hi all,
after getting my june bill for my mobile phone, i will reduce
the use of spotlite in future.
that means only one spot at the beginning or beginning at 7032khc.
if i send one spot at the beginning i will put in all qrg´s in that order
i qsy then.if i have not more than 50 or 60 qso´s in the log i will
do all qrg´s again in the same order.
if no spotlite, i will do every time this order =
7032—7118,7080<>7090—10118—14058—14122—3558—7032
in moment i´m very busy with work,but hope to cu soon
If you alert from your pc and then start your activation on 7.032 you will have 100 OM’s ready to spot you and the same with your QSY’s. No need for spotlite for you Klaus, even if no alert, you will be spotted every time if you start on 7.032;-)
In reply to GW0DSP:
Hi Mike
I’m thinking of activating next time below 7030 and of course on 10118 on account that the internet SDR RX in the Netherlands is not set up to work below 7030 or on 30m band. I listened to it tonight for the first time and I can’t say I was impressed. The RX starts to goes off LF of 7032 KHz and is U/S at 7031 KHz and down! I used the same technology in my last job and the only advantage to reception in use is the location of the receiver/antenna. Give me the old technology, a proper radio, decent antenna, good crystal filtering and a good set of ears anyday! It’s interesting that the IP address of a users PC is available for all to see on the waterfall display even when you don’t log in to the sdr receiver website. It also displays where your IP address is listening on the waterfall. One thing that I was impressed with was a very minimal time delay on the SDR RX compared to real time. That was on a 40m SSB signal.
Chasers using this method to claim chaser points could be caught out - the SOTA Police could be watching for you as your IP address is also easy to monitor when you log into SOTAWatch…anyone thinking of using this method could be severely embarassed.
I thought I ought to point this out to anyone thinking of using it for reception.
Some good points especially the use of frequencies below 7.030. I had a look at the remote rx in question and didn’t realise that it was u/s at these frequencies, so maybe a good tip to activators.
I wasn’t impressed with it to be honest when I checked it out, it seemed very hit and miss, sometimes no audio output heard.
You have made my day with the info concerning the IP address capture on both sites, Jon must have implemented it recently on sotawatch, because apparently it wasn’t available when someone passed a comment about me on the reflector, so, very interesting, now let’s see who gets caught first? then hopefully named and shamed!!
the SOTA Police could be watching for you as your IP address is also
easy to monitor when you log into SOTAWatch…anyone thinking of
using this method could be severely embarassed.
I really think that people have better things to do !!!
May I also remind everybody that, despite the vociferous views of a few, and the doubts of many more, there is not actually any SOTA rule that prohibits use of this SDR. Using it for SOTA chasing, or choosing not to do so, comes into the realm of each individual’s concept of “the spirit of SOTA”, as do many other areas which do not have watertight rules governing activities. I am sure that, if we sat down a dozen SOTA regulars and asked for their definitive list of what is and is not “in the spirit of SOTA”, we would get at least thirteen differing views!
Please also bear in mind that, even if using the SDR for claiming SOTA points was to be outlawed, there can be many reasons why somebody can be logged-on to the SDR. It is useful for monitoring one’s own signal for strength and distortion. It is a method of monitoring one band whilst the main radio is tuned elsewhere. It is a method of monitoring activity whilst away from the shack, especially with a WiFi connection. What it is not, in my opinion, is a viable method of regular SOTA chasing, but maybe others will think differently – their choice entirely. As Phil says, those activators that do not wish to participate in this way can just move a couple of kilohertz lower and be outside the tuneable passband, or choose another band.
So, just decoding somebody’s IP address on the SDR is not evidence of any wrongdoing, and I sincerely hope that there will no petulant outbursts on the Reflector or elsewhere claiming evidence of cheating. I, for one, will continue my practice of using my callsign as a log-in on the SDR as I have absolutely nothing to hide.
May I also remind everybody that, despite the vociferous views of a
few, and the doubts of many more, there is not actually any SOTA rule
that prohibits use of this SDR.
How much more conceited can you get Les? people are entitled to their view and just because you don’t agree with them there is no need to label them as vociferous. Surely the use of sdr for sota use contravines the use of repeaters because basically thats what it is.
I sincerely hope that there will no petulant outbursts on the Reflector or > elsewhere claiming evidence of cheating.
What constitutes a petulant outburst? Would that mean a comment from someone you don’t like or maybe a comment you disagree with?
In reply to GW0DSP:
You make a good point Mike likening the use of remote receivers provided by others via the internet to using a VHF repeater. In fact accruing points by the use of the internet is more against the spirit of SOTA than using repeaters. At least the repeater output is coming via a radio wave and not the phone line.
