Date   
Re: More questions about DXCC Credit Analysis Report

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

 

From: DXLab@groups.io [mailto:DXLab@groups.io] On Behalf Of Pete Smith
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 11:23 AM
To: dxlab@groups.io
Subject: [DXLab] More questions about DXCC Credit Analysis Report

 

Say I have an entry in this report as follows:

"149   851347831      card           6Y5BF           82  1976-01-01      20M         CW   no exact match found in log, new Entity, Entity-Band, Entity-Mode"

Is the part following the mode received from ARRL, or  is that DXKeeper's analysis based on what *it* knows about, in this case, the status of various QSOs with 6Y5 as of 1976?  When I do the various on-line lookups on my Logbook's DXCC Report, it appears to say that I have gotten credit for the entity and the mode, but not yet for the band.  Is there any efficient way to repeat this process for each listing in the report? 

+ The “notes” in the above entry mean that you have no logged QSO with 6Y5BF on 20m CW dated 1976-01-01. The credit specifies an entity, an entity-band, and an entity-mode.

+ The process for manually linking credits to QSOs is interactive,  proceeding one credit at a time because the user’s judgment is required in each case.

This is what I get from the Mixed listing:

Worked Station

Worked

 

6Y5BF

DXCC

 

JAMAICA (82)

Date

 

1976-01-01

Mode

 

CW (CW)

Band

 

20M

.  Can you tell from the way these listings are formatted whether credit was given for mode or band?  Is this the significance of the "(CW)"?

+ I don’t know to what “the Mixed listing” refers. If the “Worked Station Worked …” entry above comes from an ARRL report, you should ask someone from the ARRL for an explanation of its meaning.

        73,

               Dave, AA6YQ

Re: RumlogADIF

Dave AA6YQ
 

Thanks for the ADIF file.

Each QSO record in the file specifies the date and time at which the QSO ended, but none of them specify the date and time at which the QSO began.

The date and time at which a QSO begins are mandatory. The date and time at which it ends are optional.

"illegal-missing QSO date" is accurate for each QSO in your file.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

-----Original Message-----
From: John Merrill [mailto:john@...]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 11:47 AM
To: @AA6YQ
Subject: RumlogADIF

Dave:

I get illegal-missing QSO date.

John N1JM

Re: More questions about DXCC Credit Analysis Report

BILL KENNAMER
 

I can tell you definitively since I was at DXCC when it was done. 
On convert paper records:
Mixed. Only code number entered
Phone; code number and phone mode
Dates of both were 11/15/1945
CW: code number, Cw mode, and date 1/1/1976. 
No other information was entered. 

Your problem, I believe, stems from being a beta tester and entering QSOs made before 1992. 




On Wednesday, May 29, 2019, 10:23 AM, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:

Say I have an entry in this report as follows:

"149   851347831      card           6Y5BF           82  1976-01-01      20M         CW   no exact match found in log, new Entity, Entity-Band, Entity-Mode"

Is the part following the mode received from ARRL, or  is that DXKeeper's analysis based on what *it* knows about, in this case, the status of various QSOs with 6Y5 as of 1976?  When I do the various on-line lookups on my Logbook's DXCC Report, it appears to say that I have gotten credit for the entity and the mode, but not yet for the band.  Is there any efficient way to repeat this process for each listing in the report? 

This is what I get from the Mixed listing:

Worked Station Worked   6Y5BF DXCC   JAMAICA (82) Date   1976-01-01 Mode   CW (CW) Band   20M

.  Can you tell from the way these listings are formatted whether credit was given for mode or band?  Is this the significance of the "(CW)"?

















-- 

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network 
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now 
spotting RTTY activity worldwide. 
For spots, please use your favorite 
"retail" DX cluster.

Re: RumlogADIF

John Merrill
 

Thanks, Dave.

73, John N1JM

On 5/29/19, 9:08 AM, "Dave AA6YQ" <@AA6YQ> wrote:

Thanks for the ADIF file.

Each QSO record in the file specifies the date and time at which the QSO ended, but none of them specify the date and time at which the QSO began.

