THESE WORDS WOULD LOOK NICE ON A T-SHIRT: "I have no axe to grind, no
reputation to maintain, no experience to be of
value."
Credit to Ed, AI6O for the words!
OJ, George, K5KG
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces+giwagner=k5kg.com@contesting.com> On
Behalf Of cq-contest-request@contesting.com
Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 12:00 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 243, Issue 8
Send CQ-Contest mailing list submissions to
cq-contest@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
cq-contest-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
cq-contest-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CQ-Contest digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Announcement: 2023 Louisiana QSO Party (w5wz@w5wz.com)
2. ARRL DX - Self Spotting (Edward Sawyer)
3. Re: ARRL DX - Self Spotting (kq2m@kq2m.com)
4. Re: ARRL DX - Self Spotting (Barry W2UP)
5. Re: ARRL DX - Self Spotting (Mason Matrazzo)
6. Re: ARRL DX - Self Spotting (Ed Felter)
7. CTY-3309 Country Files - 09 March 2023 (Jim Reisert AD1C)
8. Re: ARRL DX - Self Spotting (Steve London)
9. Re: ARRL DX - Self Spotting (Mason Matrazzo)
10. Re: Type of male plug ICE-419 Bandpass Filters (Jim Brown)
11. Re: ARRL DX - Self Spotting (Stan Stockton)
12. Re: ARRL DX - Self Spotting (Albert Crespo)
13. Re: ARRL DX - Self Spotting (dimitri cosson)
14. Self Spotting (jpescatore@aol.com)
15. Re: Type of male plug ICE-419 Bandpass Filters (AB2E Darrell)
16. Re: Self Spotting (Steve London)
17. CQ Tokyo (Barry W2UP)
18. Re: Self Spotting (Stan Stockton)
19. North American CW Sprint - Feb 2023 - Final Results Available
(Ward Silver)
20. Re: Self Spotting (jpescatore@aol.com)
21. Re: Self Spotting (jpescatore@aol.com)
22. Re: Self Spotting (Stan Stockton)
23. Re: Type of male plug ICE-419 Bandpass Filters (David Hachadorian)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2023 13:44:28 -0600
From: w5wz@w5wz.com
To: Cq Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Announcement: 2023 Louisiana QSO Party
Message-ID: <e28c46fc59bfb9d1afa3144d60b64a55@w5wz.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
The 2023 edition of the Louisiana QSO Party, which will run from 14:00
UTC, April 1, 2023 to 02:00 UTC, April 2, 2023 (9:00 AM to 9:00 PM CDT
Saturday, April 1, 2023)
http://laqp.org/
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 22:25:14 +0000
From: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>
To: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX - Self Spotting
Message-ID:
<DM5PR06MB31301B5B93153E9F14314AB8ECB49@DM5PR06MB3130.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I am interested to hear the opinion of the DX side on this topic. I was trying
to self-spot a number of times without much success.
I tried on DX Summit. The spot was posted.
I tried on DX Watch. The spot was posted.
I tried on DX Heat and it stated that self spotting was not allowed.
What I found was that the self spot almost never generated any activity - maybe
a couple of callers. But then later (sometimes 10 mins or more later) a huge
group of callers would respond to a spot. The spot was always generated on the
EU side of the pond.
I am thinking that most people have a filter set to only see EU side spots. Is
that true? If so, then there is almost zero value in self spotting. In fact
its counter productive if people are now spotting less because they think we
are self spotting so what's the value in spotting.
Any comments on this topic welcome.
Ed N1UR
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2023 17:19:57 -0600
From: kq2m@kq2m.com
To: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>
Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX - Self Spotting
Message-ID: <2d835a8d7a28d61afb7c40ffee71d2e5@kq2m.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
I self-spotted quite a bit this past weekend after vowing NOT do do so
before the contest. But, having been spotted so little in past
contests, especially on SSB, I decided to test the hypothesis that I
have had that SPOTS MATTER! I had very mixed feelings about doing so
since before ARRLDXCW I had NEVER self-spotted, not even outside of
contests!
I didn't self spot at first but with the mediocre Saturday 20 meter
conditions I decided to give it a shot
and the results were fascinating to me. Early on, a self-spot was
usually met with callers within 30 seconds - 1 minute, mostly multis
but some single ops as well. Then within the next 5 - 10 minutes, at
some point, there would be an EXPLOSION, ALL AT ONCE, at some point.
Now when I was low in the band early in the contest you could say that
the callers were the result of people tuning and I was fresh meat so
people would call me anyway, and that was true, but the sudden BURST
that would occur and the magnitude of loud callers going from maybe 3 -
5 to 50 ALL AT ONCE, was more than just people tuning across my freq.
This pattern consistently repeated itself the same way for most of the
weekend. Sometimes when the band was open well (not just spotlight
propagation), I might get called by 4 - 5 UA4/RK4/R4 stations right in
a row where none had called me before. Same thing with DL's, G's, PA's
and other high volume countries. It was like some local packet/spotting
network that was active, had my call on it and people responded ALL AT
ONCE
based on their local spotting network, not DX Summit, which was the only
network that I self-spotted on.
There is no question that continuing to self-spot for most of the
weekend (except when the pileup got too large), kept the rate higher
than it would
have been without doing so. And self-spotting was ESPECIALLY effective
when I changed run frequencies on an existing band, moved to a new band,
or was not working anyone and then with in minutes I had a good run
going.
The only times that a self-spot did not generate callers was when I was
either not being heard (fairly frequently apparently) thanks to
qrm/qrn/qsb, or the band was dying. And then at the end when I was on 10
or 15 and most of the available callers on that band had either already
worked me or were calling cq themselves.
What it did not seem to do was to bring in any more mults than I would
normally get. But of course this was only one weekend - so only one
"data point" and one data point in which cndx were exceptionally erratic
and un predictable thanks to ** 4 ** different M-class flares DURING
the contest, which as far as I can remember, was the most M Class flares
that I have ever seen in one contest weekend!
After the contest I searched for my call on DX Summit to see who spotted
me and noticed that almost no one did besides myself. Equally
interesting was doing a search for calls on several different serious
High Power Single Op ALL Band guys and noticing that they were not being
spotted either sometimes for as many as 10 - 12 hours even though they
were obviously loud and making thousands of qso's. I did not expect
this at all. It seems like the normal spotters went on strike this
weekend seemingly determined NOT to spot anyone.
73
Bob, KQ2M
On 2023-03-08 16:25, Edward Sawyer wrote:
> I am interested to hear the opinion of the DX side on this topic. I
> was trying to self-spot a number of times without much success.
> I tried on DX Summit. The spot was posted.
> I tried on DX Watch. The spot was posted.
> I tried on DX Heat and it stated that self spotting was not allowed.
>
> What I found was that the self spot almost never generated any
> activity - maybe a couple of callers. But then later (sometimes 10
> mins or more later) a huge group of callers would respond to a spot.
> The spot was always generated on the EU side of the pond.
>
> I am thinking that most people have a filter set to only see EU side
> spots. Is that true? If so, then there is almost zero value in self
> spotting. In fact its counter productive if people are now spotting
> less because they think we are self spotting so what's the value in
> spotting.
>
> Any comments on this topic welcome.
>
> Ed N1UR
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 17:24:45 -0700
From: Barry W2UP <w2up.co@gmail.com>
To: kq2m@kq2m.com
Cc: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>,
cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX - Self Spotting
Message-ID:
<CACUWnePqCjT2Yu6HRQRy4OY76abjOA6kbwapimsXo00fLSYOLw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Rule for consideration for next year:
You can work yourself for QSO points once every 10 minutes.
Barry W2UP
On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 5:18?PM <kq2m@kq2m.com> wrote:
>
> I self-spotted quite a bit this past weekend after vowing NOT do do so
> before the contest. But, having been spotted so little in past
> contests, especially on SSB, I decided to test the hypothesis that I
> have had that SPOTS MATTER! I had very mixed feelings about doing so
> since before ARRLDXCW I had NEVER self-spotted, not even outside of
> contests!
>
> I didn't self spot at first but with the mediocre Saturday 20 meter
> conditions I decided to give it a shot
> and the results were fascinating to me. Early on, a self-spot was
> usually met with callers within 30 seconds - 1 minute, mostly multis
> but some single ops as well. Then within the next 5 - 10 minutes, at
> some point, there would be an EXPLOSION, ALL AT ONCE, at some point.
> Now when I was low in the band early in the contest you could say that
> the callers were the result of people tuning and I was fresh meat so
> people would call me anyway, and that was true, but the sudden BURST
> that would occur and the magnitude of loud callers going from maybe 3 -
> 5 to 50 ALL AT ONCE, was more than just people tuning across my freq.
>
> This pattern consistently repeated itself the same way for most of the
> weekend. Sometimes when the band was open well (not just spotlight
> propagation), I might get called by 4 - 5 UA4/RK4/R4 stations right in
> a row where none had called me before. Same thing with DL's, G's, PA's
> and other high volume countries. It was like some local packet/spotting
> network that was active, had my call on it and people responded ALL AT
> ONCE
> based on their local spotting network, not DX Summit, which was the only
> network that I self-spotted on.
>
> There is no question that continuing to self-spot for most of the
> weekend (except when the pileup got too large), kept the rate higher
> than it would
> have been without doing so. And self-spotting was ESPECIALLY effective
> when I changed run frequencies on an existing band, moved to a new band,
> or was not working anyone and then with in minutes I had a good run
> going.
>
> The only times that a self-spot did not generate callers was when I was
> either not being heard (fairly frequently apparently) thanks to
> qrm/qrn/qsb, or the band was dying. And then at the end when I was on 10
> or 15 and most of the available callers on that band had either already
> worked me or were calling cq themselves.
>
> What it did not seem to do was to bring in any more mults than I would
> normally get. But of course this was only one weekend - so only one
> "data point" and one data point in which cndx were exceptionally erratic
> and un predictable thanks to ** 4 ** different M-class flares DURING
> the contest, which as far as I can remember, was the most M Class flares
> that I have ever seen in one contest weekend!
>
> After the contest I searched for my call on DX Summit to see who spotted
> me and noticed that almost no one did besides myself. Equally
> interesting was doing a search for calls on several different serious
> High Power Single Op ALL Band guys and noticing that they were not being
> spotted either sometimes for as many as 10 - 12 hours even though they
> were obviously loud and making thousands of qso's. I did not expect
> this at all. It seems like the normal spotters went on strike this
> weekend seemingly determined NOT to spot anyone.
>
> 73
>
> Bob, KQ2M
>
>
> On 2023-03-08 16:25, Edward Sawyer wrote:
> > I am interested to hear the opinion of the DX side on this topic. I
> > was trying to self-spot a number of times without much success.
> > I tried on DX Summit. The spot was posted.
> > I tried on DX Watch. The spot was posted.
> > I tried on DX Heat and it stated that self spotting was not allowed.
> >
> > What I found was that the self spot almost never generated any
> > activity - maybe a couple of callers. But then later (sometimes 10
> > mins or more later) a huge group of callers would respond to a spot.
> > The spot was always generated on the EU side of the pond.
> >
> > I am thinking that most people have a filter set to only see EU side
> > spots. Is that true? If so, then there is almost zero value in self
> > spotting. In fact its counter productive if people are now spotting
> > less because they think we are self spotting so what's the value in
> > spotting.
> >
> > Any comments on this topic welcome.
> >
> > Ed N1UR
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 19:28:00 -0500
From: Mason Matrazzo <km4siinc@gmail.com>
To: kq2m@kq2m.com
Cc: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>,
cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX - Self Spotting
Message-ID:
<CADkhQ-NKPyA1SQjs=SWeVNVcCnwF1z1bLxsBz-2UBqVH7CnULg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
One thing to keep in mind about DXsummit is that if you post a spot there,
only people that are also using DXsummit will see your spot. Anyone using
any other cluster will not see your spots as spots posted to DXsummit
remain local to their site. I would venture to say that the majority of
serious contesters are likely using telnet through N1MM or the like and
thus will probably never have seen the self-spots that you posted via
DXsummit. You will almost certainly have more luck self-spotting elsewhere.
73
Mason - KM4SII
On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 7:18?PM <kq2m@kq2m.com> wrote:
>
> I self-spotted quite a bit this past weekend after vowing NOT do do so
> before the contest. But, having been spotted so little in past
> contests, especially on SSB, I decided to test the hypothesis that I
> have had that SPOTS MATTER! I had very mixed feelings about doing so
> since before ARRLDXCW I had NEVER self-spotted, not even outside of
> contests!
>
> I didn't self spot at first but with the mediocre Saturday 20 meter
> conditions I decided to give it a shot
> and the results were fascinating to me. Early on, a self-spot was
> usually met with callers within 30 seconds - 1 minute, mostly multis
> but some single ops as well. Then within the next 5 - 10 minutes, at
> some point, there would be an EXPLOSION, ALL AT ONCE, at some point.
> Now when I was low in the band early in the contest you could say that
> the callers were the result of people tuning and I was fresh meat so
> people would call me anyway, and that was true, but the sudden BURST
> that would occur and the magnitude of loud callers going from maybe 3 -
> 5 to 50 ALL AT ONCE, was more than just people tuning across my freq.
>
> This pattern consistently repeated itself the same way for most of the
> weekend. Sometimes when the band was open well (not just spotlight
> propagation), I might get called by 4 - 5 UA4/RK4/R4 stations right in
> a row where none had called me before. Same thing with DL's, G's, PA's
> and other high volume countries. It was like some local packet/spotting
> network that was active, had my call on it and people responded ALL AT
> ONCE
> based on their local spotting network, not DX Summit, which was the only
> network that I self-spotted on.
>
> There is no question that continuing to self-spot for most of the
> weekend (except when the pileup got too large), kept the rate higher
> than it would
> have been without doing so. And self-spotting was ESPECIALLY effective
> when I changed run frequencies on an existing band, moved to a new band,
> or was not working anyone and then with in minutes I had a good run
> going.
>
> The only times that a self-spot did not generate callers was when I was
> either not being heard (fairly frequently apparently) thanks to
> qrm/qrn/qsb, or the band was dying. And then at the end when I was on 10
> or 15 and most of the available callers on that band had either already
> worked me or were calling cq themselves.
>
> What it did not seem to do was to bring in any more mults than I would
> normally get. But of course this was only one weekend - so only one
> "data point" and one data point in which cndx were exceptionally erratic
> and un predictable thanks to ** 4 ** different M-class flares DURING
> the contest, which as far as I can remember, was the most M Class flares
> that I have ever seen in one contest weekend!
>
> After the contest I searched for my call on DX Summit to see who spotted
> me and noticed that almost no one did besides myself. Equally
> interesting was doing a search for calls on several different serious
> High Power Single Op ALL Band guys and noticing that they were not being
> spotted either sometimes for as many as 10 - 12 hours even though they
> were obviously loud and making thousands of qso's. I did not expect
> this at all. It seems like the normal spotters went on strike this
> weekend seemingly determined NOT to spot anyone.
>
> 73
>
> Bob, KQ2M
>
>
> On 2023-03-08 16:25, Edward Sawyer wrote:
> > I am interested to hear the opinion of the DX side on this topic. I
> > was trying to self-spot a number of times without much success.
> > I tried on DX Summit. The spot was posted.
> > I tried on DX Watch. The spot was posted.
> > I tried on DX Heat and it stated that self spotting was not allowed.
> >
> > What I found was that the self spot almost never generated any
> > activity - maybe a couple of callers. But then later (sometimes 10
> > mins or more later) a huge group of callers would respond to a spot.
> > The spot was always generated on the EU side of the pond.
> >
> > I am thinking that most people have a filter set to only see EU side
> > spots. Is that true? If so, then there is almost zero value in self
> > spotting. In fact its counter productive if people are now spotting
> > less because they think we are self spotting so what's the value in
> > spotting.
> >
> > Any comments on this topic welcome.
> >
> > Ed N1UR
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 20:47:39 -0600
From: Ed Felter <edfelter45@gmail.com>
To: Barry W2UP <w2up.co@gmail.com>
Cc: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>,
cq-contest@contesting.com, kq2m@kq2m.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX - Self Spotting
Message-ID:
<CAC6UyYPqRn4ozt1=bY0rGTyw4umC3_LR3Z0BXh-xsg0kk9b-Jw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I have been contesting about 5-6 years and have always CHOSEN to be low
power and unassisted. I CHOSE not to self spot this past weekend, thinking
that (for me) that would be an assistance. Bob KQ2M seems to have proven
TO ME that self spotting would put me (in my own mind) in the Assisted
class. I will continue to operate in the Unassisted category with no self
spots. MY CHOICE!
I have no axe to grind, no reputation to maintain, no experience to be of
value.
I do wish we could still have a pure Unassisted class.
No arguments here!
73 and see you on top band Friday night!
Ed AI6O
On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 6:25 PM Barry W2UP <w2up.co@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rule for consideration for next year:
>
> You can work yourself for QSO points once every 10 minutes.
>
> Barry W2UP
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 5:18?PM <kq2m@kq2m.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I self-spotted quite a bit this past weekend after vowing NOT do do so
> > before the contest. But, having been spotted so little in past
> > contests, especially on SSB, I decided to test the hypothesis that I
> > have had that SPOTS MATTER! I had very mixed feelings about doing so
> > since before ARRLDXCW I had NEVER self-spotted, not even outside of
> > contests!
> >
> > I didn't self spot at first but with the mediocre Saturday 20 meter
> > conditions I decided to give it a shot
> > and the results were fascinating to me. Early on, a self-spot was
> > usually met with callers within 30 seconds - 1 minute, mostly multis
> > but some single ops as well. Then within the next 5 - 10 minutes, at
> > some point, there would be an EXPLOSION, ALL AT ONCE, at some point.
> > Now when I was low in the band early in the contest you could say that
> > the callers were the result of people tuning and I was fresh meat so
> > people would call me anyway, and that was true, but the sudden BURST
> > that would occur and the magnitude of loud callers going from maybe 3 -
> > 5 to 50 ALL AT ONCE, was more than just people tuning across my freq.
> >
> > This pattern consistently repeated itself the same way for most of the
> > weekend. Sometimes when the band was open well (not just spotlight
> > propagation), I might get called by 4 - 5 UA4/RK4/R4 stations right in
> > a row where none had called me before. Same thing with DL's, G's, PA's
> > and other high volume countries. It was like some local packet/spotting
> > network that was active, had my call on it and people responded ALL AT
> > ONCE
> > based on their local spotting network, not DX Summit, which was the only
> > network that I self-spotted on.
> >
> > There is no question that continuing to self-spot for most of the
> > weekend (except when the pileup got too large), kept the rate higher
> > than it would
> > have been without doing so. And self-spotting was ESPECIALLY effective
> > when I changed run frequencies on an existing band, moved to a new band,
> > or was not working anyone and then with in minutes I had a good run
> > going.
> >
> > The only times that a self-spot did not generate callers was when I was
> > either not being heard (fairly frequently apparently) thanks to
> > qrm/qrn/qsb, or the band was dying. And then at the end when I was on 10
> > or 15 and most of the available callers on that band had either already
> > worked me or were calling cq themselves.
