On 1/10/11, rtty-request@contesting.com <rtty-request@contesting.com> wrote:
> Send RTTY mailing list submissions to
> rtty@contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> rtty-request@contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> rtty-owner@contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of RTTY digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: After the Contest, AMP REPAIRS?? Interface Choices??
> (Al Kozakiewicz)
> 2. Re: Have others noticed this (Al Kozakiewicz)
> 3. CQ or QRZ (Claude Du Berger)
> 4. Re: After the Contest, AMP REPAIRS?? Interface Choices??
> (Joe Subich, W4TV)
> 5. Re: CQ or QRZ (Al Kozakiewicz)
> 6. Re: ARRL RTTY Round Up OZ1ADL (James C. Hall, MD)
> 7. Re: CQ or QRZ (Cheryl Whitlock)
> 8. Re: CQ or QRZ (Clint Talmadge W5CPT)
> 9. ARRL RTTY RU (SM5LNS)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:03:12 -0500
> From: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] After the Contest, AMP REPAIRS?? Interface
> Choices??
> To: "rtty@contesting.com" <rtty@contesting.com>
> Message-ID:
> <4CD6C06BD31B9943A92A27019AD8E18196151928A1@MAIL34.thoughtbus.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Joe,
>
> Chill. Last I checked, Czechoslovakia was a former Soviet client state,
> though you are correct that it was not one of THE socialist republics.
>
> The half life of computer technology is frightenly short. As new technology
> (hardware interfaces, operating systems) is adopted, new products
> incorporate them if the vendor wants to stay in business. Continuing to
> release software for discontinued devices to work on new operating systems
> doesn't bring a dime to a company. Eventually support is dropped as no one
> works for free.
>
> I like MicroHAM products. I own MicroHAM products. But you have to be
> realistic about the computer industry. The risk that a particular
> technology won't be usable in 5-10 years is very real.
>
> Al
> AB2ZY
>
> ________________________________________
> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com [rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Joe Subich, W4TV [lists@subich.com]
> Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 10:42 PM
> To: rtty@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] After the Contest, AMP REPAIRS?? Interface Choices??
>
>>> Cons - Made in a former Soviet state. I worry that drivers and
> >> software won't be avaiable in the future.
>
> Wrong, Made in the Slovak Republic ... not the former USSR by a long
> distance. microHAM have been doing interfaces for nearly 10 years
> and even the first interfaces made are still supported by the current
> control software and drivers.
>
> If you have any doubts wait a week or so and see what the February
> QST (WB8IMY) has to say about the microHAM DigiKeyer II. DigiKeyer
> II is more capable and less costly than Navigator by US Interface.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe Subich, W4TV
> microHAM America, LLC.
> http://www.microHAM-USA.com
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/microHAM
>
>
>
> On 1/9/2011 9:58 PM, Al Kozakiewicz wrote:
>>
>>
>> 2) I still prefer my HAL 3K's but I'm entertaining choices for
>> interfaces...
>>
>> Rigblaster Pro vs US Interface/Navigator vs the MicroHAM.
>>
>> Anybody with thoughts pro/con between them??
>>
>>
>> Rigblaster - these devices have always semed awfully pricy to me for
>> something that doesn't contain a sound card. It's a glorified adapter,
>> though it does handle rig control nicely.
>>
>> I own a MicroHAM Digikeyer.
>>
>> Pros -
>>
>> 1. Contains a sound card, so there is no ambiguity about PC sounds not
>> destined rfor transmission.
>> 2. One cord (USB) connecting to PC and single cord to radio accessory
>> jack. Nice if you use a laptop and swap it out on a regular basis.
>>
>> Cons - Made in a former Soviet state. I worry that drivers and software
>> won't be avaiable in the future.
>>
>> Al
>> AB2ZY
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>>
>
> --
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe Subich, W4TV
> microHAM America, LLC.
