Date   

Re: Antenna Tuners

cessnaflyer42
 

I love my LDG tuner! I had the Z11ProII when I was running barefoot, and I liked it so well, when I bought an amp, I upgraded the tuner to an AT-1000ProII. The LDGs need no rig interface (although you can interface them with certain rigs). They just work!

Good luck!

73 de NF8I,

~James


Re: Falkland Isl

Joseph Miller <kj8o.ham@...>
 

Thanks Joe,

I heard him, no joy, maybe another day

73 de Joe KJ8O




On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 8:55 PM, ljl2002@att.net <joe_molon@yahoo.com>wrote:

**


VP8LP is calling CQ on 14071.3 khz now @ 00:54 UTC.
Fair sig into CT.
GO get him!

Joe
KA1PPV #1482



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Falkland Isl

ljl2002@att.net
 

VP8LP is calling CQ on 14071.3 khz now @ 00:54 UTC.
Fair sig into CT.
GO get him!

Joe
KA1PPV #1482


Re: Annoying things on PSK

Jerry N9AVY
 

Keep in mind that the old DXers definition of a vertical is  "an antenna that radiates equally poor in all directions " !   :-)

Jerry

--- On Tue, 3/19/13, ljl2002@att.net <joe_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: ljl2002@att.net <joe_molon@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
To: "070@yahoogroups.com" <070@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 7:06 PM
















 









Darin,

 

I operate at extremely low power levels so if another station were only being received at 347 here they would never hear me on the other end.  A good majority of my contacts are made with someone with a beam on the other end, hence a true 599.  There have been a few occasions where I have been able to exchange lower RSQ's but not many.

 

Joe

KA1PPV  #1482



From: ve3oij <ve3oij@amsat.org>

To: 070@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 7:17 PM

Subject: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK



 



--- In mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com, "my_call_is_ac4m" <ac4m@...> wrote:

Annoying things to me is giving a 599 report for EVERYONE! What is
the use of giving a 599 if it has no meaning,


For years, I've been wondering why we bother with signal reports. Whether it's contests or casual QSO, rarely does anyone bother to give an accurate signal report on digital. It's more common on CW or SSB, but even there the number of "59" grossly exceeds what I think are realistic expectations of signal reports.



The only way, it seems, to get an accurate signal report is explicitly to ask for one. Otherwise, it's simply a meaningless box that people fill out because it makes an "official" QSO.



I've been on digital modes for 7 years now, and in that time I've seen far too many people get annoyed/angry when you tell them that their signal is, in fact, 591 because it's 400 Hz wide on PSK31, or that it's 339 fading in and out of the QSB. I used to give out accurate signal reports. In fact, sometimes I'd even send a little screen shot of your signal on my waterfall. But proper reports were "not appreciated," let alone supporting evidence, and I gave up.



So for most people I give out 599 unless you ask for a proper report, then I'm happy to oblige. Also, if I remember your call and know that you actually care about it then I will as well. Generally if I recognize an 070 or 30MDG member call I give a proper report, but there's so many of you now :) Otherwise, it's just a macro field.



I can understand this practice in contest or working a DXpedition,


I can't understand why we give them out at all if nobody really cares - it's wasting air time on a practice that has been superseded by time and technology... a quaint old practice. On DXpeditions, it's especially egregious: everyone knows full well that almost nobody is actually 59 to a DXpedition, so why bother giving out 59? Who is kidding whom?



Personally, I like to know if I'm putting out a weak or crappy signal, but I've simply given up hope of finding out. Or my signal is always totally awesome, which I highly doubt. Sorry to all if that sounds cynical, but I don't see how swimming against this particular current improves my amateur radio experience - or yours for that matter. Maybe we're just seeing a general change and it's time to drop the obligatory signal report, just like we stopped having to wear ties to work.



73 de VE3OIJ

-Darin































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Annoying things on PSK

ljl2002@att.net
 

Darin,
 
I operate at extremely low power levels so if another station were only being received at 347 here they would never hear me on the other end.  A good majority of my contacts are made with someone with a beam on the other end, hence a true 599.  There have been a few occasions where I have been able to exchange lower RSQ's but not many.
 
Joe
KA1PPV  #1482

From: ve3oij <ve3oij@amsat.org>
To: 070@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 7:17 PM
Subject: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK

 

--- In mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com, "my_call_is_ac4m" <ac4m@...> wrote:

Annoying things to me is giving a 599 report for EVERYONE! What is
the use of giving a 599 if it has no meaning,
For years, I've been wondering why we bother with signal reports. Whether it's contests or casual QSO, rarely does anyone bother to give an accurate signal report on digital. It's more common on CW or SSB, but even there the number of "59" grossly exceeds what I think are realistic expectations of signal reports.

The only way, it seems, to get an accurate signal report is explicitly to ask for one. Otherwise, it's simply a meaningless box that people fill out because it makes an "official" QSO.

I've been on digital modes for 7 years now, and in that time I've seen far too many people get annoyed/angry when you tell them that their signal is, in fact, 591 because it's 400 Hz wide on PSK31, or that it's 339 fading in and out of the QSB. I used to give out accurate signal reports. In fact, sometimes I'd even send a little screen shot of your signal on my waterfall. But proper reports were "not appreciated," let alone supporting evidence, and I gave up.

So for most people I give out 599 unless you ask for a proper report, then I'm happy to oblige. Also, if I remember your call and know that you actually care about it then I will as well. Generally if I recognize an 070 or 30MDG member call I give a proper report, but there's so many of you now :) Otherwise, it's just a macro field.

