Date   
Re: Private: Re: [DXLab] monitor 60M for new DXCC

Joe Subich, W4TV
 

On 2020-01-16 3:50 PM, ve3ki wrote:
Why not just quote the FCC rules?
Part 97.303(h),
(h) 60 m band: (1) In the 5330.5-5406.4 kHz band (60 m band), amateur
stations may transmit only on the five center frequencies specified
in the table below. In order to meet this requirement, control
operators of stations transmitting phone, data, and RTTY emissions
(emission designators 2K80J3E, 2K80J2D, and 60H0J2B, respectively)
may set the carrier frequency 1.5 kHz below the center frequency as
specified in the table below. For CW emissions (emission designator
150HA1A), the carrier frequency is set to the center frequency.
Amateur operators shall ensure that their emissions do not occupy
more than 2.8 kHz centered on each of these center frequencies.

60 M Band Frequencies (kHz)
Carrier Center
5330.5 5332.0
5346.5 5348.0
5357.0 5358.5
5371.5 5373.0
5403.5 5405.0
Part 97.303(h)(2),
(2) Amateur stations transmitting on the 60 m band must not cause harmful interference to, and must accept interference from, stations authorized by:
(i) The United States (NTIA and FCC) and other nations in the fixed service; and
(ii) Other nations in the mobile except aeronautical mobile service.
part 97.221(c)
(c) Except for channels specified in §97.303(h), a station may be
automatically controlled while transmitting a RTTY or data emission
on any other frequency authorized for such emission types provided
that:
Again, ARRL have *on multiple occasions* reported communications from
FCC Enforcement staff (and NTIA who are responsible for the "60 M
band") reminding US licensed amateurs that 97.303(h) requires using
*identical* audio frequency and carrier offsets so that the transmitted
signal is centered exactly on the middle of the assigned "Channel" -
not generating a random offset within a 2.7 KHz "band".

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-01-16 3:50 PM, ve3ki wrote:
Why not just quote the FCC rules?
Part 97.303(h), first sentence, and part 97.221(c), first sentence.
73,
Rich VE3KI
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 02:51 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:



Is this word for word from a rule or interpretive guideline (please
cite the reference), or your interpretation of something else? >
<Begin quote>:
The use of any of the 60 meter "channels" as a 3 KHz wide CW/digital
band or for ACDS (automatically controlled digital operations) is
*ILLEGAL* for *ANY* amateur station licensed by the United States.
<End quote>
The statement was my paraphrase of what ARRL have posted both on-line
at ARRL.org and printed in QST on multiple occasions. If you have a
disagreement, take it up with them.


Suffice it to say, while I personally follow the 1500 Hz approach,
and as a very active 60m FT8 operator with hundreds of qsos, 99% of
the USA stations I work are not transmitting on 1500 Hz exclusively,
nor am I aware of any enforcement actions taken against them.
I expect to see active enforcement of this rule (among others) as
the new Amateur Auxiliary (replacement for the old Official Observer
program but with designated enforcement authority from the FCC and
headed by Rudy Hollingsworth) gets up and running.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

Re: Internet Stack

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

I have a second machine that has a full install of DXLabs. I just tried the ctrl+ Sync LOTW QSL's process and after 2 seconds I
received the blue spinning circle and the download finished as it should.

On my shack computer the countdown sometimes goes to 56 seconds before I get the time out message, which seems should be long enough
for LOTW to stop the time out.

Is there a setting somewhere that could be effecting this?

+ I don't know, Julio. Microsoft Support may be able to answer your question.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: Internet Stack

Julio Peralta
 

I have a second machine that has a full install of
DXLabs. I just tried the ctrl+ Sync LOTW QSL's
process and after 2 seconds I received the blue
spinning circle and the download finished as it
should.

On my shack computer the countdown sometimes goes
to 56 seconds before I get the time out message,
which seems should be long enough for LOTW to stop
the time out.

Is there a setting somewhere that could be
effecting this?

