Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Auto log option

Expand Messages
  • BrianW
    I agree with you there Tim I think we have to remember that Jose kindly donated this program to the Ham fraternity as a result of a request by G0NBD,
    Message 1 of 8 , Feb 1, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      I agree with you there Tim

      I think we have to remember that Jose kindly donated this program to the Ham fraternity as a result of a request by G0NBD, presumably as a straight Beacon mode/ propagation tool, and was not initially intended to be a 'QSO' mode as such.

      Like any new program, it's creator,ie Jose, will naturally add new facilities as they come to mind, or by further request if possible.

      Saying that, even I with my modest knowledge of all things computer/data related, can see there are limitations as regards 'having a qso' in the usually accepted sense with Opera.

      I think maybe we can take life too seriously sometimes, and perhaps expect Jose to come up with instant perfection.

      The way I see it. I transmit a beacon that is hopefully received by someone else. If they do give a possitive report, in this case over the internet, I am pleased to log the latest distance record.

      If I have also received the same station and sent it a report, then I record it as 'A two way contact'. I'm not bothered about calling it a qso as such, as I'm quite satisfied to have made it both ways so to speak. Simple as that. No splitting hairs Hi!.

      If I wanted a QSO in the generally accepted sense, I have the option of switching to at least JT65-HF, or maybe PSK, as Tim suggests.

      I must say, now the auto upload is working fine, I love it. According to HRD, and HAM logs, my Opera loggings are called QSO's. Well who am I to argue. I'll buy that Hi!

      To me Ham Radio is about having fun. And not to be what is called, in model railway circles, 'A rivet counter' Hi!

      For those outside of that particular hobby, when most people accept a model as 'perfect' in their eyes, there's always the person who insists the tender, for instance, has the correct number of rivets modelled. Said people will no doubt reject my view as irrelevant.

      No problem. As Ronnie Corbett would say in 'The Frost Report' sketch. 'I know my place' Hi!

      Cheers!,
      Brian






      --- In O_P_E_R_A_@yahoogroups.com, vk4yeh@... wrote:
      >
      > There has been some debate on the WSPR group and website as to whether recoding and being recorded in beacon mode is actually a QSO. I reserve judgement as I believe it depends what information is exchanged and how "frequently" there is two way contact. In the case of WSPR and OPERA, I err towards saying that 2 way contact is not a QSO as most modes would understand it - it is certainly not the same as a QSO in JT65-HF or PSK for example.
      >
      > Having said that, if someone logs me as a QSO on e-QSL for example, I'll respond in kind as I think the jury is still out on these new modes.
      >
      > My 2c worth to the debate .......
      >
      > Tim
      >
      > --- In O_P_E_R_A_@yahoogroups.com, "BrianW" <jillxbrian@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Hi all. Wonder if anyone has this new option of Auto Log in use yet (Ver1.2.1)
      > >
      > > I have it checked, but even though I have had contact both ways (HA2RD)I can't see anything happening. I thought maybe at least a warning or different colour would show. Or maybe even an auto upload to HAM.eu for instance
      > >
      > > Do I have to click callsign If I happen spot a two way link, then 'ADIF' which brings up the qso box with upload options. Then upload qso to HAM.eu myself for instance.
      > >
      > > If so how do I enter a date in the supplied box, as I'm not allowed to enter anything at the moment.
      > >
      > > If it did mangage it, however, would this contitute a 'QSO' acceptable to HAM.eu or HAMLOG.net?
      > >
      > > Clicking 'qsos' on the tool bar, i see a couple of stations 'Have been sent'. Any idea where I've sent'em Hi! I've checked both online log books and they're not there.
      > >
      > > All probably quite simple to you guys, but I going a bit scenic in my old age Hi!
      > >
      > > Cheers all!
      > > Brian
      > >
      >
    • martin_ehrenfried
      Hi All, I d agree and say that an Opera exchange does not constitute a valid QSO. It s a beaconing system. This has been discussed previously on this group
      Message 2 of 8 , Feb 1, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi All,

        I'd agree and say that an Opera exchange does not constitute a valid QSO. It's a beaconing system.

        This has been discussed previously on this group

        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/O_P_E_R_A_/message/224

        And I don't think that any of the new enhancements change this.

        JT-65 is currently about the only weak signal QSO mode which uses the very minimum amount of information exchange over the air, in order to validate a contact.

        Regards,

        Martin - G8JNJ

        www.g8jnj.webs.com

        --- In O_P_E_R_A_@yahoogroups.com, "BrianW" <jillxbrian@...> wrote:
        >
        > I agree with you there Tim
        >
        > I think we have to remember that Jose kindly donated this program to the Ham fraternity as a result of a request by G0NBD, presumably as a straight Beacon mode/ propagation tool, and was not initially intended to be a 'QSO' mode as such.
        >
        > Like any new program, it's creator,ie Jose, will naturally add new facilities as they come to mind, or by further request if possible.
        >
        > Saying that, even I with my modest knowledge of all things computer/data related, can see there are limitations as regards 'having a qso' in the usually accepted sense with Opera.
        >
        > I think maybe we can take life too seriously sometimes, and perhaps expect Jose to come up with instant perfection.
        >
        > The way I see it. I transmit a beacon that is hopefully received by someone else. If they do give a possitive report, in this case over the internet, I am pleased to log the latest distance record.
        >
        > If I have also received the same station and sent it a report, then I record it as 'A two way contact'. I'm not bothered about calling it a qso as such, as I'm quite satisfied to have made it both ways so to speak. Simple as that. No splitting hairs Hi!.
        >
        > If I wanted a QSO in the generally accepted sense, I have the option of switching to at least JT65-HF, or maybe PSK, as Tim suggests.
        >
        > I must say, now the auto upload is working fine, I love it. According to HRD, and HAM logs, my Opera loggings are called QSO's. Well who am I to argue. I'll buy that Hi!
        >
        > To me Ham Radio is about having fun. And not to be what is called, in model railway circles, 'A rivet counter' Hi!
        >
        > For those outside of that particular hobby, when most people accept a model as 'perfect' in their eyes, there's always the person who insists the tender, for instance, has the correct number of rivets modelled. Said people will no doubt reject my view as irrelevant.
        >
        > No problem. As Ronnie Corbett would say in 'The Frost Report' sketch. 'I know my place' Hi!
        >
        > Cheers!,
        > Brian
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In O_P_E_R_A_@yahoogroups.com, vk4yeh@ wrote:
        > >
        > > There has been some debate on the WSPR group and website as to whether recoding and being recorded in beacon mode is actually a QSO. I reserve judgement as I believe it depends what information is exchanged and how "frequently" there is two way contact. In the case of WSPR and OPERA, I err towards saying that 2 way contact is not a QSO as most modes would understand it - it is certainly not the same as a QSO in JT65-HF or PSK for example.
        > >
        > > Having said that, if someone logs me as a QSO on e-QSL for example, I'll respond in kind as I think the jury is still out on these new modes.
        > >
        > > My 2c worth to the debate .......
        > >
        > > Tim
        > >
        > > --- In O_P_E_R_A_@yahoogroups.com, "BrianW" <jillxbrian@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Hi all. Wonder if anyone has this new option of Auto Log in use yet (Ver1.2.1)
        > > >
        > > > I have it checked, but even though I have had contact both ways (HA2RD)I can't see anything happening. I thought maybe at least a warning or different colour would show. Or maybe even an auto upload to HAM.eu for instance
        > > >
        > > > Do I have to click callsign If I happen spot a two way link, then 'ADIF' which brings up the qso box with upload options. Then upload qso to HAM.eu myself for instance.
        > > >
        > > > If so how do I enter a date in the supplied box, as I'm not allowed to enter anything at the moment.
        > > >
        > > > If it did mangage it, however, would this contitute a 'QSO' acceptable to HAM.eu or HAMLOG.net?
        > > >
        > > > Clicking 'qsos' on the tool bar, i see a couple of stations 'Have been sent'. Any idea where I've sent'em Hi! I've checked both online log books and they're not there.
        > > >
        > > > All probably quite simple to you guys, but I going a bit scenic in my old age Hi!
        > > >
        > > > Cheers all!
        > > > Brian
        > > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.