Topband: DX window

[mike l dormann]

well, my radio has a dial on it that goes from 0 to 180 somewhere around
10 i stop hearing cw, which means that is the bottom of the band, and
around 180 or so can hear ssb, which to me is the top of the band. don't
need much more calabration than that.

mike w7dra


On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 09:07:16 -0500 Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell at gmail.com>
writes:
> Hi Darrell,
> 
> I have started wading into computer logging and I usually use 
> paper.
> After the contest I enter the info into the computer but I plan to 
> just
> have the computer running and do it one QSO at a time.
> 
> None of my radios have any kind of CAT "feature". I do NOT want my 
> radio
> to be smarter than me so they have to stay pretty dern stooopid. 
> The
> logging programs let me enter the frequency I am using in whatever
> format I want AND just keep using the same info for each QSO until 
> I
> change it. I would enter something like 160M or 1.8 (as in mc) but 
> I
> could as easily put in 1.835001. Radios smarter than me can tell 
> the
> computer where they are operating (maybe to the nearest 50 or 100
> cycles. Checking for W/VE QSOs in the DX window would work for at 
> least
> those stations with Baccalaureate radios. Any kind of policing of 
> that
> nature would be encumbered with challenges and appeals processes 
> and
> final results could take years.
> 
> If CAT and computer logging become a requirement those of us without 
> CAT
> or computer logging will be banned - de facto. Come to think of it 
> my
> contest operation is already pretty low key. There are always the 
> WARC
> bands and the expected new allocation at 600 meters. I can't 
> imagine
> contests in THAT band.
> 
> Or...we could all just play by the contest rules and agreements.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Bill  KU8H
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 18:22 -0800, Darrell Bellerive wrote:
> > Being unencumbered by knowledge of contest log reporting and 
> checking 
> > perhaps I am missing something.
> > 
> > Since virtually all contest stations use automated logging 
> programs and 
> > these programs could get the actual transmit frequency directly 
> from the 
> > transceiver as the contact is logged, then why couldn't a log 
> check 
> > computer program simply check for non DX contacts within a DX 
> window?
> > 
> > I guess that would mean requiring an exact frequency rather than a 
> 
> > generic frequency to be submitted in the Cabrillo format, but 
> certainly 
> > that doesn't seem to hard to code into the logging program.
> > 
> > I suppose this could even be crosschecked in the other station's 
> log to 
> > rule out computer errors.
> > 
> > Apply penalties for a certain number of violations to allow for 
> true 
> > mistakes, but once above a certain limit, disqualification.
> > 
> > I will crawl back under my rock now.
> > 
> > 73, Darrell VA7TO
> > 
> > Darrell Bellerive
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com
> 
 
____________________________________________________________
Woman is 53 But Looks 25
Mom reveals 1 simple wrinkle trick that has angered doctors...
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/50c0db639f4545b634966st01vuc