The date and time at which a QSO begins are mandatory. The date and time at which it ends are optional.

"illegal-missing QSO date" is accurate for each QSO in your file.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

-----Original Message-----
From: John Merrill [mailto:john@...]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 11:47 AM
To: @AA6YQ
Subject: RumlogADIF

Dave:

I get illegal-missing QSO date.

John N1JM

Re: More questions about DXCC Credit Analysis Report

Pete Smith
 

Wonderful (JK). The next sound you hear will be me slogging through some 500 calls x 4 lookups from the DXCC record.  I'll probably resurface sometime next week.

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network 
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now 
spotting RTTY activity worldwide. 
For spots, please use your favorite 
"retail" DX cluster.
On 5/29/2019 12:15 PM, BILL KENNAMER wrote:

I can tell you definitively since I was at DXCC when it was done. 
On convert paper records:
Mixed. Only code number entered
Phone; code number and phone mode
Dates of both were 11/15/1945
CW: code number, Cw mode, and date 1/1/1976. 
No other information was entered. 

Your problem, I believe, stems from being a beta tester and entering QSOs made before 1992. 




On Wednesday, May 29, 2019, 10:23 AM, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:

Say I have an entry in this report as follows:

"149   851347831      card           6Y5BF           82  1976-01-01      20M         CW   no exact match found in log, new Entity, Entity-Band, Entity-Mode"

Is the part following the mode received from ARRL, or  is that DXKeeper's analysis based on what *it* knows about, in this case, the status of various QSOs with 6Y5 as of 1976?  When I do the various on-line lookups on my Logbook's DXCC Report, it appears to say that I have gotten credit for the entity and the mode, but not yet for the band.  Is there any efficient way to repeat this process for each listing in the report? 

This is what I get from the Mixed listing:

Worked Station Worked   6Y5BF DXCC   JAMAICA (82) Date   1976-01-01 Mode   CW (CW) Band   20M

.  Can you tell from the way these listings are formatted whether credit was given for mode or band?  Is this the significance of the "(CW)"?

















-- 

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network 
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now 
spotting RTTY activity worldwide. 
For spots, please use your favorite 
"retail" DX cluster.

Re: More questions about DXCC Credit Analysis Report

BILL KENNAMER
 

Pete,

It cannot be determined from that entry. Is it from LOTW or from DXLab?

From an Original DXCC listing, it should look like:
Worked: 082
DXCC: Jamaica (82)
Date: 1975-01-01
Mode: CW (cw)
Band: UNKNOWN

This would be a credit ONLY for CW DXCC. It will not be a credit for Mixed DXCC or a 20 meter credit in DXCC Records.

Credits prior to 1992 came from the original record for the original mode only. Prior to 1992, if you submitted a 6Y card for Mixed, you would submit it again for CW. There would be no record for 20 meters, as no band records were kept, even for 5Band DXCC.

I still believe this stems from your being a beta tester and how the records were entered on your end at that time. Since I was largely inactive from 2000 to 2014, and did not sign on to LOTW until then, I have no problem with my old records, as the near 40,000 QSOs entered since 1961 were entered after 2014, and were all entered with logged date and time. I had a surprising number of matches on those old one from the 80s

73

Bill K5FUV



On Wednesday, May 29, 2019, 10:23:20 AM CDT, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:


Say I have an entry in this report as follows:

"149   851347831      card           6Y5BF           82  1976-01-01      20M         CW   no exact match found in log, new Entity, Entity-Band, Entity-Mode"

Is the part following the mode received from ARRL, or  is that DXKeeper's analysis based on what *it* knows about, in this case, the status of various QSOs with 6Y5 as of 1976?  When I do the various on-line lookups on my Logbook's DXCC Report, it appears to say that I have gotten credit for the entity and the mode, but not yet for the band.  Is there any efficient way to repeat this process for each listing in the report? 

This is what I get from the Mixed listing:

Worked Station Worked   6Y5BF DXCC   JAMAICA (82) Date   1976-01-01 Mode   CW (CW) Band   20M

.  Can you tell from the way these listings are formatted whether credit was given for mode or band?  Is this the significance of the "(CW)"?

















