[Moon] [Moon-Net] WSJT

[Lars Pettersson]

Hi Matej

Yes it clearly says how a Qso should be performed.

But as you pointed out it concerns Region 1     , So i suppose region 2 
are decided by  we all know whom :-)

Cu on aurora or some mode

Lars


Den 2016-08-17 kl. 13:33, skrev ok1teh Petrzilka:
>
> Check out http://www.ok2kkw.com/iaru/handbook_7-51.pdf
>
> 7.1
 Minimum Requirement for a valid QSO (Vienna 2007) 
> .............................................................. 89

>
>
> But this is valid just for the IARU Region 1 hi.
>
>
> 73
>
> Matej, OK1TEH
>
>
>
> ---------- Původní zpráva ----------
> Od: Lars Pettersson via Moon <moon at moonbounce.info>
> Komu: Joe Taylor <joe at princeton.edu>, moon at moonbounce.info 
> <moon at moonbounce.info>
> Datum: 17. 8. 2016 8:53:06
> Předmět: Re: [Moon] [Moon-Net] WSJT
>
>
>     It would be interesting to hear your opinion on when a QSO is a QSO?
>     The information to be developed?
>     On a number of expeditions where Callsigns not existed in Call3txt
>     and
>     where they have been held because of too many characters.
>     K1JT even typed here to not use full callsigns and others said not to
>     use the full call: !!!In my eyes, these QSOs are not valid.
>     What are your opin?ion Real QSOs or fake.
>     Its like sending JT de IVE could be any one so not complete QSO FAKE
>
>     Interesting?
>
>     Lars SM4IVE
>
>
>     Den 2016-08-17 kl. 00:10, skrev Joe Taylor:
>     > Hi Mark,
>     >
>     > EA8FF wrote:
>     >> wow! I agree absolutely with many ,it would be nice to have a
>     system
>     >> based on real decodes instead of relying on deep search. To see how
>     >> much fakes deep search gives, do the following test: go to say
>     30 or 20m, where
>     >> there is plenty of activity and get map65 to work there. Do not
>     transmit and
>     >> leave deep search on for some time. you will be receiving
>     reports of people in
>     >> your call3.txt, who even do not have 30m or 20m equipment but
>     are in your call3.txt
>     >> and giving you up to R-reports. Just do the test and you'll be
>     convinced
>     >> that any QSO made with deep search on is invalid.
>     > Your experiment on 20 or 30 meters shows just one thing: if you
>     choose
>     > to turn on deep search (by default it is OFF), you should follow
>     > instructions for its use.
>     >
>     > This decoding option was designed for VHF-and-up use,
>     particularly EME.
>     > It is *not* suitable for use at HF, and never has been
>     recommended for
>     > such use. If you run the DS decoder on a band full of 20 m or 30
>     m JT65
>     > ignals, many of which are far stronger that EME signals, you're
>     > guaranteed to see what appear to be false "decodes". Any careful
>     > operator would reject such garbage out of hand.
>     >
>     > Deep search offers an optional way to get somewhat better
>     sensitivity
>     > for very weak JT65 transmissions that contain one's own call or
>     "CQ",
>     > followed by a previously decoded callsign and a grid locator or
>     report.
>     > This is hardly a revolutionary idea; it's no more than an
>     algorithmic
>     > adaptation of the callsign "cheat sheets" (lists of calls known
>     to be
>     > active on a given EME band) that have been familiar to EME operators
>     > since the 1970s.
>     >
>     > QSOs that may have benefited from deep search decoding are perfectly
>     > valid, and with any normal confirmation they are accepted for
>     DXCC, WAS,
>     > and all other awards.
>     >
>     > -- 73, Joe, K1JT
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
>     http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
>     >
>     >
>
>     -- 
>
>     CW is King!!!!
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Moon mailing list
>     Moon at moonbounce.info
>     http://lists.moonbounce.info/listinfo/moon
>

-- 

CW is King!!!!