Re: Topband: Real World logging issues
After being DX many times, mistakes happen. About 1/2 took place prior to online logs. For my operations this has been a very tiny issue. My choice before online logs was that I would wait for a period of time to see if the station in the log actually requested a QSL. I might have even reached out to ask. Hey did you work me on at V47M. If so, when? This is a hobby. We should strive for perfection but that is impossible. My goal is to give credit to the station I actually worked. I have had numerous people attempt to phish a contact with vague log data. Those requests are quickly denied. Weird stuff happens. I have worked someone and then W1MU has worked them right after me or vise versa. That has happened on enough occasions that it comes to mind quickly. The older I get the easier it is to drop a dit on CW. I have had a few duh moments just looking at the log and knowing that what I typed was not what I heard. Stuff happens. I never answer any emails about contacts during a contest or look at offline data etc. I do very very log massaging other than checking on notes that were taken during the contest and making the appropriate corrections immediately after the contest if they could not be made during. Are most people cheating, nope. Are there cheaters. You bet. W0MU On 11/30/2023 1:45 PM, w3...@roadrunner.com wrote: Am enjoying comments from DXers about real world/160m/marginal copy, and can only imagine the challenges faced. My kudos to you for making the valiant effort! One obvious but simple check an op can do, after finding HIS call is not in the DX's log, is to check whether that call is in the FCC database. A few years back, I had a qso declared NIL and when I checked the call sign that "took my place," I found it was not a listed call sign - so how could it be a valid qso? The QSL manager accepted my argument that it had to be me, and I picked up a new DX entity- Band. ( his log was off by one letter...an "S" instead of a "H," no less.) Bob, W3HKK PS While 160 has been more often poor than good here of late, the first night of the CQWWDX-CW test was excellent into EU, around their SR. It was such a pleasant surprise I stayed on the band for several hours and "mined" the band for new signals that would pop up every few minutes! PPS George, sorry I missed you at K8R. Didnt realize you were there til afterwards. PPSS 4W8X - great effort in the CQWW-CW test! Terrific sigs on 10m! Thanks for the qsos ( W3HKK-W8TNX-WW8OH-W8FD) and pulling me thru the massive pile ups! -From: topband-requ...@contesting.com To: topband@contesting.com Cc: Sent: Thursday November 30 2023 12:00:45PM Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 251, Issue 31 Send Topband mailing list submissions to topband@contesting.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband /> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to topband-requ...@contesting.com You can reach the person managing the list at topband-ow...@contesting.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Timor Leste report #10 (Dietmar Kasper) 2. Re: Timor Leste report #10 (GEORGE WALLNER) -- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 04:39:54 +0100 From: Dietmar Kasper To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Timor Leste report #10 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Dear Topbanders 90% of the equipment is in the container. We still have 2 1/2 stations running (one without amp in phone only) the 160m antennas and beverages are still up and some simple wire verticals have been added to continue beeing QRV the next days and nights. It seems we are in rain season now. No afternoon without close thunderstorms and all the noise on the bands. Propagation is still poor however last night was a short window around 12:30 to work a few lucky W4?s. In the thunderstorm noise call sign logging is guessing. I am sure that I am not almost right with the call. I called a W4 for about 5 minutes and thought it was K4SV. At the end I was logging K4SV but I had the feeling that this station was not happy with that call and I may have it wrong ... as much as you can hear in the crashes.. (QSO interpretation later) When it comes to the question if a QSO is a QSO or not there is no unique standard. Thanks to all for discussing the question about FT contacts that must be initiated by an operator. I feel that the discussion is still open and a solution accepted by the majority of topbanders is not there so far. It was clearly indicated that the station must be observed during the contacts so automated contacts do not count for DXCC. Still open is if the contacts must be initiated by the ope
Re: Topband: Real World logging issues
Am enjoying comments from DXers about real world/160m/marginal copy, and can only imagine the challenges faced. My kudos to you for making the valiant effort! One obvious but simple check an op can do, after finding HIS call is not in the DX's log, is to check whether that call is in the FCC database. A few years back, I had a qso declared NIL and when I checked the call sign that "took my place," I found it was not a listed call sign - so how could it be a valid qso? The QSL manager accepted my argument that it had to be me, and I picked up a new DX entity- Band. ( his log was off by one letter...an "S" instead of a "H," no less.) Bob, W3HKK PS While 160 has been more often poor than good here of late, the first night of the CQWWDX-CW test was excellent into EU, around their SR. It was such a pleasant surprise I stayed on the band for several hours and "mined" the band for new signals that would pop up every few minutes! PPS George, sorry I missed you at K8R. Didnt realize you were there til afterwards. PPSS 4W8X - great effort in the CQWW-CW test! Terrific sigs on 10m! Thanks for the qsos ( W3HKK-W8TNX-WW8OH-W8FD) and pulling me thru the massive pile ups! -From: topband-requ...@contesting.com To: topband@contesting.com Cc: Sent: Thursday November 30 2023 12:00:45PM Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 251, Issue 31 Send Topband mailing list submissions to topband@contesting.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband /> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to topband-requ...@contesting.com You can reach the person managing the list at topband-ow...@contesting.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Timor Leste report #10 (Dietmar Kasper) 2. Re: Timor Leste report #10 (GEORGE WALLNER) -- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 04:39:54 +0100 From: Dietmar Kasper To: topband@contesting.com Subject: Topband: Timor Leste report #10 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Dear Topbanders 90% of the equipment is in the container. We still have 2 1/2 stations running (one without amp in phone only) the 160m antennas and beverages are still up and some simple wire verticals have been added to continue beeing QRV the next days and nights. It seems we are in rain season now. No afternoon without close thunderstorms and all the noise on the bands. Propagation is still poor however last night was a short window around 12:30 to work a few lucky W4?s. In the thunderstorm noise call sign logging is guessing. I am sure that I am not almost right with the call. I called a W4 for about 5 minutes and thought it was K4SV. At the end I was logging K4SV but I had the feeling that this station was not happy with that call and I may have it wrong ... as much as you can hear in the crashes.. (QSO interpretation later) When it comes to the question if a QSO is a QSO or not there is no unique standard. Thanks to all for discussing the question about FT contacts that must be initiated by an operator. I feel that the discussion is still open and a solution accepted by the majority of topbanders is not there so far. It was clearly indicated that the station must be observed during the contacts so automated contacts do not count for DXCC. Still open is if the contacts must be initiated by the operator or just by software. Some said it is OK that the operator is still watching that everything goes well. In my opinion an operator (and ARRL clearly uses the word OPERATOR) is only an operator if HE OPERATES, means, a visitor cannot be an operator by just watching the traffic. So my personal conclusion is that every contact MUST BE INITIATED by an operator MANUALLY - like in old days before MSHV software. I have the feeling that this cn start a revolution in DXpeditions of today because I FEEL AND KNOW that most DXpeds are running FT contacts unintended and uninitiated however nobody has prove of it as long as the DXped guys state that they are work in strict order of DXCC rules - do they ? what do you think :-) ? Also in CW mode its interesting to define if a QSO is a QSO. A QSO is not just happen that one operator calls and the DXped picks him up and give him a report. Station must hear that the call was given correct and the report is for him and he has to answer without delay. Even then QSO is not sure as long as both partners have not confirmed the contact by TU. Very often on topband QSB has prevented a QSO to finish. However this is a hobby and rules give room for interpretation. One station told me that I worked him 3 times but logged his call wrong so he does not define this contacts as good He wrote: "at the 3rd time you came close to my call but it still was wron