> >
> > What it did not seem to do was to bring in any more mults than I would
> > normally get. But of course this was only one weekend - so only one
> > "data point" and one data point in which cndx were exceptionally erratic
> > and un predictable thanks to ** 4 ** different M-class flares DURING
> > the contest, which as far as I can remember, was the most M Class flares
> > that I have ever seen in one contest weekend!
> >
> > After the contest I searched for my call on DX Summit to see who spotted
> > me and noticed that almost no one did besides myself. Equally
> > interesting was doing a search for calls on several different serious
> > High Power Single Op ALL Band guys and noticing that they were not being
> > spotted either sometimes for as many as 10 - 12 hours even though they
> > were obviously loud and making thousands of qso's. I did not expect
> > this at all. It seems like the normal spotters went on strike this
> > weekend seemingly determined NOT to spot anyone.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Bob, KQ2M
> >
> >
> > On 2023-03-08 16:25, Edward Sawyer wrote:
> > > I am interested to hear the opinion of the DX side on this topic. I
> > > was trying to self-spot a number of times without much success.
> > > I tried on DX Summit. The spot was posted.
> > > I tried on DX Watch. The spot was posted.
> > > I tried on DX Heat and it stated that self spotting was not allowed.
> > >
> > > What I found was that the self spot almost never generated any
> > > activity - maybe a couple of callers. But then later (sometimes 10
> > > mins or more later) a huge group of callers would respond to a spot.
> > > The spot was always generated on the EU side of the pond.
> > >
> > > I am thinking that most people have a filter set to only see EU side
> > > spots. Is that true? If so, then there is almost zero value in self
> > > spotting. In fact its counter productive if people are now spotting
> > > less because they think we are self spotting so what's the value in
> > > spotting.
> > >
> > > Any comments on this topic welcome.
> > >
> > > Ed N1UR
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2023 19:48:20 -0700
From: "Jim Reisert AD1C" <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] CTY-3309 Country Files - 09 March 2023
Message-ID: <mailman.4.1678381202.29507.cq-contest@contesting.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
The Country (CTY) Files were updated on 09 March 2023:
https://www.country-files.com/cty-3309-09-march-2023/
For installation instructions, start at:
https://www.country-files.com/
Hover your mouse over the word Contest in the menu, then select the
software you are using.
To install the file, follow the link to your software at the top of the page.
If you are interested in a bigger CTY.DAT for everyday logging, you can get
it here:
https://www.country-files.com/big-cty-09-march-2023/
Note that the release notes (and Version Entity) for this larger file are
different than what is shown below. There is a separate link to them.
As a reminder, there is an RSS feed of the latest country file announcements:
https://www.country-files.com/feed/
Here are the release notes:
9 March 2023 (CTY-3309)
VER20230309, Version entity is Sudan, ST
Added/changed Entities/Prefixes/Callsigns:
* EA9PD/P is Ceuta & Melilla, EA9
* TX5L is New Caledonia, FK
* GB1PAT, GB2PAT and GB8KC are all Northern Ireland, GI
* GB0SIM, GB2AAW and GB5LSG are all Scotland, GM
* GB0AAW and GB0RVW are both Wales, GW
* IQ0PM is Sardinia, IS
* AA4Q, AD0L, AF9W, K5EM, K5RC, KH7X, KN9K, N1CC, N1KEZ, N3BEN, NK9I,
W2XX, W5UJ, WF4U and WQ3U are all United States, K in CQ zone 3, ITU
zone 6
* N1NYT and W7KF are both United States, K in CQ zone 4, ITU zone 6
* AH6O, K2DP, K2HT, K6KII, K7MOA, K7ZKM, KA7PNH, KB9JJA, KL7U, N6EV,
N9ISN, NG7IL, W7JKC, W7KAM, W8KR, W9DX, W9DXM, WA7EM, WB7BWZ and WW2OK
are all United States, K in CQ zone 4, ITU zone 7
* AA1JM, K1NA, K2LAT, K4HY, K4ISV, K4PKM, K4TIN, K4YA, K5FZ, K5IJ,
K7TAR, KD4ADC, KG4BIG, KG5SSB, KI5GX, KM4CRC, KM4RT, KO4O, KO4UHE,
KT4RSQ,
KV4AC, KY4AR, N3CY, N3JJT, N4DXN, N4KZ, N5INV, NG5U, NJ0U, W4SV,
W5SGL,
WA4AA, WA4MLD, WJ5K and WW4N are all United States, K in CQ zone 4,
ITU zone 8
* K5AUP, K5MO, K6ND, KE8KMX, KI8EM, KL7NCO, N7DH, N8AHH, N8HM, N9MS,
W6RIF, WA8NLX, WB5KFP and WV7MS are all United States, K in CQ zone
5, ITU zone 8
* KA1MRC and KG7ART are both Hawaii, KH6
* KD7RF, KD7UZB, KF7MVM and N5ZDI are all Alaska, KL
* WA4BCR is Puerto Rico, KP4
* LU3EU/D, LU3HGB/H and LU3XAP/H are all Argentina, LU
* R0QAW/3, R108M, R110AP, R1961G, RA9UF/4, RG61PP and RN9JM/6 are all
European Russia, UA
* R9CS/P and UA5B/8 are both Asiatic Russia, UA9
* RV3DSA/0 is Asiatic Russia, UA9 in CQ zone 19, ITU zone 34
Removed Entities/Prefixes/Callsigns:
* 3Y/LB1QI and 3Y/LB5GI in Bouvet, 3Y/b
* BG0DKM/8 in China, BY
* EA8CHC/7 in Spain, EA
* K4BWP, KC4SAW, KE8AE, KL0SS, KP2XX, N4BCD, NF4J, NV4B, W0ZP, W4NJK,
W9KKN, WJ4T, WL7AM, WW0CJ and WY7FD in United States, K
* KD0OXY in Alaska, KL
* LU1XOP/W, LU3EU/E, LU8WVA/W and LW3DJC/D in Argentina, LU
* R2023EN, R8MB/1, RM8W/3, UE80M and UE80ML in European Russia, UA
* RC7LE/9, RQ1A/9 and RV7B/9 in Asiatic Russia, UA9
73 - Jim AD1C
--
Jim Reisert AD1C, <jjreisert at alum.mit.edu>, https://ad1c.us
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 21:08:37 -0700
From: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
To: Mason Matrazzo <km4siinc@gmail.com>
Cc: kq2m@kq2m.com, Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>,
cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX - Self Spotting
Message-ID:
<CAB7zQ=3Ydw0NvGccT9TgKSK+rnOzaT0trBmCSYfYGgX-Bve1-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Between ARRL DX CW and Phone weekends, DXSummit seems to have turned off
posting self spots that originated on standard DX clusters.
73,
Steve, N2IC
On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 7:32?PM Mason Matrazzo <km4siinc@gmail.com> wrote:
> One thing to keep in mind about DXsummit is that if you post a spot there,
> only people that are also using DXsummit will see your spot. Anyone using
> any other cluster will not see your spots as spots posted to DXsummit
> remain local to their site. I would venture to say that the majority of
> serious contesters are likely using telnet through N1MM or the like and
> thus will probably never have seen the self-spots that you posted via
> DXsummit. You will almost certainly have more luck self-spotting elsewhere.
>
> 73
> Mason - KM4SII
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 7:18?PM <kq2m@kq2m.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I self-spotted quite a bit this past weekend after vowing NOT do do so
> > before the contest. But, having been spotted so little in past
> > contests, especially on SSB, I decided to test the hypothesis that I
> > have had that SPOTS MATTER! I had very mixed feelings about doing so
> > since before ARRLDXCW I had NEVER self-spotted, not even outside of
> > contests!
> >
> > I didn't self spot at first but with the mediocre Saturday 20 meter
> > conditions I decided to give it a shot
> > and the results were fascinating to me. Early on, a self-spot was
> > usually met with callers within 30 seconds - 1 minute, mostly multis
> > but some single ops as well. Then within the next 5 - 10 minutes, at
> > some point, there would be an EXPLOSION, ALL AT ONCE, at some point.
> > Now when I was low in the band early in the contest you could say that
> > the callers were the result of people tuning and I was fresh meat so
> > people would call me anyway, and that was true, but the sudden BURST
> > that would occur and the magnitude of loud callers going from maybe 3 -
> > 5 to 50 ALL AT ONCE, was more than just people tuning across my freq.
> >
> > This pattern consistently repeated itself the same way for most of the
> > weekend. Sometimes when the band was open well (not just spotlight
> > propagation), I might get called by 4 - 5 UA4/RK4/R4 stations right in
> > a row where none had called me before. Same thing with DL's, G's, PA's
> > and other high volume countries. It was like some local packet/spotting
> > network that was active, had my call on it and people responded ALL AT
> > ONCE
> > based on their local spotting network, not DX Summit, which was the only
> > network that I self-spotted on.
> >
> > There is no question that continuing to self-spot for most of the
> > weekend (except when the pileup got too large), kept the rate higher
> > than it would
> > have been without doing so. And self-spotting was ESPECIALLY effective
> > when I changed run frequencies on an existing band, moved to a new band,
> > or was not working anyone and then with in minutes I had a good run
> > going.
> >
> > The only times that a self-spot did not generate callers was when I was
> > either not being heard (fairly frequently apparently) thanks to
> > qrm/qrn/qsb, or the band was dying. And then at the end when I was on 10
> > or 15 and most of the available callers on that band had either already
> > worked me or were calling cq themselves.
> >
> > What it did not seem to do was to bring in any more mults than I would
> > normally get. But of course this was only one weekend - so only one
> > "data point" and one data point in which cndx were exceptionally erratic
> > and un predictable thanks to ** 4 ** different M-class flares DURING
> > the contest, which as far as I can remember, was the most M Class flares
> > that I have ever seen in one contest weekend!
> >
> > After the contest I searched for my call on DX Summit to see who spotted
> > me and noticed that almost no one did besides myself. Equally
> > interesting was doing a search for calls on several different serious
> > High Power Single Op ALL Band guys and noticing that they were not being
> > spotted either sometimes for as many as 10 - 12 hours even though they
> > were obviously loud and making thousands of qso's. I did not expect
> > this at all. It seems like the normal spotters went on strike this
> > weekend seemingly determined NOT to spot anyone.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Bob, KQ2M
> >
> >
> > On 2023-03-08 16:25, Edward Sawyer wrote:
> > > I am interested to hear the opinion of the DX side on this topic. I
> > > was trying to self-spot a number of times without much success.
> > > I tried on DX Summit. The spot was posted.
> > > I tried on DX Watch. The spot was posted.
> > > I tried on DX Heat and it stated that self spotting was not allowed.
> > >
> > > What I found was that the self spot almost never generated any
> > > activity - maybe a couple of callers. But then later (sometimes 10
> > > mins or more later) a huge group of callers would respond to a spot.
> > > The spot was always generated on the EU side of the pond.
> > >
> > > I am thinking that most people have a filter set to only see EU side
> > > spots. Is that true? If so, then there is almost zero value in self
> > > spotting. In fact its counter productive if people are now spotting
> > > less because they think we are self spotting so what's the value in
> > > spotting.
> > >
> > > Any comments on this topic welcome.
> > >
> > > Ed N1UR
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 23:17:25 -0500
From: Mason Matrazzo <km4siinc@gmail.com>
To: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
Cc: kq2m@kq2m.com, Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>,
cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX - Self Spotting
Message-ID:
<CADkhQ-PFRDCZKG7Jiva6v=iW=_YhkbLgfbzcfKQVbCV2yLGEMw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Steve,
For a few days DXsummit was having issues where *no* spots originating from
outside of DXsummit itself were being displayed. This has since been fixed
and all spots, both local to DXsummit and from external sources, are now
being displayed. That might be what you are referring to.
73
Mason - KM4SII
On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 11:08?PM Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com> wrote:
> Between ARRL DX CW and Phone weekends, DXSummit seems to have turned off
> posting self spots that originated on standard DX clusters.
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 7:32?PM Mason Matrazzo <km4siinc@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> One thing to keep in mind about DXsummit is that if you post a spot there,
>> only people that are also using DXsummit will see your spot. Anyone using
>> any other cluster will not see your spots as spots posted to DXsummit
>> remain local to their site. I would venture to say that the majority of
>> serious contesters are likely using telnet through N1MM or the like and
>> thus will probably never have seen the self-spots that you posted via
>> DXsummit. You will almost certainly have more luck self-spotting
>> elsewhere.
>>
>> 73
>> Mason - KM4SII
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 7:18?PM <kq2m@kq2m.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > I self-spotted quite a bit this past weekend after vowing NOT do do so
>> > before the contest. But, having been spotted so little in past
>> > contests, especially on SSB, I decided to test the hypothesis that I
>> > have had that SPOTS MATTER! I had very mixed feelings about doing so
>> > since before ARRLDXCW I had NEVER self-spotted, not even outside of
>> > contests!
>> >
>> > I didn't self spot at first but with the mediocre Saturday 20 meter
>> > conditions I decided to give it a shot
>> > and the results were fascinating to me. Early on, a self-spot was
>> > usually met with callers within 30 seconds - 1 minute, mostly multis
>> > but some single ops as well. Then within the next 5 - 10 minutes, at
>> > some point, there would be an EXPLOSION, ALL AT ONCE, at some point.
>> > Now when I was low in the band early in the contest you could say that
>> > the callers were the result of people tuning and I was fresh meat so
>> > people would call me anyway, and that was true, but the sudden BURST
>> > that would occur and the magnitude of loud callers going from maybe 3 -
>> > 5 to 50 ALL AT ONCE, was more than just people tuning across my freq.
>> >
>> > This pattern consistently repeated itself the same way for most of the
>> > weekend. Sometimes when the band was open well (not just spotlight
>> > propagation), I might get called by 4 - 5 UA4/RK4/R4 stations right in
>> > a row where none had called me before. Same thing with DL's, G's, PA's
>> > and other high volume countries. It was like some local packet/spotting
>> > network that was active, had my call on it and people responded ALL AT
>> > ONCE
>> > based on their local spotting network, not DX Summit, which was the only
>> > network that I self-spotted on.
>> >
>> > There is no question that continuing to self-spot for most of the
>> > weekend (except when the pileup got too large), kept the rate higher
>> > than it would
>> > have been without doing so. And self-spotting was ESPECIALLY effective
>> > when I changed run frequencies on an existing band, moved to a new band,
>> > or was not working anyone and then with in minutes I had a good run
>> > going.
>> >
>> > The only times that a self-spot did not generate callers was when I was
>> > either not being heard (fairly frequently apparently) thanks to
>> > qrm/qrn/qsb, or the band was dying. And then at the end when I was on 10
>> > or 15 and most of the available callers on that band had either already
>> > worked me or were calling cq themselves.
>> >
>> > What it did not seem to do was to bring in any more mults than I would
>> > normally get. But of course this was only one weekend - so only one
>> > "data point" and one data point in which cndx were exceptionally erratic
>> > and un predictable thanks to ** 4 ** different M-class flares DURING
>> > the contest, which as far as I can remember, was the most M Class flares
>> > that I have ever seen in one contest weekend!
>> >
>> > After the contest I searched for my call on DX Summit to see who spotted
>> > me and noticed that almost no one did besides myself. Equally
>> > interesting was doing a search for calls on several different serious
>> > High Power Single Op ALL Band guys and noticing that they were not being
>> > spotted either sometimes for as many as 10 - 12 hours even though they
>> > were obviously loud and making thousands of qso's. I did not expect
>> > this at all. It seems like the normal spotters went on strike this
>> > weekend seemingly determined NOT to spot anyone.
>> >
>> > 73
>> >
>> > Bob, KQ2M
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2023-03-08 16:25, Edward Sawyer wrote:
>> > > I am interested to hear the opinion of the DX side on this topic. I
>> > > was trying to self-spot a number of times without much success.
>> > > I tried on DX Summit. The spot was posted.
>> > > I tried on DX Watch. The spot was posted.
>> > > I tried on DX Heat and it stated that self spotting was not allowed.
>> > >
>> > > What I found was that the self spot almost never generated any
>> > > activity - maybe a couple of callers. But then later (sometimes 10
>> > > mins or more later) a huge group of callers would respond to a spot.
>> > > The spot was always generated on the EU side of the pond.
>> > >
>> > > I am thinking that most people have a filter set to only see EU side
>> > > spots. Is that true? If so, then there is almost zero value in self
>> > > spotting. In fact its counter productive if people are now spotting
>> > > less because they think we are self spotting so what's the value in
>> > > spotting.
>> > >
>> > > Any comments on this topic welcome.
>> > >
>> > > Ed N1UR
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
>> > > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > CQ-Contest mailing list
>> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 01:44:31 -0800
From: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Type of male plug ICE-419 Bandpass Filters
Message-ID:
<855dd791-c147-3c7a-f81f-0aa6d062bf3e@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
On 3/7/2023 6:52 PM, AB2E Darrell wrote:
> Hi all,
> I need to order an 8 pin plug that mates with the female plug on the ICE419
> Bandpass Filter set.
> I know these are old, but I'm hooking them up for FD.
Are you looking at one, Darrell? I owned two of them (real dogs) 15-20
years ago, and vaguely remember them as DIN, but don't take that as
definite. :) Why real dogs? Under-rated caps blow with relatively small
mismatches running barefoot, difficult to take apart, repair, and
realign, not great performance when they're working. Both of my two
units arrived out of alignment. Bottom line -- I wouldn't recommend
running them at more than 50W driving an amp. Lots of detail in this
report, which ran in NCJ about ten years ago.
http://k9yc.com/BandpassFilterSurvey.pdf
73, Jim K9YC
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 04:34:10 -0600
From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
To: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>
Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX - Self Spotting
Message-ID: <ECE53E61-32A3-492A-8CC9-57774BF5E56A@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
I think the explanation is that when you spotted yourself on DX Summit you
attracted a few casual operators who were just looking at DX Summit scroll by.
Then you got a spot from one of those guys or someone else who spotted you via
telnet and everyone working the contest using assistance got it and the pileup
ensued.
73?Stan, K5GO
> On Mar 8, 2023, at 4:48 PM, Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>
> wrote:
>
> ?I am interested to hear the opinion of the DX side on this topic. I was
> trying to self-spot a number of times without much success.
> I tried on DX Summit. The spot was posted.
> I tried on DX Watch. The spot was posted.
> I tried on DX Heat and it stated that self spotting was not allowed.
>
> What I found was that the self spot almost never generated any activity -
> maybe a couple of callers. But then later (sometimes 10 mins or more later)
> a huge group of callers would respond to a spot. The spot was always
> generated on the EU side of the pond.
>
> I am thinking that most people have a filter set to only see EU side spots.
> Is that true? If so, then there is almost zero value in self spotting. In
> fact its counter productive if people are now spotting less because they
> think we are self spotting so what's the value in spotting.
>
> Any comments on this topic welcome.
