Re: Topband: Blatant cheating using Remote Operation
My opinion, may not be popular. Note: I'm not talking about hams remoting to _their own_ station. That is what the great technology is meant for. A remote station to someone else s equipment is not identifying legally in my opinion. Think about it. What if there is RFI or other malicious interference other coming from that station? There is no way to identify it. The station identifies as whoever is using the remote. Remotes should be required, per FCC, to identify as the station that is transmitting. That means the licensed operator in that particular location who owns the station. Example: NZ3M/W1XXX or whatever. There are hundreds of stations that hams can log into all over the world and operate using their own call sign. Some large stations are $ per minute and many are free. This is my 2 cents, take it as you wish. 73 Dave NZ3M On 10/12/2019 3:54 PM, Raymond Benny wrote: Greg, you, VU2GSM and others openly state how you are operating, and follow the accepted rules. And I'm glad you do. Those who do not and claim DXCC credit for a out of country remote credit should openly be called out. This may not stop many of them but atleast they will known we know their mode of operation. I do hope that those calling out stations have darn good evidence and not doing it as a personal vendetta. Ray, N6VR On Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 11:59 AM Greg - ZL3IX wrote: Guys need to be more discriminatory when discussing remote operation. I use a remote installation, and have for years, but I abide by the DXCC rules which state that the Tx and Rx antennas have to be within 500 m of each other. Furthermore, this installation I designed and built myself, and I maintain myself, with great effort. This practice should NOT be equated with the practice of using a random Rx installation on the Net, probably not even in the same country as the operator using it. 73, Greg, ZL3IX On 2019-10-13 07:34, WW3S wrote: Good for you Rogeryou always hear about hams using remotes to work the dx, but they don’t usually say much when the dx uses a remote to hear them Sent from my iPad On Oct 12, 2019, at 1:21 PM, Roger D Johnson wrote: There is no way an organization such as the ARRL can prevent cheating in the DXCC program. It has to depend on the honesty of the hams involved. Yes..some people will cheat but I can't see how they can derive any satisfaction from that. Last year I worked VU2GSM on Top Band. I heard rumors that Kanti used remote receiving locations and, when asked, he freely admitted it. He's in my log but I didn't claim credit for that contact. YMMV! 73, Roger N1RJ _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65
As an electrical engineer you should realize that your rig _also_ turns otherwise undetected signals into something you can hear. Open the window, hearing any DX? - Original Message - From: To: Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2017 11:47 PM Subject: Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 Promised myself I'd stay out of this, but it's getting ridiculousComments like "I worked 20 new ones on 160, and I never heard any of them!". Wow! That's amazing...I personally can't find any satisfaction in claiming a contact I never heard. I never have...Yes, the digi modes allow easier qso's that would never have been made, but let's face it, you never made those contacts, your computer & it's software did. Any resulting "Awards" should be made out to your computer. Meteor scatter used to be very popular, actually getting to hear the excited voices of those you worked was thrilling. One m/s qso of mine was with a yl from the Carolinas with a most delightful Southern accent...hard to duplicate with digi modes. I don't know anyone who works or talks about rocks anymoreno challenge. Same with eme, which I pulled the plug on when it was no longer a challenge. How many new eme operators have heard their own voices coming back from the moon? I migrated to TopBand as one of the last real challenges left I find the litany of excuses about why one has to go to digital means on 160 to be feeble at best." My rig can't cut it, I don't have the antennas, I can't copy code (one of the real elephants in the room!), my location isn't on the coast where it's easy, etc, etc". There are MANY dxers operating successfully on small lots, and there are a myriad of clever, small receiving antennas out there. How about the gentleman on the left coast who worked DXCC on 160 from his mobile!! (without digital modes). My TopBand rig is quite modest, no towers or rotors. The TX antennas are wires hanging from trees with no more than 50' vertical rise. The 16 radials under each are only 48' long. Desperately needing a new rig, I bought the very cheapest HF transceiver on the market (no DSP, keyer, antenna tuner, etc). My location in Upper Michigan is not near either coast for "easy" dx, but is unfortunately close to the auroral oval. My amp was a non-working "gift" that doesn't run full power. However, I have 233 countries & 37 zones confirmed on 160. I have personally HEARD every qso made & have decoded them as necessary, in my HEAD. I don't spot myself or arrange skedsI don't have a computer in the shack. If ham radio was to go all digital, I would walk away from itNot because I'm a curmudgeon, but simply because the challenge and resulting thrills would be gone. Lest you think I am a ignorant technophobe, I am a degreed electrical engineer and have been a ham for over 60 years. I have a fine computer & am on it actively every daybut I never pretend that it's ham radio. I realize from the comment below that it's rather boring to work digi modes, but I suspect that help is on the wayI am truly surprised that no one has produced an "app" that will take the remaining work out of it. You would simply download the app, check the appropriate boxes (DXCC, WAS, WAZ), select the desired bands, and turn it loose 24 hours a day. It would make all the contacts for you (with similar robo-stations) and send you a text or email when it's through. Heck, it could even apply for your desired awards, and then wake up your printer to print your award certificate out! It would then send another message to pick up your awardHow truly exciting that would be. Brian K8BHZ _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: A "valid" QSO????