I can understand this practice in contest or working a DXpedition,
I can't understand why we give them out at all if nobody really cares - it's wasting air time on a practice that has been superseded by time and technology... a quaint old practice. On DXpeditions, it's especially egregious: everyone knows full well that almost nobody is actually 59 to a DXpedition, so why bother giving out 59? Who is kidding whom?

Personally, I like to know if I'm putting out a weak or crappy signal, but I've simply given up hope of finding out. Or my signal is always totally awesome, which I highly doubt. Sorry to all if that sounds cynical, but I don't see how swimming against this particular current improves my amateur radio experience - or yours for that matter. Maybe we're just seeing a general change and it's time to drop the obligatory signal report, just like we stopped having to wear ties to work.

73 de VE3OIJ
-Darin




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Annoying things on PSK

Jerry N9AVY
 

I really have to agree with this.  Besides the obligatory "599", there's also the IMHO the worthless IMD reports and sometimes even S meter reports. Really  ???  All I care about is making the contact. I hear him , he hears me and maybe we chat a bit.  If anyone really wants an honest signal report, I'll give it to them, BUT they gotta ask !

As far as using macros, I will sometimes type ahead while I semi-watching the screen.  I use macros a lot because many QSO's are repetitive to the point of being boring.  I have a couple macros where I can add extra stuff and look somewhat conversational.  When I ran HRD, there were several sets of macros I could plug in where needed and I think I fooled many into thinking I was a decent typist !

There is a place for macros, but they need to be used wisely.  I type with one finger each hand... never took typing in school because it wasn't "cool".  Wish I could have foreseen the future of computers in everyday life.  So, I muddle along as best I can. Also I have a touch of arthritis in fingers and macros keep the pain level minimal.

Amateur code of conduct ?  Yup, still good after 85 years !


Jerry  N9AVY

--- On Tue, 3/19/13, ve3oij <ve3oij@amsat.org> wrote:

From: ve3oij <ve3oij@amsat.org>
Subject: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
To: 070@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 6:17 PM
















 











--- In 070@yahoogroups.com, "my_call_is_ac4m" <ac4m@...> wrote:

Annoying things to me is giving a 599 report for EVERYONE! What is
the use of giving a 599 if it has no meaning,


For years, I've been wondering why we bother with signal reports. Whether it's contests or casual QSO, rarely does anyone bother to give an accurate signal report on digital. It's more common on CW or SSB, but even there the number of "59" grossly exceeds what I think are realistic expectations of signal reports.



The only way, it seems, to get an accurate signal report is explicitly to ask for one. Otherwise, it's simply a meaningless box that people fill out because it makes an "official" QSO.



I've been on digital modes for 7 years now, and in that time I've seen far too many people get annoyed/angry when you tell them that their signal is, in fact, 591 because it's 400 Hz wide on PSK31, or that it's 339 fading in and out of the QSB. I used to give out accurate signal reports. In fact, sometimes I'd even send a little screen shot of your signal on my waterfall. But proper reports were "not appreciated," let alone supporting evidence, and I gave up.



So for most people I give out 599 unless you ask for a proper report, then I'm happy to oblige. Also, if I remember your call and know that you actually care about it then I will as well. Generally if I recognize an 070 or 30MDG member call I give a proper report, but there's so many of you now :) Otherwise, it's just a macro field.



I can understand this practice in contest or working a DXpedition,


I can't understand why we give them out at all if nobody really cares - it's wasting air time on a practice that has been superseded by time and technology... a quaint old practice. On DXpeditions, it's especially egregious: everyone knows full well that almost nobody is actually 59 to a DXpedition, so why bother giving out 59? Who is kidding whom?



Personally, I like to know if I'm putting out a weak or crappy signal, but I've simply given up hope of finding out. Or my signal is always totally awesome, which I highly doubt. Sorry to all if that sounds cynical, but I don't see how swimming against this particular current improves my amateur radio experience - or yours for that matter. Maybe we're just seeing a general change and it's time to drop the obligatory signal report, just like we stopped having to wear ties to work.



73 de VE3OIJ

-Darin



























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Annoying things on PSK

ljl2002@att.net
 

Jim,
 
I don't type well either but I find most Hams are gracious enough to put up with me.
Could have taken typing back in HS but I knew that I would never need it. HI HI.
 
Joe
KA1PPV  #1482

From: Jim Innis <jinnis@swbell.net>
To: 070@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK

 
But I don't type fast enough.

Jim, K5SP

On 3/19/2013 5:04 PM, mailto:ljl2002%40att.net wrote:

Craig,

They were probably paying more attention to QRZ.com than listening to
you. A lot of hams miss the opportunity for a pleasant exchange that
way. Macros have their place but I think you should at least carry on
a wee bit of a conversation.( with the correct name. of course)

73
Joe
KA1PPV #1482

From: my_call_is_ac4m <mailto:ac4m%40live.com <mailto:ac4m%40live.com>>
To: mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com <mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 1:41 PM
Subject: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK


Annoying things to me is giving a 599 report for EVERYONE! What is the
use of giving a 599 if it has no meaning, I can understand this
practice in contest or working a DXpedition, I think it is a insult in
some ways of giving me a 599 then ask to repeat my QTH, name etc..or
even get my name wrong, I go by Craig which is my legal middle name
and I tell people two times my name is Craig and they say FB 599
Jonathan, that is insulting to me. I could go back to them and ask
them are they drunk and they would return to me FB copy Jonathan TU
for QSO , It seems like lots and lots of people DO NOT READ their
screen at all, is all I can figure, it really makes themselves look
stupid to the rest of the world. "I AM ROBOT"

Another annoying thing is people that give me a 73 and I give them my
73 and say QRZ? or something similar, then he/she want to key back up
and say bye or something similar again while doing this covering up
the next station calling me. I always give them a chance to give their
73 to me it is not like I said 73 to them first type of thing. What is
wrong just saying bye the first time and all the pleasant sayings and
be done with it.

