N4ZR continued: Bret, send me your data in a form I can look at, and we can have a useful discussion. I can imagine several scenarios for what you describe - harmonics, dueling CQs, keyclicks, and so
I still find it interesting that on WEEKDAYS, I found so many RBN spots of EXACTLY THE SAME CALL, at EXACTLY THE SAME TIME (to the SECOND), on either another frequency on the same band, or on another
S56A continued: VR2BG wrote: I still find it interesting that on WEEKDAYS, I found so many RBN spots of EXACTLY THE SAME CALL, at EXACTLY THE SAME TIME (to the SECOND), on either another frequency on
Meanwhile, perhaps the word could be passed along to the contest hating community to have their own contest-free contest on March 23-24. Very interesting to watch the start of the first day, the sta
K9NW suggested: And then one weekend a renegade "48 Hour Guy" with all his stacks and SO2R and other evil gadgetry invades the category because he finds he can still get his competitive fix and not h
The situation where the operator of the station is not actually present at the station is something probably few telecom laws/regulations have anticipated. Ours here does not. There is also probably
S56A responded to PA3S: I spent 36 hours on RBN carefully watching for errors after long debate with ex-VR2BG. Wrong spots were just derivates of proper callsigns and I was mentioned once as S56AE. I
S56A said about RBN spots of HB9CVQ on frequencies other than where other skimmers were spotting the same call: HB9CVQ used 1 kW on 160 m with 2 x 36 m doublet. S50ARX uses QS1R with similar doublet
Still laughing since reading this: They will be "held accountable" when people are willing to name calls in these public complaints... Being said about somebody firing up within a hundred cycles or s
After I made a presentation at last year's Asia-Pacific DX Convention on cheating in radiosport - where we looked in detail at every Q that was changed in B7P's 2007 CQWW CW log, as well as every tim
Admission of a little over one-per-minute wrong-freq-same-band RBN spots at http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/skimmertalk/2013-April/001149.html prompted me to finish the queries I started workin
As I expect more to ask, it was easy to tell what was changed in B7P's log as a list of all the calls in the original log was posted with the how-to for using SH5. Even without public logs, that coul
S56A suggested: Brett, 3,8426% can hardly be rounded to shy 3,9 %! Wrong band spots are mere 0,5 %. The total of bogus-frequency spots were just shy of 3.9% of the total of the data set as described
One of my posts was censored so I repeat again - the main problem of RBN are cheap QSD 0IF RX with I/Q images due to sampling in the middle of CW bands. Just make QS1R requirement for RBN connection
Real life 0IF RX could achieve 60 dB unavoidable image rejection and this is not enough in contests. Our ham freqs are NOT channelized although one knows where the image is! The most popular version
Let's ignore all the mechanisms responsible for wrong-frequency RBN spots, shall we? That should have been: Let's ignore all the OTHER mechanisms for wrong-frequency RBN spots, shall we? -ex-VR2BG/p.
DJ7WW added: Very true and a contester already adressed a contest sponsor and insisted on disqualification of his competitor (ahead of him of course), whos harmonic was shown on a different band in R
LY5W noted: 2 Bands *3.5 - 7 - 14 - 21 - 28 MHz*. According to IARU recommendations operation should be avoided outside contest-preferred segments. No operation to take place on: *CW* : 3560-3800; 70
Once upon a time, CQWW rules were very clear - all the functions of operating were to be done by the operator. Those functions of operating were: finding, working & logging stations. So simple, so cl
KP4KE's CQWW DQ was one of three cases I went into detail in a presentation I gave at APDXC a few years ago about cheating in radiosport. The DQ was for self-spotting. The number of times he allegedl