VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] Cabrillo mode for a JT65 QSO??

To: 73w3sz@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Cabrillo mode for a JT65 QSO??
From: VE3DS <ve3ds@acanac.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 16:53:04 -0400
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Using N1MM + and the robot kicked out my WSJT contact with VE1SKY until I put 
RY for the mode, then it took it..
Wonder why N1MM’s ARRL QSO party log program put in a non permitted cabrillo…

73 Dana VE3DS

> On Jun 19, 2015, at 4:28 PM, Roger Rehr W3SZ <73w3sz@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Dave,
> 
> I agree with what you say to do, log it as RY.
> 
> My reasoning is based on the fact that I upload my logs to LOTW and use that 
> for Awards purposes.  So a mode designation is needed that will [1] be 
> acceptable to Cabrillo and [2] be acceptable to LOTW, and which will [3] 
> likely "work" what your QSO partner has uploaded to LOTW to give you a 
> confirmed QSO in LOTW.
> 
> For digital modes and LOTW, the ARRL states at:
> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/LoTW%20Instructions/TQSL%202_0%202013/Secodary%20operations/Digital%20Modes.pdf
> 
> "LoTW will match a QSO as long as the calls, time (+/-30 minutes), date, band 
> and mode are the same. For digital modes all digital sub mode (PSK31, JT65, 
> JT9, MT63,OLIVIA, etc.) will qualify as DATA. (The same applies for voice 
> modes. All voicemodes qualify as PHONE).  That is to say that if you log a 
> QSO as PSK31 and the other operator logs the same QSO as RTTY then LoTW will 
> match the QSO, assuming all other parameters match, and each operator will be 
> credited with DATA"
> 
> And the chance that your QSO partner will log a digital QSO as some digital 
> mode, I believe, is significantly greater than the chance that he will log it 
> as "PHONE" or a phone mode.
> 
> So RY it is :)
> 
> 73,
> 
> Roger Rehr
> W3SZ
> 
> On 6/19/2015 12:44 PM, David Pruett wrote:
>> Ken,
>> 
>> PSK is not a legitimate Cabrillo mode.  According to the published Cabrillo 
>> 3.0 specification on the WWROF site, these are the only legitimate Cabrillo 
>> modes:
>> 
>> CW
>> PH
>> FM
>> RY
>> 
>> Based on this, even W5ZN's suggestion to show it as SSB (which was almost 
>> certainly the mode your transceiver was set for) doesn't comply.
>> 
>> As some have suggested, the mode is not a scoring parameter in the ARRL VHF 
>> contest, so perhaps it doesn't matter.  In the end,  it all boils down to 
>> what the ARRL contest robot and the logchecker will accept.
>> 
>> If it were me, I would do like K7CW suggested and change it to RY.  Then 
>> there can be no argument that it is legitimate Cabrillo data representing a 
>> digital mode QSO.
>> 
>> 73, Dave/K8CC
>> 
>> On 6/19/2015 10:27 AM, Kenneth Silverman wrote:
>>> We made some JT65 EME QSOs in the June VHF contest.  Is there a correct
>>> mode to use, or is mode irrelevant?  We currently have it marked as PSK.
>>> 
>>> Many thanks, Kenny K2KW - C6ATA in the contest.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> VHFcontesting mailing list
>>> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> VHFcontesting mailing list
>> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> 
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>