> http://www.microHAM-USA.com
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/microHAM
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:20:56 -0500
> From: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Have others noticed this
> To: "rtty@contesting.com" <rtty@contesting.com>
> Message-ID:
> <4CD6C06BD31B9943A92A27019AD8E18196151928A2@MAIL34.thoughtbus.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I only spent a couple of hours S&Ping this year. I run FSK. I found some W6
> dude on 40m who must have been using AFSK and didn't know what the RIT is
> for. He responded to my call by telling me I was off frequency and to
> change. He did the same thing to about 6 other people who called him in the
> few minutes I was "on frequency".
>
> What exactly was this guy expecting people to do? Sheesh....
>
> Al
> AB2ZY
>
> ________________________________________
> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com [rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Jim W7RY [w7ry@inbox.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 10:59 AM
> To: Jim Rhodes; rtty@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Have others noticed this
>
> I too noticed that my use of RIT use was down from last year.
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Jim Rhodes" <jimk0xu@gmail.com>
> Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 10:07 PM
> To: <rtty@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Have others noticed this
>
>> I noticed this also, only used rit once or twice. Don't use AFC at all if
>> I
>> can help it. If I can tune bang on so can everybody else:-)
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:00 AM, Bill, W6WRT <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 09 Jan 2011 09:53:08 -0600, Bill <w9ol@billnjudy.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >But working 80/40 last night and this am, almost everyone who called me
>>> >was dead on.
>>> >Sure helps.
>>> >Anybody guess why it was such a dramatic improvement?
>>>
>>> REPLY:
>>>
>>> I think folks have learned to turn off AFC when S&P'ing and running FSK,
>>> or else they're running AFSK with both AFC and NET on.
>>>
>>> 73, Bill W6WRT
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RTTY mailing list
>>> RTTY@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim K0XU
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3370 - Release Date: 01/09/11
>>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 08:20:53 -0500
> From: Claude Du Berger <duberger.miousse81@globetrotter.net>
> Subject: [RTTY] CQ or QRZ
> To: RTTY Mailing list <RTTY@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <1A81DDC196B24F9AAF4AA560A9E4F50A@claude>
> Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
>
> Hello Group.
>
> Still wondering why guys use QRZ when they want to say CQ
>
> QRZ = Who is calling me
> CQ = General call
>
> If I hear someone sending QRZ, I will wait because he may heard
> someone calling him? but if he send CQ I will reply.
>
> 73
> Claude Du Berger VE2FK
> ve2fk@arrl.net
>
> http://www.contestgroupduquebec.com/
> http://sites.google.com/site/va2upcontesting/Home
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:29:38 -0500
> From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] After the Contest, AMP REPAIRS?? Interface
> Choices??
> To: rtty@contesting.com
> Message-ID: <4D2B33F2.3000603@subich.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
>
>
> > Last I checked, Czechoslovakia was a former Soviet client state,
>
> You said "Soviet State" which implies part of the USSR not a member
> of the Warsaw Pact. There is a big difference, even today, in the
> two.
>
>>> I like MicroHAM products. I own MicroHAM products. But you have
>>> to be realistic about the computer industry. The risk that a
>>> particular technology won't be usable in 5-10 years is very real.
>
> That's true even with new amateur transceivers. Ask an owner of even
> an FT-1000MP MKV who is unfortunate to need certain key repair parts
> that are no longer available due to the advent of ROHS regulations.
> However, your complaint wasn't availability of parts ... it was the
> stability and longevity of the company and given the history of
> microHAM, that's clearly not founded.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe Subich, W4TV
> microHAM America, LLC.
> http://www.microHAM-USA.com
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/microHAM
>
>
> On 1/10/2011 11:03 AM, Al Kozakiewicz wrote:
>> Joe,
>>
>> Chill. Last I checked, Czechoslovakia was a former Soviet client state,
>> though you are correct that it was not one of THE socialist republics.
>>
>> The half life of computer technology is frightenly short. As new
>> technology (hardware interfaces, operating systems) is adopted, new
>> products incorporate them if the vendor wants to stay in business.
>> Continuing to release software for discontinued devices to work on new
>> operating systems doesn't bring a dime to a company. Eventually support
>> is dropped as no one works for free.
>>
>> I like MicroHAM products. I own MicroHAM products. But you have to be
>> realistic about the computer industry. The risk that a particular
>> technology won't be usable in 5-10 years is very real.
