|
something I don't understand
is how people can expect to work FT5XO on CW when they can't copy Morse.
Fired up on 40m this evening, but sat the paddle aside & gave up on working them (for now) when I found it simply totally impossible to figure out where the FT5 was listening. The offending calls below are NOT fake; while I don't guarantee I copied them all right, I'm pretty sure the operators appearing after "Pileup:" below really are lids. FT5XO: KC4AUF 5NN Pileup: W3QY W3QY KI0F KI0F FT5XO: K2CI 5NN Pileup: K2FU K2FU FT5XO: VE7XF 5NN Pileup: AA9PB AA9PB FT5XO: WX2K 5NN Pileup: K1UO K1UO FT5XO: K7 UP LID Pileup: VE3XB VE3XB FT5XO: N9IW 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K8IW 5NN Pileup: K3PA K3PA FT5XO: UP LIDJAQ 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K9NA 5NN Pileup: NS1L NS1L OK, at least in the second case, the guy who called had more than one letter in common with who FT5XO came back to..... There are plenty more guilty parties out there. It was difficult to collect the incriminating evidence, as before one "I don't recognize my own call!" lid could finish sending his call, another one would call over the top of him. Figuring out where the guy FT5XO actually came back to was is simply impossible in this mess. I DX for fun -- this kind of crap isn't. Dialed down to 1510 in the BCB & got my new one down there... Hint to DXers: IF YOU CAN'T COPY CODE, DON'T BOTHER TRYING TO WORK DX ON CW! That's what SSB and RTTY are for... -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com (will try the FT5 later in the week, when hopefully I can be on past some of these lids' bedtimes...) |
As you know by the 2 nd or 3rd day from the end of the dxpedition they are
typically begging for q's on al lmodes..... I need them for #314 but I'm waiting for when it will be fun to work them and not a collage of dx cops, whistlers, carrier throwers, and frequency lords. As I get older busting pileups has revealed itself to me as the ego trip it has really been all along. I have a kw but I don't like the atmosphere till towards the end of the entire operation when I can work them in a relaxed environment and actually have a qso..gee what a novel idea!!! -- Charlie Ham Radio - AD5TH www.ad5th.com Live Blues Music www.492acousticblues.com "Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message ... is how people can expect to work FT5XO on CW when they can't copy Morse. Fired up on 40m this evening, but sat the paddle aside & gave up on working them (for now) when I found it simply totally impossible to figure out where the FT5 was listening. The offending calls below are NOT fake; while I don't guarantee I copied them all right, I'm pretty sure the operators appearing after "Pileup:" below really are lids. FT5XO: KC4AUF 5NN Pileup: W3QY W3QY KI0F KI0F FT5XO: K2CI 5NN Pileup: K2FU K2FU FT5XO: VE7XF 5NN Pileup: AA9PB AA9PB FT5XO: WX2K 5NN Pileup: K1UO K1UO FT5XO: K7 UP LID Pileup: VE3XB VE3XB FT5XO: N9IW 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K8IW 5NN Pileup: K3PA K3PA FT5XO: UP LIDJAQ 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K9NA 5NN Pileup: NS1L NS1L OK, at least in the second case, the guy who called had more than one letter in common with who FT5XO came back to..... There are plenty more guilty parties out there. It was difficult to collect the incriminating evidence, as before one "I don't recognize my own call!" lid could finish sending his call, another one would call over the top of him. Figuring out where the guy FT5XO actually came back to was is simply impossible in this mess. I DX for fun -- this kind of crap isn't. Dialed down to 1510 in the BCB & got my new one down there... Hint to DXers: IF YOU CAN'T COPY CODE, DON'T BOTHER TRYING TO WORK DX ON CW! That's what SSB and RTTY are for... -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com (will try the FT5 later in the week, when hopefully I can be on past some of these lids' bedtimes...) |
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 02:15:52 GMT, Doug Smith W9WI
wrote: is how people can expect to work FT5XO on CW when they can't copy Morse. Fired up on 40m this evening, but sat the paddle aside & gave up on working them (for now) when I found it simply totally impossible to figure out where the FT5 was listening. The offending calls below are NOT fake; while I don't guarantee I copied them all right, I'm pretty sure the operators appearing after "Pileup:" below really are lids. FT5XO: KC4AUF 5NN Pileup: W3QY W3QY KI0F KI0F FT5XO: K2CI 5NN Pileup: K2FU K2FU FT5XO: VE7XF 5NN Pileup: AA9PB AA9PB FT5XO: WX2K 5NN Pileup: K1UO K1UO FT5XO: K7 UP LID Pileup: VE3XB VE3XB FT5XO: N9IW 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K8IW 5NN Pileup: K3PA K3PA FT5XO: UP LIDJAQ 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K9NA 5NN Pileup: NS1L NS1L OK, at least in the second case, the guy who called had more than one letter in common with who FT5XO came back to..... There are plenty more guilty parties out there. It was difficult to collect the incriminating evidence, as before one "I don't recognize my own call!" lid could finish sending his call, another one would call over the top of him. Figuring out where the guy FT5XO actually came back to was is simply impossible in this mess. I DX for fun -- this kind of crap isn't. Dialed down to 1510 in the BCB & got my new one down there... Hint to DXers: IF YOU CAN'T COPY CODE, DON'T BOTHER TRYING TO WORK DX ON CW! That's what SSB and RTTY are for... It's no better on SSB. For example the aforementioned FT5WJ this morning calls on 14.278 (I still don't understand this, Charlie's "help" notwithstanding) and says that he's listening 5 to 15 up. He's only about 44 here but I can understand this quite nicely. The exact same thing happens. He says, WX0XX and several hundred stations keep right on giving their calls, often while he's transmitting. If WX0XX actually makes a QSO everyone who heard him pile on his freq. In the meantime, FT5WJ, if anyone bothered to listen for a few minutes, is now listening on another frequency. A bit of listening instead of a lot of calling and this was easy to figure. I called once up 15 after he worked someone up 10 and he came right back with a 59. I remember an expedition from a few years ago (not the call just the event) where the op, transmitting on 14.195, said, "Listening 5 to 20 up....(mob starts calling)... and 14.190." Worked him on the first call on 14.190. |
