When is CQ going to enter the 20th century. Why do they STILL require
disk AND PAPER LOGS???? The ARRL is light years ahead of CQ in this
matter with BBS and FTP/internet uploads or mailing only a disk. We
just printed out the VP2VFP logs for CQWW SSB and there was a stack of
paper 2" thick!! How many trees do we have to kill before they get the
picture? If anyone else feels this way about paper logs, how about
expressing your opinion to CQ or on the CQWW summary sheet.
73's tim
>From Sylvan Katz <sylvank@syma.sussex.ac.uk> Tue Nov 30 08:55:10 1993
From: Sylvan Katz <sylvank@syma.sussex.ac.uk> (Sylvan Katz)
Subject: CT Protocol
Message-ID: <1639.9311300855@syma.sussex.ac.uk>
Does anyone have the communication protocol that CT uses? Also does
anyone have access to the format for the various CT files? We want to grab
and change some messages that CT send to the various stations.
A great time was had by all at GB5DX. Not sure yet what the final score
was but by Sunday 1800Z we had about 4100 Q's and 5.5M points. I expect
that we will have made about 4500 Q's and 6-7M.
Thanks
Sylvan
VE5ZX/G0TZX
*** Dr. J. Sylvan Katz ***
Science Policy Research Unit, Mantell Building, University of Sussex,
Falmer, Brighton, East Sussex, UK BN1 9RF
Tel: (273) 686758 ext 3617 Fax: (273) 685865
G0TZX & VE5ZX
>From hatcher_d <hatcher_d@bt-web.bt.co.uk> Tue Nov 30 10:57:53 1993
From: hatcher_d <hatcher_d@bt-web.bt.co.uk> (hatcher_d)
Subject: CT Protocols ...
Hi All,
I have reverse engineered some of the more useful parts of the CT data
transfer protocol. Things like:
LOG data
Talk/Gab messages
Pass messages
Cluster Traffic to and from the network.
Anyone with some interest mail me direct.
As an aside, I wonder what Ken would think about all this. Maybe there
is a market for CT "add-ons" ???
As the subject of protocols is about, I had an idea of scrapping the
COMTSR system for one that would use IPX messaging, cheap ethernet
cards and thin ethernet as a transport medium. This would have fewer
need for serial ports (none) and would run at a much higher data rate.
For a contest network, you would build a small LAN, each station with an
ethernet card, bit like what we do in the office.
The problem is I'd need to get hold of the hooks from CT to the COMTSR
and then on to the IPX messaging part of the system. The bottom line
is that we need to know what CT speaks to the COMTSR so that a
differing TSR or other mechanism can be put in its place. Anyone got a
definition of what goes on here? Anyone tried this or something like it?
Comments?
Darren - G7BKO - Secretary Martlesham RS
Darren Hatcher = X400 : /C=GB/ADMD=BT/PRMD=BT
Rm 16, 1st Floor, Ph2 = /PN=.D.HATCHER/O=BT PLC/OU=BIB3IP
BT Computer Centre = WEB : hatcher_d
Bibb Way, Ipswich = Packet : G7BKO @ GB7DXM
Suffolk,IP1 2EQ = Internet : hatcher_d@bt-web.bt.co.uk (work)
U.K. = or : dhatcher@micromuse.co.uk (play)
Voice: +44 473 227332 = Data: +44 473 227259 = Fax +44 473 231727
>From D.RODMAN" <OOPDAVID@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu Tue Nov 30 12:08:50 1993
From: D.RODMAN" <OOPDAVID@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu (D.RODMAN)
Subject: CT Protocols ...
Message-ID: <01H5X1KWFI6E8WWIGA@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu>
About two years ago, we (KN2M) tried the LAND approach using Novell
and tied 3 stations together. There appeared to be two problems
initiated by this approach. First the computers were still hard wired
and RF was capable of traversing the serial lines (the ones we used
for the actual connects). The Novell LAN was used to speed backing
up data and the server was non-dedicated 486. The system seemed to
run for a few hours but about 4 hrs into the test one or more
computers started to mis-communicate. That error was ultimately
traced to RF and was cured by installing fiberoptic communication
lines. The second problem was noted that the server was just too
overloaded by data keeping. Although it was perferable to me in
theory to have ONE source of loging data for the contest, the LAN
would not permit this. Ultimately, the computer using the Novell portion
and actually running CT started to miss spots. I asked Ken to
rewrite the software after consulting with my Novell experts in town.
Ken agreed, in principle to do this, but after 6 or so months of
begging him for a solution we both agreed that he is just TOO busy
to change the RS232 to a LAN approach (with any software not only
Novell). I believe that the EASIEST thing to do is provide each
computer in the chain with a 4-Comm board and put the idea of
a LAN on the back burner. This will maximize your versatility with
the present software and use it with the indended drivers. I doubt
with Ken's work load he will complete this request in the near future.
At least, he hasn't spoken to me about it. 73, Dave.
>From D.RODMAN" <OOPDAVID@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu Tue Nov 30 12:15:47 1993
From: D.RODMAN" <OOPDAVID@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu (D.RODMAN)
Subject: CT Protocols ... (More)
Message-ID: <01H5X24MMWEA8WWCKD@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu>
Just to clarify my earlier message: When we cured the RS232
RF problem by installing fiberoptic lines we still had an RF path
with the Ethernet cards and RG58. That was probably the reason
why the computer connected to the server continued to have rare
problems. The server would, after a few thousand QSOs, take 5
minutes or more to rebuild its files whenever we put them in synch
after losing communications from RF down the Ethernet cards. The
system now works flawlessly: I use fiberoptic for the RS232 and removed
the Ethernet cards. Dave.