I think Les should be emphasing that this method of reception is not only against the spirit of SOTA but the management team should consider making a rule against it, not stating that operators may use it if they think in their own opinion it is ethical and not cheating. Obviously we will have to rely on cheaters, sorry I mean chasers, own conscience, and as we know, some folk don’t have one. I’m sure there are other SDR receivers in Europe that operate over a wider spectrum or there soon will be, so activators operating out of the passband of the receiver may not be worthwhile. I’ll certainly be using 7025-7030 on my next activation especially if it’s a weekend. 7032 KHz± as I found last Sunday, is becoming cluttered with too many activations at the same time anyway.
I think Les should be emphasing that this method of reception is not
only against the spirit of SOTA but the management team should
consider making a rule against it, not stating that operators may use
it if they think in their own opinion it is ethical and not cheating.
To be honest Phil, you know that the management team won’t make a ruling on this issue and to be fair to them, I’m sure they have other, more important things to be getting on with. Maybe some guidelines could have been offered though.
I do find it unfair that Les should label ANY participants comments as vociferous! We are all entitled to an opinion without snide remarks being made by Les just because he disagrees with them, whether under the guise of G3VQO or officially as MT, but there is a deeper rooted reason behind it. What would have happened if it was you or I who made such remarks!! 2E0HJD holds the answer to that one.
Best drop the subject now Phil or we may join Mick on the struck off list.
Frankly, I’m bewildered. The use of repeaters is NOT ALLOWED. Clearly stated in the rules. Just becasue the thing is on HF does not make it any less of a repeater. The spirit doesnt come into it.
A blind man on a galloping horse could see it too Ian.
It is without a doubt breaking the rules however you paint it. End of story!
Admittedly, it is impossible to police but that shouldn’t deter the rule makers from applying the rules they themselves put into place.
Any media that picks up a radio signal and then relays it to others by whatever means is a repeater and we have rules in sota which SHOULD outlaw SDR, there’s no grey areas here. It is beyond me why that rule is not being applied by our MT, although I do have an idea why it is not.
It’s not a repeater. The best analogy is that it’s a receiver with the aerial some considerable distance from the loudspeaker.
I think I’m being a bit slow here but I can’t see why there is such an objection. The only advantage it would give me is if it had a lower noise environment than my own home QTH, I might be able to hear a weaker signal. Possibly I could hear a station on it that I couldn’t because of skip length. But if the skip was wrong such that I can’t hear directly it would unlikely the skip back from my TX would be suitable for a 2 way.
I really do think I’m missing something here especially when people seem to have such strong views. So would someone who feels very anti the use of such a receiver explain why to someone who’s had a long, hard week at work!
The way I see it Andy is that it receives a rf signal then forwards it to you via your phone line, just as a repeater would but by rf. It’s receiving a report from someone else which ever way you look at it so therefore is against sota rules in my opinion.
It is no different to me hearing a chaser struggling to get his report, then ringing him and telling him his report down his phone line, as heard on my receiver and that woul be tabboo.
OK Mike, thanks for your explanation. As I said the only advantage I can see is that if the skip is right for both a remote RX and your own TX to be viable to an activator, then the remote RX gives you an advantage if its noise level is lower allowing it to hear signals that you couldn’t at your own location. I, personally, dont see it as a problem as you still have to be able to transmit and be heard by the activator.
What about the case where someone has a fully remote controlled tcvr? I was reading about a guy in QST who has his microwave gear at his holiday home and controls the whole thing via a net connection. His TX and RX are remote from his microphone and speaker. Would you consider that to be unfair? The only advantage is that he can use his station when he’s at his normal home instead of only be able to use it at the weekend.
I can see why using repeater is not right. If, as an activator, you had 4 QSOs through the same repeater, you’ve only really worked one station, the repeater. Consider the following then, wouldn’t it be OK to have 4 QSOs as an activator through 4 different repeaters? You, the activator, have had contacts with 4 separate stations. Repeaters are well sited (obviously), but that’s not really different than having 4 S2S contacts. No, I’m not suggesting the rules be changed, but you have to admit, an activator working through 4 different repeaters is not really any different than 4 S2S contacts! It’s different from a chasing point of view though.
Anyway, thanks for clarifying your objections. I’m not sure I fully agree with you but I’ll go away and think about it some more!
problem as you still have to be able to transmit and be heard by the
activator.