Wes the real answer to your dx conundrum is that there are just so few ops
that even begin to approach 1/10th the competency level you have. Funny...I thought the true fruition of greatness in anything was a deeper true humility...you as the exception to that have proved the rule ..TY Wes... -- Charlie "Wes Stewart" wrote in message ... On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 02:15:52 GMT, Doug Smith W9WI wrote: is how people can expect to work FT5XO on CW when they can't copy Morse. Fired up on 40m this evening, but sat the paddle aside & gave up on working them (for now) when I found it simply totally impossible to figure out where the FT5 was listening. The offending calls below are NOT fake; while I don't guarantee I copied them all right, I'm pretty sure the operators appearing after "Pileup:" below really are lids. FT5XO: KC4AUF 5NN Pileup: W3QY W3QY KI0F KI0F FT5XO: K2CI 5NN Pileup: K2FU K2FU FT5XO: VE7XF 5NN Pileup: AA9PB AA9PB FT5XO: WX2K 5NN Pileup: K1UO K1UO FT5XO: K7 UP LID Pileup: VE3XB VE3XB FT5XO: N9IW 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K8IW 5NN Pileup: K3PA K3PA FT5XO: UP LIDJAQ 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K9NA 5NN Pileup: NS1L NS1L OK, at least in the second case, the guy who called had more than one letter in common with who FT5XO came back to..... There are plenty more guilty parties out there. It was difficult to collect the incriminating evidence, as before one "I don't recognize my own call!" lid could finish sending his call, another one would call over the top of him. Figuring out where the guy FT5XO actually came back to was is simply impossible in this mess. I DX for fun -- this kind of crap isn't. Dialed down to 1510 in the BCB & got my new one down there... Hint to DXers: IF YOU CAN'T COPY CODE, DON'T BOTHER TRYING TO WORK DX ON CW! That's what SSB and RTTY are for... It's no better on SSB. For example the aforementioned FT5WJ this morning calls on 14.278 (I still don't understand this, Charlie's "help" notwithstanding) and says that he's listening 5 to 15 up. He's only about 44 here but I can understand this quite nicely. The exact same thing happens. He says, WX0XX and several hundred stations keep right on giving their calls, often while he's transmitting. If WX0XX actually makes a QSO everyone who heard him pile on his freq. In the meantime, FT5WJ, if anyone bothered to listen for a few minutes, is now listening on another frequency. A bit of listening instead of a lot of calling and this was easy to figure. I called once up 15 after he worked someone up 10 and he came right back with a 59. I remember an expedition from a few years ago (not the call just the event) where the op, transmitting on 14.195, said, "Listening 5 to 20 up....(mob starts calling)... and 14.190." Worked him on the first call on 14.190. |
"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
... is how people can expect to work FT5XO on CW when they can't copy Morse. Fired up on 40m this evening, but sat the paddle aside & gave up on working them (for now) when I found it simply totally impossible to figure out where the FT5 was listening. The offending calls below are NOT fake; while I don't guarantee I copied them all right, I'm pretty sure the operators appearing after "Pileup:" below really are lids. FT5XO: KC4AUF 5NN Pileup: W3QY W3QY KI0F KI0F FT5XO: K2CI 5NN Pileup: K2FU K2FU FT5XO: VE7XF 5NN Pileup: AA9PB AA9PB FT5XO: WX2K 5NN Pileup: K1UO K1UO FT5XO: K7 UP LID Pileup: VE3XB VE3XB FT5XO: N9IW 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K8IW 5NN Pileup: K3PA K3PA FT5XO: UP LIDJAQ 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K9NA 5NN Pileup: NS1L NS1L OK, at least in the second case, the guy who called had more than one letter in common with who FT5XO came back to..... There are plenty more guilty parties out there. It was difficult to collect the incriminating evidence, as before one "I don't recognize my own call!" lid could finish sending his call, another one would call over the top of him. Figuring out where the guy FT5XO actually came back to was is simply impossible in this mess. I DX for fun -- this kind of crap isn't. Dialed down to 1510 in the BCB & got my new one down there... Hint to DXers: IF YOU CAN'T COPY CODE, DON'T BOTHER TRYING TO WORK DX ON CW! That's what SSB and RTTY are for... Doug, it sounded even worse from out here on the left coast. At least you don't hear ALL of the lids all at once due to skip zones. There was one W9 with a short call (from IL not TN (grin)) who called continuously about 1 KHz up for at least two hours. They never listened 1 up ... -- ... Hank http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli |
There is this to understand