>
> Ed N1UR
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 11:53:43 +0100 (CET)
From: Albert Crespo <f5vhj@orange.fr>
To: kq2m@kq2m.com, cq-contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX - Self Spotting
Message-ID:
<770563283.1069807.1678359223304.JavaMail.open-xchange@opme11oxm24nd1.pom.fr.intraorange>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 12:59:17 +0100
From: dimitri cosson <dimitri.cosson@gmail.com>
To: kq2m@kq2m.com
Cc: Edward Sawyer
<edwards@advanced-conversion.com>,cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL DX - Self Spotting
Message-ID: <a0ec5927-ba83-4cb8-8094-3bc5c3cbf737@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi Bob,
<<<
After the contest I searched for my call on DX Summit to see who spotted
me and noticed that almost no one did besides myself.
>>>
?Based on dxheat.com database, you've been spotted 114 times (without your
selfspots) during the ARRL DX phone 2023.? Not too bad for somebody that
"almost no one did beside myself"...
That said, here is my experience about selfspots the last weekend (part time
activity - 6 hours). All my selfspots only generated a few calls (almost always
the same operators when changing bands), then the flow of calls was nothing
like that generated by a spot on the cluster. But when a North American station
put me on the cluster, it was really different and I found myself with a
continuous stream of callers. I therefore deduced, like De said, that most of
the participants filter the origin of the spots (something that I never do and
many could be surprised by what we can contact even if the spot comes from
another continent !).
I don't think that selfspots are counter productive since I've been spotted 48
times by others for 05h56 on air which seems to me a normal spot rate.
73, Dimitri F4DSK
Le 9 mars 2023 ? 01:18, ? 01:18, kq2m@kq2m.com a ?crit:
>
>I self-spotted quite a bit this past weekend after vowing NOT do do so
>before the contest. But, having been spotted so little in past
>contests, especially on SSB, I decided to test the hypothesis that I
>have had that SPOTS MATTER! I had very mixed feelings about doing so
>since before ARRLDXCW I had NEVER self-spotted, not even outside of
>contests!
>
>I didn't self spot at first but with the mediocre Saturday 20 meter
>conditions I decided to give it a shot
>and the results were fascinating to me. Early on, a self-spot was
>usually met with callers within 30 seconds - 1 minute, mostly multis
>but some single ops as well. Then within the next 5 - 10 minutes, at
>some point, there would be an EXPLOSION, ALL AT ONCE, at some point.
>Now when I was low in the band early in the contest you could say that
>the callers were the result of people tuning and I was fresh meat so
>people would call me anyway, and that was true, but the sudden BURST
>that would occur and the magnitude of loud callers going from maybe 3 -
>
>5 to 50 ALL AT ONCE, was more than just people tuning across my freq.
>
>This pattern consistently repeated itself the same way for most of the
>weekend. Sometimes when the band was open well (not just spotlight
>propagation), I might get called by 4 - 5 UA4/RK4/R4 stations right
>in
>a row where none had called me before. Same thing with DL's, G's, PA's
>and other high volume countries. It was like some local
>packet/spotting
>network that was active, had my call on it and people responded ALL AT
>ONCE
>based on their local spotting network, not DX Summit, which was the
>only
>network that I self-spotted on.
>
>There is no question that continuing to self-spot for most of the
>weekend (except when the pileup got too large), kept the rate higher
>than it would
>have been without doing so. And self-spotting was ESPECIALLY effective
>
>when I changed run frequencies on an existing band, moved to a new
>band,
>or was not working anyone and then with in minutes I had a good run
>going.
>
>The only times that a self-spot did not generate callers was when I was
>
>either not being heard (fairly frequently apparently) thanks to
>qrm/qrn/qsb, or the band was dying. And then at the end when I was on
>10
>or 15 and most of the available callers on that band had either already
>
>worked me or were calling cq themselves.
>
>What it did not seem to do was to bring in any more mults than I would
>normally get. But of course this was only one weekend - so only one
>"data point" and one data point in which cndx were exceptionally
>erratic
>and un predictable thanks to ** 4 ** different M-class flares DURING
>the contest, which as far as I can remember, was the most M Class
>flares
>that I have ever seen in one contest weekend!
>
>After the contest I searched for my call on DX Summit to see who
>spotted
>me and noticed that almost no one did besides myself. Equally
>interesting was doing a search for calls on several different serious
>High Power Single Op ALL Band guys and noticing that they were not
>being
>spotted either sometimes for as many as 10 - 12 hours even though they
>were obviously loud and making thousands of qso's. I did not expect
>this at all. It seems like the normal spotters went on strike this
>weekend seemingly determined NOT to spot anyone.
>
>73
>
>Bob, KQ2M
>
>
>On 2023-03-08 16:25, Edward Sawyer wrote:
>> I am interested to hear the opinion of the DX side on this topic. I
>> was trying to self-spot a number of times without much success.
>> I tried on DX Summit. The spot was posted.
>> I tried on DX Watch. The spot was posted.
>> I tried on DX Heat and it stated that self spotting was not allowed.
>>
>> What I found was that the self spot almost never generated any
>> activity - maybe a couple of callers. But then later (sometimes 10
>> mins or more later) a huge group of callers would respond to a spot.
>> The spot was always generated on the EU side of the pond.
>>
>> I am thinking that most people have a filter set to only see EU side
>> spots. Is that true? If so, then there is almost zero value in self
>> spotting. In fact its counter productive if people are now spotting
>> less because they think we are self spotting so what's the value in
>> spotting.
>>
>> Any comments on this topic welcome.
>>
>> Ed N1UR
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 12:33:56 +0000 (UTC)
From: jpescatore@aol.com
To: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
Message-ID: <2090354368.1180885.1678365236628@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Self spotting obviously did not ruin the ARRL SSB, and it is definitely one now
legal way to increase score. But, it just doesn't feel right. Below is what I
sent to Bob W5OV in the ARRL contest forum and directly to the CAC.
Context: Bud AA3B both independently put in similar but slightly different
feature requests to the N1MM Logger+ team to support comment field labeling of
self spots. Bud's implemented - you can now include text in your self spot, Bud
suggested "QRV" and a few were doing that. Bud's goal was to make finding self
spots more easily. The version pushed out before the ARRL DX SSB includes Bud's
suggestion.
Mine was rejected - I wanted a default value put in the text field so I could
choose to filter out self-spots. Right now the AR cluster syntax doesn't
support doing so. That would hurt me more than it would hurt any self spotter,
but, like not using history files, it is what I'd like to do.
I'm going to check to see if there has been a feature request turn Spot All S&P
Qs by default, which I think is a much better solution.
73 John K3TN
Hi, Bob - I feel like self spotting goes against the values we've had in
contesting and contesting rules for many years.
In the past there have been little things, like MultiMulti ops not being
allowed to go home and work the MM from home. That was never going to swing the
results but it represented a value that QSOs should be made the right way,
kinda like fishing in a barrel is not an acceptable norm in fishing.
I sent in comments that I was against it in HF non-SSB contests where we
already have skimmers doing a fine job of spotting stations large and small.
I'm not a big VHF contester so don't think my opinion shouldn't count there? -
but I feel the same way there! Contesting and skeds to me should not go
together, nor should self-spotting.
The rules changed, so be it. I'd like a way in CW and RTTY contest for me to
not participate. I doubt that is a meaningful punishment to anyone but me, and
it let's me maintain my values. The other way would be for me to only look at
skimmer spots, which would punish me a bit more!
I would have much, much, much rather see the CAC and members talk with the
contesting community to think of ways rules could be changed to encourage more
spotting in SSB contests - that is the real issue that was trying to be
addressed, since there is no shortage of spots in CW and RTTY tests.
A feature request to N1MM to make the "Spot every S&P QSO" the default would
have been a simple step. The ARRL using RBN stats after the contest to have
"Top 10 Human Spotter" listings in the results, maybe even offer $20 coffee
cups to the top spotters, etc. Many other ways to get more spots in SSB tests.
I've been a fan of leaping on most technology changes that have caused
controversy, like FT8 and remote operating. But to me this (and history files
that I choose not to use) are like post contest log manipulation. A norm that
I'd like to see N1MM Logger+ enable choice in, just the way Logger+ was changed
years ago to make post-contest log manipulation harder (not impossible!).
73 John K3TN
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 14:00:56 +0000
From: AB2E Darrell <ab2e@hotmail.com>
To: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>,
"k9yc@arrl.net" <k9yc@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Type of male plug ICE-419 Bandpass Filters
Message-ID:
<SJ2PR20MB5901C10E6694C754AB25B4879BB59@SJ2PR20MB5901.namprd20.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi Jim,
Thanks for the info. Actually, not new but stored in a box from an old QTH
so just thought I would make use of it for FD, 100W only.
I found that regular 8 pin DINs do fit.
I know they are now probably the bottom of the list for any one buying one,Just
wanted to try something zero cost hihi).
73 and thanks for the reply,
Darrell AB2E
________________________________
From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces+ab2e=hotmail.com@contesting.com> on behalf
of Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 4:44 AM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Type of male plug ICE-419 Bandpass Filters
On 3/7/2023 6:52 PM, AB2E Darrell wrote:
> Hi all,
> I need to order an 8 pin plug that mates with the female plug on the ICE419
> Bandpass Filter set.
> I know these are old, but I'm hooking them up for FD.
Are you looking at one, Darrell? I owned two of them (real dogs) 15-20
years ago, and vaguely remember them as DIN, but don't take that as
definite. :) Why real dogs? Under-rated caps blow with relatively small
mismatches running barefoot, difficult to take apart, repair, and
realign, not great performance when they're working. Both of my two
units arrived out of alignment. Bottom line -- I wouldn't recommend
running them at more than 50W driving an amp. Lots of detail in this
report, which ran in NCJ about ten years ago.
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fk9yc.com%2FBandpassFilterSurvey.pdf&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cdf36359747094b903a1e08db20a4ebac%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638139664921268581%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=smNLSSdt4YmCphGGgM%2BW02sBwZpk6vsf6QcCl%2BGURe4%3D&reserved=0
73, Jim K9YC
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.contesting.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcq-contest&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cdf36359747094b903a1e08db20a4ebac%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638139664921424685%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2F4ImjH9geITJtoAZiLaL6uM74HnAFBBXaXH%2BfwhxTME%3D&reserved=0
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 07:01:52 -0700
From: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
To: jpescatore@aol.com
Cc: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
Message-ID:
<CAB7zQ=0CwNT1WPdpZ1uSb+S-t8xDWNTHy9Po9j9XKkYY-G7Ewg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Spot all S&P will not be enabled by default. Many users do not have the
skills to use it correctly.
73,
Steve, N2IC
On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 6:49?AM K3TN via CQ-Contest <
cq-contest@contesting.com> wrote:
> Self spotting obviously did not ruin the ARRL SSB, and it is definitely
> one now legal way to increase score. But, it just doesn't feel right. Below
> is what I sent to Bob W5OV in the ARRL contest forum and directly to the
> CAC.
> Context: Bud AA3B both independently put in similar but slightly different
> feature requests to the N1MM Logger+ team to support comment field labeling
> of self spots. Bud's implemented - you can now include text in your self
> spot, Bud suggested "QRV" and a few were doing that. Bud's goal was to make
> finding self spots more easily. The version pushed out before the ARRL DX
> SSB includes Bud's suggestion.
> Mine was rejected - I wanted a default value put in the text field so I
> could choose to filter out self-spots. Right now the AR cluster syntax
> doesn't support doing so. That would hurt me more than it would hurt any
> self spotter, but, like not using history files, it is what I'd like to do.
> I'm going to check to see if there has been a feature request turn Spot
> All S&P Qs by default, which I think is a much better solution.
> 73 John K3TN
>
> Hi, Bob - I feel like self spotting goes against the values we've had in
> contesting and contesting rules for many years.
>
> In the past there have been little things, like MultiMulti ops not being
> allowed to go home and work the MM from home. That was never going to swing
> the results but it represented a value that QSOs should be made the right
> way, kinda like fishing in a barrel is not an acceptable norm in fishing.
>
> I sent in comments that I was against it in HF non-SSB contests where we
> already have skimmers doing a fine job of spotting stations large and
> small. I'm not a big VHF contester so don't think my opinion shouldn't
> count there - but I feel the same way there! Contesting and skeds to me
> should not go together, nor should self-spotting.
>
> The rules changed, so be it. I'd like a way in CW and RTTY contest for me
> to not participate. I doubt that is a meaningful punishment to anyone but
> me, and it let's me maintain my values. The other way would be for me to
> only look at skimmer spots, which would punish me a bit more!
>
> I would have much, much, much rather see the CAC and members talk with the
> contesting community to think of ways rules could be changed to encourage
> more spotting in SSB contests - that is the real issue that was trying to
> be addressed, since there is no shortage of spots in CW and RTTY tests.
>
> A feature request to N1MM to make the "Spot every S&P QSO" the default
> would have been a simple step. The ARRL using RBN stats after the contest
> to have "Top 10 Human Spotter" listings in the results, maybe even offer
> $20 coffee cups to the top spotters, etc. Many other ways to get more spots
> in SSB tests.
>
> I've been a fan of leaping on most technology changes that have caused
> controversy, like FT8 and remote operating. But to me this (and history
> files that I choose not to use) are like post contest log manipulation. A
> norm that I'd like to see N1MM Logger+ enable choice in, just the way
> Logger+ was changed years ago to make post-contest log manipulation harder
> (not impossible!).
>
> 73 John K3TN
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 07:26:16 -0700
From: Barry W2UP <w2up.co@gmail.com>
To: CQ-Contest Reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQ Tokyo
Message-ID:
<CACUWneOT8T-xpbgKNVOaiQGSv6r+TMuKzX6W0tka64xPi_dUWg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I will be in JA next month and it appears I will have a free evening in
Tokyo on April 5. Any JA contesters want to get together for an eyeball
QSO or dinner? I will be staying in a hotel in Shinjiku-ku and will not
have a car.
73,
Barry W2UP
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 08:32:43 -0600
From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
To: jpescatore@aol.com
Cc: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
Message-ID: <AB3D8D00-46E4-45F7-BDFA-7A9EA870DF9B@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
John,
Here is my take on self spotting. On CW you have a perfectly fair situation.
If you can generate a signal that can be heard by a Skimmer station you will be
spotted automatically by the RBN. There is no reason for your friends to spot
you or for you to spot yourself. It will have minimal to no impact unless you
don?t have a signal picked up by any Skimmer stations.
On SSB, without self- spotting, you have an unfair situation where the
difference between winning and losing could be the difference in how many of
your friends spot you versus how many of your competitors? friends spot them.
It would be totally unfair for a station to win a contest because he was in a
big club with several members spotting him regularly while the better operator
at the better station lost because he didn?t have that support. Self spotting
on SSB levels the playing field to a great extent just like the RBN does on CW.
73?Stan, K5GO
> On Mar 9, 2023, at 7:49 AM, K3TN via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> wrote:
>
> ?Self spotting obviously did not ruin the ARRL SSB, and it is definitely one
> now legal way to increase score. But, it just doesn't feel right. Below is
> what I sent to Bob W5OV in the ARRL contest forum and directly to the CAC.
> Context: Bud AA3B both independently put in similar but slightly different
> feature requests to the N1MM Logger+ team to support comment field labeling
> of self spots. Bud's implemented - you can now include text in your self
> spot, Bud suggested "QRV" and a few were doing that. Bud's goal was to make
> finding self spots more easily. The version pushed out before the ARRL DX SSB
> includes Bud's suggestion.
> Mine was rejected - I wanted a default value put in the text field so I could
> choose to filter out self-spots. Right now the AR cluster syntax doesn't
> support doing so. That would hurt me more than it would hurt any self
> spotter, but, like not using history files, it is what I'd like to do.
> I'm going to check to see if there has been a feature request turn Spot All
> S&P Qs by default, which I think is a much better solution.
> 73 John K3TN
>
> Hi, Bob - I feel like self spotting goes against the values we've had in
> contesting and contesting rules for many years.
>
> In the past there have been little things, like MultiMulti ops not being
> allowed to go home and work the MM from home. That was never going to swing
> the results but it represented a value that QSOs should be made the right
> way, kinda like fishing in a barrel is not an acceptable norm in fishing.
>
> I sent in comments that I was against it in HF non-SSB contests where we
> already have skimmers doing a fine job of spotting stations large and small.
> I'm not a big VHF contester so don't think my opinion shouldn't count there
> - but I feel the same way there! Contesting and skeds to me should not go
> together, nor should self-spotting.
>
> The rules changed, so be it. I'd like a way in CW and RTTY contest for me to
> not participate. I doubt that is a meaningful punishment to anyone but me,
> and it let's me maintain my values. The other way would be for me to only
> look at skimmer spots, which would punish me a bit more!
>
> I would have much, much, much rather see the CAC and members talk with the
> contesting community to think of ways rules could be changed to encourage
> more spotting in SSB contests - that is the real issue that was trying to be
> addressed, since there is no shortage of spots in CW and RTTY tests.
>
> A feature request to N1MM to make the "Spot every S&P QSO" the default would
> have been a simple step. The ARRL using RBN stats after the contest to have
> "Top 10 Human Spotter" listings in the results, maybe even offer $20 coffee
> cups to the top spotters, etc. Many other ways to get more spots in SSB tests.
>
> I've been a fan of leaping on most technology changes that have caused
> controversy, like FT8 and remote operating. But to me this (and history files
> that I choose not to use) are like post contest log manipulation. A norm that
> I'd like to see N1MM Logger+ enable choice in, just the way Logger+ was
> changed years ago to make post-contest log manipulation harder (not
> impossible!).
>
> 73 John K3TN
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 08:48:44 -0600
From: Ward Silver <hwardsil@gmail.com>
To: CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] North American CW Sprint - Feb 2023 - Final
Results Available
Message-ID:
<CAFr7d=oipz1DxQMR5kcosf5RLEtGnV4HrCh4LJAwhkFJW_bBfg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
The final results article for the February NA CW Sprint is now available at
https://ncjweb.com along with updated records. This is the complete
results article. A summarized version will be printed in the May-June issue
of the National Contest Journal, as well.
Thanks to Jim George, N3BB for his contributions to the final results -
this is Jim's last Sprint results article and his efforts are greatly
appreciated.
Also thanks to the Boring Amateur Radio Club team for fast work in
processing the logs and ensuring everybody is in the right order of
finish. And to the NCJ team for getting the results and records posted for
you.
Be sure to put the September CW Sprint on your calendars for 0000-0359 UTC,
Sep 10 with logs due on September 17.
The NA RTTY Sprint is coming up this weekend from 0000-0359 UTC, Mar 12
with logs due on March 19.
As long as I'm promoting Boring Amateur Radio Club contests, don't forget
this weekend's Spring edition of the Stew Perry Topband Distance Challenge
beginning at 1500 UTC on March 11th. Full rules are here:
https://www.kkn.net/stew/stew_rules.html. There is life on Top Band as the
winter season comes to a close!
73, Ward N0AX
NA CW Sprint Manager
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 14:55:06 +0000 (UTC)
From: jpescatore@aol.com
To: "wa5rtg@gmail.com" <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
Cc: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
Message-ID: <196653993.1225741.1678373706780@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi, Stan - In the big club I'm in (PVRC) I'm in the minority for not liking
self spotting and I'm not even trying to change the decision to allow it. I'm
just looking for a way not to take advantage of it because it doesn't feel
right to me. If the AR cluster filter syntax allowed me to simply filter out
CALL=SPOTTER I'd just do that, but it doesn't and W9PA says no chance of that
happening soon.
History files don't feel right to me, either - so I don't use them. To be
honest, I kinda enjoy that when I'm operating a VA station remotely and am JOHN
VA vs. JOHN MD that the number of ops who bust my exchange jumps 3x!? K3ZO used
to quote Lenny W3GRF and say "It is a listening contest just as much, if not
more, than a sending contest..." Of course, Fred never used filters, either...
So, I voiced my opinion to the CAC, self spotting was approved - no problem.?
Just looking for some tools to differentiate, just the way if I was
anti-Internet (I'm not) I can choose to filter out non-human spots.?
73 John K3TN
-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
To: jpescatore@aol.com
Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thu, Mar 9, 2023 9:32 am
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
John,
Here is my take on self spotting.? On CW you have a perfectly fair situation.?
If you can generate a signal that can be heard by a Skimmer station you will be
spotted automatically by the RBN. There is no reason for your friends to spot
you or for you to spot yourself.? It will have minimal to no impact unless you
don?t have a signal picked up by any Skimmer stations.
On SSB, without self- spotting, you have an unfair situation where the
difference between winning and losing could be the difference in how many of
your friends spot you versus how many of your competitors? friends spot them.?
It would be totally unfair for a station to win a contest because he was in a
big club with several members spotting him regularly while the better operator
at the better station lost because he didn?t have that support. Self spotting
on SSB levels the playing field to a great extent just like the RBN does on CW.
73?Stan, K5GO
> On Mar 9, 2023, at 7:49 AM, K3TN via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> wrote:
>
> ?Self spotting obviously did not ruin the ARRL SSB, and it is definitely one
> now legal way to increase score. But, it just doesn't feel right. Below is
> what I sent to Bob W5OV in the ARRL contest forum and directly to the CAC.
> Context: Bud AA3B both independently put in similar but slightly different
> feature requests to the N1MM Logger+ team to support comment field labeling
> of self spots. Bud's implemented - you can now include text in your self
> spot, Bud suggested "QRV" and a few were doing that. Bud's goal was to make
> finding self spots more easily. The version pushed out before the ARRL DX SSB
> includes Bud's suggestion.
> Mine was rejected - I wanted a default value put in the text field so I could
> choose to filter out self-spots. Right now the AR cluster syntax doesn't
> support doing so. That would hurt me more than it would hurt any self
> spotter, but, like not using history files, it is what I'd like to do.
> I'm going to check to see if there has been a feature request turn Spot All
> S&P Qs by default, which I think is a much better solution.
> 73 John K3TN
>
> Hi, Bob - I feel like self spotting goes against the values we've had in
> contesting and contesting rules for many years.
>
> In the past there have been little things, like MultiMulti ops not being
> allowed to go home and work the MM from home. That was never going to swing
> the results but it represented a value that QSOs should be made the right
> way, kinda like fishing in a barrel is not an acceptable norm in fishing.
>
> I sent in comments that I was against it in HF non-SSB contests where we
> already have skimmers doing a fine job of spotting stations large and small.
> I'm not a big VHF contester so don't think my opinion shouldn't count there?
> - but I feel the same way there! Contesting and skeds to me should not go
> together, nor should self-spotting.
>
> The rules changed, so be it. I'd like a way in CW and RTTY contest for me to
> not participate. I doubt that is a meaningful punishment to anyone but me,
> and it let's me maintain my values. The other way would be for me to only
> look at skimmer spots, which would punish me a bit more!
>
> I would have much, much, much rather see the CAC and members talk with the
> contesting community to think of ways rules could be changed to encourage
> more spotting in SSB contests - that is the real issue that was trying to be
> addressed, since there is no shortage of spots in CW and RTTY tests.
>
> A feature request to N1MM to make the "Spot every S&P QSO" the default would
> have been a simple step. The ARRL using RBN stats after the contest to have
> "Top 10 Human Spotter" listings in the results, maybe even offer $20 coffee
> cups to the top spotters, etc. Many other ways to get more spots in SSB tests.
>
> I've been a fan of leaping on most technology changes that have caused
> controversy, like FT8 and remote operating. But to me this (and history files
> that I choose not to use) are like post contest log manipulation. A norm that
> I'd like to see N1MM Logger+ enable choice in, just the way Logger+ was
> changed years ago to make post-contest log manipulation harder (not
> impossible!).
>
> 73 John K3TN
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
------------------------------
Message: 21
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 15:57:23 +0000 (UTC)
From: jpescatore@aol.com
To: "wa5rtg@gmail.com" <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
Cc: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
Message-ID: <53637535.1253542.1678377443712@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Stan - yes, you understand exactly.
When I was a W3LPL op in the late 80s/early 90s I kinda liked the rule that
multi ops could not go home and work the multi using their own calls.? I
seriously doubt that could have ever swung any contest results ever but it felt
right. Same with the no skeds rule. Same with old rule against self spotting.
Encouraging turning on Spot All S&P QSOs is the standard practice I've seen,
not "Just Spot Club Members" but if self spotting is seen as a way for smaller
clubs, or DXpeditions from smaller clubs, to equalize, great.
As I said, I'm not looking to change the decision to impact what others want to
do, just want the tools to do what I'd like to do.
73 John K3TN
-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
To: jpescatore@aol.com
Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thu, Mar 9, 2023 10:32 am
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
John,
I am trying to understand.? You want to use the spotting network but only want
to see spots for Station 2 that are generated by someone other than Station 2??
In both cases you are using information that comes from a source other than
amateur means to know the callsign and the frequency for Station 2.? I guess
your choices are to operate without assistance or use what shows up.? I would
not differentiate between K3TN being spotted by a dozen different PVRC members
and a N7___ who was not a member of a club and had no spots other than the one
he created for himself if I chose to operated in the assisted category using
callsign and frequency information provided by others through a non-amateur
means of delivery.??
I operated?at K4VX several times and although we were in the M/M category, it
was not allowed by Lew to use the spotting information that would have been
readily available.? It was more exciting when you found a double multiplier but
was certainly not a competitive way to operate in the M/M category.?
Historically operators have either been for or against spotting assistance.?
Yours is a new one, if I understand correctly, where you are OK with using
spotting assistance as long as the station does not spot itself in absence of
friends who will.
73...Stan, K5GO
??
On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 8:55?AM <jpescatore@aol.com> wrote:
Hi, Stan - In the big club I'm in (PVRC) I'm in the minority for not liking
self spotting and I'm not even trying to change the decision to allow it. I'm
just looking for a way not to take advantage of it because it doesn't feel
right to me. If the AR cluster filter syntax allowed me to simply filter out
CALL=SPOTTER I'd just do that, but it doesn't and W9PA says no chance of that
happening soon.
History files don't feel right to me, either - so I don't use them. To be
honest, I kinda enjoy that when I'm operating a VA station remotely and am JOHN
VA vs. JOHN MD that the number of ops who bust my exchange jumps 3x!? K3ZO used
to quote Lenny W3GRF and say "It is a listening contest just as much, if not
more, than a sending contest..." Of course, Fred never used filters, either...
So, I voiced my opinion to the CAC, self spotting was approved - no problem.?
Just looking for some tools to differentiate, just the way if I was
anti-Internet (I'm not) I can choose to filter out non-human spots.?
73 John K3TN
-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
To: jpescatore@aol.com
Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thu, Mar 9, 2023 9:32 am
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
John,
Here is my take on self spotting.? On CW you have a perfectly fair situation.?
If you can generate a signal that can be heard by a Skimmer station you will be
spotted automatically by the RBN. There is no reason for your friends to spot
you or for you to spot yourself.? It will have minimal to no impact unless you
don?t have a signal picked up by any Skimmer stations.
On SSB, without self- spotting, you have an unfair situation where the
difference between winning and losing could be the difference in how many of
your friends spot you versus how many of your competitors? friends spot them.?
It would be totally unfair for a station to win a contest because he was in a
big club with several members spotting him regularly while the better operator
at the better station lost because he didn?t have that support. Self spotting
on SSB levels the playing field to a great extent just like the RBN does on CW.
73?Stan, K5GO
> On Mar 9, 2023, at 7:49 AM, K3TN via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> wrote:
>
> ?Self spotting obviously did not ruin the ARRL SSB, and it is definitely one
> now legal way to increase score. But, it just doesn't feel right. Below is
> what I sent to Bob W5OV in the ARRL contest forum and directly to the CAC.
> Context: Bud AA3B both independently put in similar but slightly different
> feature requests to the N1MM Logger+ team to support comment field labeling
> of self spots. Bud's implemented - you can now include text in your self
> spot, Bud suggested "QRV" and a few were doing that. Bud's goal was to make
> finding self spots more easily. The version pushed out before the ARRL DX SSB
> includes Bud's suggestion.
> Mine was rejected - I wanted a default value put in the text field so I could
> choose to filter out self-spots. Right now the AR cluster syntax doesn't
> support doing so. That would hurt me more than it would hurt any self
> spotter, but, like not using history files, it is what I'd like to do.
> I'm going to check to see if there has been a feature request turn Spot All
> S&P Qs by default, which I think is a much better solution.
> 73 John K3TN
>
> Hi, Bob - I feel like self spotting goes against the values we've had in
> contesting and contesting rules for many years.
>
> In the past there have been little things, like MultiMulti ops not being
> allowed to go home and work the MM from home. That was never going to swing
> the results but it represented a value that QSOs should be made the right
> way, kinda like fishing in a barrel is not an acceptable norm in fishing.
>
> I sent in comments that I was against it in HF non-SSB contests where we
> already have skimmers doing a fine job of spotting stations large and small.
> I'm not a big VHF contester so don't think my opinion shouldn't count there?
> - but I feel the same way there! Contesting and skeds to me should not go
> together, nor should self-spotting.
