[RTTY] RTTY Digest, Vol 103, Issue 25

Sun Jul 17 21:14:39 PDT 2011

After answering the first I decided not to answer the others.  Reinforcing bad behavior is not good.  Hopefully we can present a united approach to maintain good procedures.

73

Ed, AI6O

rtty-request at contesting.com wrote:

>Send RTTY mailing list submissions to
>	rtty at contesting.com
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	rtty-request at contesting.com
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	rtty-owner at contesting.com
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of RTTY digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Fonts, mostly off topic (Kok Chen)
>   2. Exchanges (edfelter at cox.net)
>   3. Re: Exchanges (Kok Chen)
>   4. Re: Exchanges (Ron Kolarik)
>   5. Re: Exchanges (Bill, W6WRT)
>   6. Re: Exchanges (David Levine)
>   7. Re: Exchanges (Tom Osborne)
>   8. Re: Exchanges (Ron Kolarik)
>   9. NAQP RTTY AC0C Single Op LP (Jeff Blaine)
>  10. NAQP (Dick White)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:14:04 -0700
>From: Kok Chen <chen at mac.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Fonts, mostly off topic
>To: RTTY Reflector <rtty at contesting.com>
>Cc: iw1ayd <iw1ayd at googlemail.com>
>Message-ID: <0952C615-E02D-4A85-A4B1-AC4F9002BE00 at mac.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
>
>On Jul 17, 2011, at 1:18 PM, iw1ayd wrote:
>
>> Monaco on several M*S W*S PC's here around.
>
>Monaco is an old typeface that debut on the first Macintosh in 1984.
>
>The original Macintosh came with a bunch of fonts that were named after cities.  There were Geneva, Chicago, New York, etc. 
>
>In about 1987, Apple developed TrueType and converted the old bitmapped fonts to scalable Truetype.  Subsequently, Apple licensed the TrueType technology to Microsoft, which has become the resident font technology today in Windows.  So I am not surprised that many of the TrueType fonts are usable on both Windows and Mac OS.  At least, the format conversion should be relatively easy.
>
>The Chicago font was used even quite recently, like on the third generation iPod.  Monaco is still a defacto "standard" fixed width font on Macintoshes today.
>
>Chuck Bigelow did the bitmap to TrueType conversion for Monaco and you can read about the effort here: 
>
>http://cajun.cs.nott.ac.uk/compsci/epo/papers/volume4/issue3/ep050cb.pdf
>
>In the above article, he mentioned:
>
>> The zero has a diagonal slash through the centre, which effectively differentiates it from
>> the capital ?O? in a manner common in older terminals, but the zero slash does not protrude
>> from the body of the letter, which distinguishes zero from O-slash.
>
>As you can see, there was a conscious effort to make zero distinguishable not just from "oscar" but also from the Scandinavian slashed-O.
>
>Bigelow received a MacArthur Foundation "Genius" award for his font work back in the mid-1980s and he is the original designer of the Lucida family of fonts; first used by the Scientific American periodical.  Today, Lucida Grande is the Macintosh system font.
>
>73
>Chen, W7AY
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:52:06 -0700
>From: <edfelter at cox.net>
>Subject: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: rtty at contesting.com
>Message-ID: <20110717175206.OVLY2.1222783.imail at fed1rmwml41>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
>After my CQ, I noticed several stations answering with their call and their contest exchange on their first transmission.  Several years ago I saw this develope in the early PSK contests, but didn't think much about it.  I spent only about 4 hours (102 Qs) in the NAQP but saw enough instances of this "new" protocol to give it some thought.  I would answer with my report but also would quickly remove the last callsign and <RXC> and hit my TU QRZ macro to hold frequency. 
>
>Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol?  I'll change my macros according if so.  Just curious!
>
>73,
>
>Ed, AI6O
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 15:01:30 -0700
>From: Kok Chen <chen at mac.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: RTTY Reflector <rtty at contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <B627BBCB-DA44-4A1B-9DD0-E699057ED166 at mac.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
>
>
>On Jul 17, 2011, at 2:52 PM, edfelter at cox.net wrote:
>> After my CQ, I noticed several stations answering with their call and their contest exchange on their first transmission.
>
>The good thing about free sound card modems is that it *democratizes* digital modes for the masses so that anyone can operate in RTTY.
>
>The bad thing about free sound card modems is that it democratizes digital modes for the masses so that *anyone* can operate in RTTY.
>
>73
>Chen, W7AY
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 17:13:24 -0500
>From: "Ron Kolarik" <rkolarik at neb.rr.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: <rtty at contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <EB7C7660C515408BAA3F2D96C84723C6 at atom1>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>	reply-type=original
>
>I just don't answer them and CQ again. Don't encourage the behaviour and it
>will eventually stop.....maybe. It's a good way to lose your run frequency to someone
>that wants points at all costs....only happened to me once, you want my points
>play the game right :)
>
>Ron
>K0IDT
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: <edfelter at cox.net>
>To: <rtty at contesting.com>
>Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 4:52 PM
>Subject: [RTTY] Exchanges
>
>