All of the below is old hat and has been going on for a long time -- 30 years that I know of. No worse now as compared to then. There are plenty of resources as how to work DX -- books and on the web. And from the looks of the "offenders" below (mostly extras) -- they know better or should. Maybe look em up and e-mail em. Snail mail anon if you wish. Will do little good to grouse here. -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! "Hank Oredson" wrote in message ink.net... "Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message ... is how people can expect to work FT5XO on CW when they can't copy Morse. Fired up on 40m this evening, but sat the paddle aside & gave up on working them (for now) when I found it simply totally impossible to figure out where the FT5 was listening. The offending calls below are NOT fake; while I don't guarantee I copied them all right, I'm pretty sure the operators appearing after "Pileup:" below really are lids. FT5XO: KC4AUF 5NN Pileup: W3QY W3QY KI0F KI0F FT5XO: K2CI 5NN Pileup: K2FU K2FU FT5XO: VE7XF 5NN Pileup: AA9PB AA9PB FT5XO: WX2K 5NN Pileup: K1UO K1UO FT5XO: K7 UP LID Pileup: VE3XB VE3XB FT5XO: N9IW 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K8IW 5NN Pileup: K3PA K3PA FT5XO: UP LIDJAQ 5NN Pileup: KV0Q KV0Q FT5XO: K9NA 5NN Pileup: NS1L NS1L OK, at least in the second case, the guy who called had more than one letter in common with who FT5XO came back to..... There are plenty more guilty parties out there. It was difficult to collect the incriminating evidence, as before one "I don't recognize my own call!" lid could finish sending his call, another one would call over the top of him. Figuring out where the guy FT5XO actually came back to was is simply impossible in this mess. I DX for fun -- this kind of crap isn't. Dialed down to 1510 in the BCB & got my new one down there... Hint to DXers: IF YOU CAN'T COPY CODE, DON'T BOTHER TRYING TO WORK DX ON CW! That's what SSB and RTTY are for... Doug, it sounded even worse from out here on the left coast. At least you don't hear ALL of the lids all at once due to skip zones. There was one W9 with a short call (from IL not TN (grin)) who called continuously about 1 KHz up for at least two hours. They never listened 1 up ... -- ... Hank http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli |
"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
news:qL10e.60653$xt.54509@fed1read07... There is this to understand All of the below is old hat and has been going on for a long time -- 30 years that I know of. 50 years, but was not so bad 50 years ago. In fact was much better. It was better 30 years ago as well. No worse now as compared to then. Why shouldn't it get better? The equipment available to us is better. There are plenty of resources as how to work DX -- books and on the web. And from the looks of the "offenders" below (mostly extras) -- they know better or should. Yup. Maybe look em up and e-mail em. Snail mail anon if you wish. Will do little good to grouse here. Who's grousing? Didn't have any problem working them with 100W and inverted vee on 30M :-) But I did have to listen a bit until it was clear where they would listen next ... -- ... Hank http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli |
Caveat Lector wrote:
There is this to understand All of the below is old hat and has been going on for a long time -- 30 years that I know of. No worse now as compared to then. I would disagree with that assessment. There are a lot of things in ham radio that aren't worse than they were 30 years ago. But this isn't one of them. I got my license in 1973 and I clearly remember a day when if you would listen, you could almost always find the guy the DX was working. Yeah, there were plenty of people who didn't know that - who would just pick a transmit frequency at random & just call there - but they didn't call continuously *every time* the DX stopped transmitting. Indeed, while I hate to join the "I hate packet" bandwagon there really does seem to be a correlation between continuous calling and the explosive growth of spotting nets. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message ... Caveat Lector wrote: There is this to understand All of the below is old hat and has been going on for a long time -- 30 years that I know of. No worse now as compared to then. I would disagree with that assessment. There are a lot of things in ham radio that aren't worse than they were 30 years ago. But this isn't one of them. I got my license in 1973 and I clearly remember a day when if you would listen, you could almost always find the guy the DX was working. I have no problem with finding the guy the DX is working. Nor do others here in our DX club. Yeah, there were plenty of people who didn't know that - who would just pick a transmit frequency at random & just call there - but they didn't call continuously *every time* the DX stopped transmitting. Yes they did now and they did then. Indeed, while I hate to join the "I hate packet" bandwagon there really does seem to be a correlation between continuous calling and the explosive growth of spotting nets. The spotting nets give a lot of info that was not available in the old days -- working country X only, working district X only, Up x to x freq, wrked em at XXX, QSX X , QSY to Band X, DX station is QRT, etc. So for the intelligent DXer this should bring more order out of chaos. But alas it seems to have helped very little -- so perhaps it is not the cluster hounds who are the problem as evidenced with the unbelievable "Who's the Dx" queries. Obviously these guys aren't looking at the cluster. Nor is the lid who is calling on the DX frequency -- one look at the packet cluster would reveal that --provided the lid knows what "he is working split" means. Alas chaps -- same o same o, I fear Caveat Lector -- Honor Roll, WAZ, etc. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message ... is how people can expect to work FT5XO on CW when they can't copy Morse. Hint to DXers: IF YOU CAN'T COPY CODE, DON'T BOTHER TRYING TO WORK DX ON CW! That's what SSB and RTTY are for... -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com Can't imagine any one who can't copy the code, trying to work CW DX or a contest. What you will find is lots of DXers and budding contesters (extra heavy included) who can't copy much above 20 WPM very well. Generally these folks can recognize their call sign at any speed, and with a memory keyer -- pushing buttons (or keyboarding macros) is what they do to work CW DX or contesting. So these folks get befuzzled when the DX sends something out of the ordinary such as QSO NR PSE etc. or UR ZONE ? Hey it's just a hobby, let the slow guys give contacts -- the DX (contesters) loves em, especially toward the end of the contest or DXpedition. I know one extra lite here who hung in there and with some study and working contests is now copying 25WPM. Contests are good CW practice -- why deny that to the newbies ? PS the DX uses memory keyers or keyboarding too! Caveat Lector -- A medium speed extra (;-) |
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:26:47 -0800, "Caveat Lector"
wrote: [snip] | Indeed, while I hate to join the "I hate packet" bandwagon there really | does seem to be a correlation between continuous calling and the explosive | growth of spotting nets. | |The spotting nets give a lot of info that was not available in the old |days -- working country X only, working district X only, Up x to x freq, |wrked em at XXX, QSX X , QSY to Band X, DX station is QRT, etc. | |So for the intelligent DXer this should bring more order out of chaos. But |alas it seems to have helped very little -- so perhaps it is not the |cluster hounds who are the problem as evidenced with the unbelievable "Who's |the Dx" queries. Obviously these guys aren't looking at the cluster. Nor is |the lid who is calling on the DX frequency -- one look at the packet cluster |would reveal that --provided the lid knows what "he is working split" means. I will admit to occasionally looking at worldwide Internet spots on the computer in a room away from the ham shack. I do this mainly to get a feel for what the propagation is around the globe. But I don't have a filtered packet cluster tuning my radio for me or have voice announcements calling me away from other things to work DX. I don't have a problem with those who want to operate this way, I just choose not to. That said, I do believe that clusters have caused a certain sloppiness to creep into current DX practice. For example, I have on occasion been the first to work some DX station and have had him ask me to spot him. I have to decline, since I wouldn't know how to do it if I wanted to. Why the guy can't just keep calling CQ until he makes his own pileup escapes me. But when he gets spotted and the pile is in place, he figures he doesn't have to identify anymore, so guys like me that tune across the pileup wonder who in the hell he is. I know better than to ask, but some don't, hence the "Who's the DX?" questions. The assumption that *everyone* is connected to a cluster is ridiculous. When did it become a requirement that to work DX you had to have a packet cluster connection? If on occasion, the DX would say, this is P5A, listening up 5 for W7s only, there would be a lot less chaos. |
The original poster sed that the DX packet Clusters were a contributing
cause of the mess on the bands. I replied au contraire as it gives lots of info that should reduce the chaos. What the clusters have done is make DX activity known world wide in a very short period of time. Instant DX huh ? Many perceive this as a mess where in fact without the clusters, the pileup would probably build eventually to the same "mess" So the pileups are bigger quicker. That is a fact of DXing today and it ain't gonna change -- get over it and use your skills to get thru the pileup. In what way has the clusters caused sloppiness? Good grief -- it gives the freq, split, callsign, QSL mgr, District or country currently being worked, QSX spots, etc. I suspect many who would ask "Who's the DX" "Who's the manager" "Where is he/she listening"; no longer do that as it is readily available on the clusters VHF or telnet. Thus anyone using the cluster shouldn't have to ask these questions on top of the DX freq. No not all use the clusters, of course. No one sed they did or that it was a requirement. Whether one should use the clusters or whether they should even exist is an entirely different matter. Many will say they have 3 jobs, 8 kids and a demanding wife and don't have the time to tune for 8 hours. So be it. I like to tune and find them myself but I have the time and inclination to do that. Personally I prefer the old days when one had to tune tune tune to find DX, but that ain't the way it is any more. As for "If on occasion, the DX would say, this is P5A, listening up 5 for W7s only, there would be a lot less chaos." That's the DX station's fault not the callers or the cluster -- in fact the cluster is quite useful when the DX is sloppy. As for the DX asking for a cluster post -- of course he/she wants the maximum number of contacts -- seems like a reasonable request to me. Are you going to help them do that or decline ? Bottom line DX Packet Clusters are here to stay -- like em or not. -- CV - I doubt, therefore I might be ! "Wes Stewart" *n7ws*@ yahoo.com wrote in message ... On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 