I am glad the 070 group is educated bunch about PSK procedures and
such, I just wish we could get the rest of the world up to speed.

Can you all think of ways to help spread the word? It is ok to
complain about things, but it is even better to do something about it.

--- In mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com, David Westbrook <dwestbrook@...>
wrote:

It's like they got their license and jumped on digital with zero
experience.

Well, that's exactly what I did!! and nothing wrong with that ...
no prerequisite of doing other parts of the hobby (e.g. cw or ssb)
before
any other parts (e.g. digital)
Pretty hard not to start with zero experience :)



Scott -- i think you're right about contest "swatting" -- the CQ'er will
definitely attempt to hold the run freq, and just keep CQ'ing over
someone
trying to hijack it. But also in contests it's very clear who the cq'er
is ... and in psk style Q's it's impossible to know unless you were
listening before the qso started.

--david
KJ4IZW


On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Jerry <n9avy@...> wrote:

**


Double positive beats my "No se nada nunca !" Hi ! Hi !

Well I am more and more convinced that many PSK operators have
never had
any experience with phone/cw and are totally ignorant of proper
procedures. It's like they got their license and jumped on digital
with
zero experience. Other than they don't really care about the mess they
create, that's about the only explanation I can come up with.

Just had a station QRM the heck out my QSO with a German station
and when
he called me, I just ignored him and QSYed. Think I'll be doing
more of
that now.

Just got a couple more hard-earned N's for WTW !

73, Jerry N9AVY


--- On Tue, 3/19/13, Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...> wrote:

From: Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...>
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
To: "070@...@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 10:39 AM




In this you are completely correct, Jerry (I like that double
positive!).
I have often participated in this type of even in that my answering a
station using my XE call prompts several others to try to work me
on the
original station's frequency. If they just moved up or down a little I
would see them and qsy! And for sure, contests are not "real life"!

It is curious that I haven't noticed this on cw or ssb, even in
contests,
but I do see it a lot in psk and rtty (which I just recently
learned to
operate); maybe because higher wattage often is used and offenders
are just
"swatted". I don't remember even seeing this mentioned in other than
digital groups.

73, Scott

________________________________
From: Jerry <n9avy@...>
To: mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
In a contest some things are forgivable. But in daily operations they
should be.

Case in point, I still need a bunch of N's for WTW... so, I see a
station with an N suffix calling CQ , I answer him only to be beat
out by a
station is Iceland. That's okay because I'll call again. They
finish and
then a certain VE2 call the TF station while I'm call the N
station. The N
station disappeared and the VE2 & TF station monopolized the
frequency. I
think it would have been appropriate had the TF station said "it's
not my
frequency " and moved off . That would have been the gentlemanly
way to
do it.

Still getting a lot of folks jumping on frequency and calling CQ
right on
top of a QSO. It would help if these folks would LISTEN FIRST ! The
excuse that they didn't hear anything doesn't wash. Watching the
waterfall
for a few minutes will usually tell if a frequency is in use.

Think I'll start keep a list of offending stations.. sort of a
"Do Not
Call" list ... or perhaps a version of the notorious "LID List" (Yes,
there really is one !).

Just my 2 cents worth ...
Jerry N9AVY
--- On Tue, 3/19/13, Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...> wrote:
From: Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...>
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
To: "070@...@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 8:09 AM
In the resent contest I was "guilty" of this several times due in
part to
bad conditions. I would hear the same call repeated several times
but not
be sure who was holding the spot. It sometimes was the other
station by
mistake. I would then re-call the spotholder, who often answered.
Sure, I
could have waited and waited to be certain, but it was a contest!
Taking
things too seriously often leads to throwing stones too quickly.

Scott. XE1/AA0AA
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 19, 2013, at 8:56, "Bill AB9QU" <ab9qu@...> wrote:
I have had stations call me after a QSO when it is not my spot.
I don't

answer them and move on
so the original person still has the spot.
Bill ab9qu


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Annoying things on PSK

Larry
 

Dan,
I sent a few e-mails to Bruce, NU0R, reguarding his Easy-Tenna and was satified with his answers.
He stated that the 80-10 meter Easy-Tenna will work very well on the higher frequencies.
 
Also, I read on eHam that one fellow said it worked great on 10-17 meters w/o a tuner.
 
After reading eHam and talking to Bruce, I decided to buy the 160-10 version.
 
ILarry WA7HDZ #404 
 

From: Dan Morris <dbmorris315@gmail.com>
To: 070@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: [070] Annoying things on PSK

Thanks for info but the endfed I'm talking about on the store on eBay is
actually multiple bands. Since I want to get on all the bands for PSK
(at least 20 - 10M) this antenna might work better than getting an one
for each band.

Dan Morris  KZ3T  070-1065
dbmorris315@gmail.com


On 3/19/13 4:39 PM, pegduck56 wrote:

Dan, the end fed from Par Electonics works well and you can really
hide the 20m version. RadioWavz also makes end feds, but their balun
is a bit larger than the Par.

GL, K7TRK







------------------------------------

Check out the 070 Club website at <http://www.podxs070.com/> for the latest information on 070 Club activities.