>> After my CQ, I noticed several stations answering with their call and their contest 
>> exchange on their first transmission.  Several years ago I saw this develope in the 
>> early PSK contests, but didn't think much about it.  I spent only about 4 hours (102 
>> Qs) in the NAQP but saw enough instances of this "new" protocol to give it some 
>> thought.  I would answer with my report but also would quickly remove the last 
>> callsign and <RXC> and hit my TU QRZ macro to hold frequency.
>>
>> Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol?  I'll change my macros according 
>> if so.  Just curious!
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Ed, AI6O
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty 
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 15:20:42 -0700
>From: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242 at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: rtty at contesting.com
>Message-ID: <ann627dhi36ic72pour0lh24pvkgo5dmlu at 4ax.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
>On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:52:06 -0700, <edfelter at cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol?
>
>REPLY:
>
>I hope not. The calling station should never send his exchange until he knows
>the CQ station has his call right. If the CQ station has it wrong and logs his
>exchange, sends the TU message and goes on to another QSO, it becomes VERY
>difficult to straighten it out. 
>
>If the CQ station has the call wrong, the S&P station should just keep sending
>his call ONLY until the CQ station has it right. 
>
>73, Bill W6WRT
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 18:57:53 -0400
>From: David Levine <david at levinecentral.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: edfelter at cox.net
>Cc: rtty at contesting.com
>Message-ID:
>	<CAGu77J-cJRgVZgLAoagrQ2qM4Tp7XE5e80HW1QscFreTdGoqhA at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>Ed,
>
>I use N1MM and there are some real neat features but once in a while, if I'm
>not paying attention and do something out of sequence, where N1MM thinks I
>am in the exchange is different then where I really am. It's not N1MM's
>fault but my fault and as I use the features more, it becomes less of a
>problem. In fact, I know I blew it when I was working Ed, W0YK, and the
>cursor was in the wrong field. The 2 "oops" that happen are instead of
>sending my own call or report it sends AGN? AGN? or it might send my
>exchange vs my call.
>
>Maybe in the 366 contacts I made there were 8-10 "oops" moments. Not sure if
>that factors into what you experienced, but it could at least add to the
>reason.
>
>73,
>K2DSL - David
>
>On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 5:52 PM, <edfelter at cox.net> wrote:
>
>> After my CQ, I noticed several stations answering with their call and their
>> contest exchange on their first transmission.  Several years ago I saw this
>> develope in the early PSK contests, but didn't think much about it.  I spent
>> only about 4 hours (102 Qs) in the NAQP but saw enough instances of this
>> "new" protocol to give it some thought.  I would answer with my report but
>> also would quickly remove the last callsign and <RXC> and hit my TU QRZ
>> macro to hold frequency.
>>
>> Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol?  I'll change my macros
>> according if so.  Just curious!
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Ed, AI6O
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 16:06:18 -0700
>From: "Tom Osborne" <w7why at frontier.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: "RTTY" <rtty at contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <EEDECBA80A654A9287FA1783AD0EBBFC at Tom>
>
>These are probably newbie operators that don't know better.
>
>What is better, blow them off, or explain to them the correct method of 
>operating.
>
>Someone mentioned on the reflector before to keep a list of offending 
>stations, and after the contest, send them an email *polite* and expain that 
>what they were doing was not the norm.
>
>Next time they will probably be more apt to give you contact then if you 
>just ignore them and hope they go away.  73
>
>Tom W7WHY
>
>
>>Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol?
>
>REPLY:
>
>I hope not. The calling station should never send his exchange until he 
>knows
>the CQ station has his call right. If the CQ station has it wrong and logs 
>his
>exchange, sends the TU message and goes on to another QSO, it becomes VERY
>difficult to straighten it out.
>
>If the CQ station has the call wrong, the S&P station should just keep 
>sending
>his call ONLY until the CQ station has it right.
>
>73, Bill W6WRT
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 8
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 18:29:53 -0500
>From: "Ron Kolarik" <rkolarik at neb.rr.com>
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>To: "Tom Osborne" <w7why at frontier.com>,	"RTTY" <rtty at contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <E900EB87EF9C44ABBF2C877F29B854EB at atom1>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>	reply-type=response
>
>Tom, I don't blow them off. If I get the information exchange
>the first pass I'll CQ again and if the same thing happens then
>I have a macro for "your call pse k0idt".  There have been to many
>times when the information exchange was for a close station and
>not my pipsqueak signal that I came up with the macro in self
>defense :)
>
>Ron
>k0idt
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Tom Osborne" <w7why at frontier.com>
>To: "RTTY" <rtty at contesting.com>
>Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 6:06 PM
>Subject: Re: [RTTY] Exchanges
