Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Top\s+Band\s+and\s+JT65\s*$/: 67 ]

Total 67 documents matching your query.

21. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Brian D G3VGZ <topband@planet3.freeuk.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 20:00:55 +0100
WSJT-X 1.7.0 -- Brian D G3VGZ _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00057.html (10,448 bytes)

22. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Brian D G3VGZ <topband@planet3.freeuk.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 20:07:18 +0100
57 out of my total of 84 entities on 160 have been worked using JT modes. I've heard quite a few more. -- Brian D G3VGZ _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topba
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00058.html (8,603 bytes)

23. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Nick Maslon - K1NZ <k1nz@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 18:11:58 -0400
Hi Len, So, you would rather me set up stations in W1 and work EU, W4 and work the Caribbean, W5 and work SA, and W6 and work Asia on SSB or CW instead of letting me work digimodes from my QTH in W1?
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00059.html (10,490 bytes)

24. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: <JAYB1943@OPTONLINE.NET>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 18:15:41 -0400
And MY 2 cents...the ONLY criteria for ANY ARRL (or other) awards is very simple: If both stations AGREE they have made a QSO, then they DID have a valid QSO...regardless how/when/mode/assist/etc is
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00060.html (8,183 bytes)

25. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 16:53:49 -0700
I think that's nonsense. That said, there a lot of ways to skin this cat: Perhaps I can brib...sorry...convince SV2ASP/A to QSL me for an ATNO on top-band at my local noon that will be a good one tha
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00063.html (9,683 bytes)

26. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 19:03:11 -0500
I thought the OP was talking about casual non-contest JT65 exchanges in one narrow section of 160. 73, Mike www.w0btu.com _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_top
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00064.html (8,710 bytes)

27. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: "Jorge Diez (CX6VM-CW5W)" <cx6vm.jorge@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 21:46:06 -0300
Wes If you convince him to upload to LOTW, you will have the qso confirmed Some weeks ago, a JA station requested me to check the qsl I sent him, instead of 08:30 utc I filled the qsl with 20:30 utc
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00065.html (10,614 bytes)

28. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: <JAYB1943@OPTONLINE.NET>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 21:20:22 -0400
Well, lets face it if two dishonest hams decide to agree that they had a QSO that never was and verify it on either LOTW or by QSL, its nobodys business but their own, IMHO. If getting some credit fo
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00066.html (8,542 bytes)

29. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Michael Walker <va3mw@portcredit.net>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 22:41:55 -0400
JC Amateur radio is about communicating, regardless of the mode. Chokes don't solve an RF noise floor issue if the RF noise is generated by devices you don't own or control. For my station, and I hav
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00067.html (12,677 bytes)

30. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 22:36:17 -0500
Ok, what is the truth here? Is JT9 better than JT65 on 160m, or is it inferior????? On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Brian D G3VGZ <topband@planet3.freeuk.co.uk That certainly got my attention! Has a
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00068.html (10,995 bytes)

31. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: "JC" <n4is@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 00:13:58 -0400
Mike I understand that, I know several friends that enjoy JT modes, I used it a lot on Meteor Scatter and few QSO's on EME, Actually I gave up on EME because I like CW and really few JT modes boring,
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00069.html (14,474 bytes)

32. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: CT1EKD <CT1EKD@mail.telepac.pt>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 12:17:50 +0100
I already saw this discussion on EME foruns, then at HF foruns and now at Top Band... The Facts are that JT65 (or JT9) is MORE sensitive, USE IT it if you want to... just like the QRP versus QRO , us
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00070.html (8,249 bytes)

33. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Richard Beerman <rbeersr@att.net>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 16:22:12 -0500
Gentlemen, The topic of WSJT came up at the Central States VHF Society gathering about 12 to 15 years ago in Milwaukee. There were some very angry old timers who, like some here, had earned awards on
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00071.html (10,569 bytes)

34. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Jim Murray via Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 23:44:49 +0000 (UTC)
    I hate to weigh in on this since it's been beaten to death already but just another opinion.  Over the years I've tried several digital modes starting with psk31.  There weren't many  signals on
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00072.html (9,043 bytes)

35. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Brian Pease <bpease2@myfairpoint.net>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 20:41:50 -0400
10 Watts is considered high power on the digital modes. Is using 1000 Watts on 160m (+20dB) and 250Hz receive filters (+10dB) on both ends of a CW QSO more challenging than 10W on JT65 on the same li
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00073.html (9,799 bytes)

36. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: Dale Putnam <daleputnam@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 00:46:32 +0000
10 watts??? really? That is QRO power.. Try ONE watt on 160.. cw.!! Have a great day, --... ...-- Dale - WC7S in Wy "Actions speak louder than words" 1856 - Abraham Lincoln __________________________
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00074.html (10,874 bytes)

37. Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 23:27:03 -0400
Not really, there are different 'flavours' of JT65, on HF it's JT65A. As for JT9, there reason is that JT65-HF, and its derivatives, such as the one maintained by HB9HQX, is still used by a substant
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00075.html (7,346 bytes)

38. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 23:38:09 -0400
I did JT65 on 160, but really what´s the challenge? Is amazing when you did a CW qso, switching between RX antennas, filters and radio adjustments to pull out a callsign I don´t know what people than
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00076.html (7,820 bytes)

39. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 23:45:20 -0400
It'll never reach the levels of SSB/CW/RTTY, if that's what you are getting to, for the simple reason that DXpeditions to rare places would be crazy to spend precious time on a 6 minutes per QSO mod
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00077.html (7,426 bytes)

40. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1)
Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 23:56:11 -0400
And my question is about the feeling of doing a JT65 QSO, or nothing, on topband. :^) 73 de Vince, VA3VF _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
/archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00078.html (6,936 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]
This search system is powered by Namazu