Yahoo! Groups Links



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Annoying things on PSK

Daniel Wiley
 

I use the Balun Designs Unun #9130 and Wiremans #534 Stealth wire, with my KX3 does a great job on all bands. below the description see the wire lengths/SWR Table.

http://www.balundesigns.com/servlet/the-102/QRP-9-cln-1-Unun-1.5/Detail

http://www.balundesigns.com/Wire%20Length%20for%209132s.pdf

Dan N9BAV
Fort Worth
1365


Re: Antenna Tuners

David M (AJ4TF)
 

I second the LDG. They make a great product. Z11Pro2 is working pretty well in my shack.

--- In 070@yahoogroups.com, Mark Crosbie <N8MNI@...> wrote:

I am running a TS-2000 in the shack. But mine will not tune my windom on
160M, or 30M. I have been running a Diamond SX-600 meter, and a loaned
Dentron Jr. Monitor Tuner. I am looking to replace this with either the
MFJ-993B, or the LDG KT-100. I would like some user input on these two
tuners. Pro's, Con's, other recommendations.

-


73,

N8MNI
Mark Crosbie
London, Ohio
PODXS 070# 0525
PODXS Clubhouse Barkeep
PODXS Reflector Boss


Subscribe to 070

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com <http://us.groups.yahoo.com/>


Subscribe to 070_contest

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com <http://us.groups.yahoo.com/>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Annoying things on PSK

ve3oij <ve3oij@...>
 

--- In 070@yahoogroups.com, "my_call_is_ac4m" <ac4m@...> wrote:

Annoying things to me is giving a 599 report for EVERYONE! What is
the use of giving a 599 if it has no meaning,
For years, I've been wondering why we bother with signal reports. Whether it's contests or casual QSO, rarely does anyone bother to give an accurate signal report on digital. It's more common on CW or SSB, but even there the number of "59" grossly exceeds what I think are realistic expectations of signal reports.

The only way, it seems, to get an accurate signal report is explicitly to ask for one. Otherwise, it's simply a meaningless box that people fill out because it makes an "official" QSO.

I've been on digital modes for 7 years now, and in that time I've seen far too many people get annoyed/angry when you tell them that their signal is, in fact, 591 because it's 400 Hz wide on PSK31, or that it's 339 fading in and out of the QSB. I used to give out accurate signal reports. In fact, sometimes I'd even send a little screen shot of your signal on my waterfall. But proper reports were "not appreciated," let alone supporting evidence, and I gave up.

So for most people I give out 599 unless you ask for a proper report, then I'm happy to oblige. Also, if I remember your call and know that you actually care about it then I will as well. Generally if I recognize an 070 or 30MDG member call I give a proper report, but there's so many of you now :) Otherwise, it's just a macro field.

I can understand this practice in contest or working a DXpedition,
I can't understand why we give them out at all if nobody really cares - it's wasting air time on a practice that has been superseded by time and technology... a quaint old practice. On DXpeditions, it's especially egregious: everyone knows full well that almost nobody is actually 59 to a DXpedition, so why bother giving out 59? Who is kidding whom?

Personally, I like to know if I'm putting out a weak or crappy signal, but I've simply given up hope of finding out. Or my signal is always totally awesome, which I highly doubt. Sorry to all if that sounds cynical, but I don't see how swimming against this particular current improves my amateur radio experience - or yours for that matter. Maybe we're just seeing a general change and it's time to drop the obligatory signal report, just like we stopped having to wear ties to work.


73 de VE3OIJ
-Darin


Re: Annoying things on PSK

Dan Morris - KZ3T
 

Jim - Well, there is a way. fortunately my typing skills are above avg (approx 50 - 60 WPM) but what I do is I will hit my key and start typing away and answering anything the other person is asking. I do this while they are transmitting so when they get finished I have time to look over quickly and hit my transmit button when it's my turn. That way everyone will think you are a heck of a typist!! hihi

Dan Morris KZ3T 10-10# 41015
dbmorris315@gmail.com





On Mar 19, 2013, at 6:15 PM, Jim Innis <jinnis@swbell.net> wrote:

But I don't type fast enough.

Jim, K5SP

On 3/19/2013 5:04 PM, ljl2002@att.net wrote:

Craig,

They were probably paying more attention to QRZ.com than listening to
you. A lot of hams miss the opportunity for a pleasant exchange that
way. Macros have their place but I think you should at least carry on
a wee bit of a conversation.( with the correct name. of course)

73
Joe
KA1PPV #1482

From: my_call_is_ac4m <ac4m@live.com <mailto:ac4m%40live.com>>
To: 070@yahoogroups.com <mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 1:41 PM
Subject: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK


Annoying things to me is giving a 599 report for EVERYONE! What is the
use of giving a 599 if it has no meaning, I can understand this
practice in contest or working a DXpedition, I think it is a insult in
some ways of giving me a 599 then ask to repeat my QTH, name etc..or
even get my name wrong, I go by Craig which is my legal middle name
and I tell people two times my name is Craig and they say FB 599
Jonathan, that is insulting to me. I could go back to them and ask
them are they drunk and they would return to me FB copy Jonathan TU
for QSO , It seems like lots and lots of people DO NOT READ their
screen at all, is all I can figure, it really makes themselves look
stupid to the rest of the world. "I AM ROBOT"

Another annoying thing is people that give me a 73 and I give them my
73 and say QRZ? or something similar, then he/she want to key back up
and say bye or something similar again while doing this covering up
the next station calling me. I always give them a chance to give their
73 to me it is not like I said 73 to them first type of thing. What is
wrong just saying bye the first time and all the pleasant sayings and
be done with it.

I am glad the 070 group is educated bunch about PSK procedures and
such, I just wish we could get the rest of the world up to speed.

Can you all think of ways to help spread the word? It is ok to
complain about things, but it is even better to do something about it.

--- In mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com, David Westbrook <dwestbrook@...>
wrote:

It's like they got their license and jumped on digital with zero
experience.

Well, that's exactly what I did!! and nothing wrong with that ...
no prerequisite of doing other parts of the hobby (e.g. cw or ssb)
before
any other parts (e.g. digital)
Pretty hard not to start with zero experience :)



Scott -- i think you're right about contest "swatting" -- the CQ'er will
definitely attempt to hold the run freq, and just keep CQ'ing over
someone
trying to hijack it. But also in contests it's very clear who the cq'er
is ... and in psk style Q's it's impossible to know unless you were
listening before the qso started.

--david
KJ4IZW


On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Jerry <n9avy@...> wrote:

**


Double positive beats my "No se nada nunca !" Hi ! Hi !

Well I am more and more convinced that many PSK operators have
never had
any experience with phone/cw and are totally ignorant of proper
procedures. It's like they got their license and jumped on digital
with
zero experience. Other than they don't really care about the mess they
create, that's about the only explanation I can come up with.

Just had a station QRM the heck out my QSO with a German station
and when
he called me, I just ignored him and QSYed. Think I'll be doing
more of
that now.

Just got a couple more hard-earned N's for WTW !

73, Jerry N9AVY


--- On Tue, 3/19/13, Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...> wrote:

From: Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...>
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
To: "070@...@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 10:39 AM




In this you are completely correct, Jerry (I like that double
positive!).
I have often participated in this type of even in that my answering a
station using my XE call prompts several others to try to work me
on the
original station's frequency. If they just moved up or down a little I
would see them and qsy! And for sure, contests are not "real life"!

It is curious that I haven't noticed this on cw or ssb, even in
contests,
but I do see it a lot in psk and rtty (which I just recently
learned to
operate); maybe because higher wattage often is used and offenders
are just
"swatted". I don't remember even seeing this mentioned in other than
digital groups.

73, Scott

________________________________
From: Jerry <n9avy@...>
To: mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
In a contest some things are forgivable. But in daily operations they
should be.

Case in point, I still need a bunch of N's for WTW... so, I see a
station with an N suffix calling CQ , I answer him only to be beat
out by a
station is Iceland. That's okay because I'll call again. They
finish and
then a certain VE2 call the TF station while I'm call the N
station. The N
station disappeared and the VE2 & TF station monopolized the
frequency. I
think it would have been appropriate had the TF station said "it's
not my
frequency " and moved off . That would have been the gentlemanly
way to
do it.

Still getting a lot of folks jumping on frequency and calling CQ
right on
top of a QSO. It would help if these folks would LISTEN FIRST ! The
excuse that they didn't hear anything doesn't wash. Watching the
waterfall
for a few minutes will usually tell if a frequency is in use.

Think I'll start keep a list of offending stations.. sort of a
"Do Not
Call" list ... or perhaps a version of the notorious "LID List" (Yes,
there really is one !).

Just my 2 cents worth ...
Jerry N9AVY
--- On Tue, 3/19/13, Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...> wrote:
From: Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...>
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
To: "070@...@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 8:09 AM
In the resent contest I was "guilty" of this several times due in
part to
bad conditions. I would hear the same call repeated several times
but not
be sure who was holding the spot. It sometimes was the other
station by
mistake. I would then re-call the spotholder, who often answered.
Sure, I
could have waited and waited to be certain, but it was a contest!
Taking
things too seriously often leads to throwing stones too quickly.

Scott. XE1/AA0AA
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 19, 2013, at 8:56, "Bill AB9QU" <ab9qu@...> wrote:
I have had stations call me after a QSO when it is not my spot.
I don't

answer them and move on
so the original person still has the spot.
Bill ab9qu
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Antenna Tuners

pegduck56 <pegduck56@...>
 

Mark, out of curiosity, looked at the MFJ on line....WOW it is 10" wide (radio is 10.5") The LDG is about 6.5x6.5 and sits nicely on top of the 2000. It has only 1 input but I just use an wall mounted antenna switch to handle HF and my 6m antenna..Also, LDG is +- $100 bucks less.
 
I'll send you a pix of my set up
 
GL, Ted


________________________________
From: pegduck56 <pegduck56@yahoo.com>
To: "070@yahoogroups.com" <070@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [070] Antenna Tuners


 

Hi Mark, I have the KT-100 and would highly reommend it . Small, compact and efficient and you just use the AT button on the 2000 and you are Golden. If you use the HRD program, you can click on the tune button and tune it. I am able to tune the WARC bands and 80m on my Alpha Delta parallel dipole...Also, LDG has good cust svc
 
GL, Ted, K7TRK


________________________________
From: Mark Crosbie <mailto:N8MNI%40columbus.rr.com>
To: "mailto:070%40yahoogroups.commailto:070%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 3:01 PM
Subject: [070] Antenna Tuners


 

I am running a TS-2000 in the shack. But mine will not tune my windom on
160M, or 30M. I have been running a Diamond SX-600 meter, and a loaned
Dentron Jr. Monitor Tuner. I am looking to replace this with either the
MFJ-993B, or the LDG KT-100. I would like some user input on these two
tuners. Pro's, Con's, other recommendations.

-

73,

N8MNI
Mark Crosbie
London, Ohio
PODXS 070# 0525
PODXS Clubhouse Barkeep
PODXS Reflector Boss

Subscribe to 070

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com <http://us.groups.yahoo.com/>

Subscribe to 070_contest

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com <http://us.groups.yahoo.com/>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Antenna Tuners

Bob N3PPH <rsheskin@...>
 

I have a few LDG tuners and have not had any issues with any of them. One
thing to consider, the MFJ does not do 6 meters but your radio does. The
LDG's are 6 to 160 tuners and mine will make my windom work on 6.



