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

RE: [wsjtgroup] New modes for RH ??

Expand Messages
  • Randy Tipton
    Bruce, I agree with you, FSK441 this week during the Random Hour to allow time for everyone to discover there is a new mode out. After everyone becomes
    Message 1 of 7 , Mar 4, 2004

      Bruce, I agree with you, FSK441 this week during the Random Hour to allow time for everyone to discover there is a new mode out.

      After everyone becomes familiar with the FSK441C & FSK441B I think we should consider changing to them.

       

      If we swap too soon, some may not know what is happening when there FSK441A does not decode and pings

      sound strange.

       

      Having said that, I encourage everyone to provide Joe with feedback of their experiences with the new version / modes.

       

      Bruce good luck in the mobile / rover I will be looking for your pings Saturday & Sunday.

       

      Tip

      WA5UFH

       

       

       

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Bruce Brackin [mailto:bbrackin@...]
      Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 1:46 PM
      To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [wsjtgroup] New modes for RH ??

       

      OK, now what do you suggest we try for RH modes? - hi!.  I'd say we stay
      with original FSK441A for time being and most get use to the B and  C
      modes.   FSK441C seems to run OK on old laptop in truck so we'll
      probably phase over to it for mobile/rover runs.  Joe ideas (and
      implementation of them) continues to amaze me!

      BTW - Headed to TN and Pickwick Lake in southeastern tip of EM55 for
      weekend and be in 53 and 54 mid/late afternoon tomorrow (Fri).  Wife in
      retreat and in meetings so I plan on being on RH Sat morning from lodge
      parking lot or high spot nearby.  Probably will have little, if any
      internet access from there for RH postings.  I'm looking at map and
      picking route for return trip Sunday through EM65 and 64 before cutting
      back into 54.  Group breaks up midmorning and Memphis crowd (including
      wife) with head out by bus before lunch and I'll probably start back
      home about noon.

      Bruce

      130701 22.2  300  5  3   66     IX WA5UFH N5SIX
      WA5                          
      130900 21.8  480  5  3   78     N5SIX WA5UFH N5SIX WA5UFH
      N5SIX              
      130900 27.3  200  3  0   71     N5SIX
      WA5UFH                                 
      131000  6.5   20  2 -2   82
      R27                                              
      131000  6.6   20  3  0   86
      R27                                              
      131000 27.9   20  2 -2   85
      R27                                              
      131000 28.0   20  1 -4   86
      R27                                              
      131200 26.7   20  3  0   70
      73                                               
      131200 26.8   20  2 -3   83 73   

      I think for given ping, C gives higher db reading than A.





      To unsubscribe, send an email to:
      wsjtgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      Activity Periods http://www.qsl.net/wa5ufh/WSJTGROUP/WSJTGROUP.htm



    • Jon W0AMT
      I like the way the December 2003 North American Meteor Scatter Contest rules were setup. I think that making the rules the same for Spring 2004 Contest would
      Message 2 of 7 , Mar 4, 2004
        I like the way the December 2003 North American Meteor Scatter Contest rules
        were setup. I think that making the rules the same for Spring 2004 Contest
        would be good. I always hope for more random qso's.

        73, Jon
        W0AMT
      • Mike Hasselbeck
        I agree with Jon - the December contest rules were excellent. Only wish more stations would try to work randoms during the designated windows. Mike WB2FKO
        Message 3 of 7 , Mar 4, 2004
          I agree with Jon - the December contest rules were excellent. Only wish more
          stations would try to work randoms during the designated windows.

          Mike WB2FKO

          Jon W0AMT <w0amt@...> said:

          > I like the way the December 2003 North American Meteor Scatter Contest rules
          > were setup. I think that making the rules the same for Spring 2004 Contest
          > would be good. I always hope for more random qso's.
          >
          > 73, Jon
          > W0AMT
          >
        • Brad Pioveson W9FX
          Joe and all: First, thanks for the sponsorship of and the spiffy certificate I received for my activity in the Dec. 2003 event. It graces the shack wall as I
          Message 4 of 7 , Mar 5, 2004
            Joe and all:

            First, thanks for the sponsorship of and the spiffy certificate I received
            for my activity in the Dec. 2003 event. It graces the shack wall as I type
            this. Your request for comments re: the 2004 rules has reminded me of my
            experiences during the recent event. My comments follow:

            For my part, the Dec. 2003 rules were acceptable -- save for the 'random
            QSO' rule - which, in my view, is fatally flawed, towit:

            "Random QSOs. . .must originate during the random windows."

            Huh? OK...what's a 'random window?' Back to the Rules. Here 'tis:

            "The first 30 minutes of each even-numbered UTC hour (00, 02, 04, .) are
            designated as "Random
            Windows" in which non-scheduled QSOs are strongly encouraged. . ."

            There were several occasions during the December event when I could have
            easily tail-ended stations completing skeds and added to my score, the
            scores of other entrants -- and the overall event activity, but, the clock
            wasn't in agreement. The time was not ' . . .the first 30 minutes of an
            even number UTC hour.' Too bad! No random QSO's allowed! Now, the only
            reason to work these folks was to add to my contest score. All of the
            stations I heard were old friends whom I've worked, in most cases, many
            times. Translation: I don't need the grid, state, or country. If I could
            not work them and add their points and multipliers to my contest score, the
            alternative - in the absence of a sked (or 'net assistance) during the
            'QSO's disallowed' hours - was to turn the rig off and go do something else.
            That is exactly what I did.

            Why should random QSO's, for the purpose of scoring, only be allowed during
            the first half of even numbered hours? What logical thought process led to
            that conclusion? If I hear K2TXB working K9KNW (as the result of a sked, or
            not -- no matter to me!) and I choose to tail end Russ, why should it matter
            what time it is? Should I run a timer on the receive attenuator so 30 dB of
            signal degradation is kicked in and I hear him less well at 31 minutes past
            the even numbered hours - or, just shut the rig off, as I did in December?
            This is, to my recollection, the only radio operating event that I've ever
            known of that actually *discouraged* event activity. I believe this is a
            self defeating point. If the Dec. 2003 rules stand, I suggest the wording
            of the definition of 'Random Windows' be reworked to eliminate the 'strongly
            encouraged' language, in favor of, ". . .all times outside of 'Random
            Windows' are those times during which non-scheduled QSO's are strongly
            discouraged."

            If the intended purpose of this rule was to make random QSO's easier for
            newbies, I applaud the effort, if not the result. If y'all wish to
            encourage the 'random window' concept, publish as many times, frequencies,
            and tail-ending schemes as the 'net and your ISP will allow. Please,
            however, do not discourage contest activity simply based upon an arbitrarily
            arrived at timing standard.

            73, Brad, W9FX
          • Mike Hasselbeck
            http://www.canada.com/calgary/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=229bcf98-ae28-497c-a1c1-0d838c277148
            Message 5 of 7 , Mar 23, 2004
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.