmits 
on

top of the DX
2. The lid who deliberately neglects to put his rig in split and 
transmits

on top of the DX
3. The alleged DX'er who claims that they can't work split... sometimes
true, sometimes not
4. The operator (sometimes DX'er, sometimes not) who hears the DX 
calling,
but doesn't hear or doesn't understand "listening up" who calls on the 
DX's

frequency
5. The frequency cops, most of whom mean well, who transmit on top of the 
DX
to try and tell the aforementioned ops that they're QRM'ing the DX... and 
in

the process, QRM the DX
6. The net or alleged net or sked or alleged sked that "always" operates 
on
or around this frequency and time, thus giving them hypothetical 
ownership

of the frequency range, who either demand that the DX move, the pile-up
move, or who blunder on with their QSO anyway
7. The usually innocent QSO that suddenly gets QRM from the DX and/or 
pileup
due to propagation shift, who rather than move (if they can) try to 
blunder

on, either not knowing or not caring that they're now QRM'ing the DX &
pileup back

I can go on, and I'm sure someone will add a few, but you get the point.
Some of this can be solved by better operators... and better operators
happen when those of us who know them try to teach them or show them 
better.

Some of this is just, well, bad luck.  And some of this is caused by that
extremely small percentage of lids (and even smaller percentage of those 
who

make regular lids look good) who for their own reasons of ego, perceived
slights, general mean streaks, sadism, or mental illness (diagnosed or
otherwise) enjoy making life miserable for the rest of us.

73

-----Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
Of Peter W2IRT
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 10:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; dx-chat@njdxa.org
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question


At 10:01 03/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



What is the solution to the qrm on the DX frequency?  Well, if
someone doesn't know the DX is woking split, or by accident is on
the wrong VFO, or whatever, it would be no problem if ppeople had
the smallest amount of self control. If the offending station is
calling with proper timing, when the Dx says QRZ, or is otherwise
ready for a call, calling on the DX transmit frequency is of no
consequence other than a waste of time for the caller.


If I recall, 14195 became the DX frequency because it was a place
where DX stations could TX but that Americans could not (US
privileges started at 14200 for t

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Norm Gertz]

Very true Jerry.some years back when the cesspool of amateur radio 14313 
existed a college professor psyciatrist who specialized in this type of 
behaviour gave one sentence of advice for this situation" Ignore, Ignore 
and Ignore"


73   Norm   K1AA


- Original Message - 
From: "Jerry Keller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question


We're giving the freebanders and intentional QRMers entirely too much 
attention and too much publicity. Going back 40+ years I can't remember a 
DXpedition that didn't get some QRM, though it's a lot more these days... 
but that just makes working the DX that much more of a challenge. Ignore 
those malicious QRMers. They only do it to irritate us, and when we get 
annoyed, they win.


Every time I hear one of the Deserving lose his cool and even acknowledge 
the existence of these jerks, I cringe... because some idiot QRMer just 
got what he wanted. We need to keep our focus on the DX, play the game our 
way, not their way, and work the DX right over them. Pretend they are not 
even there. That way, we win and they lose.


Something to think about.

73,  Jerry K3BZ


- Original Message - 
From: "David Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Ron Notarius WN3VAW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question



Ron,

I must add one more as I know this for a fact.  Now that we are near the 
bottom of this sunspot cycle, some of those Freeband Nuts in Europe and 
the US that have all that expensive ham gear can't use it much on 27 & 28 
MHz. They are having "Big Fun" QRMing ham DXpeditions and braging about 
it on their web sites.


I will take this opportunity to thank all the "Gentlemen DXers" that have 
responded to my question here on dx-chat and direct.  It has been very 
informative.


Dave - K4SSU  (K4SSU/KP1)


- Original Message - 
From: "Ron Notarius WN3VAW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 11:05 AM
Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] Question



Peter,

Hmmm.  Not a bad idea, but I'm not so sure how well it would work.
Remember, at the time that US Phone privileges started at 14.200, the 
14.1 -

14.2 part of the band was filled with DX Phone.  Now, while a lot of the
region below 14.150 still has DX Phone, you're also finding more and 
more

digital modes in the same area.

More importantly, moving the unofficial calling frequencies won't solve 
the

fundamental problem involved.  Wherever the DX station listening "up"
transmits, on any band, you will always have the combined problems of:

1. The DX'er who accidently forgets to put his rig in split and 
transmits on

top of the DX
2. The lid who deliberately neglects to put his rig in split and 
transmits

on top of the DX
3. The alleged DX'er who claims that they can't work split... sometimes
true, sometimes not
4. The operator (sometimes DX'er, sometimes not) who hears the DX 
calling,
but doesn't hear or doesn't understand "listening up" who calls on the 
DX's

frequency
5. The frequency cops, most of whom mean well, who transmit on top of 
the DX
to try and tell the aforementioned ops that they're QRM'ing the DX... 
and in

the process, QRM the DX
6. The net or alleged net or sked or alleged sked that "always" operates 
on
or around this frequency and time, thus giving them hypothetical 
ownership

of the frequency range, who either demand that the DX move, the pile-up
move, or who blunder on with their QSO anyway
7. The usually innocent QSO that suddenly gets QRM from the DX and/or 
pileup
due to propagation shift, who rather than move (if they can) try to 
blunder

on, either not knowing or not caring that they're now QRM'ing the DX &
pileup back

I can go on, and I'm sure someone will add a few, but you get the point.
Some of this can be solved by better operators... and better operators
happen when those of us who know them try to teach them or show them 
better.
Some of this is just, well, bad luck.  And some of this is caused by 
that
extremely small percentage of lids (and even smaller percentage of those 
who

make regular lids look good) who for their own reasons of ego, perceived
slights, general mean streaks, sadism, or mental illness (diagnosed or
otherwise) enjoy making life miserable for the rest of us.

