Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+MF\s+630m\:\s+False\s+Decode\s+or\s+Real\?\s*$/: 23 ]

Total 23 documents matching your query.

1. LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: Jochen Althoff <>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 20:02:09 +0200
Just popped up at my RX: 17:52 477 VK3ELV de DF1VB/3 Op8 Deep Search ?? 16348 km -37 dB in Dortmund with 140w + Top loaded L 18m vert 80m horz Any comments welcome 73, Jochen -- -= DF1VB =- -= KH2MM
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00145.html (9,321 bytes)

2. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: Andy Talbot <>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 19:16:44 +0100
Latest RadCom (June 2015)  Page 70 I rest my case,  M'lud :-) Andy G4JNT On 20 May 2015 at 19:02, Jochen Althoff <> wrote: Just popped up at my RX: 17:52    477 VK3ELV de DF1VB/3 Op8 D
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00146.html (11,303 bytes)

3. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "Graham" <>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 19:48:30 +0100
Now it becomes Psychological Jochen VK3ELV TX beacon is in the psk-map data base Without a second decode / time stamp the system cannot validate it Its definitely in the happy hour window Q Do you ha
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00147.html (11,493 bytes)

4. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "J. Althoff" <>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 21:00:03 +0200
Hi Graham, LF, I Do have a very low number of false decodes, and when, than all the time Fantasy call signs. And because it happened in the magic hour I keep Scratching my head.... I will send him an
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00149.html (12,311 bytes)

5. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "Graham" <>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 20:16:46 +0100
Well .. False opera data decode = random letters in call sign format False dynamic detection = real call from list with random time stamp With 2 spots the system will valuate the detection , if web l
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00150.html (13,707 bytes)

6. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: wolf_dl4yhf <>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 21:44:53 +0200
Sorry to dissapoint you but .. no, no, no, and again, no. 73, Wolf Am 20.05.2015 20:02, schrieb Jochen Althoff: Just popped up at my RX: 17:52 477 VK3ELV de DF1VB/3 Op8 Deep Search ?? 16348 km -37 dB
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00151.html (10,541 bytes)

7. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "J. Althoff" <>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 22:03:42 +0200
Hi Wolf, You are not disappointing me at all. I put this issue under discussion myself. Please share your opinion about this to this topic to us in detail. Maybe I missed A discussion about this befo
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00153.html (11,221 bytes)

8. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: wolf_dl4yhf <>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 22:40:35 +0200
Hi Jochen, I think the discussion about Opera's own 'deep search' mode (or whatever the proper name is) was done here (or on "the other" reflector) over a year ago, and the main problem I see is that
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00155.html (13,946 bytes)

9. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "Graham" <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 00:04:56 +0100
"Well that's a TWO BIT description if ever there was one :-) Some one has been at the wobbly bob again And we had just one coincidental detection all night , despite there being 14 active monitors' ,
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00159.html (15,469 bytes)

10. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "Graham" <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 01:39:59 +0100
This time may be not ! but VK2XGJ is also showing , so hopefully , there is the time marker for the next one G, Rx at Thu, 21 May 2015 00:28:32 GMT From VK3ELV in Australia Loc QF33BQ by DF1VB/3 Dist
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00161.html (13,487 bytes)

11. RE: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: Rik Strobbe <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 06:47:46 +0000
Hello Wolf, well said. From the IARU R1 VHF managers handbook: A valid contact is one where both operators have copied both callsigns, the report and an unambiguous confirmation. However no recourse
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00162.html (30,469 bytes)

12. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: Andy Talbot <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 09:05:22 +0100
Hello Wolf,   well said. From the IARU R1 VHF managers handbook:   A valid contact is one where both operators have copied both callsigns, the report and an unambiguous confirmation. However no reco
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00163.html (27,674 bytes)

13. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "Mike Dennison" <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 17:04:12 +0100
Very likely a false decode. The clue is the two question marks. In my experience, almost every decode with question marks is false, and there are very few cases where these particular decodes are use
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00169.html (11,995 bytes)

14. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "Graham" <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 17:27:02 +0100
Yes I agree very well sad , can talk the talk, but would appears to have problems walking the walk . It actually bears no resemblance to how the system work's or shows insight to the difference betwe
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00171.html (32,140 bytes)

15. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "Alan Melia" <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 17:47:50 +0100
A couple of comments on the statistics......this has little to do with the decode process itself. The timing only goes to show that the "decoded" call sign was active at the time NOT that he was real
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00172.html (14,343 bytes)

16. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "Graham" <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 19:39:50 +0100
Graham thinks that because there were no more false decodes in the previous 24 hours this one MUST be good. Its not Just Good Alan ... Its 'Ruddy MARVELLOUS ' As in any data system, there is no actua
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00173.html (17,904 bytes)

17. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "Graham" <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 19:52:47 +0100
Thanks Mike , We can add this one to the list of 'ifs' The times are temptingly close , but genuine false detection occurred some time later ...With the number of near misses' Down Under is becoming
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00174.html (13,554 bytes)

18. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: "Graham" <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 20:01:17 +0100
HOWEVER, I don't see the various deep search solutions in Opera including any unknowns in this sense. The time stamp is meant to act as that item of unknown,information, but is not being actually tra
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00175.html (28,792 bytes)

19. RE: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: Rik Strobbe <>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 20:39:36 +0000
Hi Andy, OK about the known callsigns. My focus was on the second part: "However no recourse should be made during the contact to obtain the required information, change of frequency, antenna directi
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00176.html (30,480 bytes)

20. Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real? (score: 1)
Author: Claudio Pozzi <>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 13:38:56 +0200
What happens if someone flood the internet 'deep search' channel wit a lot of fake callsign etc etc? Can someone test this flood? 73 de Claudio IK2PII -- Claudio Pozzi - rispondere a
/rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2015-05/msg00179.html (16,630 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu