Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id w2NFI1ca008298 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 16:18:03 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1ezON1-0001Jj-W2 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 15:12:43 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1ezON1-0001Ja-KM for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 15:12:43 +0000 Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com ([74.125.82.51]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ezOMy-0000Oa-79 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 15:12:42 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id e194so4182091wmd.3 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 08:12:40 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=q8fRPainRsLwveeMz/cCeaBqVkg17lIIVD60qh6uqMY=; b=t6HkLebPFCu6421ysE2yJqtIA4MlEXE0h3KFGiRFbc3iaIpLfDJOVGU1zqoUSaYdb7 0KmIxp0Uqrz07hpmNSIkj09tLeMFiVoN+WBfKrWX1wHfvSS7lXDda9wFVgOxXanNlEyK ddfOP2u0rPhDupxGce/2a10ZhTiunzI7Ja3PtSMAKGRQWtJsdlVnY2Nt8oDq7F9OyT0C fyY2whB7f1vZ13kivNYrBllFbTQdBibPWkGynSRqyU7/YJp23R3r6EpYdfJU1jbUIJ2Y Ddz2paUHYoQNw6LBaXVUW8mnQJCFEZa/wmianBqirFNSYI++K/HW7hig5cGl5QulGPYL QVtQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=q8fRPainRsLwveeMz/cCeaBqVkg17lIIVD60qh6uqMY=; b=XhnfHptLvCMX8SZU9n8kb/zzAUIhPX0J/ei3Jxek2AnIzLljr+tqcgE/hYlAmBcIfJ ZTkKZU86GgdpSXwWxQCEVIVnteqDO4B4LF+rj98Z5S7c8RsQI/of+ytpVjzIMunz3wGV VZW4TVcFEnmZYsm5D99mOHcQ3dtqqp3JNnLRc96dsHPiFv1mSqGDaZNArO4+e7Ho8FFX Uvq3tff1yOSs7/CJN6fO1XVK/xy50Kvm7qSQ1Zp3SXtyf776fe6MwxEpdoEXpREOfmq9 MFcLExTAKszWsHwnxpCLimtAaI5s7fml66OI5btNim/BFPbRrkZffphbZ6wUCV6PhPkC IevA== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7HqjE+Xah4291pD8orcXDzH9T4eUce4S4YI8QMznFzhU6se2BRB RAJDdtXN1V4DQHHY65IQFa0GbN3YlBKUcC5fofEgtw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvh/YJRlimciVT/O7CScn+Qfo8OSR41VjRZekPkcCXrUOlyrAW+wMeRpixbIo0acyVT+bGhLbKFSlhFNTdYumA= X-Received: by 10.80.244.167 with SMTP id s36mr30428734edm.262.1521817899455; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 08:11:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.80.154.195 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 08:11:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <77fdd1d6-7e60-2f33-8c6e-98f787fe0ca8@n1bug.com> From: Andy Talbot Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 15:11:39 +0000 Message-ID: To: LineOne X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Your website of firsts and the history of LF shows that I set a few of the early 'firsts' on 73kHz and reminds me of what must be the longest QSO in history. On 12 April 1997 I had a one-way QSO (CW yes, I know !) with me transmitting to G3YGF/P who had driven out at increasing distances to see how far we could get. Eventually managed 99km, hugely increasing the maximum distance on that band - and showing that it 'could' be done. [...] Content analysis details: (0.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (andy.g4jnt[at]gmail.com) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 URIBL_SBL_A Contains URL's A record listed in the Spamhaus SBL blocklist [URIs: n1bug.com] 0.6 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL's NS IP listed in the Spamhaus SBL blocklist [URIs: n1bug.com] 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 6bb858db23df2b82c4f5a8cb512b45b1 Subject: Re: LF: Important question on LF QSOs Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c09293a4f58c5056815d7d9" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50,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 --94eb2c09293a4f58c5056815d7d9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Your website of firsts and the history of LF shows that I set a few of the early 'firsts' on 73kHz and reminds me of what must be the longest QSO in history. On 12 April 1997 I had a one-way QSO (CW yes, I know !) with me transmitting to G3YGF/P who had driven out at increasing distances to see how far we could get. Eventually managed 99km, hugely increasing the maximum distance on that band - and showing that it 'could' be done. The other half of the QSO wasn't completed until June 2003 just as the 73kHz band was about to be withdrawn that G3YGF cobbled together a simple 73 Tx system and transmitted to me to complete the QSO. He was now using a different location, home QTH just 5km from me, so it doesn't count as a proper QSO , but whateverrrrrr..... Andy g4JNt On 23 March 2018 at 14:50, Alex R7NT wrote: > Paul, > first TA full 2way QSOs on 136 in 2001: > from Feb 5 to Feb 19 VA3LK and G3AQC > Feb 13 VE1ZJ(RX) + VE1ZZ(TX) and G3LDO > > 2001-Mar-15 DARC, RSBG and AMRAD - the sponsors of the Trans-Atlantic > Challenge have decided to present awards to Larry VA3LK, Laurie G3AQC, Jack > VE1ZZ, John VE1ZJ and Peter G3LDO for their contacts > > 73! Alex R7NT 136.73.ru > > 2018-03-23 15:38 GMT+03:00 N1BUG : > >> LF / 2200 meter community, >> >> I am a little afraid to ask this question. I don't want to start a >> "war" here. But... >> >> What is the feeling in the LF community about a QSO (DFCW or QRSS) >> which takes more than a single night to complete? Is this OK or will >> it be seen as cheating? >> >> I am a very conservative operator but I cannot think of any reason >> why a QSO spanning a few nights would not be perfectly OK. To me it >> seems that's just taking advantage of available propagation and >> (very slow) modes which can get information across. >> >> I do think that if the operators stop for some nights, the QSO >> should reset to the beginning because that is a new attempt. >> >> I'm trying to find out what the community feels about this. I want >> to be a respectable member of this community, not an invading >> outlaw. ;-) If a QSO taking a few nights is considered evil, I won't >> do it. Now is your chance to educate me. >> >> 73, >> Paul N1BUG >> >> > --94eb2c09293a4f58c5056815d7d9 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Your website of firsts and the history of LF shows that I = set a few of the early 'firsts' on 73kHz and reminds me of what mus= t be the longest QSO in history.