FWIW LOTW only looks for callsign, date, time and mode. Nothing else is needed for a confirmation. All other information is collected from your station location information in the TQSL software. This includes state, dxcc, county, grid, zone, whatever. 73 Dave NZ3M On 12/27/2015 9:33 AM, James Rodenkirch wrote: Well, that squares up with what I was told...wonder about the WAS award From: n...@comcast.net Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2015 7:28 AM To: James Rodenkirch Cc: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: A "valid" QSO For DXCC purposes a signal report is not required. In submitting a contact for credit only the call signs of the two stations, DXCC entity, time, date and mode are required. I realized this is only for one award but it is a big one. Best, Steve, NN4T From: "James Rodenkirch" To: w...@w5zn.org Cc: "Top Band Contesting" Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2015 8:21:05 AM Subject: Re: Topband: A "valid" QSO I believe the gentlemen I conversed with would qualify as holding a position, Joel. I always understood a valid QSO to include receiving the otherham's call sign and the RST but both gentlemen stated an RST wasn't required...think I'lln go back and ask the question again... By the bye - I am referring to a every day, garden variety QSO - not a contest-related Q. From: Joel Harrison Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2015 5:19 AM To: James Rodenkirch Cc: Top Band Contesting Subject: Re: Topband: A "valid" QSO I would be very interested to know "who" at ARRL HQ told you than and holds that position! Is it someone in a position to render an "ARRL position"? I have always been told, have understood and followed the same position Jim has so I'm just curious if there was a "change" somewhere along the way when I may have been taking a nap. I guess exchange and acknowledgement of callsigns constitutes an "exchange of data". Lots of bad storms and heavy QRN here in Arkansas so not much Stew consumption this year. 73 Joel W5ZN Jim K9YC wrote, "A valid contact is the exchange of callsigns and one additional piece of information, followed by acknowledgement by both stations. When running QRP at the limits of propagation, that exchange can take a while." Where would one find official documentation to support that posit? I see some verbiage stating that in some sort of ARRL operating manual written by Mark Wilson, Jimis that your "source of support"? I've ntalked to ARRL staff who contend one doesn't need anything other than the exchange of call signs soI'm just "axin'"!! 72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband www.w5zn.org _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Yikes
The K1N website says... QSL via N2OO: Navassa 2015 DXpedition c/o Bob N2OO PO Box 345 Tuckerton NJ 08087 "QSL methods: U.S.A. Direct: Minimum S.A.S.E. (Self-Addressed Stamped Envelope) World Direct: S.A.E. (Self-Addressed Envelope) plus minimum $2 or 1 IRC OQRS Direct and bureau: via CLUBLOG Regular Bureau: via N2OO c/o the W2 QSL Bureau LOTW: Sooner rather than later." 73 Dave NZ3M On 2/19/2015 8:46 PM, Doug Renwick wrote: K1N club log is now up. First QSO costs $6.00 USD. That's got to be the most expensive I have seen. Anyone top that one. I am not complaining! Doug "There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual or lawyer could believe them." - George Orwell, 1984 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: Missing K1N 160m QSO records just uploaded to Clublog
Mine is missing from 2/4 @ 1121z. :-( Hope it wasn't a pirate. Op this morning was saying "no dupes" 73 Dave NZ3M On 2/6/2015 1:01 PM, Ronald Gorski wrote: Many 160m Q's from 4 Feb still missing from upload made a few minutes ago. Ron N9AU -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd Berg N9LB Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 11:41 AM To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Missing K1N 160m QSO records just uploaded to Clublog All, They just uploaded the missing K1N 160m QSO records to Clublog site a few minutes ago. ~ 7000 entries! ... including my missing 160m QSO :-) 73 Lloyd - N9LB _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
The queue is currently almost 10 days behind. You can track it here http://www.arrl.org/logbook-queue-status Everyone keeps uploading over and over and over because they don't see their QSO's, which likely is compounding the problem to massive levels. They have a new server on order but 6 weeks out I believe. Dave NZ3M On 12/18/2012 3:41 PM, herbs wrote: After several frustrating weeks of trying to figure out why my ARRL LOTW uploads were not registering I decided to contact the company. It seems they are back logged beyond comprehension. Not even the most recent DX-Peditions who have uploaded all there logs are showing up. As a result confirmations will not show either. I certainly hope that some DX-ers don't get bumped from the Honor Roll because of this slow down in accreditation. LOTW used to be very fast and now it is so slow to almost not be worth the money charged for the service. I complained in past posts about the lack of fairness in the ARRL 160 Meter Contest for not treating the U.S. Territories as DX, no not even KP1 or KP5, none. But with the ARRL 10 Meter contest that followed, stations located in the U.S. Territories are indeed DX as it should be. Why in the world won't anyone on the CAC or at HQ realize that there is no acceptable reason for not correcting this problem. or if there is they aren't saying. I struggle to find out who is responsible for prohibiting this correction. HQ tells me to write the CAC members and the CAC members tell me they have no power to do anything unless they are "tasked" by those in command at HQ. I see how easy it was to give Ontario more sections and even in the ARRL 10 Meter Contest you get multipliers by working "Mexican" states that nobody knows about, that some how found relevance...I don't know how this is logically done but someone must have the way to make things happen at HQ. I presume that there are some fundemental democratic principles that would allow for debate fo this topic so I can make my case on behalf of the much malighed U.S. Territories in the structure of this contest's rules. If you know what to do. Please let me know. 73, Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: HK0NA Logs
And that is Jan 21st On 1/13/2012 4:04 PM, Augie "Gus" Hansen wrote: > On 1/13/2012 1:51 PM, Eddy Swynar wrote: >> Hi Guys, >> >> Is it just me here, or is there some sort of a glitch with the HK0NA on-line >> logs...? >From the HK0NA "Latest News" entry for 12 Jan 2012, > > "We intend to upload the HK0NA logs to ClubLog soon after the > arrival of the main operating team. Don't bother checking the "Log > Online" until then." > > Gus Hansen > KB0YH > > _______ > UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK > > -- Dave Clouser. www.nz3m.com ...www.6MetersOnline.com ___ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