73,

Bob N3PPH



From: 070@yahoogroups.com [mailto:070@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Crosbie
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 6:01 PM
To: 070@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [070] Antenna Tuners





I am running a TS-2000 in the shack. But mine will not tune my windom on
160M, or 30M. I have been running a Diamond SX-600 meter, and a loaned
Dentron Jr. Monitor Tuner. I am looking to replace this with either the
MFJ-993B, or the LDG KT-100. I would like some user input on these two
tuners. Pro's, Con's, other recommendations.

-

73,

N8MNI
Mark Crosbie
London, Ohio
PODXS 070# 0525
PODXS Clubhouse Barkeep
PODXS Reflector Boss

Subscribe to 070

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com <http://us.groups.yahoo.com/>

Subscribe to 070_contest

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com <http://us.groups.yahoo.com/>


Re: Annoying things on PSK

Tim Richardson <groupsrichart@...>
 

I do find some things annoying on PSK from time to time, but for the
most part I tend to just make a note of them as an example of what I do
not want to do. There are a lot of different operators out there with
various levels of expertise. And what one operator is seeing on his
screen may be totally different that what I am seeing due to
propagation. So, I give the benefit of the doubt and try to be the best
operator that I can be.

First publish in 1928, I think 'The Amateur's Code' still has important
meaning today:


*The Radio Amateur is:*

*CONSIDERATE* never knowingly operating in such a way as to lessen the
pleasure of others.

*LOYAL* offering loyalty, encouragement and support to other amateurs,
local clubs and the American Radio Relay League, through which Amateur
Radio in the United States is represented nationally and internationally.

*PROGRESSIVE* with knowledge abreast of science, a well built and
efficient station, and operation beyond reproach.

*FRIENDLY* with slow and patient operation when requested, friendly
advice and counsel to the beginner, kindly assistance, co-operation and
consideration for the interests of others. These are the hallmarks of
the amateur spirit.

*BALANCED* Radio is an avocation, never interfering with duties owed to
family, job, school or community.

*PATRIOTIC* with station and skill always ready for service to country
and community


Re: Antenna Tuners

pegduck56 <pegduck56@...>
 

Hi Mark, I have the KT-100 and would highly reommend it . Small, compact and efficient and you just use the AT button on the 2000 and you are Golden. If you use the HRD program, you can click on the tune button and tune it. I am able to tune the WARC bands and 80m on my Alpha Delta parallel dipole...Also, LDG has good cust svc
 
GL, Ted, K7TRK


________________________________
From: Mark Crosbie <N8MNI@columbus.rr.com>
To: "070@yahoogroups.com" <070@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 3:01 PM
Subject: [070] Antenna Tuners


 

I am running a TS-2000 in the shack. But mine will not tune my windom on
160M, or 30M. I have been running a Diamond SX-600 meter, and a loaned
Dentron Jr. Monitor Tuner. I am looking to replace this with either the
MFJ-993B, or the LDG KT-100. I would like some user input on these two
tuners. Pro's, Con's, other recommendations.

-

73,

N8MNI
Mark Crosbie
London, Ohio
PODXS 070# 0525
PODXS Clubhouse Barkeep
PODXS Reflector Boss

Subscribe to 070

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com <http://us.groups.yahoo.com/>

Subscribe to 070_contest

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com <http://us.groups.yahoo.com/>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Annoying things on PSK

Larry
 

"If some one doesn't tell you about what your doing wrong you will never know that your wrong."
 
Very well put Ian, I feel the same way....since I can't see my own signal, I have to rely on  my
equipment indications and other folks to keep me in line.
 
Larry WA7HDZ #404
 

From: Skippyinspace <skippyinspace@gmail.com>
To: "070@yahoogroups.com" <070@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 2:39 PM
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK

Must admit I'm new to psk but did a lot of reading before sending my first cq call

I will take any advice given

The one thing I have enjoyed so far on psk is calling cq and getting a response which never seams to happen on Ssb with 50w usually for psk I run about 20w

If some one doesn't tell you about what your doing wrong you will never know that your wrong

Ian
2m0bvn

Sent from my iPhone

On 19 Mar 2013, at 21:25, Jerry <n9avy@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

I've done some of this "on the air" helping with people who have had wide signals and it's very rewarding when they accept the help.  Maybe that's one way to clean up the bands... one station at a time.  Reminds me of the thing about "no need to thank me, just pass on what you have learned".  If we all help others then it will hopefully spread/

Good point David !

Jerry  N9AVY 

--- On Tue, 3/19/13, David Rock <david@graniteweb.com> wrote:

As for the "someone is splattering so I just ignore them" tactic, I

personally don't like that at all. I spent 30 minutes just last night

helping someone that was 500Hz wide get his signal under control and he

was very appreciative. Not only did he have no idea he was doing it, he

also got a system that was running a lot cooler. I made a friend AND

made things better for everyone.

If you want people to learn, you have to guide them. You can't just

assume they will figure it out on their own. We were ALL beginners at

some point, and we ALL had help along the way. Sometimes I think we

forget that in our rants. You serve the radio community much better by

taking a little extra time to help fix the problem, rather than ignore

it.

Now if they decide not to listen... that's a whole different ballgame.

I seriously doubt there are many people out there that are deliberately

trying to splatter, though.

--

David, K9DWR

#1604

david@graniteweb.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Check out the 070 Club website at <http://www.podxs070.com/> for the latest information on 070 Club activities.