Julio

-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io [mailto:DXLab@groups.io] On
Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2020 2:31 PM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] Internet Stack

+ AA6YQ comments below

Dave there has been some misunderstanding I think.

The only problem I have or had was that when
invoking the ctrl+"Sync LOTW QSL's" process, the
process never began and times out
after about 3 seconds.

snip<
You recommended fixing the internet Stack issue
which I think I have done, but the ctrl+"Sync LOTW
QSL's" continues to time out.

"Sync LOTW QSO's" is working as I see the LOTW
rcvd box change to Y from time to time as DXK
downloads info from LOTW.

+ Depressing the CTRL key while clicking the "Sync
LoTW QSLs" button directs LoTW to assemble all
QSOs confirmed via LoTW and
download their descriptions to DXKeeper. It can
take LoTW some time to assemble these QSOs and
begin the download. In contrast,
simply clicking the "Sync LoTW QSLs" button
directs LoTW to assemble all QSOs confirmed via
LoTW since the last time you invoked
"Sync LoTW QSLs" -- typically a much smaller
number of QSOs that takes LoTW less time to
assemble.

+ Your system is "timing out" before LoTW can
respond when you depress the CTRL key while
clicking the "Sync LoTW QSLs" button.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: monitor 60M for new DXCC

Joe Subich, W4TV
 

Is this word for word from a rule or interpretive guideline (please
cite the reference), or your interpretation of something else? >
<Begin quote>:
The use of any of the 60 meter "channels" as a 3 KHz wide CW/digital
band or for ACDS (automatically controlled digital operations) is
*ILLEGAL* for *ANY* amateur station licensed by the United States.
<End quote>
The statement was my paraphrase of what ARRL have posted both on-line
at ARRL.org and printed in QST on multiple occasions. If you have a
disagreement, take it up with them.

Suffice it to say, while I personally follow the 1500 Hz approach,
and as a very active 60m FT8 operator with hundreds of qsos, 99% of
the USA stations I work are not transmitting on 1500 Hz exclusively,
nor am I aware of any enforcement actions taken against them.
I expect to see active enforcement of this rule (among others) as
the new Amateur Auxiliary (replacement for the old Official Observer
program but with designated enforcement authority from the FCC and
headed by Rudy Hollingsworth) gets up and running.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-01-16 9:56 AM, Hasan Schiers N0AN wrote:
The purpose of my post was to explain to Wolf why, in my estimation, Dave
may have chosen not to include 60 meters in the Suite.(and to agree with
it) My comments were not to start a rehash of this worn out topic on the
DXLab list! This is not the place for debate on 60m privileges, I didn't
start a debate and won't continue one. This is my last post on the matter.
Suffice it to say, while I personally follow the 1500 Hz approach, and as a
very active 60m FT8 operator with hundreds of qsos, 99% of the USA stations
I work are not transmitting on 1500 Hz exclusively, nor am I aware of any
enforcement actions taken against them.
Where, precisely, did the following statement come from, or is it your own
conclusion?
Is this word for word from a rule or interpretive guideline (please cite
the reference), or your interpretation of something else?
<Begin quote>:
The use of any of the 60 meter "channels" as a 3 KHz wide CW/digital
band or for ACDS (automatically controlled digital operations) is
*ILLEGAL* for *ANY* amateur station licensed by the United States.
<End quote>
If you have such a source, please email me privately, as this whole thing
appears to be way off topic for DXLab, and I apologize to the list members
for this kind of distraction.
73, N0AN
Hasan
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:59 AM Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@...> wrote:

On 2020-01-16 8:08 AM, Hasan Schiers N0AN wrote:

There has been considerable debate in the USA as to whether operation
on any other frequency than 5357 kHz with a 1500 Hz tone is
permissible. Taking this position means only one freq (audio
included) may be used in the USA. There is no 3 kHz spread allowed,
single frequency means single frequency, not a band from 200 to 3000
Hz. So there is no room, according to this way of thinking.
*THERE IS NO DEBATE* That is exactly what the US Rules state - one
user per channel and that user must monitor in USB for primary users
(US Government).