07:26:47 -0800, "Caveat Lector" wrote: [snip] | Indeed, while I hate to join the "I hate packet" bandwagon there really | does seem to be a correlation between continuous calling and the explosive | growth of spotting nets. | |The spotting nets give a lot of info that was not available in the old |days -- working country X only, working district X only, Up x to x freq, |wrked em at XXX, QSX X , QSY to Band X, DX station is QRT, etc. | |So for the intelligent DXer this should bring more order out of chaos. But |alas it seems to have helped very little -- so perhaps it is not the |cluster hounds who are the problem as evidenced with the unbelievable "Who's |the Dx" queries. Obviously these guys aren't looking at the cluster. Nor is |the lid who is calling on the DX frequency -- one look at the packet cluster |would reveal that --provided the lid knows what "he is working split" means. I will admit to occasionally looking at worldwide Internet spots on the computer in a room away from the ham shack. I do this mainly to get a feel for what the propagation is around the globe. But I don't have a filtered packet cluster tuning my radio for me or have voice announcements calling me away from other things to work DX. I don't have a problem with those who want to operate this way, I just choose not to. That said, I do believe that clusters have caused a certain sloppiness to creep into current DX practice. For example, I have on occasion been the first to work some DX station and have had him ask me to spot him. I have to decline, since I wouldn't know how to do it if I wanted to. Why the guy can't just keep calling CQ until he makes his own pileup escapes me. But when he gets spotted and the pile is in place, he figures he doesn't have to identify anymore, so guys like me that tune across the pileup wonder who in the hell he is. I know better than to ask, but some don't, hence the "Who's the DX?" questions. The assumption that *everyone* is connected to a cluster is ridiculous. When did it become a requirement that to work DX you had to have a packet cluster connection? If on occasion, the DX would say, this is P5A, listening up 5 for W7s only, there would be a lot less chaos. |
"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
... Caveat Lector wrote: There is this to understand All of the below is old hat and has been going on for a long time -- 30 years that I know of. No worse now as compared to then. I would disagree with that assessment. There are a lot of things in ham radio that aren't worse than they were 30 years ago. But this isn't one of them. I got my license in 1973 and I clearly remember a day when if you would listen, you could almost always find the guy the DX was working. Yeah, there were plenty of people who didn't know that - who would just pick a transmit frequency at random & just call there - but they didn't call continuously *every time* the DX stopped transmitting. And WHILE the DX is transmitting ... Indeed, while I hate to join the "I hate packet" bandwagon there really does seem to be a correlation between continuous calling and the explosive growth of spotting nets. Used to use things like the telephone and of course 10M AM. The local group tended to monitor 28.7. -- ... Hank http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli |
"Hank Oredson" wrote in message ink.net... "Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message ... Caveat Lector wrote: There is this to understand All of the below is old hat and has been going on for a long time -- 30 years that I know of. No worse now as compared to then. I would disagree with that assessment. There are a lot of things in ham radio that aren't worse than they were 30 years ago. But this isn't one of them. I got my license in 1973 and I clearly remember a day when if you would listen, you could almost always find the guy the DX was working. Yeah, there were plenty of people who didn't know that - who would just pick a transmit frequency at random & just call there - but they didn't call continuously *every time* the DX stopped transmitting. And WHILE the DX is transmitting ... Indeed, while I hate to join the "I hate packet" bandwagon there really does seem to be a correlation between continuous calling and the explosive growth of spotting nets. Used to use things like the telephone and of course 10M AM. The local group tended to monitor 28.7. -- ... Hank http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli And in the past, many DX clubs set up DX spotting repeaters on 2M -- some with 200 members Also 2M simplex And prior to that folks gave a one ringer landline call to their DX buddies as u sed. An before the clusters, avid DXers subscribed to DX newsletters to "spot" the DX Ala The West Coast DX Bulletin by Hugh Cassidy WA6AUD Or now a days The Daily DX. Any difference between these and today's Packet Cluster other than wide distribution ????? |
"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