>>
>> Al
>> AB2ZY
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com [rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf
>> Of Joe Subich, W4TV [lists@subich.com]
>> Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 10:42 PM
>> To: rtty@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] After the Contest, AMP REPAIRS?? Interface Choices??
>>
>>>> Cons - Made in a former Soviet state. I worry that drivers and
>> >> software won't be avaiable in the future.
>>
>> Wrong, Made in the Slovak Republic ... not the former USSR by a long
>> distance. microHAM have been doing interfaces for nearly 10 years
>> and even the first interfaces made are still supported by the current
>> control software and drivers.
>>
>> If you have any doubts wait a week or so and see what the February
>> QST (WB8IMY) has to say about the microHAM DigiKeyer II. DigiKeyer
>> II is more capable and less costly than Navigator by US Interface.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe Subich, W4TV
>> microHAM America, LLC.
>> http://www.microHAM-USA.com
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/microHAM
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/9/2011 9:58 PM, Al Kozakiewicz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> 2) I still prefer my HAL 3K's but I'm entertaining choices for
>>> interfaces...
>>>
>>> Rigblaster Pro vs US Interface/Navigator vs the MicroHAM.
>>>
>>> Anybody with thoughts pro/con between them??
>>>
>>>
>>> Rigblaster - these devices have always semed awfully pricy to me for
>>> something that doesn't contain a sound card. It's a glorified adapter,
>>> though it does handle rig control nicely.
>>>
>>> I own a MicroHAM Digikeyer.
>>>
>>> Pros -
>>>
>>> 1. Contains a sound card, so there is no ambiguity about PC sounds not
>>> destined rfor transmission.
>>> 2. One cord (USB) connecting to PC and single cord to radio accessory
>>> jack. Nice if you use a laptop and swap it out on a regular basis.
>>>
>>> Cons - Made in a former Soviet state. I worry that drivers and software
>>> won't be avaiable in the future.
>>>
>>> Al
>>> AB2ZY
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RTTY mailing list
>>> RTTY@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:26:22 -0500
> From: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] CQ or QRZ
> To: RTTY Mailing list <RTTY@contesting.com>
> Message-ID:
> <4CD6C06BD31B9943A92A27019AD8E18196151928A4@MAIL34.thoughtbus.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I think QRZ has morphed from the original use of "Who is calling me" to a
> general purpose "Who else is there".
>
> QRZ? refers to the former use, while plain old QRZ refers to the latter.
> With voice, it's easier to pick up the inflection that indicates which use
> is appropriate.
>
> And yes, you can argue about the inappropriate use of "shorthand" that
> introduces ambiguity that the Q abbreviation is supposed to eliminate, but
> it is what it is.
>
> Al
> AB2ZY
> ________________________________________
> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com [rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Claude Du Berger [duberger.miousse81@globetrotter.net]
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 8:20 AM
> To: RTTY Mailing list
> Subject: [RTTY] CQ or QRZ
>
> Hello Group.
>
> Still wondering why guys use QRZ when they want to say CQ
>
> QRZ = Who is calling me
> CQ = General call
>
> If I hear someone sending QRZ, I will wait because he may heard
> someone calling him? but if he send CQ I will reply.
>
> 73
> Claude Du Berger VE2FK
> ve2fk@arrl.net
>
> http://www.contestgroupduquebec.com/
> http://sites.google.com/site/va2upcontesting/Home
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:30:41 -0600
> From: "James C. Hall, MD" <heartdoc@nwtcc.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] ARRL RTTY Round Up OZ1ADL
> To: 'Jan Th?gersen' <jan@thogersen.dk>, "'contest'"
> <OZ-Contest@contesting.com>, <bcc@bavarian-contest-club.de>,
> <rtty@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <009e01cbb0e3$be4e5320$3aeaf960$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Thanks for the QSO, Jan ! You were my only OZ station.
>
> 73, Jamie
> WB4YDL
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On
> Behalf Of Jan Th?gersen
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 06:29 AM
> To: contest; bcc@bavarian-contest-club.de; rtty@contesting.com
> Subject: [RTTY] ARRL RTTY Round Up OZ1ADL
>
> ....Just 5,5 hours of operation scattered over the week-end:
>
> 379 QSOs, 37 S/P, 46 DXCC - a total of 31.457 points
>
> RTTY Contesting is FUN !