The use of any of the 60 meter "channels" as a 3 KHz wide CW/digital
band or for ACDS (automatically controlled digital operations) is
*ILLEGAL* for *ANY* amateur station licensed by the United States.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-01-16 8:08 AM, Hasan Schiers N0AN wrote:
Wolf, (not speaking for Dave, just my own assessment of the issue you
raised)

Your comments about being USA centered certainly have merit. At first, I
had the perspective that you used, i.e.. there is plenty of room in a 3
kHz
bandwidth ...and I myself have worked tons of DX on 60m with a dipole and
80w It is a super band for FT8 on 5357 kHz

I think the general idea is to prevent 60m (a shared resource in the
USA),
from becoming a mad-house of DX award chasers. Since the resource is so
limited there is a fear that encouraging mass dx chasing ops will cause
real issues, again, inside the USA.

Another scary issue:

There has been considerable debate in the USA as to whether operation on
any other frequency than 5357 kHz with a 1500 Hz tone is permissible.
Taking this position means only one freq (audio included) may be used in
the USA. There is no 3 kHz spread allowed, single frequency means single
frequency, not a band from 200 to 3000 Hz. So there is no room, according
to this way of thinking.

Secondly, this is a shared resource with other services and we (USA) are
SECONDARY and must not cause interference to these other services. When I
examine the entire 3 kHz span around 5357 kHz, I do see commercial or
other
services sending data. We have been told NOT to interfere with those
services and if they are on 1500 Hz to stop transmitting.

So it's not just narrow (3 kHz) that is the issue. Narrow may, in fact
be a
single audio freq of 1500 Hz (which is often ignored)
It is also the "shared" allocation on a non-interference basis.
Both of which are terribly compromised by encouraging DX style/Award
Style
or congested operations on 60m inside the USA

Your USA-centric comments are accurate, but the restrictions and
limitations imposed are not driven by whim.

...and before someone asks, "Why doesn't someone like ARRL take this up
with the FCC?" The answer is "never ask an authority a question you
can't
afford the answer 'NO' to". The point being, we could lose the ability
to
use FT8 on 60m altogether if we ask the wrong question to the wrong
authority. For now, we can use it with care. Encouraging DX operating or
award operating is not "using it with care".

73, N0AN
Hasan


On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 5:19 AM Wolf, DK1FW <dk1fw@...> wrote:

Due to the channelized 60m situation in the US I understand ARRLs
decision to not issue a 60m DXCC to some extent. After all US hams are
ARRL's prime customers.

However, there is DXing following personal targets beyond DXCC and a
world outside FCC jurisdiction. It is a pity that DXLab is too focused
on the US situation.

A blunt statement that 60m "is too narrow for DXing" is simply
narrow-sighted (even Dave is not perfect).
30m is only 3 times as wide as 60m and is almost the backbone of DXing
during the present sunspot minimum.
Monitoring 60m from Europe the band is NEVER overcrowded with DXing and
would show almost no actitivity without DXing.

Fortunately SpotSpy (in the licensed version - a beer or a pizza) offers
60m DXCC alerts and tracking of 60m worked /confirmed status for those
of us, who are interested in 60m DX.

73 de Wolf, DK1FW


Am 15.01.2020 um 16:59 schrieb Dave AA6YQ:
+ AA6YQ comments below

How can I monitor 60M for new DXCC's?
Creating a filter in Spotcollector?
I'm not good at SQL.

+ 60m QSOs do not count for ARRL awards like DXCC. DXLab does not
support realtime award tracking for DXCC on 60m. The ARRL considers this
band to be too narrow for DXing; I agree.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: Backup API?

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

Thanks for the comments Dave. So, if the workspace is backed-up, is there anything that isn't available in a file restore? In other words, are all of the registry settings saved as part of the workspace?

