Topband: Wow, great conditions
I heard ZS1JX at his sunrise, and I heard and worked 4Z1UF at about the same time, also his sunrise. 4Z1UF, Ilya, was BOOMING in on my inverted L, a solid 589. I looked back in my log, and saw that I worked 4Z1UF almost ONE YEAR ago at his sunrise. The magic is still there! Mark Lunday WD4ELG ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Hi Brendan, This all seems unethical. To me these are bogus QSO's. This is a radio hobby, not a professional business. If the radiocontact isn't possible, so be it. Better luck next time and perhaps even more motivation and fun then. 73 Mark, PA5MW On 10 feb. 2011, at 21:38, Brendan Minish ei6iz.bren...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make available when I am not using it for others to use. it's an SDR-14 and is usually connected to one of my beverages via a multi-coupler so it hears and performs well Software wise , anyone using sdrradio can connect to it. the latency is alos very low with sdrradio. I am happy to make this available to others because in turn I enjoy using internet connected SDR's provided by others last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here) But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me -- 73 Brendan EI6IZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Brendan EI6IZ Wrote .last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here) But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me The last time this subject was discussed on a Reflector, it was suggested that if a long delay were inserted between the SDR's input and output, the device would retain it's intended usefulness for propagation checking but make it useless as a QSO repeater for the Cheaters! Perhaps that should become standard practice? ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
really this is not ethic. so this DX Station think he is doing 160 SSB? If I use this SDR of course I will run Europe easily, also in SSB, but I know that this is not radio, is internet! So finally, will be good to know who is this DX station. 73, Jorge CX6VM/CW5W -Mensaje original- De: topband-boun...@contesting.com [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] En nombre de Brendan Minish Enviado el: Jueves, 10 de Febrero de 2011 06:38 p.m. Para: topband@contesting.com Asunto: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' Hello all I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make available when I am not using it for others to use. it's an SDR-14 and is usually connected to one of my beverages via a multi-coupler so it hears and performs well Software wise , anyone using sdrradio can connect to it. the latency is alos very low with sdrradio. I am happy to make this available to others because in turn I enjoy using internet connected SDR's provided by others last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here) But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me -- 73 Brendan EI6IZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Of course it's wrong. Why not take the radio all the way out of it, use Skype or CQ100, and call it radio? I'd be interested to know what the sponsors of the Top Band awards have to say about it. On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 20:38:27 + Brendan Minish ei6iz.bren...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all I have a Software Defined Receiver (SDR) that I make available when I am not using it for others to use. it's an SDR-14 and is usually connected to one of my beverages via a multi-coupler so it hears and performs well Software wise , anyone using sdrradio can connect to it. the latency is alos very low with sdrradio. I am happy to make this available to others because in turn I enjoy using internet connected SDR's provided by others last night however I took a listen to what the connected user was listening to, It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. Surely this is 'not on' After all the EU stations may have been able to hear him (although I could not copy him better than about 21 here) But he was using a receiver within Europe to hear the EU stations calling. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me -- R. Kevin Stover AC0H ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
absolutely an ethical violation! in a contest of course most rules forbid it. perhaps that's a different game, with different rules like talking on the telephone. 73/Jon AA1K www.aa1k.us On 2/10/2011 15:38 PM, Brendan Minish wrote: It turns out that the connected user was a DX station utilising my SDR to work 160m SSB. He had a pileup of EU stations and was utilising my SDR to better hear his pileup. What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: [Topband] DX window for the southern hemisphere
A write up in CQ could be what's needed to foster more souther hemisphere interest. By the way, that's what's missing in the Stew Perry contest; a write up in a major magazine or at least a QST type formatted article online. The present crude online list of scores causes me to skip most Stew's. Dave WX7G On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Ward Silver hward...@gmail.com wrote: Unfortunately those 160m contest contacts with southern hemisphere stations are likely to become increasingly rare, unless something can be done to encourage operation from here. Vy 73 Steve, VK6VZ I suggest having a contest within a contest for the southern hemisphere operators with plaques, certificates, and a separate writeup by a writer from the region on a web site, possibly posted on the CQ 160 web site. The CQ 160 sponsors obviously have to focus on the main body of participants who are in the northern hemisphere, but there's no reason not to have your own Midsummer's Eve version at the same time. As long as the exchange and rules are compatible with those of the CQ 160 contest, everyone will benefit from the increased activity and the southern hemisphere operators will get their fair share of the fun. 73, Ward N0AX ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Why not just use SKYPE? Could have a packaged service which includes band noise, QRM, etc. Like Dr DX but via SKYPE. QST can do a full tech review. For once it may be meaningful too. Sent from my iPad On Feb 11, 2011, at 10:17, Tree t...