-- 

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network 
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now 
spotting RTTY activity worldwide. 
For spots, please use your favorite 
"retail" DX cluster.

Re: More questions about DXCC Credit Analysis Report

Pete Smith
 

It's from ARRL, somehow changed from the original block format to that line.  The only difference from what you expect is that the callsign is present.  I also noticed that looking at my DXCC record online, it says that I have credit for Mixed as well as CW, but not for the band.  For the moment my focus is on getting to the Honor Roll, so I'll concentrate on the Mixed list.

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network 
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now 
spotting RTTY activity worldwide. 
For spots, please use your favorite 
"retail" DX cluster.
On 5/29/2019 5:20 PM, BILL KENNAMER wrote:

Pete,

It cannot be determined from that entry. Is it from LOTW or from DXLab?

From an Original DXCC listing, it should look like:
Worked: 082
DXCC: Jamaica (82)
Date: 1975-01-01
Mode: CW (cw)
Band: UNKNOWN

This would be a credit ONLY for CW DXCC. It will not be a credit for Mixed DXCC or a 20 meter credit in DXCC Records.

Credits prior to 1992 came from the original record for the original mode only. Prior to 1992, if you submitted a 6Y card for Mixed, you would submit it again for CW. There would be no record for 20 meters, as no band records were kept, even for 5Band DXCC.

I still believe this stems from your being a beta tester and how the records were entered on your end at that time. Since I was largely inactive from 2000 to 2014, and did not sign on to LOTW until then, I have no problem with my old records, as the near 40,000 QSOs entered since 1961 were entered after 2014, and were all entered with logged date and time. I had a surprising number of matches on those old one from the 80s

73

Bill K5FUV



On Wednesday, May 29, 2019, 10:23:20 AM CDT, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:


Say I have an entry in this report as follows:

"149   851347831      card           6Y5BF           82  1976-01-01      20M         CW   no exact match found in log, new Entity, Entity-Band, Entity-Mode"

Is the part following the mode received from ARRL, or  is that DXKeeper's analysis based on what *it* knows about, in this case, the status of various QSOs with 6Y5 as of 1976?  When I do the various on-line lookups on my Logbook's DXCC Report, it appears to say that I have gotten credit for the entity and the mode, but not yet for the band.  Is there any efficient way to repeat this process for each listing in the report? 

This is what I get from the Mixed listing:

Worked Station Worked   6Y5BF DXCC   JAMAICA (82) Date   1976-01-01 Mode   CW (CW) Band   20M

.  Can you tell from the way these listings are formatted whether credit was given for mode or band?  Is this the significance of the "(CW)"?

















-- 

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network 
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now 
spotting RTTY activity worldwide. 
For spots, please use your favorite 
"retail" DX cluster.

Re: More questions about DXCC Credit Analysis Report

Dave AA6YQ
 

Pete, if “partial credit” has been granted to one or more of your QSOs – like “mixed and CW, but not the band” – enable DXKeeper’s “Partial Credit” option, which allows the use of E, B, and M in “QSL Rcvd” items of logged QSOs:

https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxkeeper/Help/Items.htm#QSL%20rcvd

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


It's from ARRL, somehow changed from the original block format to that line. The only difference from what you expect is that the callsign is present. I also noticed that looking at my DXCC record online, it says that I have credit for Mixed as well as CW, but not for the band. For the moment my focus is on getting to the Honor Roll, so I'll concentrate on the Mixed list.
73, Pete N4ZR

Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now
spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

On 5/29/2019 5:20 PM, BILL KENNAMER wrote:
Pete,

It cannot be determined from that entry. Is it from LOTW or from DXLab?

From an Original DXCC listing, it should look like:
Worked: 082
DXCC: Jamaica (82)
Date: 1975-01-01
Mode: CW (cw)
Band: UNKNOWN

This would be a credit ONLY for CW DXCC. It will not be a credit for Mixed DXCC or a 20 meter credit in DXCC Records.

Credits prior to 1992 came from the original record for the original mode only. Prior to 1992, if you submitted a 6Y card for Mixed, you would submit it again for CW. There would be no record for 20 meters, as no band records were kept, even for 5Band DXCC.

I still believe this stems from your being a beta tester and how the records were entered on your end at that time. Since I was largely inactive from 2000 to 2014, and did not sign on to LOTW until then, I have no problem with my old records, as the near 40,000 QSOs entered since 1961 were entered after 2014, and were all entered with logged date and time. I had a surprising number of matches on those old one from the 80s

73

Bill K5FUV



On Wednesday, May 29, 2019, 10:23:20 AM CDT, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote:


Say I have an entry in this report as follows:
"149 851347831 card 6Y5BF 82 1976-01-01 20M CW no exact match found in log, new Entity, Entity-Band, Entity-Mode"
Is the part following the mode received from ARRL, or is that DXKeeper's analysis based on what *it* knows about, in this case, the status of various QSOs with 6Y5 as of 1976? When I do the various on-line lookups on my Logbook's DXCC Report, it appears to say that I have gotten credit for the entity and the mode, but not yet for the band. Is there any efficient way to repeat this process for each listing in the report?
This is what I get from the Mixed listing:
Worked Station
Worked

6Y5BF
DXCC

JAMAICA (82)
Date

1976-01-01
Mode

CW (CW)
Band

20M
. Can you tell from the way these listings are formatted whether credit was given for mode or band? Is this the significance of the "(CW)"?
















--

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now
spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

missing PTT with Flex and WSJT-X

Jamie WW3S
 

I know I had this working, now trying to work E31A on 40m, and the rig (Flex 6600) wont go into transmit, I have the rig set in WSJT-X as DXlab commander, commander is running and following the radio.....not sure what else to check

Re: More questions about DXCC Credit Analysis Report

Pete Smith
 

Thanks, Dave.

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network 
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now 
spotting RTTY activity worldwide. 
For spots, please use your favorite 
"retail" DX cluster.
On 5/29/2019 8:02 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:

Pete, if “partial credit” has been granted to one or more of your QSOs – like “mixed and CW, but not the band” – enable DXKeeper’s “Partial Credit” option, which allows the use of E, B, and M in “QSL Rcvd” items of logged QSOs:

https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxkeeper/Help/Items.htm#QSL%20rcvd

    73,

            Dave, AA6YQ


It's from ARRL, somehow changed from the original block format to that line.  The only difference from what you expect is that the callsign is present.  I also noticed that looking at my DXCC record online, it says that I have credit for Mixed as well as CW, but not for the band.  For the moment my focus is on getting to the Honor Roll, so I'll concentrate on the Mixed list.
73, Pete N4ZR

Check out the Reverse Beacon Network 
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now 
spotting RTTY activity worldwide. 
For spots, please use your favorite 
"retail" DX cluster.
On 5/29/2019 5:20 PM, BILL KENNAMER wrote:
Pete,

It cannot be determined from that entry. Is it from LOTW or from DXLab?

>From an Original DXCC listing, it should look like:
Worked: 082
DXCC: Jamaica (82)
Date: 1975-01-01
Mode: CW (cw)
Band: UNKNOWN

This would be a credit ONLY for CW DXCC. It will not be a credit for Mixed DXCC or a 20 meter credit in DXCC Records.

Credits prior to 1992 came from the original record for the original mode only. Prior to 1992, if you submitted a 6Y card for Mixed, you would submit it again for CW. There would be no record for 20 meters, as no band records were kept, even for 5Band DXCC.

I still believe this stems from your being a beta tester and how the records were entered on your end at that time. Since I was largely inactive from 2000 to 2014, and did not sign on to LOTW until then, I have no problem with my old records, as the near 40,000 QSOs entered since 1961 were entered after 2014, and were all entered with logged date and time. I had a surprising number of matches on those old one from the 80s

73

Bill K5FUV



On Wednesday, May 29, 2019, 10:23:20 AM CDT, Pete Smith <n4zr@...> wrote: 