There is the point that as home based chasers we run say 100w so can easily tx to an activator that we can’t here with his 5w or less, i.e. the chasers report from the activator is generally lower than received back from the activator. In such cases there is a chance to listen to the SDR for a signal you cant hear in your shack and tx to him no probs with your bigger power levels.
What about the case where someone has a fully remote controlled tcvr?
That’s a damn good question and I’ll have to think about that one.
I can see why using repeater is not right. If, as an activator, you
had 4 QSOs through the same repeater, you’ve only really worked one
station, the repeater. Consider the following then, wouldn’t it be OK
to have 4 QSOs as an activator through 4 different repeaters? You, the
activator, have had contacts with 4 separate stations. Repeaters are
well sited (obviously), but that’s not really different than having 4
S2S contacts. No, I’m not suggesting the rules be changed, but you
have to admit, an activator working through 4 different repeaters is
not really any different than 4 S2S contacts! It’s different from a
chasing point of view though.
Repeater use for sota is not allowed under the rules, end of story. I fail to see how you can compare a repeater to a s2s contact, with s2s it is a genuine station just as if at home and a repeater electronically enhances a received signal, then forwards it to a recipient, not cricket for sota use.
Repeater use for sota is not allowed under the rules, end of story.
Contacts via a repeater are not allowed. There’s nothing about contacts with the repeater itself.
I
fail to see how you can compare a repeater to a s2s contact, with s2s
it is a genuine station just as if at home and a repeater
electronically enhances a received signal, then forwards it to a
recipient, not cricket for sota use.
So I’m sat on Winter Hill and you are sat on Hope Mountain. I take out my 70cms handheld and call you. As an activator on Winter Hill I’ve had a valid contact with you. Now also on Hope Mountain is GB3CR. So I QSY to its frequency and call via it. I have a contact with Steve GW7AAV. From an RF point of view there is no technical difference between my contact with you or to GB3CR. RF has travelled between me and a station located on Hope Mountain and back. My handheld can’t tell the difference because there is none. I’ve certainly not had a direct QSO with Steve, so he can’t claim a point. GB3CR can claim a point, I’ve had a QSO with it, though it would have to give me a signal report. If you read the rules you’ll see that I can claim for my contact with GB3CR but not contacts via it. The wording is explicitly clear.
OK I’m pushing the envelope on the rules, but the point I’m trying to make is just because something is an X and all X are forbidden in the rules doesn’t mean that it’s not also a Y where Y’s are valid.
Your comments are noted and understood. I can remember having a marginal contact on 60m once and you were quite happy to not claim for it as it was so marginal. Only when we had a good QSO on 2m were you happy to claim the points. If you are that strict with yourself, then your comments about remote receivers do make sense.
OK I’m pushing the envelope on the rules, but the point I’m trying to
make is just because something is an X and all X are forbidden in the
rules doesn’t mean that it’s not also a Y where Y’s are valid.
I do see where you are coming from Andy re repeaters, but you are really being hypothetical because the repeaters can’t give u a report as required for a valid qso and this detracts from the real issue here.
Your comments are noted and understood. I can remember having a
marginal contact on 60m once and you were quite happy to not claim for
it as it was so marginal. Only when we had a good QSO on 2m were you
happy to claim the points.
Maybe that’s my problem Andy, I set myself high standards and believe in total honesty and fair play and expect others to be the same.
I do see where you are coming from Andy re repeaters, but you are
really being hypothetical because the repeaters can’t give u a report
as required for a valid qso and this detracts from the real issue
here.
Repeaters can give you a report. There are several I’ve used where the logic will report your strength at the input back in Morse, normally in response to some DTMF request. Anyway, an activator doesn’t need a report. Only the chasor. Bizare but read the rules!
Maybe that’s my problem Andy, I set myself high standards and believe
in total honesty and fair play and expect others to be the same.
Well if you cheat you are only cheating yourself. It’s not like a race where you are head to head with others. You’re head to head with only yourself and cheating yourself is pretty low! Actiavtors up here in GM could get away with murder on HF. Nobody would really know if I’m up Sgiath a Chaise (tomorrow’s possible target) or sat in the garden. That’s one reason I always try to get a photo of the summit to show I have actually been there.
I can’t see the repeater filling in a sota log although that is not a prerequisite for a good contact, other than that, I concede, I can’t argue with you.
I have learnt something new though, you are 100% correct when you state that the activator DOES NOT need to receive a report from the chasers, there is absolutely NO mention governing this in the rules. I may even be guilty of not entering some chasers in my activation logs, solely due to the fact that I didn’t get their report. I was wrong in doing so and I suspect that other activators may not have realised that they don’t need a report from the chasers.