@kkn.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 16:29 +1300, Greg - ZL3IX wrote: I am also a member of the SDR community (HPSDR) and I have had several disputes with the proponents of remote SDR receivers. I have requested that they put long time delays, say 15s, into the audio path, but they refuse to do so on the grounds that they don't want to limit technical progress for the sake of a few dishonest operators. A few people have suggested a delay BUT I would hate to see this implemented just to manage a problem of a few people who use real-time access to an SDR to 'cheat' at amateur radio award chasing. The majority of users of my SDR have to date listened outside the amateur bands either to the various broadcast bands or to HF Utility traffic of various kinds. Others use the system just to tune around, I myself find it fascinating to hear what 20 or 40m sounds like on the west coast of the states for example Almost without exception the users of the system are people like me who enjoy SWL activities, In my case it's predominantly tropical band broadcast Dxing. We are all fully aware that reception is taking place AT the location of the remote SDR not in our own shacks A 15 second delay would make the system unacceptably laggy and unpleasant to use, this is not a web-sdr, it's remotely controllable (via the internet) SDR that can be freely tuned from 10KHz or so to 30MHz Others have suggested that I should only allow the receiver to be used under my direct supervision, but again this means I must deny the resource to many just because a tiny minority use the system unethically. Let's also not forget that for SWL's in compromised locations with high local noise floor etc that these internet accessible SDR's provide a great opportunity for them to experience reception from a quiet location with good antennas. -- 73 Brendan EI6IZ ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
As a Software Radio Developer and chair of the ARRL Software Defined Radio and Digital Communications technical committee, as a DXCC recipient, contester, and as a ham radio operator period, I abhor this misuse of the technology. Boo Hiss indeed. Bob N4HY On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Tree t...@kkn.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Who among us is surprised? Almost all of the new technology tools (SDR, chatroom, Spectran, etc.) while intriguing and fun to operate, can be used to make QSO's that would not otherwise be made. I personally have no interest in working DX that way. It removes some of the challenge that drew me to Topband in the first place. Sadly, it causes one to look at some achievements on the band with a far more skeptical eye too. Ken K4ZW ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
Your SDR was effectively a remote receiver used by the DX station. Credit for contacts made utilizing remote receivers depends on the rules governing specific awards and contests. Here's the relevant rule governing DXCC credit: 9. All stations must be contacted from the same DXCC entity. The location of any station shall be defined as the location of the transmitter. For the purposes of this award, remote operating points must be located within the same DXCC entity as the transmitter and receiver. As you can see, this isn't completely clear. In the first part of the sentence, remote operating points is not defined. Does that include only the transmitter, as defined in the second sentence, or both the transmitter and receiver, as suggested by the second part of the third sentence? In fact, the second part of the third sentence appears to contradict the second sentence! My guess is that they want the transmitter and receiver to be located in the same DXCC entity, but this is not stated explicitly. Fortunately, the situation is much clearer for ARRL contests, and for most CQ contests: remote receivers are not allowed. Period. (Well, except for the Extreme category in CQ WW.) For ARRL, the definition of a remote receiver rests on General Rule 5.3, which states that all transmitters, receivers and antennas must be within a 500m circle. Since the 160m contact made by the DX station utilized a transmitter in his location and a remote receiver (your SDR and antenna) located more than 500m from the transmitter, it would not be eligible for credit in any ARRL contest and in most CQ contests and categories. However, note that the ARRL rules on remote receivers do not preclude the operator from being outside the circle. So, you can remotely operate a station that's anywhere else in the world. The location of the transmitter and receiver (which must be within the same 500m circle) defines where the station is located, not the op's location. So, if you operate a transmitter and receiver located within the same 500m circle in Ghana, and you are sitting comfortably in your easy chair in Brooklyn, NY, running the station over the Internet, the contact is perfectly legal for ARRL contests and counts as having been made from Ghana. Hope this clarifies the issue, at least a little. 73, Dick WC1M -Original Message- From: Robert McGwier [mailto:rwmcgw...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 1:27 PM To: Tree Cc: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' As a Software Radio Developer and chair of the ARRL Software Defined Radio and Digital Communications technical committee, as a DXCC recipient, contester, and as a ham radio operator period, I abhor this misuse of the technology. Boo Hiss indeed. Bob N4HY On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Tree t...@kkn.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating'
