[Moon] QRA-codes for EME.

[Wolfgang Schlaffer]

Hi Peter, 

thanks for your comment. 


One more thing: 

Unfortunately K1JTs software is still decoding "nonsense"  and misleading people 
with wrong decodes. More and more people using JT65 on 50MHz now and 
recently I saw floods of very annoying  6m spots on DXClusters. 
Who knows, 6m is always good for surprises and people seem to believe everything whats decoded. 

Otherwise I cant explain DX Cluster spots like yesterday on F5LEN webcluster: 

Example: 

EA1HRR 50277.5 AF6O +in83:es:dm14 jt65 -19  1159z 2016-June-11

As for me it looked strange (opening from EU to California on 6m at 12z...but who knows,
6m is sometimes "magic")  I asked Jim (AF6O) directly if he had a contact with 
EA1HRR. 
Jim replied and told me in an Email that he has not been active on 6m since a long time 
and never worked EU on 6m.

vy 73 de DL5MAE Wolfgang




--------------------------------------------
Peter Sundberg via Moon <moon at moonbounce.info> schrieb am So, 12.6.2016:

 Betreff: Re: [Moon] QRA-codes for EME.
 An: moon at moonbounce.info
 Datum: Sonntag, 12. Juni, 2016 11:21 Uhr
 
 Very interesting to read
 Leif clarification of Nico IV3NWV's highly 
 (for me) technical article.
 
 Some comments from me
 
 At 16:54 2016-06-10, Leif Asbrink via Moon
 wrote:
 ..snip..
 
 >When a station is not present in the data
 base or when the operator
 >does not want
 to use DS because he considers it to be cheating
 
 Which it is.. and always has
 been..
 
 ..snip..
 
   This corresponds to short
 hand messages
 >of JT65 that convey zero
 information to others
 
 Indeed so!
 
 ..snip..
 
 >Both Nico and Joe will give lectures at the
 EME 2016 meeting. I think
 >it will be a
 very good idea to skip the DS decoder and makee a digital
 >system that entirely relies on signals that
 are received via the
 >antenna.
 
 I could not agree more, very
 good point. It is about time people 
 stopped
 fooling themselves and others that EME QSO's are made
 when 
 using the Deep Search
 functionality.
 
 Another
 aspect that comes to mind, why is the Deep Search 
 functionality constantly referred to as a
 'decoder'? Klaus DJ5HG made 
 it
 clear long time ago that Deep Search can not communicate 
 callsigns. It is not a decoder of callsigns.
 Should we even compare 
 new developments to
 a cheating piece of software? Reading Leifs last 
 paragraph makes it very clear that we should
 not.
 
 73
 Peter SM2CEW
 
 
 
 
 
 _______________________________________________
 Moon mailing list
 Moon at moonbounce.info
 http://lists.moonbounce.info/listinfo/moon