Yahoo! Groups Links



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Annoying things on PSK

W7RIV
 

Is there something similar to a Code of Conduct for Digital? Or at minimum
it could be 070 code of conduct that we can then add to our signatures or
what not. I know I'm new and I just go with the flow and learn from you
experts out there over time and fine tune the items I use.

- -
Bryon (W7RIV)


Re: Annoying things on PSK

Jim K5SP
 

But I don't type fast enough.

Jim, K5SP

On 3/19/2013 5:04 PM, ljl2002@att.net wrote:

Craig,

They were probably paying more attention to QRZ.com than listening to
you. A lot of hams miss the opportunity for a pleasant exchange that
way. Macros have their place but I think you should at least carry on
a wee bit of a conversation.( with the correct name. of course)

73
Joe
KA1PPV #1482

From: my_call_is_ac4m <ac4m@live.com <mailto:ac4m%40live.com>>
To: 070@yahoogroups.com <mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 1:41 PM
Subject: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK


Annoying things to me is giving a 599 report for EVERYONE! What is the
use of giving a 599 if it has no meaning, I can understand this
practice in contest or working a DXpedition, I think it is a insult in
some ways of giving me a 599 then ask to repeat my QTH, name etc..or
even get my name wrong, I go by Craig which is my legal middle name
and I tell people two times my name is Craig and they say FB 599
Jonathan, that is insulting to me. I could go back to them and ask
them are they drunk and they would return to me FB copy Jonathan TU
for QSO , It seems like lots and lots of people DO NOT READ their
screen at all, is all I can figure, it really makes themselves look
stupid to the rest of the world. "I AM ROBOT"

Another annoying thing is people that give me a 73 and I give them my
73 and say QRZ? or something similar, then he/she want to key back up
and say bye or something similar again while doing this covering up
the next station calling me. I always give them a chance to give their
73 to me it is not like I said 73 to them first type of thing. What is
wrong just saying bye the first time and all the pleasant sayings and
be done with it.

I am glad the 070 group is educated bunch about PSK procedures and
such, I just wish we could get the rest of the world up to speed.

Can you all think of ways to help spread the word? It is ok to
complain about things, but it is even better to do something about it.

--- In mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com, David Westbrook <dwestbrook@...>
wrote:

It's like they got their license and jumped on digital with zero
experience.

Well, that's exactly what I did!! and nothing wrong with that ...
no prerequisite of doing other parts of the hobby (e.g. cw or ssb)
before
any other parts (e.g. digital)
Pretty hard not to start with zero experience :)



Scott -- i think you're right about contest "swatting" -- the CQ'er will
definitely attempt to hold the run freq, and just keep CQ'ing over
someone
trying to hijack it. But also in contests it's very clear who the cq'er
is ... and in psk style Q's it's impossible to know unless you were
listening before the qso started.

--david
KJ4IZW


On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Jerry <n9avy@...> wrote:

**


Double positive beats my "No se nada nunca !" Hi ! Hi !

Well I am more and more convinced that many PSK operators have
never had
any experience with phone/cw and are totally ignorant of proper
procedures. It's like they got their license and jumped on digital
with
zero experience. Other than they don't really care about the mess they
create, that's about the only explanation I can come up with.

Just had a station QRM the heck out my QSO with a German station
and when
he called me, I just ignored him and QSYed. Think I'll be doing
more of
that now.

Just got a couple more hard-earned N's for WTW !

73, Jerry N9AVY


--- On Tue, 3/19/13, Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...> wrote:

From: Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...>
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
To: "070@...@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 10:39 AM




In this you are completely correct, Jerry (I like that double
positive!).
I have often participated in this type of even in that my answering a
station using my XE call prompts several others to try to work me
on the
original station's frequency. If they just moved up or down a little I
would see them and qsy! And for sure, contests are not "real life"!

It is curious that I haven't noticed this on cw or ssb, even in
contests,
but I do see it a lot in psk and rtty (which I just recently
learned to
operate); maybe because higher wattage often is used and offenders
are just
"swatted". I don't remember even seeing this mentioned in other than
digital groups.

73, Scott

________________________________
From: Jerry <n9avy@...>
To: mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
In a contest some things are forgivable. But in daily operations they
should be.

Case in point, I still need a bunch of N's for WTW... so, I see a
station with an N suffix calling CQ , I answer him only to be beat
out by a
station is Iceland. That's okay because I'll call again. They
finish and
then a certain VE2 call the TF station while I'm call the N
station. The N
station disappeared and the VE2 & TF station monopolized the
frequency. I
think it would have been appropriate had the TF station said "it's
not my
frequency " and moved off . That would have been the gentlemanly
way to
do it.

Still getting a lot of folks jumping on frequency and calling CQ
right on
top of a QSO. It would help if these folks would LISTEN FIRST ! The
excuse that they didn't hear anything doesn't wash. Watching the
waterfall
for a few minutes will usually tell if a frequency is in use.

Think I'll start keep a list of offending stations.. sort of a
"Do Not
Call" list ... or perhaps a version of the notorious "LID List" (Yes,
there really is one !).

Just my 2 cents worth ...
Jerry N9AVY
--- On Tue, 3/19/13, Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...> wrote:
From: Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...>
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
To: "070@...@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 8:09 AM
In the resent contest I was "guilty" of this several times due in
part to
bad conditions. I would hear the same call repeated several times
but not
be sure who was holding the spot. It sometimes was the other
station by
mistake. I would then re-call the spotholder, who often answered.
Sure, I
could have waited and waited to be certain, but it was a contest!
Taking
things too seriously often leads to throwing stones too quickly.

Scott. XE1/AA0AA
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 19, 2013, at 8:56, "Bill AB9QU" <ab9qu@...> wrote:
I have had stations call me after a QSO when it is not my spot.
I don't

answer them and move on
so the original person still has the spot.
Bill ab9qu
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Annoying things on PSK

ljl2002@att.net
 

Craig,
 
They were probably paying more attention to QRZ.com than listening to you.  A lot of hams miss the opportunity for a pleasant exchange that way.  Macros have their place but I think you should at least carry on a wee bit of a conversation.( with the correct name. of course)
 
73
Joe
KA1PPV  #1482

From: my_call_is_ac4m <ac4m@live.com>
To: 070@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 1:41 PM
Subject: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK

 
Annoying things to me is giving a 599 report for EVERYONE! What is the use of giving a 599 if it has no meaning, I can understand this practice in contest or working a DXpedition, I think it is a insult in some ways of giving me a 599 then ask to repeat my QTH, name etc..or even get my name wrong, I go by Craig which is my legal middle name and I tell people two times my name is Craig and they say FB 599 Jonathan, that is insulting to me. I could go back to them and ask them are they drunk and they would return to me FB copy Jonathan TU for QSO , It seems like lots and lots of people DO NOT READ their screen at all, is all I can figure, it really makes themselves look stupid to the rest of the world. "I AM ROBOT"

Another annoying thing is people that give me a 73 and I give them my 73 and say QRZ? or something similar, then he/she want to key back up and say bye or something similar again while doing this covering up the next station calling me. I always give them a chance to give their 73 to me it is not like I said 73 to them first type of thing. What is wrong just saying bye the first time and all the pleasant sayings and be done with it.

I am glad the 070 group is educated bunch about PSK procedures and such, I just wish we could get the rest of the world up to speed.

Can you all think of ways to help spread the word? It is ok to
complain about things, but it is even better to do something about it.

--- In mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com, David Westbrook <dwestbrook@...> wrote:

It's like they got their license and jumped on digital with zero
experience.

Well, that's exactly what I did!! and nothing wrong with that ...
no prerequisite of doing other parts of the hobby (e.g. cw or ssb) before
any other parts (e.g. digital)
Pretty hard not to start with zero experience :)



Scott -- i think you're right about contest "swatting" -- the CQ'er will
definitely attempt to hold the run freq, and just keep CQ'ing over someone
trying to hijack it. But also in contests it's very clear who the cq'er
is ... and in psk style Q's it's impossible to know unless you were
listening before the qso started.

--david
KJ4IZW


On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Jerry <n9avy@...> wrote:

**


Double positive beats my "No se nada nunca !" Hi ! Hi !

Well I am more and more convinced that many PSK operators have never had
any experience with phone/cw and are totally ignorant of proper
procedures. It's like they got their license and jumped on digital with
zero experience. Other than they don't really care about the mess they
create, that's about the only explanation I can come up with.

Just had a station QRM the heck out my QSO with a German station and when
he called me, I just ignored him and QSYed. Think I'll be doing more of
that now.

Just got a couple more hard-earned N's for WTW !

73, Jerry N9AVY


--- On Tue, 3/19/13, Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...> wrote:

From: Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...>
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
To: "070@...@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 10:39 AM




In this you are completely correct, Jerry (I like that double positive!).
I have often participated in this type of even in that my answering a
station using my XE call prompts several others to try to work me on the
original station's frequency. If they just moved up or down a little I
would see them and qsy! And for sure, contests are not "real life"!

It is curious that I haven't noticed this on cw or ssb, even in contests,
but I do see it a lot in psk and rtty (which I just recently learned to
operate); maybe because higher wattage often is used and offenders are just
"swatted". I don't remember even seeing this mentioned in other than
digital groups.

73, Scott

________________________________
From: Jerry <n9avy@...>
To: mailto:070%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
In a contest some things are forgivable. But in daily operations they
should be.

Case in point, I still need a bunch of N's for WTW... so, I see a
station with an N suffix calling CQ , I answer him only to be beat out by a
station is Iceland. That's okay because I'll call again. They finish and
then a certain VE2 call the TF station while I'm call the N station. The N
station disappeared and the VE2 & TF station monopolized the frequency. I
think it would have been appropriate had the TF station said "it's not my
frequency " and moved off . That would have been the gentlemanly way to
do it.

Still getting a lot of folks jumping on frequency and calling CQ right on
top of a QSO. It would help if these folks would LISTEN FIRST ! The
excuse that they didn't hear anything doesn't wash. Watching the waterfall
for a few minutes will usually tell if a frequency is in use.

Think I'll start keep a list of offending stations.. sort of a "Do Not
Call" list ... or perhaps a version of the notorious "LID List" (Yes,
there really is one !).

Just my 2 cents worth ...
Jerry N9AVY
--- On Tue, 3/19/13, Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...> wrote:
From: Scott Monks <cq_dx_de_aa0aa@...>
Subject: Re: [070] Re: Annoying things on PSK
To: "070@...@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 8:09 AM
In the resent contest I was "guilty" of this several times due in part to
bad conditions. I would hear the same call repeated several times but not
be sure who was holding the spot. It sometimes was the other station by
mistake. I would then re-call the spotholder, who often answered. Sure, I
could have waited and waited to be certain, but it was a contest! Taking
things too seriously often leads to throwing stones too quickly.

Scott. XE1/AA0AA
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 19, 2013, at 8:56, "Bill AB9QU" <ab9qu@...> wrote:
I have had stations call me after a QSO when it is not my spot. I don't
answer them and move on
so the original person still has the spot.
Bill ab9qu
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]