>
>
>> These are probably newbie operators that don't know better.
>> 
>> What is better, blow them off, or explain to them the correct method of 
>> operating.
>> 
>> Someone mentioned on the reflector before to keep a list of offending 
>> stations, and after the contest, send them an email *polite* and expain that 
>> what they were doing was not the norm.
>> 
>> Next time they will probably be more apt to give you contact then if you 
>> just ignore them and hope they go away.  73
>> 
>> Tom W7WHY
>> 
>> 
>>>Is this to be come the new and accepted protocol?
>> 
>> REPLY:
>> 
>> I hope not. The calling station should never send his exchange until he 
>> knows
>> the CQ station has his call right. If the CQ station has it wrong and logs 
>> his
>> exchange, sends the TU message and goes on to another QSO, it becomes VERY
>> difficult to straighten it out.
>> 
>> If the CQ station has the call wrong, the S&P station should just keep 
>> sending
>> his call ONLY until the CQ station has it right.
>> 
>> 73, Bill W6WRT
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 9
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 19:39:50 -0500
>From: "Jeff Blaine" <keepwalking188 at yahoo.com>
>Subject: [RTTY] NAQP RTTY AC0C Single Op LP
>To: "RTTY Reflector" <rtty at contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <FA7621FB95DA4D7683852DD260B802C0 at 8710w>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>                    North American QSO Party, RTTY - July
>
>Call: AC0C
>Operator(s): AC0C
>Station: AC0C
>
>Class: Single Op LP
>QTH: Kansas
>Operating Time (hrs): 9:45
>
>Summary:
>Band  QSOs  Mults
>-------------------
>   80:   42    22
>   40:  239    46
>   20:  237    37
>   15:    0     0
>   10:    0     0
>-------------------
>Total:  518   105  Total Score = 54,908
>
>Club: Kansas City DX Club
>
>Team: 
>
>Comments:
>
>Eq:  SO2V FTdx-5000MP and an array of attic mounted mono-banders.  Unassisted.
>
>Got a late start as our final coordination meeting leading to next weekend's
>W0DXCC convention overlapped the contest start (us RTTY guys just can't get no
>respect!).
>
>Ran on one main VFO and S&P on the 2nd VFO looking for mults and guys I had not
>worked.  Without the telnet feed, catching the mults was tough.  Fortunately, 10
>and 15 were dead here making the band selection quite a bit easier.  hi hi.
>
>Pleased with results on 20 & 40.  Especially on 40m - with antenna improvements
>paying off on that band.  
>
>Even with the receiving loop on 80m, it was tough to keep a decent rate going
>even with the SO2V combo.  Band noise was tough and the transmit antenna on 80m
>is marginal.
>
>SO2V is a huge step up from SO1R.  And guys not running this are really missing
>out if their rig is capable of it.  My score is weak from a mult standpoint, but
>the Q count is pretty good and that would not have been possible without the
>SO2V op mode.  While SO2V is not SO2R, it's also easy to implement as it
>requires only the additional AF to PC feed for sub-VFO equipped rigs.
>
>This contest run was mostly a good chance to check out the FT5K in SO2V mode so
>I could contrast it to the FT2K.  The FT2K is really smooth in SO2V and by
>comparison, has far better ergonomics for SO2V for a couple of reasons. The 2K
>has a dedicated RIT knob (on the 5K, the VFO-B and RIT share the same knob). 
>SO2V on the 5K is workable on RTTY, but I dont' think in CW it would be
>efficient for this reason.
>
>The most troublesome quirk in RTTY SO2V is the unnecessary limits on the filter
>bandwidths requiring manipulation of the A/B, NAR/WIDE and WIDTH buttons in
>order to fine tune VFO-B width.  A big step backward from the 2K for this
>reason specifically.
>
>Fortunately plans here for the fall include moving from the current SO2V to a
>SO2R config.  The FT2K will be taking anchor position on the key 20/40m bands. 
>Lot of work to be done by September!
>
>73/jeff/ac0c
>www.ac0c.com
>
>
>Posted using 3830 Score Submittal Forms at: http://www.hornucopia.com/3830score/
>______________________________________________
>3830 mailing list
>3830 at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/3830
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 10
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 20:53:40 -0500
>From: "Dick White" <whiter26 at sbcglobal.net>
>Subject: [RTTY] NAQP
>To: "RTTY Contesting" <rtty at contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <GCEHIONANEIKLALFAGJOGELNFAAA.whiter26 at sbcglobal.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>I made 175 Q's in the NAQP in my 3.5 hours I worked the contest. 17 on 80,
>22 on 40 and 136 on 20 meters with 60 mults.
>
>N1MM worked great. 44 were 1st time calls. Maybe we are getting some new
>blood into RTTY contesting. I had two operator error problems due to hitting
>the wrong key. I use 250 and 500 Hz filters, depending on how crowded the
>band is. I had about 10 or so callers who were just on the edge of my band
>pass that I could not copy. I continued to call CQ until they either tuned
>in my signal properly or went away. All of us should make sure we are tuned
>in on the callers frequency. All in all, I think the contesters were well
>behaved and made the usual unavoidable errors.
>
>73  Dick  KS0M
>
>Richard C. "Dick" White
>Fulton, Missouri 65251 U.S.A.
>whiter26 at sbcglobal.net
>
>"We make a living by what we do.
> We make a life by what we give."
>              Winston Churchill
>
>Amateur Radio Station:  KS0M
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>RTTY mailing list
>RTTY at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
>End of RTTY Digest, Vol 103, Issue 25
>*************************************