[CQ-Contest] Ft1000 MP audio output

Thu Dec 20 19:23:39 EST 2001

Hi John --

   This is a problem with almost every radio.  The original applications for these line level outputs (phone patches, RTTY) do NOT
want the transmitted signal routed back through the receiver output jack, as it would cause a feedback loop (in the telephone) or
garble decoders (RTTY terminal units).

   Perhaps one solution is to simply mix your line input (transmit) audio with the line output.  That, of course, requires some
external hardware and doesn't work for CW; one would have to synthesize a sidetone for CW.  This is yet another option for station
trick boxes that interconnect computers with radios...

-- Eric K3NA

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-cq-contest at contesting.com
[mailto:owner-cq-contest at contesting.com]On Behalf Of John Devoldere
Sent: 2001 December 19 Wed 09:14
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Ft1000 MP audio output

The audio oputput available oin the RTTY, FSK or AF-out connector of the =
Ft1000 MP (or mark V) only gives the receive audio. I need to have the =
transmit audio (monitor audio) there as well for recording purposes. =
Anyone knows how to fix that? BTW I do not want to use the headphone or =
speaker output because those outputs are controled b the audio =
potentiometer.

Thank you and 73

john, ON4UN

--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com

--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com

>From Tonno Vahk" <tonno.vahk at mail.ee  Thu Dec 20 09:38:09 2001
From: Tonno Vahk" <tonno.vahk at mail.ee (Tonno Vahk)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:38:09 +0200
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Re: Logging Dupes
References: <3C20C9D9.A10FE208 at mvosprey.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20011219180030.00aa4030 at pop.ne.mediaone.net> <00dc01c188fe$9a6278e0$9600000a at bedroom>
Message-ID: <00a901c1893a$09b30440$5a01a8c0 at lhvdirect.com>

Most of the answers I got suggested bad packet spots.

I checked and identified only one bad spot on 20m: ES8C once. No EI-s or
EH-s or IS-s or anything else. Checked for frequency also and found no
lucrative spots with coinciding frequency during the times of frequent
dupes.

Of course there were cases still that had spots involved but I still have a
feeling that there was something else behind. Anyway, I guess this is a call
for a particular station himself - if he feels a smallest bit of uncertainty
about the first QSO then let him dupe when rate are slow.

I am still not sure if time is important in the CQWW log. I asked this
question once but got no answers.
If I log a QSO at 00:01 first day and my correspondent 23:59 the second day
for some reason we will still get it verified as a good QSO as the computer
only matches callsigns. I guess time checks can be carried out only manually
if needed, isn't it so?

Thus if you get a QSO B4 from someone whom you don't have in the log yet,
just put him into the log and you have the QSO? No need to peg for another?
In the same time it is probably incorrect to log a QSO like that...

73
tonno
ES5TV
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jamie WW3S" <jtolbert at gremlan.org>
To: "Tonno Vahk" <tonno.vahk at mail.ee>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>; "Jim
Reisert" <jjreisert at alum.mit.edu>
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 4:32 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Re: Logging Dupes

>
> search for ei9c....
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Reisert" <jjreisert at alum.mit.edu>
> To: "Tonno Vahk" <tonno.vahk at mail.ee>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 6:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Re: Logging Dupes
>
>
> >
> > I'll bet the callsign was busted on packet.  That can account for
> > outrageous pileups when guys are desperate to work anything new that
> > moves.  If you still have your logs, it would be interesting to compare
> > against the archived spots on the OH2AQ web cluster to see if there is
> > correlation.
> >
> > 73 - Jim AD1C
> >
> > At 10:26 PM 12/19/2001 +0200, Tonno Vahk wrote:
> > >My feeling is that there are stations who dupe some multipliers
> deliberately
> > >in the second half of the contest when the rates are slow to make sure
> that
> > >they are in the log.
> > >
> > >In CQWW CW, I remember that we had quite nice US pile-ups on 40m and
20m
> at
> > >ES9C in the last hours of the contest and in times more than half of
the
> > >QSOs were dupes. It was really funny. And most of them were 1x2 US
calls
> > >probably quite seriously in the contest so we could copy each other
very
> > >well and probably copied as well during the first QSO.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863
> > USA +978-251-9933, <jjreisert at alum.mit.edu>, http://www.ad1c.com
> >
> >
> > --
> > CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> > Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
> >
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
>

--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com