On 12 April 1997 I had = a one-way QSO (CW yes, I know !)=C2=A0 with me transmitting to G3YGF/P who = had driven out at increasing distances to see how far we could get.=C2=A0 E= ventually managed 99km, hugely increasing the maximum distance on that band= - and showing that it 'could' be done.

Th= e other half of the QSO wasn't completed until June 2003 just as the 73= kHz band was about to be withdrawn=C2=A0 that G3YGF cobbled=C2=A0 together = a simple 73 Tx system and transmitted to me to complete the QSO.=C2=A0 He w= as now using a different location, home QTH just 5km from me, so it doesn&#= 39;t count as a proper QSO , but whateverrrrrr.....

Andy=C2=A0 g4JNt

On 23 March 2018 at 14:50, Alex R7NT <r7nt.73@gmail.com> wrote:
Paul,
first= TA full 2way QSOs on 136 in 2001:
from Feb 5 to=C2=A0Feb 19=C2=A0 =C2=A0VA3LK and G3AQC
Feb 13=C2=A0 =C2=A0VE1ZJ= (RX) + VE1ZZ(TX) and G3LDO
<= br>
2001-Mar-15 DARC= , RSBG and AMRAD - the sponsors of the Trans-Atlantic Challenge have decide= d to present awards to Larry VA3LK, Laurie G3AQC, Jack VE1ZZ, John VE1ZJ an= d Peter G3LDO for their contacts

73! Alex R7NT =C2=A0136.73.ru

2018-03-23 15:38 GMT+03:00 N1BUG <paul@n1bug= .com>:
LF / 2200 meter comm= unity,

I am a little afraid to ask this question. I don't want to start a
"war" here. But...

What is the feeling in the LF community about a QSO (DFCW or QRSS)
which takes more than a single night to complete? Is this OK or will
it be seen as cheating?

I am a very conservative operator but I cannot think of any reason
why a QSO spanning a few nights would not be perfectly OK. To me it
seems that's just taking advantage of available propagation and
(very slow) modes which can get information across.

I do think that if the operators stop for some nights, the QSO
should reset to the beginning because that is a new attempt.

I'm trying to find out what the community feels about this. I want
to be a respectable member of this community, not an invading
outlaw. ;-) If a QSO taking a few nights is considered evil, I won't do it. Now is your chance to educate me.

73,
Paul N1BUG



--94eb2c09293a4f58c5056815d7d9--