Return-Path: Received: from rly-mb09.mx.aol.com (rly-mb09.mail.aol.com [172.21.131.167]) by air-mb02.mail.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILINMB022-d274b07b6eb121; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:46:49 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-mb09.mx.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMB093-d274b07b6eb121; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:46:22 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1NBmWn-0003RM-6S for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:45:13 +0000 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1NBmWl-0003RD-Vt for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:45:12 +0000 Received: from mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.49]) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NBmWj-0007k6-8o for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:45:11 +0000 Received: from know-smtpout-1.server.virginmedia.net ([62.254.123.1]) by mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20091121094003.SYKZ17277.mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@know-smtpout-1.server.virginmedia.net> for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:40:03 +0000 Received: from [81.109.247.175] (helo=desktop) by know-smtpout-1.server.virginmedia.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NBmRl-0006Rt-Sa for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:40:03 +0000 From: "James Cowburn" To: References: <20091120141648.8WGQY.1557635.root@mp17> <007f01ca6a1b$34a0b8d0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <009a01ca6a22$07a90470$0517aac0@desktop> <9afca2640911201343q6330c05cxbc250a456fc61952@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:39:57 -0000 Message-ID: <000f01ca6a8e$97d80f20$0517aac0@desktop> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <9afca2640911201343q6330c05cxbc250a456fc61952@mail.gmail.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Thread-Index: AcpqKp7dEg5x0wWJQRSiF9pg01idLwAYkEQg X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=jX188lzWSCQA:10 a=8RloEfZUAAAA:8 a=F3M5lZpKAAAA:8 a=hOpmn2quAAAA:8 a=nN7BH9HXAAAA:8 a=fnYqA7hvAAAA:8 a=j6Q1dnSHAAAA:8 a=GbdeLIPe6U4U5j_syv0A:9 a=5a5wPlvpv7jtFlUYscQA:7 a=Z24HcA_M4BtqXtMAM-68lCKOfXYA:4 a=O58u2wXj750A:10 a=wk6s2zzMB60A:10 a=hUswqBWy9Q8A:10 a=muIvw5a9-cgA:10 a=gA6IeH5FQcgA:10 a=NWVoK91CQyQA:10 a=yre12JMCcONAJUPy:21 a=Mfy-UuinzJnzaJtC:21 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=4EHlyYgopu4XDhHgo30A:9 a=80CKpWDzqLSgmUmwTtUA:7 a=jBQkSH3L9w9Uss9Spr0TWAxQoyQA:4 a=1OdKWuaQUqg08G2b:21 a=aKpl4JqWlNFO67uJ:21 X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_FONT_BIG=0.256,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: RE: LF: WSPR a QSO mode not just beacon Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01CA6A8E.97D80F20" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=EXCUSE_16,HTML_50_60, HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNKNOWN,HTML_FONT_BIG,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01CA6A8E.97D80F20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Roger/LF The discussion at the RSGB meeting noted the ARRL's position that essentially if two stations make WSPR reports with each other and this is confirmed by QSL or sme other approved method then there has been a two way exchange of call sign, report and other info e.g. locator and that qualifies as a QSO for DXCC purposes. As you can imagine this was a little contentious to say the least with a lot of head shaking and muttering under breath from portions of the audience and nodding and smiles from others. I for one am not an avid DXCC chaser but for my own view I consider my 2 way reports as QSOs. As Rik says the WSJT programme has a QSO mode in WSPR but I found it hard to set up and also you need to have someone listening for the transmission so for simplicity I stay with WSPR. I've downloaded WSPR2 but I think I am being a luddite as I prefer the older version! (Hence my steadfast avoidance of Vista and W7!) Drop me a note if you fancy a CW QSO sometime and also we can try WSPR on 136. Chris XIZ has kindly offered to help me with the loan of coils and varios for 136 so I can get on that band. We are going to try for a 6m/600m x-band CW QSO with his home brew 6m rig! With best regards Jim Dr. James Cowburn 26 Birch Close Broom Biggleswade Beds SG18 9NR T +44 (0) 1767 600522 M+44 (0) 7967 300152 E james.cowburn@virgin.net The information transmitted is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you must not read this message. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. Consequently, this email is not intended to be contractually binding. If you received this in error, please contact the sender, return the message as well as its attachments and delete the whole from any computer. _____ From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Roger Lapthorn Sent: 20 November 2009 21:43 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: WSPR a QSO mode not just beacon Now I am unclear what really constitutes a WSPR QSO. Does me getting a WSPR database report from XX3XXX and he getting on from me at much the same time on the same database constitute a QSO? Or does it have to be a "real" QSO a bit like JT6m? I agree with Rik that an HF contest exchange contains less (mutually useful) data than either of these. 73s Roger G3XBM 2009/11/20 James Cowburn Dear All, According to the ARRL, WSPR contacts, if verified as two way, will qualify towards DXCC awards as they consider these to be a QSO mode and not simply a beacon. As there is an exchange of callsign, locator and signal strength then that was deemed sufficient by the ARRL to qualify for DXCC and as a QSO in a data mode much like RTTY or PSK31 for example. This was discussed at the recent RSGB conference in a session on WSPR. With best regards Jim -----Original Message----- From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of mal hamilton Sent: 20 November 2009 19:54 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Re: WD2XES WSPR 136.0 Recently there has been an upsurge in wspr BEACON appliance operators and your suggested frequency area is not the place for them. The bottom end would keep Beacon acty out of the way. There would still be room for the odd EU qrs operator, can't say I have heard many in recent years. The freq area 137 - 138 k/cs is frequently occupied by Russian and other EU dxers for inter Country working using CW and QRS and 136.5 - 137 for local CW working. NA stns wishing to work EU would still use 137 - 138 on CW and QRS and not be clobbered by wspr carriers going ON/OFF. I hope you see the logic G3KEV ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 7:16 PM Subject: Re: LF: Re: WD2XES WSPR 136.0 > Thanks for the suggestion, but I doubt it will cause you any more interference than it has for the last 5 years. From our perspective, the lower end of the band has long been reserved for EU to NA operation. > > John, W1TAG > > ---- mal hamilton wrote: > > om I woud suggest you Beacon at the extreme bottom end of the band and not > > in the middle of the CW and QRS DX portion. > > -- ------------------------------------------------------------- http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/ http://www.g3xbm.co.uk G3XBM GQRP 1678 ISWL G11088 ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01CA6A8E.97D80F20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Roger/LF