news:aLk0e.112$k57.19@fed1read07... "Hank Oredson" wrote in message ink.net... "Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message ... Caveat Lector wrote: There is this to understand All of the below is old hat and has been going on for a long time -- 30 years that I know of. No worse now as compared to then. I would disagree with that assessment. There are a lot of things in ham radio that aren't worse than they were 30 years ago. But this isn't one of them. I got my license in 1973 and I clearly remember a day when if you would listen, you could almost always find the guy the DX was working. Yeah, there were plenty of people who didn't know that - who would just pick a transmit frequency at random & just call there - but they didn't call continuously *every time* the DX stopped transmitting. And WHILE the DX is transmitting ... Indeed, while I hate to join the "I hate packet" bandwagon there really does seem to be a correlation between continuous calling and the explosive growth of spotting nets. Used to use things like the telephone and of course 10M AM. The local group tended to monitor 28.7. -- ... Hank http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli And in the past, many DX clubs set up DX spotting repeaters on 2M -- some with 200 members Yes, that was much later, once there were repeaters :-) There were also various DX nets on HF. For VHF DXing there were the 75M and 10M coordination freqs. Also 2M simplex And prior to that folks gave a one ringer landline call to their DX buddies as u sed. An before the clusters, avid DXers subscribed to DX newsletters to "spot" the DX Used to get several of them ... Ala The West Coast DX Bulletin by Hugh Cassidy WA6AUD Or now a days The Daily DX. Any difference between these and today's Packet Cluster other than wide distribution ????? DX cluster is just another tool. There is also much better propagation information available now. Used to use the charts in QST, but they were just estimates and were, on average, two weeks out of date. Now there is good realtime data available. The good news is that some folks will look at that data and decide some particular band is dead. That gives an edge to those of us who tune it anyway ... and find that unexpected 5 minute opening to very rare Eastern Lower Slabovia. I find, however, that my best luck is with some rare station that has just come on air. I'll post it to the cluster right after I've worked it :-) But heck, I'm not a serious DXer ... -- ... Hank http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli |
Caveat Lector wrote:
The original poster sed that the DX packet Clusters were a contributing cause of the mess on the bands. I replied au contraire as it gives lots of info that should reduce the chaos. I think it does both. I use it largely for the same thing Wes does: to help learn what propagation is like; to help learn what DX is on; and to help learn the operating habits of interesting DX stations. And I certainly don't begrudge those who use packet to find where a specific station is operating at a specific time and work them. There's nothing wrong with that. Packet might indeed contribute to some degree to getting callers off the DX's frequency, people who might not have heard the DX say he's listening up. (it is disturbing how often this is the DX's fault - how often the DX is listening up but isn't saying so.) It might also inform operators the DX is working by districts, or only working EU, or ??? Though really, packet shouldn't be necessary to these ends -- the DX should be frequently indicating what they're doing, and the DX chasers shouldn't be transmitting unless they're copying the DX well enough to know what the DX is saying. In what way has the clusters caused sloppiness? In that people who can't hear/copy the DX can become aware of the DX's presence. In the days before spotting systems, I couldn't know FT5XO was on 21024 unless I was listening to 21024 and could copy the DX station transmitting there. I wouldn't be calling FT5XO unless I could *hear* FT5XO. Today, I look at DX Summit and I immediately know where the FT5 is. === I don't believe clusters will go away. I don't believe they *should* go away. I don't believe there's anything wrong with the clusters themselves or the way they're programmed. I think the problem lies with a significant number of *users* who are unable to operate in a sensible manner. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
Caveat Lector wrote:
And in the past, many DX clubs set up DX spotting repeaters on 2M -- some with 200 members Also 2M simplex And prior to that folks gave a one ringer landline call to their DX buddies as u sed. An before the clusters, avid DXers subscribed to DX newsletters to "spot" the DX Ala The West Coast DX Bulletin by Hugh Cassidy WA6AUD Or now a days The Daily DX. Any difference between these and today's Packet Cluster other than wide distribution ????? No, but that's a big difference. The newsletters are useful but they don't tell you specifically who's on what frequency *now*. If your source of DX news is The Daily DX, you still need to be able to copy to know whether the station on 21024 really is FT5XO as predicted in the news bulletin. On cluster, you can rely on someone else's copying ability. (true, you'll occasionally get screwed that way!) -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
Caveat Lector wrote:
Hint to DXers: IF YOU CAN'T COPY CODE, DON'T BOTHER TRYING TO WORK DX ON CW! That's what SSB and RTTY are for... -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com Can't imagine any one who can't copy the code, trying to work CW DX or a contest. Never said anything about contests. Any contester of value will welcome any CW op regardless of speed. I would hope slower CW ops would not be intimidated by my high CQ speed and would call anyway. (I realize that's probably not realistic) I will happily slow down to match the speed at which you call me. There was someone on one of the Chilean islands -- CE0X, I think -- who didn't know Morse, a few years back. He worked a bunch of RTTY. One of his RTTY contacts realized his terminal unit would work on CW, and talked this guy into running a CW sked using his TU. That ended up being far from his last CW QSO. There wasn't much rate -- automatic Morse decoders are iffy