>
>
> 73 de Jan, OZ1ADL
>
> http://www.thogersen.dk/Site_2/What_is_happening_at_OZ1ADL/What_is_happening
> _at_OZ1ADL.html
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
>
>
> =======
> Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
> (Email Guard: 7.0.0.21, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.16660)
> http://www.pctools.com/
> =======
>
>
>
>
>
> =======
> Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
> (Email Guard: 7.0.0.21, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.16660)
> http://www.pctools.com/
> =======
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:39:22 -0600
> From: Cheryl Whitlock <cherwhit@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] CQ or QRZ
> To: Claude Du Berger <duberger.miousse81@globetrotter.net>
> Cc: RTTY Mailing list <RTTY@contesting.com>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTikZf1UQk4cbkE8-_8bE3Mg=UtY4cWmz_FysHZ2T@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> I use QRZ at the end of the exchange with a station to ask if there are any
> other stations on frequency that want to call me.
>
> I use the CQ macro if no one comes back and I have to put out another
> general call.
>
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 7:20 AM, Claude Du Berger <
> duberger.miousse81@globetrotter.net> wrote:
>
>> Hello Group.
>>
>> Still wondering why guys use QRZ when they want to say CQ
>>
>> QRZ = Who is calling me
>> CQ = General call
>>
>> If I hear someone sending QRZ, I will wait because he may heard
>> someone calling him? but if he send CQ I will reply.
>>
>> 73
>> Claude Du Berger VE2FK
>> ve2fk@arrl.net
>>
>> http://www.contestgroupduquebec.com/
>> http://sites.google.com/site/va2upcontesting/Home
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:51:37 -0600
> From: "Clint Talmadge W5CPT" <w5cpt@bellsouth.net>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] CQ or QRZ
> To: "'Claude Du Berger'" <duberger.miousse81@globetrotter.net>, "'RTTY
> Mailing list'" <RTTY@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <002a01cbb0e6$a6084e80$f218eb80$@bellsouth.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Thanks - that is the way I have always understood it.
>
>
> Clint Talmadge - W5CPT
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On
> Behalf Of Claude Du Berger
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 7:21 AM
> To: RTTY Mailing list
> Subject: [RTTY] CQ or QRZ
>
> Hello Group.
>
> Still wondering why guys use QRZ when they want to say CQ
>
> QRZ = Who is calling me
> CQ = General call
>
> If I hear someone sending QRZ, I will wait because he may heard
> someone calling him? but if he send CQ I will reply.
>
> 73
> Claude Du Berger VE2FK
> ve2fk@arrl.net
>
> http://www.contestgroupduquebec.com/
> http://sites.google.com/site/va2upcontesting/Home
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 17:56:00 +0100
> From: "SM5LNS" <sm5lns@telia.com>
> Subject: [RTTY] ARRL RTTY RU
> To: "RTTY REFLEKTOR" <rtty@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <9FA10D32ED654AD0B19B676DD30E17FD@KjellDator>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> ARRL Round-Up Contest
>
> Callsign : SM5LNS
> Operator : SM5LNS
> Loc./DXCC/Cont. : DX / SM / EU
> Category : Single Op. / All Band
> Mode : RTTY
> Club Competition :
> Power : LOW 100 Watt
> Contest Date : 08.JAN 2011
> Default Exchange : 599
> Operating Time : 13:13 h
> Software : RCKRtty V3.17
>
> BAND QSOs Valid QSOs Points DXCC QTHs
> 10 0 0 0 0 0
> 15 20 20 20 6 0
> 20 17 16 16 8 3
> 40 52 52 52 18 0
> 80 51 51 51 17 0
> -------------------------------------------
> 140 139 139 28* 3*
>
> * = Counted only once (not once per band)
>
> Final Score: 139 * (28 + 3) = 4309
>
>
> 73 de SM5LNS
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
> End of RTTY Digest, Vol 97, Issue 26
> ************************************
>
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|