Say I have an entry in this report as follows:
"149   851347831      card           6Y5BF           82  1976-01-01      20M         CW   no exact match found in log, new Entity, Entity-Band, Entity-Mode"
Is the part following the mode received from ARRL, or  is that DXKeeper's analysis based on what *it* knows about, in this case, the status of various QSOs with 6Y5 as of 1976?  When I do the various on-line lookups on my Logbook's DXCC Report, it appears to say that I have gotten credit for the entity and the mode, but not yet for the band.  Is there any efficient way to repeat this process for each listing in the report?
This is what I get from the Mixed listing:
Worked Station
Worked
 
6Y5BF
DXCC
 
JAMAICA (82)
Date
 
1976-01-01
Mode
 
CW (CW)
Band
 
20M
.  Can you tell from the way these listings are formatted whether credit was given for mode or band?  Is this the significance of the "(CW)"?
















Re: missing PTT with Flex and WSJT-X

CSM\(r\) Gary Huber - AB9M
 

If you've had a windows update, you probably have the com ports corrupted. You may need to download com_name_arbiter.zip then extract, install, run, reboot and WSJT-X will be able to PTT the 6600. If not, you need to create a SmartSDR CAT PTT com port, and provide the port number to WSJt-X / Commander.


From: DXLab@groups.io <DXLab@groups.io> on behalf of Jamie WW3S <ww3s@...>
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 8:48 PM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: [DXLab] missing PTT with Flex and WSJT-X
 
I know I had this working, now trying to work E31A on 40m, and the rig (Flex 6600) wont go into transmit, I have the rig set in WSJT-X as DXlab commander, commander is running and following the radio.....not sure what else to check

Re: missing PTT with Flex and WSJT-X

Dave AA6YQ
 

I know I had this working, now trying to work E31A on 40m, and the rig (Flex 6600) wont go into transmit, I have the rig set in WSJT-X as DXlab commander, commander is running and following the radio.....not sure what else to check

 

+ Please terminate WSJT-X. Using the PTT panel on the General tab of Commander’s Configuration window, can you switch your 6600 between RX and TX?

 

     73,

 

            Dave, AA6YQ

Re: missing PTT with Flex and WSJT-X

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

If you've had a windows update, you probably have the com ports corrupted.
You may need to download com_name_arbiter.zip then extract, install, run,
reboot and WSJT-X will be able to PTT the 6600. If not, you need to create a
SmartSDR CAT PTT com port, and provide the port number to WSJt-X /
Commander.

+ Commander does not use COM ports to interact with Flex Signature radios
like the 6600, nor does it use SmartSDR CAT. Commander interacts with Flex
Signature radios via your Ethernet local area network.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Wicked Slow Commander Launch

Nick Maslon - K1NZ
 

Hi everyone,

Apologies if this has been asked before, but why do DXLab programs take ages to launch (and also close)? Commander takes 40+ seconds on its own and DXKeeper isn't far behind. I have a non-ancient computer: AMD FX-8120, 16 GB of RAM, and an SSD.

Any thoughts or ways to improve would be greatly appreciated. It's becoming increasingly frustrating to switch between Commander/JTDX and N1MM (for CW keying) due to the minutes of lag time.

Many thanks and 73,
Nick K1NZ

Re: Congratulations Dave

n4nm
 

Wow! Nice! I've been listening to a lot of Scriabin recently; I had forgotten how closely connected he was to Rachmaninov. Those preludes show the influence, IMHO. 

Chuck, N4NM 

On 5/29/2019 9:33:56 AM, Stephen Rabinowitz <srabin@...> wrote:

Compared with Rachmaninoff, CW seems trivial.
All the best, Dave.
73, Steve K2SN

Sent from BlueMail
On May 28, 2019, at 11:54 PM, Dave AA6YQ <aa6yq@...> wrote:

+ AA6YQ comments below

On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 08:43 PM, jgmags2000 wrote:

Still playing Rachmaninoff?

+ Still trying. These two preludes are the current "state of my art":

     <http://www.ambersoft.com/Piano/Rachmaninoff%20Prelude%20Op%2032%20nr%2010.mp3>

      http://www.ambersoft.com/Piano/Rachmaninoff%20Prelude%20Op%2032%20nr%2012.mp3>

 

        73,
              Dave, AA6YQ

 

 

 

 

 

Re: Wicked Slow Commander Launch

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

Apologies if this has been asked before

+ All questions are welcome here, no matter how many times they may have already been asked and answered.

but why do DXLab programs take ages to launch (and also close)?

