[Moon] [Moon-net] More on QSO
pe1lwt
pe1lwt at xs4all.nl
Mon Feb 4 20:42:42 CET 2008
Any smart guy around who can make a computer program which can decide if
i made a qso/contact ?
:) Jurgen PE1LWT
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: moon-net-bounces at list-serv.davidv.net
[mailto:moon-net-bounces at list-serv.davidv.net] Namens Russ K2TXB
Verzonden: maandag 4 februari 2008 17:10
Aan: 'moonbounceboard'
Onderwerp: [Moon-net] More on QSO
We use the term QSO so much and so incorrectly that I momentarily forgot
that it is one of our Q signals. Of course there is an official meaning
for QSO. According to the ARRL
QSO Can you communicate with me?
Actually, I recall that would be the meaning if one sent "QSO?". The
response would be "QSO" - I can communicate with you.
So, QSO really means to arrange a communication or contact, not to
perform it. In that sense Dominique, I would have to answer your
question NO. A contact is not a QSO, but it could be the result of a
QSO.
However I think today everyone has his own expectations as to what QSO
means and it is almost meaningless for us to try to define it.
73, Russ K2TXB
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moon-net-bounces at list-serv.davidv.net
> [mailto:moon-net-bounces at list-serv.davidv.net] On Behalf Of Russ K2TXB
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 10:11 AM
> To: 'moonbounceboard'
> Subject: Re: [Moon-net] Will things ever change? Pls clarify!
>
> Dominique, it depends upon your definition of a QSO. Some
> people would say that none of our EME contacts are QSO's
> because we (usually) do not have discussions or exchange any
> data except in a predetermined format. No one
> discusses the weather or what their rig is, etc. I actually
> saw a message
> to that effect from a ham the other day. He allows that
> contacts made in contests and via EME or MS are not QSO's,
> but that they count for credit for working a station. I do
> not necessarily agree, but it goes to show that we do not all
> think alike on the matter.
>
> I do not know if there is any official definition of a QSO,
> but there is an official definition of a contact and that is
> what we use for our standard - exchange calls, report, rogers
> - both ways. The standard does not specify any requirement
> for how the stations get together. It does not matter if it
> was random, via the internet, via mail sked, or via the
> telephone. The only requirements are that the contact
> contain the above information that information is only
> exchanged over the radio waves. One cannot use the internet
> or the telephone to send his report or his RRR. That seems
> obvious and I think everyone understands this (even though
> some are willing to break that rule). But there are some
> people on here who are trying to say that contacts made by
> using the internet for making the sked are somehow different
> than the skeds we have always used. That is just not true.
>
> Contests, on the other hand, have specific rules that go
> beyond the simple requirements of a contact. In the past
> they have always prohibited schedules made during the actual
> contest period and by non-amateur means.
> Only recently have contests started allowing an assisted
> class - allowing skeds to be made during the contest, and via
> non-radio means. Personally I do not believe that such
> assisted contest classes are good for our hobby or for EME.
> However it seems that my opinion is out voted and assisted
> mode has become popular with some. I do believe that a worse
> thing would be to have separate contests for assisted modes.
> That would split us and make each contest have less activity.
> So if we are going to have assisted contest classes, then I
> guess "so be it". It is better than splitting us into
> disparate groups - "east is east and west is west and never
> the twain shall meet" (Rudyard Kipling-1892).
>
> Very 73, Russ K2TXB
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: dfaessler at bluewin.ch [mailto:dfaessler at bluewin.ch]
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 4:38 AM
> To: k2txb at dxcc.com; moonbounceboard
> Subject: AW: Re: [Moon-net] Will things ever change?
> Pls clarify!
>
>
>
> Russ
>
>
>
> you are right. They are contacts.
>
> The real question however is, - ARE THEY QSO'S?
>
> 73 HB9BBD
>
>
>
>
>
> Dominique Fässler
> HB9BBD
> +41794002118
>
>
>
>
>
> ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
> Von: k2txb at dxcc.com
> Datum: 04.02.2008 04:20
> An: "moonbounceboard"<moon-net at list-serv.davidv.net>
> Betreff: Re: [Moon-net] Will things ever change? Pls clarify!
>
> Bodo, Clearly all of your examples are valid contacts.
>
> 73, Russ K2TXB
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: moon-net-bounces at list-serv.davidv.net
> > [mailto:moon-net-bounces at list-serv.davidv.net] On
> Behalf Of Bodo Heyl
> > Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 3:24 PM
> > To: moonbounceboard
> > Subject: [Moon-net] Will things ever change? Pls clarify!
> >
> > To make it more clear for me:
> >
> > A) I am using JT65, look for the logger and see XYZ calling
> > on a certain QRG (selfspotting), I call him, we exchange the
> > necessary QSO infos, I am not using the logger during the QSO.
> >
> > B) I know from my paper list, that station XYZ is normally
> > using the QRG 144.139MHz.
> > I see him and call him, we again exchange the infos.
> > There is no logger info at all, my computer is switched off.
> >
> > Which QSO is valid? A or B or none?
> >
> > C) I am using CW, see XYZ selfspotting in the CW logger, call
> > him and fortunately we make a QSO
> >
> > D) XYZ sends me an E-mail asking for a CW sked.
> > We arrange by e-mail (not snail mail) the details like QRG
> > and date/time, finally we make a QSO.
> >
> > Which QSO is valid? C or D or none?
> >
> > Thanks in advance for enlightment,
> >
> > 73s Bodo/DL2FCN
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
> http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
More information about the Moon
mailing list