73

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
Of Peter W2IRT
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 10:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; dx-chat@njdxa.org
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question


At 10:01 03/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



What is the solution to the qrm on the DX frequency?  Well, if
someone doesn't know the DX is woking split, or by accident is on
the wrong VFO, or whatever, it would be n

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Jack]

http://www.hfpower.com/

At 02:20 PM 5/18/2009, William Beyer wrote:


Hello Group:
Any one get a photo of the NEW Acom VFD wattmeter? @ Dayton Hamvention.




Jack Hartley
K4WSB / VP2MSB
DXCC Honor Roll
QCWA OOTC
"Celebrating 50 years in Ham Radio"


---
To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list.  Please send a message to

imail...@njdxa.org 

In the message body put either 


unsubscribe dx-chat

or 


subscribe dx-chat

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
---

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[Mark Robinson]

I started looking at the Acom amplifier site and all of a sudden I got a 
message from my avg software that it had stopped the exploit swf.gen. Has 
anyone else seen that?

Mark N1UK
  - Original Message - 
  From: Jack 
  To: wbeye...@cfl.rr.com ; DX List... 
  Sent: Monday, 18 May, 2009 3:12 PM
  Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question


  http://www.hfpower.com/

  At 02:20 PM 5/18/2009, William Beyer wrote:


Hello Group:
Any one get a photo of the NEW Acom VFD wattmeter? @ Dayton Hamvention.
 


  Jack Hartley
  K4WSB / VP2MSB
  DXCC Honor Roll
  QCWA OOTC
  "Celebrating 50 years in Ham Radio"

  ---
  To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list. Please send a message to

  imail...@njdxa.org 

  In the message body put either 

  unsubscribe dx-chat

  or 

  subscribe dx-chat

  This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
  ---


---
To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list.  Please send a message to

imail...@njdxa.org 

In the message body put either 

unsubscribe dx-chat

or 

subscribe dx-chat

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
---

Re: [DX-CHAT] Question

[SzGy]

The same here, but the  trojan was  JS/Exploit.Agent.AFH   George HA5WA 
>  - Original Message - From: Mark  Robinson To: k4...@arrl.net ; 
> wbeye...@cfl.rr.com ; DX List... Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 1:51 AM Subject: 
> Re: [DX-CHAT] Question   I started looking at the Acom amplifier site and  
> all of a sudden I got a message from my avg software that it had stopped the  
> exploit swf.gen. Has anyone else seen that?   Mark N1UK  - Original 
> Message - From: Jack To: wbeye...@cfl.rr.com ; DX List... Sent: Monday, 
> 18 May, 2009 3:12 PM Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Question  http://www.hfpower.com/
> 
> At 02:20 PM 5/18/2009,  William Beyer wrote:
>  
> Hello Group:
> Any one get a photo of the NEW Acom VFD  wattmeter? @ Dayton Hamvention.
>  
> 

__  ESET Smart Security - Vírusdefiníciós adatbázis: 4085 (20090519)  
__

Az üzenetet az ESET Smart Security ellenõrizte.

http://www.eset.hu


Könyvszerda! Móra 
kiadó mesekönyvei 25-50% 
kedvezménnyel!http://bookline.hu/news/news.action?id=397&tabname=book&affiliate=frekszkar8578



---
To unsubscribe or subscribe to this list.  Please send a message to

imail...@njdxa.org 

In the message body put either 

unsubscribe dx-chat

or 

subscribe dx-chat

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
---

[DX-CHAT] question about buro

[Gary Stone]

Hi,

I worked CP1UU on cw and he said to qsl via the buro
100.  He repeated this a few times.  Does that mean to
send a $1 with the card to the Buro ?  Can you do
that?

Does anyone have a qsl route on cp1uu.  He was on 15
meter cw this afternoon (Sun - 22 Dec) with a good sig
into Texas.

73 de N5PHT, Gary


__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

[DX-CHAT] Question about EL2DX

[Gary Stone]

Any help with locating any QSL route or info for EL2DX
I worked on CW back on 9 July 2004?  I have sent QSLs
to K8SJP and receive no answers.  Any help
appreciated.

Gary, N5PHT
 

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
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] question about buro

[John J Dize]

He probably meant qsl via Buro 100 percent...  Goood luckk  W3BJ
On Sun, 22 Dec 2002 12:29:36 -0800 (PST) Gary Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> Hi,
> 
> I worked CP1UU on cw and he said to qsl via the buro
> 100.  He repeated this a few times.  Does that mean to
> send a $1 with the card to the Buro ?  Can you do
> that?
> 
> Does anyone have a qsl route on cp1uu.  He was on 15
> meter cw this afternoon (Sun - 22 Dec) with a good sig
> into Texas.
> 
> 73 de N5PHT, Gary
> 
> 
> __
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
> Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
> http://njdxa.org/dx-chat
> 
> To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 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, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org

[DX-CHAT] question about dx-central.com dx spots

[Marty Blaise AG5T]

Has anyone used the e-mail dx spots through dx-central.com?  I tried
filtering them so that I would only get U.S. spots on certain bands, but I
am getting spots from all countries on all bands.  Maybe someone can help
me set the filters properly.  For example, I don't want spots for 160 or 80
meters or 6 meters.  Thanks.
Marty
AG5T

_
Free email with personality! Over 200 domains!
http://www.MyOwnEmail.com

Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems 
http://njdxa.org/dx-chat

To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA 
http://njdxa.org