Chen has good points below, but there are good counter-points too. I call this style of operating QYF, meaning "answer my CQ on a different frequency and I will work you there". YF = Your Frequency
A band scope reveals the RTTY pileup on 7O6T covers 1 to 10 KHz up, solid. Forget about finding a clear frequency because there isn't one. When I am operating RTTY from a DX location I want callers t
the receiver filter set to wide (2KHz), you get a small but useable bandscope that sees 1KHz. I work a station and then visually observe a signal that I think I can copy. Tune to that signal precise
Bill, If, as you state, "Jamming the DX's CQ frequency is pointless because 99% of the time nobody is listening there", then it would be equally the case that if you don't have dual receive, listenin
Continuing to use the conventional split type of operation is not working. The jammers and Kops are getting worse and worse. Recently the jammers have been sending apparently real call signs on the D
For something like 17m, one way is to have the DX transmit outside the legal USA portion for digital modes. It might deter some of the ejets. I hear JA (and one KH6/K9FD typing really slowly -- proba
"Surely someone must live close enough to some of the frequency cops to know who they are?" I concur. I have always wondered why these jerks can't be located and have a visit by Guido and his 15# sle
And those "taps" would likely send you to jail, although I sympathize with your feelings. What the jammer is doing is technically not even against the law, just an FCC rule violation. What you are su
I agree. Disbaring them from the DXCC program would probably cause them more angst than "Guido's Hammer." The problem, even if the ARRL is willing to disbar someone, is how do you prove a violation.
I agree completely. Can somebody notify the dxpedition and ask them to try it? Might work FB and set a new precedent for the future Jerry W4UK _______________________________________________ RTTY mai
These jammers - the hardcore ones - basically are sociopaths. Barring them from DXCC would have no effect. They get their kicks from disrupting everyone else. They are similar to contest cheaters. Th
If that is true, the scheme of the DX coming to your frequency will not work either. A sociopath would just go up the band giving a bogus 599 to every station that he hears. RTTY is especially easy t
Ok, back to Guido. If the miscreant can be identified Guido wouldn't need to enter his house with the sledge hammer. A large rotary saw with a metal cutting blade or an acetylene torch at the base of
Say, don't RTTY sigs have a 'fingerprint' just like the human hand? I mean, can't one set up some software to detect characteristics unique to the transmitter and 'style' of sending of the jammer? Th
In addition to the baud rate and Mark duration at the beginning and ending (like a squelch tail) that I mentioned earlier, the shift frequency can also be different. If this can be accurately measure
Okay, I concede, Guido and his 15# sledgehammer were mostly symbolic. There are other ways to deal with renegades, whether sociopaths or otherwise. My point was that if a jamming station came on near
Many of the techniques used to "fingerprint" other modes can also be used for RTTY, of course. The profile of how RF power increases to full power when the carrier is first keyed is also usable to id
If you have heard the DX, you can tell him from a jammer, same as now. When a jammer calls you on the DX frequency, are you suckered in? Nope. A jammer with a skimmer has no great advantage. Rememb
Not to be a wet blanket but Guido and his 15# sledge hammer would be in trouble so many ways it's not funny. Intentional damage to any federally licensed communications facility is a serious felony -
Here's a maybe different thought: We learned at Visalia IDXC that massive funding is required to finance some of the more complex operations, e.g. VP8ORK. Would it make sense to set aside say $200,00