 

The discussion= at the RSGB meeting noted the ARRL’s position that essentially if two stations make WSPR= reports with each other and this is confirmed by QSL or sme other approved met= hod then there has been a two way exchange of call sign, report and other info= e.g. locator and that qualifies as a QSO for DXCC purposes.

 

As you can imag= ine this was a little contentious to say the least with a lot of head shaking and muttering= under breath from portions of the audience and nodding and smiles from other= s.

 

I for one am no= t an avid DXCC chaser but for my own view I consider my 2 way reports as QSOs.  =

 

As Rik says the= WSJT programme has a QSO mode in WSPR but I found it hard to set up and also you need to have= someone listening for the transmission so for simplicity I stay with WSPR.

 

I’ve down= loaded WSPR2 but I think I am being a luddite as I prefer the older version!   (Hence= my steadfast avoidance of Vista and W7= !)

 

Drop me a note= if you fancy a CW QSO sometime and also we can try WSPR on 136.   Chris XIZ has ki= ndly offered to help me with the loan of coils and varios for 136 so I can= get on that band.  We are going to try for a 6m/600m x-band CW QSO with= his home brew 6m rig! 

 

With best regards=

 

 

Jim

 

 

Dr. James Cowbu= rn

26 Birch Close<= o:p>

Broom

Biggleswade

Beds=

SG18 9NR

 

T +44= (0) 1767 600522

M+44= (0) 7967 300152

E james.cowburn@virgin.net

 

The information= transmitted is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or pri= vileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notifi= ed that you must not read this message.
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking= of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other= than the intended recipient is prohibited.  Consequently, this email is no= t intended to be contractually binding.
If you received this in error, please contact the sender, return the= message as well as its attachments and delete the whole from any computer.=

From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blac= ksheep.org [mailto:owner-= rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Roger Lapthorn
Sent: 20 November 2009= 21:43
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: WSPR= a QSO mode not just beacon

 

Now I am unclea= r what really constitutes a WSPR QSO. Does me getting a WSPR database report from XX= 3XXX and he getting on from me at much the same time on the same database const= itute a QSO? Or does it have to be a "real" QSO a bit like JT6m?
I agree with Rik that an HF contest exchange contains less (mutually= useful) data than either of these.

73s
Roger G3XBM

2009/11/20 James Cowburn <james.cowburn@virgin.net>

Dear All,

According to the ARRL, WSPR contacts, if verified as two way, will qua= lify
towards DXCC awards as they consider these to be a QSO mode and not si= mply a
beacon.

As there is an exchange of callsign, locator and signal strength then= that
was deemed sufficient by the ARRL to qualify for DXCC and as a QSO in= a data
mode much like RTTY or PSK31 for example.

This was discussed at the recent RSGB conference in a session on WSPR.=

With best regards


Jim



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rsgb= _lf_group@blacksheep.org
[mailto:owner-rs= gb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of mal hamilton=
Sent: 20 November 2009 19:54
To: rsgb_lf_group@blac= ksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: Re: WD2XES WSPR 136.0

Recently there has been an upsurge in wspr BEACON appliance operators= and
your suggested frequency area is not the place for them. The bottom en= d
would keep Beacon acty out of the way. There would still be room for= the odd
EU qrs operator, can't say I have heard many in recent years. The freq= area
137 - 138 k/cs is frequently occupied by Russian and other EU dxers fo= r
inter Country working using CW and     QRS and 136.5 - 137= for local CW
working.
NA stns wishing to work EU would still use 137 - 138 on CW and  Q= RS and not
be clobbered by wspr carriers going ON/OFF.
I hope you see the logic
G3KEV

----- Original Message -----
From: <w1tag@charter.net&g= t;
To: <rsgb_lf_group@= blacksheep.org>
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Re: WD2XES WSPR 136.0


> Thanks for the suggestion, but I doubt it will cause you any more=
interference than it has for the last 5 years. From our perspective,= the
lower end of the band has long been reserved for EU to NA operation. >
> John, W1TAG
>
> ---- mal hamilton <g3kevmal@talktalk.net= > wrote:
> > om I woud suggest you Beacon at the extreme bottom end of th= e band and
not
> > in the middle of the CW and QRS DX portion.
>
>





--
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.c= om/
http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
G3XBM    GQRP 1678      ISWL G11088

------=_NextPart_000_0010_01CA6A8E.97D80F20--