So does that mean the guy in his Brooklyn hi rise without any gear can operate X number of stations in the US in say the 160M contest and likely win? There is no rule I see about not moving the 500m entity X times just as their is no rule about a cross country trucker operating and submitting a log.. Carl KM1H - Original Message - From: Dick Green WC1M wc1...@gmail.com To: 'Robert McGwier' rwmcgw...@gmail.com; Tree t...@kkn.net Cc: topband@contesting.com Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 3:44 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' Your SDR was effectively a remote receiver used by the DX station. Credit for contacts made utilizing remote receivers depends on the rules governing specific awards and contests. Here's the relevant rule governing DXCC credit: 9. All stations must be contacted from the same DXCC entity. The location of any station shall be defined as the location of the transmitter. For the purposes of this award, remote operating points must be located within the same DXCC entity as the transmitter and receiver. As you can see, this isn't completely clear. In the first part of the sentence, remote operating points is not defined. Does that include only the transmitter, as defined in the second sentence, or both the transmitter and receiver, as suggested by the second part of the third sentence? In fact, the second part of the third sentence appears to contradict the second sentence! My guess is that they want the transmitter and receiver to be located in the same DXCC entity, but this is not stated explicitly. Fortunately, the situation is much clearer for ARRL contests, and for most CQ contests: remote receivers are not allowed. Period. (Well, except for the Extreme category in CQ WW.) For ARRL, the definition of a remote receiver rests on General Rule 5.3, which states that all transmitters, receivers and antennas must be within a 500m circle. Since the 160m contact made by the DX station utilized a transmitter in his location and a remote receiver (your SDR and antenna) located more than 500m from the transmitter, it would not be eligible for credit in any ARRL contest and in most CQ contests and categories. However, note that the ARRL rules on remote receivers do not preclude the operator from being outside the circle. So, you can remotely operate a station that's anywhere else in the world. The location of the transmitter and receiver (which must be within the same 500m circle) defines where the station is located, not the op's location. So, if you operate a transmitter and receiver located within the same 500m circle in Ghana, and you are sitting comfortably in your easy chair in Brooklyn, NY, running the station over the Internet, the contact is perfectly legal for ARRL contests and counts as having been made from Ghana. Hope this clarifies the issue, at least a little. 73, Dick WC1M -Original Message- From: Robert McGwier [mailto:rwmcgw...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 1:27 PM To: Tree Cc: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' As a Software Radio Developer and chair of the ARRL Software Defined Radio and Digital Communications technical committee, as a DXCC recipient, contester, and as a ham radio operator period, I abhor this misuse of the technology. Boo Hiss indeed. Bob N4HY On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Tree t...@kkn.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
Re: Topband: Web-based SDRs and DXCC [was Web SDR's and 'Cheating']
I asked this question a few years ago and was referred to the clear DXCC rule 9. 9. All stations must be contacted from the same DXCC entity. The location of any station shall be defined as the location of the transmitter. For the purposes of this award, remote operating points must be located within the same DXCC entity as the transmitter and receiver. This seems to state that the operator and TX/RX must also be in the same DXCC entity. 73, Gerry VE6LB/VA6XDX DXCC Field Checker-Southern Alberta VE/VA6 QSL Bureau Team (403) 251-0384 ve...@telus.net http://www.qsl.net/ve6lb/ From: William Q Meeker Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 4:03 PM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Web-based SDRs and DXCC [was Web SDR's and 'Cheating'] I am glad to see this subject return to the topband reflector. Hard to believe, but contrary to what Tree has said, my investigations indicate that the present DXCC rules would, unfortunately, permit the use of remote Internet-connected SDRs in another continent for purposes of making DXCC contacts. In my posting here last year, http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/Topband/2010-01/msg9.html I outlined my correspondence with the DXCC desk on the subject. Perhaps if more people make the point to the DXCC desk, their ARRL reps (on the DXAC and at the Section level) we can get the rules to be changed (or clarified) so that this kind of activity is clearly out of bounds. The (somewhat related) DXAC report to which I referred in the posting has been moved or removed from the ARRL webpages. If anyone wants to get a copy, send email to me. 73, Bill K0KT At 14:00 2/11/2011, you wrote: From: Tree t...@kkn.net CC: topband@contesting.com topband@contesting.com Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 09:17:17 -0600 Subject: Re: Topband: Web SDR's and 'Cheating' ext/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:21:26PM -0800, Bob Kupps wrote: What is the ethical position on this, it sure seems wrong to me What country are the people really working with their radio? There is not a two way exchange of information with someone in a single country - therefore - no QSO. The DX station is making these QSOs not count. If caught - they will not be accepted for DXCC. Next step - put the transmitter there too and make it even easier!! Boo hiss!! Tree N6TR William Q. Meeker Department of Statistics 2109 Snedecor Hall Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 50011 Phone: 515-294-5336 Fax: 515-294-4040 Home Fax: 515-232-1323 www.public.iastate.edu/~wqmeeker ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