>
> The rules changed, so be it. I'd like a way in CW and RTTY contest for me to
> not participate. I doubt that is a meaningful punishment to anyone but me,
> and it let's me maintain my values. The other way would be for me to only
> look at skimmer spots, which would punish me a bit more!
>
> I would have much, much, much rather see the CAC and members talk with the
> contesting community to think of ways rules could be changed to encourage
> more spotting in SSB contests - that is the real issue that was trying to be
> addressed, since there is no shortage of spots in CW and RTTY tests.
>
> A feature request to N1MM to make the "Spot every S&P QSO" the default would
> have been a simple step. The ARRL using RBN stats after the contest to have
> "Top 10 Human Spotter" listings in the results, maybe even offer $20 coffee
> cups to the top spotters, etc. Many other ways to get more spots in SSB tests.
>
> I've been a fan of leaping on most technology changes that have caused
> controversy, like FT8 and remote operating. But to me this (and history files
> that I choose not to use) are like post contest log manipulation. A norm that
> I'd like to see N1MM Logger+ enable choice in, just the way Logger+ was
> changed years ago to make post-contest log manipulation harder (not
> impossible!).
>
> 73 John K3TN
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
------------------------------
Message: 22
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 09:32:51 -0600
From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
To: jpescatore@aol.com
Cc: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
Message-ID:
<CACdYvGF3B38YB6=th6MKsf3GxJRhE6TSF2LdpBj2UJ7=THq_Rw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
John,
I am trying to understand. You want to use the spotting network but only
want to see spots for Station 2 that are generated by someone other than
Station 2? In both cases you are using information that comes from a
source other than amateur means to know the callsign and the frequency for
Station 2. I guess your choices are to operate without assistance or use
what shows up. I would not differentiate between K3TN being spotted by a
dozen different PVRC members and a N7___ who was not a member of a club and
had no spots other than the one he created for himself if I chose to
operated in the assisted category using callsign and frequency information
provided by others through a non-amateur means of delivery.
I operated at K4VX several times and although we were in the M/M category,
it was not allowed by Lew to use the spotting information that would have
been readily available. It was more exciting when you found a double
multiplier but was certainly not a competitive way to operate in the M/M
category. Historically operators have either been for or against spotting
assistance. Yours is a new one, if I understand correctly, where you are
OK with using spotting assistance as long as the station does not spot
itself in absence of friends who will.
73...Stan, K5GO
On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 8:55?AM <jpescatore@aol.com> wrote:
> Hi, Stan - In the big club I'm in (PVRC) I'm in the minority for not
> liking self spotting and I'm not even trying to change the decision to
> allow it. I'm just looking for a way not to take advantage of it because it
> doesn't feel right to me. If the AR cluster filter syntax allowed me to
> simply filter out CALL=SPOTTER I'd just do that, but it doesn't and W9PA
> says no chance of that happening soon.
>
> History files don't feel right to me, either - so I don't use them. To be
> honest, I kinda enjoy that when I'm operating a VA station remotely and am
> JOHN VA vs. JOHN MD that the number of ops who bust my exchange jumps 3x!
> K3ZO used to quote Lenny W3GRF and say "It is a listening contest just as
> much, if not more, than a sending contest..." Of course, Fred never used
> filters, either...
>
> So, I voiced my opinion to the CAC, self spotting was approved - no
> problem. Just looking for some tools to differentiate, just the way if I
> was anti-Internet (I'm not) I can choose to filter out non-human spots.
>
> 73 John K3TN
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
> To: jpescatore@aol.com
> Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Thu, Mar 9, 2023 9:32 am
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting
>
> John,
>
> Here is my take on self spotting. On CW you have a perfectly fair
> situation. If you can generate a signal that can be heard by a Skimmer
> station you will be spotted automatically by the RBN. There is no reason
> for your friends to spot you or for you to spot yourself. It will have
> minimal to no impact unless you don?t have a signal picked up by any
> Skimmer stations.
>
> On SSB, without self- spotting, you have an unfair situation where the
> difference between winning and losing could be the difference in how many
> of your friends spot you versus how many of your competitors? friends spot
> them.
>
> It would be totally unfair for a station to win a contest because he was
> in a big club with several members spotting him regularly while the better
> operator at the better station lost because he didn?t have that support.
> Self spotting on SSB levels the playing field to a great extent just like
> the RBN does on CW.
>
> 73?Stan, K5GO
>
> > On Mar 9, 2023, at 7:49 AM, K3TN via CQ-Contest <
> cq-contest@contesting.com> wrote:
> >
> > ?Self spotting obviously did not ruin the ARRL SSB, and it is definitely
> one now legal way to increase score. But, it just doesn't feel right. Below
> is what I sent to Bob W5OV in the ARRL contest forum and directly to the
> CAC.
> > Context: Bud AA3B both independently put in similar but slightly
> different feature requests to the N1MM Logger+ team to support comment
> field labeling of self spots. Bud's implemented - you can now include text
> in your self spot, Bud suggested "QRV" and a few were doing that. Bud's
> goal was to make finding self spots more easily. The version pushed out
> before the ARRL DX SSB includes Bud's suggestion.
> > Mine was rejected - I wanted a default value put in the text field so I
> could choose to filter out self-spots. Right now the AR cluster syntax
> doesn't support doing so. That would hurt me more than it would hurt any
> self spotter, but, like not using history files, it is what I'd like to do.
> > I'm going to check to see if there has been a feature request turn Spot
> All S&P Qs by default, which I think is a much better solution.
> > 73 John K3TN
> >
> > Hi, Bob - I feel like self spotting goes against the values we've had in
> contesting and contesting rules for many years.
> >
> > In the past there have been little things, like MultiMulti ops not being
> allowed to go home and work the MM from home. That was never going to swing
> the results but it represented a value that QSOs should be made the right
> way, kinda like fishing in a barrel is not an acceptable norm in fishing.
> >
> > I sent in comments that I was against it in HF non-SSB contests where we
> already have skimmers doing a fine job of spotting stations large and
> small. I'm not a big VHF contester so don't think my opinion shouldn't
> count there - but I feel the same way there! Contesting and skeds to me
> should not go together, nor should self-spotting.
> >
> > The rules changed, so be it. I'd like a way in CW and RTTY contest for
> me to not participate. I doubt that is a meaningful punishment to anyone
> but me, and it let's me maintain my values. The other way would be for me
> to only look at skimmer spots, which would punish me a bit more!
> >
> > I would have much, much, much rather see the CAC and members talk with
> the contesting community to think of ways rules could be changed to
> encourage more spotting in SSB contests - that is the real issue that was
> trying to be addressed, since there is no shortage of spots in CW and RTTY
> tests.
> >
> > A feature request to N1MM to make the "Spot every S&P QSO" the default
> would have been a simple step. The ARRL using RBN stats after the contest
> to have "Top 10 Human Spotter" listings in the results, maybe even offer
> $20 coffee cups to the top spotters, etc. Many other ways to get more spots
> in SSB tests.
> >
> > I've been a fan of leaping on most technology changes that have caused
> controversy, like FT8 and remote operating. But to me this (and history
> files that I choose not to use) are like post contest log manipulation. A
> norm that I'd like to see N1MM Logger+ enable choice in, just the way
> Logger+ was changed years ago to make post-contest log manipulation harder
> (not impossible!).
> >
> > 73 John K3TN
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 23
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 08:18:05 -0700
From: David Hachadorian <k6ll.dave@gmail.com>
To: reflector cq-contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Type of male plug ICE-419 Bandpass Filters
Message-ID: <89c4e9d3-806f-0026-1878-6794f2ce2e63@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Bring a rubber mallet to Field Day so you can smack the filters when the
relays get intermittent on receive.
Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
Yuma, AZ
On 3/9/2023 7:00 AM, AB2E Darrell wrote:
> Hi Jim,
> Thanks for the info. Actually, not new but stored in a box from an old QTH
> so just thought I would make use of it for FD, 100W only.
> I found that regular 8 pin DINs do fit.
> I know they are now probably the bottom of the list for any one buying
> one,Just wanted to try something zero cost hihi).
>
> 73 and thanks for the reply,
> Darrell AB2E
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: CQ-Contest<cq-contest-bounces+ab2e=hotmail.com@contesting.com> on
> behalf of Jim Brown<k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 4:44 AM
> To:cq-contest@contesting.com <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Type of male plug ICE-419 Bandpass Filters
>
> On 3/7/2023 6:52 PM, AB2E Darrell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I need to order an 8 pin plug that mates with the female plug on the ICE419
>> Bandpass Filter set.
>> I know these are old, but I'm hooking them up for FD.
> Are you looking at one, Darrell? I owned two of them (real dogs) 15-20
> years ago, and vaguely remember them as DIN, but don't take that as
> definite. :) Why real dogs? Under-rated caps blow with relatively small
> mismatches running barefoot, difficult to take apart, repair, and
> realign, not great performance when they're working. Both of my two
> units arrived out of alignment. Bottom line -- I wouldn't recommend
> running them at more than 50W driving an amp. Lots of detail in this
> report, which ran in NCJ about ten years ago.
>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fk9yc.com%2FBandpassFilterSurvey.pdf&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cdf36359747094b903a1e08db20a4ebac%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638139664921268581%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=smNLSSdt4YmCphGGgM%2BW02sBwZpk6vsf6QcCl%2BGURe4%3D&reserved=0
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.contesting.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcq-contest&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cdf36359747094b903a1e08db20a4ebac%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638139664921424685%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2F4ImjH9geITJtoAZiLaL6uM74HnAFBBXaXH%2BfwhxTME%3D&reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
------------------------------
End of CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 243, Issue 8
******************************************
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|