In reply to HA3LV:
Thank you for your comments and perspective. My intent was to try and help a fellow activator by passing information to him about a potential problem that he may wish to investigate while still on the summit, as that is what I would hope someone would do for me if I were in a similar situation. Clearly I failed and only managed to offend you and Zoli. For that I sincerely apologize.
The details aren’t important at this point, nor are they meant as an excuse, but I’ll provide them just in case you find them of interest.
Zoli’s signal was very good here in Western North America, actually the strongest activator signal from Europe that I ever recall hearing. There were times when he would call CQ SOTA, many stations would respond, and he would call CQ SOTA again. I only have a simple wire antenna, so it wouldn’t surprise me at all if he couldn’t hear me. However, among the other stations calling were ones with much more capable stations.
Since he was apparently unaware that they were calling, it suggested to me that there may be an issue with the receive system (NOT the operator) at the summit. Perhaps it was related to the receiver itself, or the environment (e.g., noise, front-end overload, intermod, etc.), some combination of those or something else entirely. Perhaps there was no issue at all, or perhaps there was but nothing could be done about it. I don’t know, I wasn’t there, I was only considering my observations from thousands of miles away and my own past experiences.
I wanted to communicate “Hello Zoli, you have a very strong signal here in Western North America, many stations are calling that you are apparently not copying, so you may wish to investigate the receive side of your system to see if there are any quick improvements or corrections that you could implement so as to enable you to work more stations”. There obviously isn’t enough room in a spot comment to say all of that, and thinking that an English/Hungarian language barrier may exist, I came up with the comment I posted: “Needs better receiver, loud here and many calling”.
I think the first three words is where the misunderstanding occurred. By saying “needs better” I was trying to express the idea of “may wish to investigate the receive side of your system to see if there are any quick improvements or corrections that you could implement” in a way that would be understood across any potential language barrier. Maybe “need make better”, “chk ur rx”, “rx bad?” “pls make rx gud” or something similar would have conveyed the thought more clearly(?).
Once again BalÃ¡zs, these details are not important, and I reiterate my apology to you and Zoli.
Free SOTA Spot Monitor Software + RBNGate FAQ: