Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1290; Body=3 Fuz1=3 Fuz2=3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, FORGED_RCVD_HELO,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id tAEBta0E000858 for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 12:55:36 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1ZxZNH-0004kx-4l for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 11:52:07 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1ZxZNG-0004ko-FF for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 11:52:06 +0000 Received: from s16315160.onlinehome-server.info ([87.106.80.234] helo=mail.vigilant.es) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1ZxZMC-00058Z-SN for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 11:52:05 +0000 Received: from servigilant.vigilant.local ([87.216.178.132]) by vigilant.es with MailEnable ESMTP; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 12:50:06 +0100 Received: from servigilant.vigilant.local ([fe80::3cdf:95f8:c1c9:3931]) by servigilant.vigilant.local ([fe80::3cdf:95f8:c1c9:3931%13]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 12:50:29 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?VIGILANT_Luis_Fern=E1ndez?= To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Thread-Topic: LF: RE: Re: FR5ZX on MF WSPR Thread-Index: AQHRHfVqUJEX7wOn7kyqdjtwlMR3ZJ6ZsKiwgAB8qACAAA27gIAA/fgAgAArm3o= Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 11:50:29 +0000 Message-ID: <579355A36AEE9D4FA555C45D556003AB1B2876E2@servigilant.vigilant.local> References: <579355A36AEE9D4FA555C45D556003AB1B286613@servigilant.vigilant.local> <0ADAA2ADD4844DA1B2EC8471B7B28629@AGB> ,<3C386F463D28484AA74889615A91FD91@PCFausto> In-Reply-To: <3C386F463D28484AA74889615A91FD91@PCFausto> Accept-Language: es-ES, en-US Content-Language: es-ES X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [95.17.138.0] MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scan-Signature: ea325ff0d4a9c53a3010c97c9e919a12 Subject: Re: LF: RE: Re: FR5ZX on MF WSPR Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_579355A36AEE9D4FA555C45D556003AB1B2876E2servigilantvigi_" 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-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.10 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 5061 --_000_579355A36AEE9D4FA555C45D556003AB1B2876E2servigilantvigi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi MF No problem Fausto. I think we have all waked up today in angry due to the n= ews from Paris My condolences here to the French people which is suffering this today I think we all understand your point of view as we understand that digital = modes are here to stay and will improve, like many other things machine based nowadays Just to insist in one point: Ham community is getting older and in clear recession Human operated modes for QRO and big signals means that you must have a pro= perty and the money (plus skills of course) to build a decent radiating sys= tem. Digital modes lets you play the game with much less requirements And from my point of view this is the best of digital modes: make the weak = signal game available to many And this is the way to keep ham activity in a near future. Is a matter of "= ham survival" Just my thoughts. Obviously it was fantastic to work four CW stations yeste= rday, but that is only because I won the ERP lottery here. With any other radiation sistem it shou= ld be VERY difficoult and probably limited to QRSS qso's 73 de Luis EA5DOM ________________________________ De: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org]= en nombre de Fausto Coletti [faustocoletti@alice.it] Enviado: s=E1bado, 14 de noviembre de 2015 10:57 Para: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Asunto: Re: LF: RE: Re: FR5ZX on MF WSPR Hi Graham and all, I do not know if it is possible and I do not know if Opera use the same dec= oding sistem of JT65 but for you it is possible that a ham receive some qsl card for 144 MHz EME qso= in JT65 when in his life he never made a QSO via EME in 144 MHz. Permit me some doubt about these "deep search" systems. It seems very similar to those that make QSOs with callbbok. As you can see I do not like the digital modes because I want to be a fun t= o make a QSO and not my computer. A digital QSO is a little how to send an SMS to a pretty girl instead of ta= king her out to dinner. Ok for the importance of automated systems for understanding the propagatio= n but when it is determined that for a direction it is possible a QSO with traditional systems why do n= ot make a real QSO? Every day when I read the email I see dozens and dozens of WSPR reports, do= zens and dozens of OPERA reports... I rarely see a report of a real QSO,dozens and dozens of computers that wor= k all night while operators are sleeping. Maybe I'm a purist as says Luis but honestly the satisfaction of a CW QSO m= ade by me and my key between the fingers, although I am a average operator, is unmatched. Maybe I'll never make a MF QSO with the US or Australia but I think that if= on the other side there is a well-equipped station is not impossible. Take the example of EA5DOM, yesterday for the first time used the CW on 630= m, does not seem to have had many difficulties to make QSOs at distances similar to the WSPR reports that ha= s received so far. Please forgive me, but this morning I woke up so ... 73, Fausto IK4NMF ----- Original Message ----- From: Graham To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 7:48 PM Subject: Re: LF: RE: Re: FR5ZX on MF WSPR ''Not considered "real" decodes by the purists and so, garbaje qualifyed'' So the belief structure is . ''Its possible for two stations to randomly detect the same stati= on call sign at exactly the same time'' --_000_579355A36AEE9D4FA555C45D556003AB1B2876E2servigilantvigi_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi MF

