Mail Archive Search: <+from:hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:hfdxmonitor@gmail.com: 105 ]

Total 105 documents matching your query.

21. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 23:38:09 -0400; I did JT65 on 160, but really what´s the challenge? Is amazing when you did a CW qso, switching between RX antennas, filters and radio adjustments to pull out a callsign I don´t know what people than; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00076.html (7,820 bytes)
22. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 23:45:20 -0400; It'll never reach the levels of SSB/CW/RTTY, if that's what you are getting to, for the simple reason that DXpeditions to rare places would be crazy to spend precious time on a 6 minutes per QSO mod; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00077.html (7,426 bytes)
23. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 23:56:11 -0400; And my question is about the feeling of doing a JT65 QSO, or nothing, on topband. :^) 73 de Vince, VA3VF _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00078.html (6,936 bytes)
24. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 00:03:36 -0400; There is JTDX, based on WSJT-X, but with some additional tweaks for the HF user. 73 de Vince, VA3VF _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00079.html (7,734 bytes)
25. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 00:08:54 -0400; You didn't really mean this, did you? 73 de Vince, VA3VF _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00080.html (7,961 bytes)
26. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 00:17:12 -0400; JC, Amateur radio is basically about RF, not modes. Modes, beginning with code, were and are being added as technology permits. 73 de Vince, VA3VF _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http:; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00081.html (7,914 bytes)
27. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 00:21:30 -0400; JC, I'm way behind reading messages. Please disregard my last one. As we say in our mother tongue 'gosto nao se discute'. :^)) 73 de Vince, VA3VF _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http:/; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00082.html (7,791 bytes)
28. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 00:31:01 -0400; JT modes are weak signal modes, not necessarily low power/QRP modes. The power needed on 160 will likely be higher than on 20, for example. The benefit is that, mode by mode, JT can do more with les; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00083.html (8,280 bytes)
29. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 00:39:13 -0400; Fair enough. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Another angle. I find JT65 to be a very relaxing mode. Which other mode allows one to read and write emails, go get a coffee, answer 'nature; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00084.html (7,577 bytes)
30. Re: Topband: To JT or not to JT (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 13:51:27 -0400; Right! When we see some of issues that are popping up now, such as remotes being used outside ones entity but claimed as inside, to argue about which mode is worthy or not, is misguided. In addition,; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00088.html (7,983 bytes)
31. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 15:10:25 -0400; Mike, I'm most interested in hearing more about your conversation with K1JT about JT9. I've been away from the WSJTGroup for some time, and may have missed any new info about the mode. In theory, JT9; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00092.html (10,939 bytes)
32. Re: Topband: Top Band and JT65 (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 15:23:15 -0400; Rick, The technical explanation takes into account a number of conditions. The details are all available on K1JT's website. If memory serves, it uses 2.5kHz BW in the calculations. CW will have diffe; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00093.html (12,229 bytes)
33. Re: Topband: Stone age arguments (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 17:23:16 -0400; Roger, There is a little discussion going on on eHam right now, about the use o DX Clusters, and other tools. Being attached to the past, fighting progress, etc etc ...the standard good natured 'circ; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00096.html (9,455 bytes)
34. Re: Topband: Stone age arguments (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 17:30:14 -0400; Should have said he wrote this tongue in check, as the way some people think/see the hobby. Vince, VA3VF There is a little discussion going on on eHam right now, about the use o DX Clusters, and othe; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00097.html (9,629 bytes)
35. Re: Topband: N7QT on "Increasing the Rate of the JT Modes" (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 10:28:05 -0400; Thank you for the link, Tim. As for the second part, I have to read and re-read that again. I have seen multiples stations calling the DX in different places, but I don't think it was as part of this; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00109.html (9,295 bytes)
36. Re: Topband: N7QT on "Increasing the Rate of the JT Modes" (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 10:45:18 -0400; Hi Larry, People are still debating about when to consider a QSO complete. As you mentioned, if you received a report, and sent a report back, the QSO is in theory complete. However, there is no conf; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00112.html (8,715 bytes)
37. Re: Topband: P.O.A. (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 11:06:34 -0400; Hi Barry, Very early on, I decided that any valid personal QSO, would have to be made not only by me, but using my own station. This decision has kept me off the air for long stretches of time, and t; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00113.html (7,915 bytes)
38. Re: Topband: P.O.A. (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 12:17:40 -0400; Hi Paul, Think about an eventual P5 activation, a mega one, with lots of ops. The likelyhood that many of them will not have P5 already confirmed, is a real possibility. They will be there making a l; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00115.html (8,315 bytes)
39. Re: Topband: P.O.A. (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 12:44:55 -0400; And don't forget remotes. While they may not be feasible from every location and operation, it allows the DXpedioner to be at both ends of the same QSO. 73 de Vince, VA3VF Think about an eventual P5; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00116.html (8,659 bytes)
40. Re: Topband: to JT or not to JT (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 14:28:30 -0400; Hi JC, That's true, but it is an endorsement for WAS. And since the DXCC categories were not delivered to us a part of the 10 commandments, it can change at any moment. :^) 73 de Vince, VA3VF DXCC JT; /archives//html/Topband/2017-05/msg00119.html (8,195 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]