[Moon] QSO or not?

Wed May 2 14:17:50 CEST 2007

Dear Bernd

thank you for your reply. 
I am glad it was a typing error, as this can happen to anyone. 
Now even a mistake in a cw qso, one side thinking it was complete and other side
believing it is not, can also very rarely happen under marginal conditions, even
to experienced operators.

Have a good travel & 73,
Jimmy SV1BTR

> Dear Jimmy,
> 
> It is an honour to me that you think I make no mistakes. However unlike you
> and some others I am not perfect. The answer to the noise you΄re making below
> is rather simple. I made a typing error. This can happen, independant from
> the mode of the QSO or NO-QSO.
> 
> I am currently on business travel and will have access to the paper log only
> this weekend when I am back home. I will then correct the log on my website.
> 
> I have never ever had problems with decoding single tones messages but every
> little mistake seems to serve as a wonderful platformfoor those interested to
> intrigue against WSJT and DS in particular. BTW I also made a typing error
> with Jan DL9KR΄s 70 cm CW qso which I printed as 10z instead of 11z.
> 
> I hope this clarification comes early enough for Peter SM2CEW΄s "The world
> ist a disk"  blog, before he starts using my typing error again as an
> argument against JT65 DS in toto.
> 
> Of course if it had been a cw QSO and I had made this typing error, nobody
> would have written an email o the reflector.
> 
> 73 Bernd DF2ZC
> 
> ----- Ursprόngliche Nachricht -----
>    >Von: "jimmyv at hol.gr"<jimmyv at hol.gr>
>    >Gesendet: 02.05.07 10:19:54
>    >An: "moon at moonbounce.info"<moon at moonbounce.info>,
> "moon-net at list-serv.davidv.net"<moon-net at list-serv.davidv.net>
>    >Betreff: [Moon-net] QSO or not?
>    >
>    >Hello all
>    > 
>    >I am trying to understand how JT65 works sometimes (even without Deep
> Search!),
>    >especially when it comes to expeditions. I am confused. 
>    >Could you please explain to me how is possible to have a QSO as complete
> in the
>    >log of an expedition, when the station calling them says it is not
> complete?
>    >However, expedition says it has data files for all QSOs. So does the
> station
>    >trying to work them. So where is the error? 
>    >This is even more profound because in the case of JT65 it is even more
> difficult
>    >to make a personal judgement mistake. Since software algorithms do the
> decision
>    >making for you and we have been told that reliability of a contact
> remains
>    >intact. Regardless of signal level.
>    >
>    >As i do not question the integrity and experience of operators in the
> specific
>    >expedition (in fact they are experienced operators with good operating
>    >standards), neither do i question the experience and integrity of the
>    >particular station calling them, then is it the JT65 software generating
> the
>    >error? I think, and hope, not.
>    > 
>    >Perhaps is it the plain shorthand messages? To me, it looks like this
> being the
>    >reason, because shorthand messages are not accompanied with callsigns
> (unless
>    >the Big exception of someone transferring both reports and callsigns as
> unknown
>    >text). Therefore, using the standard format of shorthand messages, in a
> pileup
>    >situation, one can not be sure if the RO or Rs received was for him or
>    >not...(as logger extract shows below at 5:19)
>    >We have seen situations with other expeditions in the past.
>    > 
>    >To substantiate my argument and subsequent confusion with facts, pls find
> below
>    >extracts of ON4KST logger showing PE1BTX saying to ZB2/DH7FB he did not
> have
>    >complete QSO with ZB2 expedition. At the end of this mail, pls see the
> log of
>    >ZB2 expedition where QSO is listed as complete.
>    > 
>    >Once more, i will repeat this is nothing personal and NOT aiming the
> operators
>    >involved; the specific case is merely used as another example. But just
>    >scratching my head as to how some QSOs eventually take place and the
> totally
>    >different outcomes reached. Your help in understanding what is happening
> is
>    >appreciated!
>    > 
>    >Thanks in advance & 73,
>    >Jimmy SV1BTR
>    >
>    >ON4KST logger:
>    >05:26:40 PE1BTX Gerard 4X12/QRO Frank, but despite my NC congrats on your
> FB
>    >operation, you gave a lot of stations a new DXCC 
>    >05:24:05 DH7FB frank gerard, yes in next time we will also do this 
>    >05:19:50 PE1BTX Gerard 4X12/QRO Frank, could be, pse look my EME log
>    >http://www.pe1btx.nl/EME%20initials%20all%20bands.htm 
>    >05:19:16 DH7FB frank gerard, so the received "ro" came fm another stn
> maybe 
>    >05:16:17 PE1BTX Gerard 4X12/QRO Yep, NC for me, but already wkd ZB2IQ
> back in
>    >1983 on ES, and confirmed 
>    >05:13:57 PE1BTX Gerard 4X12/QRO Found my QSO complete in the log, but
> never
>    >send RO to him on 21st, so not complete for me, did not even had a decent
> decode
>    >on 21st, very strange 
>    >
>    >
>    >PE1BTX Log (bottom of his webpage)
>    >http://www.pe1btx.nl/EME%20initials%20all%20bands.htm 
>    > 
>    >ZB2 log:
>   
>
>http://www.df2zc.de/hamradioresults/seite5/022c0a991e127580c/index.html#022c0a992008a0a01
>    >EME
>    >21.04.2007
>    >1110-1113 PE1BTX O/RO -21 dB C 9
>    >
>    >
>    >
>    >
>    >_______________________________________________
>    >Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
> http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
>    >
> 
> [Nachricht abgeschnitten. Tippen Sie auf "Bearb."->"Zum Downloaden
> markieren", um den Rest der Nachricht abzurufen.]
> 
> -- 
> "Feel free" - 10 GB Mailbox, 100 FreeSMS/Monat ...
> Jetzt GMX TopMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/topmail
> 
> -- 
> "Feel free" - 10 GB Mailbox, 100 FreeSMS/Monat ...
> Jetzt GMX TopMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/topmail
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Moon mailing list
> Moon at moonbounce.info
> http://www.moonbounce.info/mailman/listinfo/moon
> 
> Please enter/update your standings: http://www.vhf-dx.net/top.html
> 
> 