>From Randy A Thompson <K5ZD@world.std.com> Tue Nov 30 12:31:37 1993
From: Randy A Thompson <K5ZD@world.std.com> (Randy A Thompson)
Subject: K5ZD WWCW Score/Breakdowns
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9311300737.A873-0100000@world.std.com>
Great contest to be in W1! Congratulations to K1KI on the win.
Here is my score and breakdowns. If you pay by the byte, sorry. I have
this great technology for complete score exchange and I want to use it!
CQ WORLD WIDE DX CONTEST 1993
Call: K5ZD Country: United States
Mode: CW Category: Single Operator
BAND QSO QSO PTS PTS/QSO ZONES COUNTRIES
160 111 308 2.77 13 53
80 340 975 2.87 21 77
40 808 2363 2.92 32 111
20 944 2785 2.95 33 104
15 780 2302 2.95 29 102
10 60 152 2.53 18 37
---------------------------------------------------
Totals 3043 8885 2.92 146 484 => 5,597,550
Here is the rate sheet. Remember, CT does not handle the multipliers
correctly on this report so they do not match what is above.
BREAKDOWN QSO/mults K5ZD Single Operator
HOUR 160 80 40 20 15 10 HR TOT CUM TOT
0 ..... ..... 47/34 13/10 ..... ..... 60/44 60/44
1 . . 40/21 15/11 . . 55/32 115/76
2 . 66/34 . . . . 66/34 181/110
3 16/15 12/3 5/3 10/6 . . 43/27 224/137
4 . . 87/8 . . . 87/8 311/145
5 51/18 . 8/1 . . . 59/19 370/164
6 12/4 52/11 . . . . 64/15 434/179
7 7/3 31/3 28/0 . . . 66/6 500/185
8 ..... ..... 61/8 ..... ..... ..... 61/8 561/193
9 3/1 9/5 29/3 . . . 41/9 602/202
10 4/4 5/1 13/5 2/2 . . 24/12 626/214
11 . . 3/1 92/27 . . 95/28 721/242
12 . . . 20/3 124/26 . 144/29 865/271
13 . . . . 119/6 . 119/6 984/277
14 . . . . 111/3 . 111/3 1095/280
15 . . . . 67/1 20/20 87/21 1182/301
16 ..... ..... ..... 59/4 27/20 2/2 88/26 1270/327
17 . . . 103/3 . . 103/3 1373/330
18 . . . 25/6 21/12 16/6 62/24 1435/354
19 . . 2/0 29/8 7/3 5/2 43/13 1478/367
20 . . . 21/3 8/5 4/1 33/9 1511/376
21 . . 28/4 7/1 4/1 . 39/6 1550/382
22 . . 83/5 . . . 83/5 1633/387
23 . . 90/4 . . . 90/4 1723/391
0 ..... ..... 74/3 ..... ..... ..... 74/3 1797/394
1 . 6/2 40/2 . . . 46/4 1843/398
2 . 29/5 . . . . 29/5 1872/403
3 6/5 9/2 6/1 1/0 . . 22/8 1894/411
4 2/1 30/8 . . . . 32/9 1926/420
5 1/1 37/0 . . . . 38/1 1964/421
6 4/0 24/0 1/0 . . . 29/0 1993/421
7 3/2 . 24/5 . . . 27/7 2020/428
8 ..... 21/2 37/0 ..... ..... ..... 58/2 2078/430
9 1/1 3/3 14/2 . . . 18/6 2096/436
10 1/0 2/0 5/3 6/0 . . 14/3 2110/439
11 . . 1/0 52/1 . . 53/1 2163/440
12 . . . 116/5 . . 116/5 2279/445
13 . . . . 113/3 . 113/3 2392/448
14 . . . . 84/6 3/2 87/8 2479/456
15 . . . . 71/5 2/2 73/7 2552/463
16 ..... ..... ..... 81/4 1/1 3/3 85/8 2637/471
17 . . . 116/0 . . 116/0 2753/471
18 . . . 80/3 . . 80/3 2833/474
19 . . . 28/1 7/4 4/0 39/5 2872/479
20 . . . 8/5 11/6 . 19/11 2891/490
21 . . 1/0 33/2 5/2 1/1 40/5 2931/495
22 . . 26/1 23/2 . . 49/3 2980/498
23 . 4/0 55/1 4/1 . . 63/2 3043/500
DAY1 93/45 175/57 524/97 396/84 488/77 47/31 ..... 1723/391
DAY2 18/10 165/22 284/18 548/24 292/27 13/8 . 1320/109
TOT 111/55 340/79 808/115 944/108 780/104 60/39 . 3043/500
Here is the time/rate for each band.
DAY1 2.2/43 3.0/59 7.6/69 5.2/76 5.0/97 1.0/49 ..... 23.8/72
DAY2 1.4/12 4.5/37 5.6/51 6.7/82 3.9/75 0.5/24 . 22.6/58
TOT 3.6/31 7.4/46 13.2/61 11.9/80 8.9/88 1.5/40 . 46.4/66
Is Europe important from W1 or what?!
Continent Statistics
K5ZD Single Operator 28 Nov 1993 2359z
160 80 40 20 15 10 ALL percent
North America 21 43 51 45 36 22 218 7.2
South America 4 11 16 27 26 29 113 3.7
Europe 82 274 686 756 686 0 2484 81.6
Asia 1 4 34 95 5 0 139 4.6
Africa 2 5 16 14 14 8 59 1.9
Oceania 1 3 5 7 13 1 30 1.0
73,
Randy
|