+ Because one or more applications on your computer are interfering with their operation. Misconfigured anti-malware applications are the usual culprit. See

<https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxlabwiki/ApplicationInteference>

+ Try rebooting Windows into "Safe Mode with Networking", and start DXKeeper. Any change in startup time?

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: RumlogADIF

John Merrill
 

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 09:08 AM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:
Thanks for the ADIF file.

Each QSO record in the file specifies the date and time at which the QSO ended, but none of them specify the date and time at which the QSO began.

The date and time at which a QSO begins are mandatory. The date and time at which it ends are optional.

"illegal-missing QSO date" is accurate for each QSO in your file.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

-----Original Message-----
From: John Merrill [mailto:john@...]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 11:47 AM
To: aa6yq@...
Subject: RumlogADIF

Dave:

I get illegal-missing QSO date.

John N1JM
I figured out in RumlogNG how to change from QSO end to QSO start. Now it imports properly.
73, John N1JM

Re: RumlogADIF

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

I figured out in RumlogNG how to change from QSO end to QSO start. Now it imports properly.

+ Interesting that this is an option. Glad you found it!

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: 6m spotting on ft8

ghassan chammas
 

hi dave

i found the file you mentioned in my SC folder. I selected it in the general tab.:   C:\DXLab\SpotCollector\BandModes 2019-05-02.txt

restarted Dxlab, but still the spectrum and the SC do not depict any FT8 spots or stations on 6mts.

regards
ghassan

On Tuesday, May 28, 2019, 9:06:34 PM GMT+3, Dave AA6YQ <aa6yq@...> wrote:


# more AA6YQ comments below

On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 09:51 AM, ghassan chammas wrote:

C:\DXLab\SpotCollector\BandModes 2017-12-27.txt
 
this the file name
# That file specifies

50310,50312,FT8,6M
50312,50314,JT9,6M

# which explains why spots in the 50313 sub-band are not reported as FT8.
 
# SpotCollector 8.3.4 includes a file named
 
BandModes 2019-05-02.txt
 
# that specifies
50310,50313,FT8,6M
50313,50314,JT9,6M
 
# Before you switch to this file, I encourage you to review all of its sub-band definitions to be sure they meet your needs. You can create your own custom version if desired; see
 
 
       73,

             Dave, AA6YQ
 

Re: 6m spotting on ft8

ghassan chammas
 

Note that today i worked 6m ft8 and created 3 spots that did not show on sc nor on the spectrum.
To make sure i did spot them,i logged to dxheat znd my posts were correctly and duly listed.

Ghassan



Sent from Samsung tablet.

-------- Original message --------
From: "ghassan chammas via Groups.Io" <ac2ra@...>
Date: 30/05/2019 10:41 (GMT+02:00)
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] 6m spotting on ft8

hi dave

i found the file you mentioned in my SC folder. I selected it in the general tab.:   C:\DXLab\SpotCollector\BandModes 2019-05-02.txt

restarted Dxlab, but still the spectrum and the SC do not depict any FT8 spots or stations on 6mts.

regards
ghassan

On Tuesday, May 28, 2019, 9:06:34 PM GMT+3, Dave AA6YQ <aa6yq@...> wrote:


# more AA6YQ comments below

On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 09:51 AM, ghassan chammas wrote:

C:\DXLab\SpotCollector\BandModes 2017-12-27.txt
 
this the file name
# That file specifies

50310,50312,FT8,6M
50312,50314,JT9,6M

# which explains why spots in the 50313 sub-band are not reported as FT8.
 
# SpotCollector 8.3.4 includes a file named
 
BandModes 2019-05-02.txt
 
# that specifies
50310,50313,FT8,6M
50313,50314,JT9,6M
 
# Before you switch to this file, I encourage you to review all of its sub-band definitions to be sure they meet your needs. You can create your own custom version if desired; see
 
 
       73,

             Dave, AA6YQ