Topband: Field Checking strange cards

[Louis Parascondola]

Since I have personal knowledge of the S2 to Connecticut QSO as being valid, I would just be curious how many on here have worked S2 on 160 and has it confirmed.  Lou W1QJ

Sent from AOL Mobile Mail


-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Cizek W0VTT <mgcizek at gmail.com>
To: Louis Parascondola <gudguyham at aol.com>; topband <topband at contesting.com>
Sent: Fri, Jan 15, 2016 12:32 PM
Subject: Field Checking strange cards


Lou, Larry, and the gang,

Newington's instructions to Field Checkers state that our job is to 
verify that the information on the QSL cards is the same as is claimed 
on the application.  If we note anything "unusual", like a 160m QSO 
taking place in broad daylight, we note it on the application.  It is 
NOT our job to decide if the QSO is "good" or not.  This also applies to 
unauthorized operations like P5RS7, and the like.

If I saw a claimed 160m QSO with S2 at 4pm local time, I would flag it 
on the application.  Then, I would go home, look up sunrise and sunset 
times for that date in both CT and the guy's town in S2, write it all 
up, and email it to the DXCC desk.  I have done exactly this before, and 
I know some of my colleagues have, as well.

-- 
73,
Mike Cizek WØVTT



On 15-Jan-16 01:01, Louis Parascondola wrote:
> Tom please comment on the 4pm QSL card from ct. Claiming S2 at 4pm 
> local time.
>
> Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom W8JI <<a href="mailto:w8ji at w8ji.com">w8ji at w8ji.com</a>>
> To: topband <<a href="mailto:topband at contesting.com">topband at contesting.com</a>>; Mike Cizek W0VTT <<a href="mailto:mgcizek at gmail.com">mgcizek at gmail.com</a>>
> Sent: Thu, Jan 14, 2016 09:42 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Strange propagation
>
>
> I am a 160 card checker, and I damn well DO check the times! I'm sorry
> to report that I have found cases where "impossible" QSOs were claimed,
> and reported them to the mother ship in Newington. I would sincerely
> hope that my colleagues would do the same.>>>
>
> But isn't it legal to operate anywhere in the lower continental USA to 
> make
> a DXCC contact in the lower continental USA?
>
> As far as I know, they made that legal many years ago, and the contact
> simply has to be made from the USA lower 48 no matter where.
>
> Where were all the complainers when they did that? As far as I'm 
> concerned,
> that was the end of DXCC meaning very much. I wrote and complained. 
> Now it
> is what it is.
>
> 73 Tom
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - <a href="http://www.contesting.com/_topband" target="_blank">http://www.contesting.com/_topband</a>