enough with strong interference-free code, pileups are a big problem! -- but his much-appreciated effort landed a bunch of CW ops a rare one. And all with an op who didn't know CW at all... Generally these folks can recognize their call sign at any speed, and with a memory keyer -- pushing buttons (or keyboarding macros) is what they do to work CW DX or contesting. So these folks get befuzzled when the DX sends something out of the ordinary such as QSO NR PSE etc. or UR ZONE ? Or someone else's call, apparently. My problem, quite simply, is with people who call the DX when the DX has obviously answered someone else. To be honest I highly doubt poor copying ability is responsible for most offenses. Usually, this crap results from liddish behavior on the parts of ops whose Morse speed is quite respectable. (I know I've worked at least three of the lids in the FT5XO pile in the ARRL CW SS contest at speeds of at least 26wpm. You don't complete a Sweepstakes exchange unless you're competent at the Morse speed in use.) -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message ... Caveat Lector wrote: Hint to DXers: IF YOU CAN'T COPY CODE, DON'T BOTHER TRYING TO WORK DX ON CW! That's what SSB and RTTY are for... -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com Can't imagine any one who can't copy the code, trying to work CW DX or a contest. Never said anything about contests. Any contester of value will welcome any CW op regardless of speed. I would hope slower CW ops would not be intimidated by my high CQ speed and would call anyway. (I realize that's probably not realistic) I will happily slow down to match the speed at which you call me. There was someone on one of the Chilean islands -- CE0X, I think -- who didn't know Morse, a few years back. He worked a bunch of RTTY. One of his RTTY contacts realized his terminal unit would work on CW, and talked this guy into running a CW sked using his TU. That ended up being far from his last CW QSO. There wasn't much rate -- automatic Morse decoders are iffy enough with strong interference-free code, pileups are a big problem! -- but his much-appreciated effort landed a bunch of CW ops a rare one. And all with an op who didn't know CW at all... Generally these folks can recognize their call sign at any speed, and with a memory keyer -- pushing buttons (or keyboarding macros) is what they do to work CW DX or contesting. So these folks get befuzzled when the DX sends something out of the ordinary such as QSO NR PSE etc. or UR ZONE ? Or someone else's call, apparently. My problem, quite simply, is with people who call the DX when the DX has obviously answered someone else. To be honest I highly doubt poor copying ability is responsible for most offenses. Usually, this crap results from liddish behavior on the parts of ops whose Morse speed is quite respectable. (I know I've worked at least three of the lids in the FT5XO pile in the ARRL CW SS contest at speeds of at least 26wpm. You don't complete a Sweepstakes exchange unless you're competent at the Morse speed in use.) -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com Very well stated - yep agree |
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 06:14:04 GMT, Doug Smith W9WI
wrote: Caveat Lector wrote: The original poster sed that the DX packet Clusters were a contributing cause of the mess on the bands. I replied au contraire as it gives lots of info that should reduce the chaos. I think it does both. I use it largely for the same thing Wes does: to help learn what propagation is like; to help learn what DX is on; and to help learn the operating habits of interesting DX stations. And I certainly don't begrudge those who use packet to find where a specific station is operating at a specific time and work them. There's nothing wrong with that. Packet might indeed contribute to some degree to getting callers off the DX's frequency, people who might not have heard the DX say he's listening up. (it is disturbing how often this is the DX's fault - how often the DX is listening up but isn't saying so.) It might also inform operators the DX is working by districts, or only working EU, or ??? Though really, packet shouldn't be necessary to these ends -- the DX should be frequently indicating what they're doing, and the DX chasers shouldn't be transmitting unless they're copying the DX well enough to know what the DX is saying. In what way has the clusters caused sloppiness? In that people who can't hear/copy the DX can become aware of the DX's presence. In the days before spotting systems, I couldn't know FT5XO was on 21024 unless I was listening to 21024 and could copy the DX station transmitting there. I wouldn't be calling FT5XO unless I could *hear* FT5XO. Today, I look at DX Summit and I immediately know where the FT5 is. === I don't believe clusters will go away. I don't believe they *should* go away. I don't believe there's anything wrong with the clusters themselves or the way they're programmed. I think the problem lies with a significant number of *users* who are unable to operate in a sensible manner. Right on. |
"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