No problem Fausto. I think we have all waked up today in angry due to the news from Paris
My condolences here to the French peo= ple which is suffering this today

I think we all understand your point of view as we understand that dig= ital modes are here to stay
and will improve, like many other things machine based nowadays

Just to insist in one point:
Ham community is getting older and in clear recession

Human operated modes for QRO and big signals means that you must have a property and the money (plus skills= of course) to build a decent = radiating system. Digital modes lets you play the game with much less requirements
And from my point of view this is the= best of digital modes: make the weak signal game available to many<= /div>

And this is the way to keep ham activity in a near future. Is a matter= of "ham survival"

Just my thoughts. Obviously it was fantastic to work four CW stations = yesterday, but that is only
because I won the ERP lottery here. With any other radiation sistem it= should be VERY difficoult
and probably limited to QRSS qso's

73 de Luis
EA5DOM
De: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [o= wner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] en nombre de Fausto Coletti [faustocolet= ti@alice.it]
Enviado: s=E1bado, 14 de noviembre de 2015 10:57
Para: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Asunto: Re: LF: RE: Re: FR5ZX on MF WSPR

Hi Graham and all,
 
I do not know if it is possible and I = do not know if Opera use the same decoding sistem of JT65 but
for you it is possible that a ham rece= ive some qsl card for 144 MHz EME qso in JT65 when in his life
he never made a QSO via=  EME in 144 MHz.
&nbs= p;
Permit me some doubt about these<= /span> "deep search" systems.
It seems very similar to those that make QSOs with callbbok. <= /span>
 
As you can see I do not like the digital modes because I want to be a fun to make a QSO and not my computer.
A digital QSO is a little how to send an SMS to a pretty girl instead of taking her out to dinner. <= /span>
 
O= k for the importance of automated systems = for understanding the propagation but when it is determined
t= hat for a direction it is possib= le a QSO with traditiona= l systems why do not make a real QSO? <= /div>
 
Every day when I read the email I see dozens an= d dozens of WSPR report= s, dozens and dozens of = OPERA reports...
I rarely see a report of a real QSO,dozens and dozens of computers t= hat work all night while operators ar= e sleeping.
Maybe I'm a purist as says Luis but honestly the satisf= action of a CW QSO made by me and my key between the fingers,
although I= am a average operator<= /span>, is unmatched.
= =  
Maybe I'll never make a MF QSO with the US or Australia but I th= ink that if on the other = side there is a well-equipped
station<= /span> is not impossible.
= <= /span> 
Ta= ke the example of EA5DOM, yesterday for the first time used the CW on 630m, does not seem to have had many =
di= fficulties to make QSOs at distances similar = to the WSPR reports that  has received so far. =
=  
Please forgive me, but this morning I woke up so ...
 
73, Fausto IK4NMF
 
----- Original Me= ssage -----
From: Graham
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 7:48 = PM
Subject: Re: LF: RE: Re: FR5ZX on MF = WSPR

''Not considered "real" d= ecodes by the purists and so, garbaje qualifyed''
 
So  the  belief  structure = ; is  .
 
 ''Its possible  for  two =   stations  to  randomly  detect the  same  s= tation  call  sign  at  exactly  the  same&nb= sp; time''   
 
--_000_579355A36AEE9D4FA555C45D556003AB1B2876E2servigilantvigi_--