... Caveat Lector wrote: And in the past, many DX clubs set up DX spotting repeaters on 2M -- some with 200 members Also 2M simplex And prior to that folks gave a one ringer landline call to their DX buddies as u sed. An before the clusters, avid DXers subscribed to DX newsletters to "spot" the DX Ala The West Coast DX Bulletin by Hugh Cassidy WA6AUD Or now a days The Daily DX. Any difference between these and today's Packet Cluster other than wide distribution ????? No, but that's a big difference. The newsletters are useful but they don't tell you specifically who's on what frequency *now*. If your source of DX news is The Daily DX, you still need to be able to copy to know whether the station on 21024 really is FT5XO as predicted in the news bulletin. On cluster, you can rely on someone else's copying ability. (true, you'll occasionally get screwed that way!) Going by the spots for 17M CW this morning, nobody out there can copy code anymore :-) -- ... Hank http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli |
Doug Smith W9WI said :
Any contester of value will welcome any CW op regardless of speed. I would hope slower CW ops would not be intimidated by my high CQ speed and would call anyway. (I realize that's probably not realistic) I will happily slow down to match the speed at which you call me. Generally these folks can recognize their call sign at any speed, and with a memory keyer -- pushing buttons (or keyboarding macros) is what they do to work CW DX or contesting. This is something I can relate to. Not being a CW lover, my DXCC was SSB-only, and until last year, that's all I really operated. That and a little RTTY and PSK-31. Well, once I realized that even though my primary DXCC was phone, my band awards could be mixed, I started to get curious. I still couldn't do more than about 8 or 9 WPM after not using code for about 20 years (and never being much good at it even then), so I took to using CW decoding software. It helped a little but I found it more useless than useful. Then I discovered CW contesting as a means to building up my 40 and 80m totals. Intimidating as hell at 35-40 WPM, but with packet spots, in S&P mode, I could see who I was working; I could audibly confirm their calls even if it took 3 or 4 tries (or 5 or 6 if they were really fast). I can pick my own call out of noise easily, I know what report I was being given back (even serial numbers if I listened carefully), and all of a sudden I was a lot more comfortable with code. N1MM generates my replies with good clean CW which helps, too! I now DX in CW just as happily as in phone (though my TS-570's AGC makes is painful at times), but I still can't hold a long QSO in that mode. I just bought a Vibroplex iambic and with luck, my QSO speed will start back to 17-20 WPM by year's end. In all of that, I never attempted to throw my call in even once if I wasn't sure what to expect back. As I listen to the zoo that is FT5XO on 40, I have to stop and wonder just what level some of these bozos are at. I'm betting there are some extra-heavies in there (along with extra-lites). Few seem to understand the concept of split, some fists are so bad it's agonizing to listen to and the litany of lids who continue to throw their calls ad-infinitum-ad-nauseum, even as the MicroLites are transmitting, is enough to drive me batty. I just have to wonder if CW decoding software is taking a lot of inDUHviduals from the SSB parts of the bands and making them pretend-CW ops, fouling it for those who actually know how to listen and have a clue on how to operate. 73 de Peter, W2IRT (ex-AB2NZ, VE3THX) Please reply to Double-you Two Eye Are Tee at Arrl.net |
Peter Dougherty wrote:
I now DX in CW just as happily as in phone (though my TS-570's AGC makes is painful at times), but I still can't hold a long QSO in that mode. I just bought a Vibroplex iambic and with luck, my QSO speed will start back to 17-20 WPM by year's end. Congrats & welcome! They say "practice makes perfect" and that probably applies more to CW than pretty much anything else in life... wasn't sure what to expect back. As I listen to the zoo that is FT5XO on 40, I have to stop and wonder just what level some of these bozos are at. I'm betting there are some extra-heavies in there (along with extra-lites). I *know* there are "extra-heavies" as some of the calls involved are well known to me. Really, I was being facetious when I suggested the problems in the FT5 pile are due to poor general CW skills. They aren't. (for the most part) The honest DXer whose CW isn't up to the FT5's speed is either sitting out the CW side of the expedition (and sticking with SSB/RTTY) or is doing as you are. Few seem to understand the concept of split, some fists I do have *one* criticism of the FT5's operating: I don't think they're indicating that they're split often enough. I just don't know that it's reasonable to expect people to just naturally know that any rare expedition is likely to be working split. That knowledge certainly comes with experience, but every DXer starts without experience and can only acquire experience by working DX! "TU FT5XO UP" might be a good idea. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:05:52 GMT, Doug Smith W9WI wrote:
I do have *one* criticism of the FT5's operating: I don't think they're indicating that they're split often enough. I just don't know that it's reasonable to expect people to just naturally know that any rare expedition is likely to be working split. That knowledge certainly comes with experience, but every DXer starts without experience and can only acquire experience by working DX! "TU FT5XO UP" might be a good idea. The op on 40 last evening was doing exactly that for almost every qso. Bob, N7XY |
Well, I stumbled across FT5XO on 30 meters this evening... without
benefit of a spot on the cluster, not that I've not been looking for them on DX Summit too... Worked on the third call -- in large part because people were a LOT better behaved and I could actually hear the folks the FT5 was working... -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:26 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com