+ With one exception, the settings of all DXLab applications are stored in the Windows Registry, and are saved to a Workspace when you invoked the Launcher's "Save Settings to Workspace" function. The exception is DXKeeper, which stores a few of its settings in the current log file; these are settings that automatically "follow" the current log, like those in the "Log Settings" panel on DXKeeper's Configuration window's Log tab, and those denoted with a trailing asterisk on the eQSL and LoTW tabs of DXKeeper's "QSL Configuration" window. Thus if you back up your Workspace and Log file(s), all settings are backed up, as well as all logged QSOs.

+ There are several other files referenced by DXLab applications that you may or may not choose to customize. If you have customized one or more of these files, you should include them in your backup so that you won't have to reconstruct the customizations when recovering from a computer or operating system failure. These files are highlighted in bold font in step 3 of

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

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: Internet Stack

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

Dave there has been some misunderstanding I think.

The only problem I have or had was that when invoking the ctrl+"Sync LOTW QSL's" process, the process never began and times out
after about 3 seconds.

snip<
You recommended fixing the internet Stack issue which I think I have done, but the ctrl+"Sync LOTW QSL's" continues to time out.

"Sync LOTW QSO's" is working as I see the LOTW rcvd box change to Y from time to time as DXK downloads info from LOTW.

+ Depressing the CTRL key while clicking the "Sync LoTW QSLs" button directs LoTW to assemble all QSOs confirmed via LoTW and
download their descriptions to DXKeeper. It can take LoTW some time to assemble these QSOs and begin the download. In contrast,
simply clicking the "Sync LoTW QSLs" button directs LoTW to assemble all QSOs confirmed via LoTW since the last time you invoked
"Sync LoTW QSLs" -- typically a much smaller number of QSOs that takes LoTW less time to assemble.

+ Your system is "timing out" before LoTW can respond when you depress the CTRL key while clicking the "Sync LoTW QSLs" button.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: GPS in winwarbler problem

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

I purchased a Garmin 18x gps receiver and verified it is working with another software but not sure why I'm not receiving data on winwarbler it is NEA compliant. I'm not sure if I have the setting correct or not. My gps is on com3. baud at 4800 .word lenght 8. stop bit 1 .parity none. Anyone have any ideas?

+ Is there an errorlog.txt file in your WinWarbler folder? If so, please attach this file to an email message, and send the message to me via

aa6yq (at) ambersoft.com

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: monitor 60M for new DXCC

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ Let's keep the discussion friendly, folks. We can disagree without being disagreeable.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: FW: Windows 10

neil_zampella
 

This was reported on the local TV news.    I suspect this vulnerability is also present in Win7, but M$ will not be releasing any fixes or security patches for it any longer. 

IMHO ... anyone who just uses Windows Defender is letting the fox watch the hen house.    Having a third party firewall (if not a full security suite) should provide protection from any external accesses.   (just don't use Norton or McAfree .. LOL)

Neil, KN3ILZ

On 1/16/2020 12:27 PM, Bob Main wrote:

Had this sent to me from another ham and thought it might be of interest to those of you running Windows 10.

 

From: Office of the Under Secretary for Management [mgmt.under.secretary@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 9:32 AM
Subject: IT Update: Critical Windows Vulnerability Patch Recommended

 

 

January 15, 2020

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

Yesterday, Microsoft announced a critical vulnerability in their Windows 10 operating system that can potentially be exploited to undermine trust across the system and other software. This flaw allows threat actors to bypass security tools by spoofing legitimate digital signatures. New vulnerabilities are continually emerging, but the best defense against attackers exploiting vulnerabilities is simple: keep software up to date. Timely patching is one of the most efficient and cost-effective steps an organization or an individual can take to minimize exposure to cybersecurity threats.

 

As a Department we are rapidly patching all affected Windows systems and recommend you do the same on your home windows-based computers using the Windows update feature. In Windows 10, Windows Update is found within Settings. To get there, select the Start menu, followed by the settings icon (picture of a “gear”) to the left. In there, choose Update & Security and then Windows Update on the left. Check for new Windows 10 updates by choosing Check for updates and follow the instructions on the screen. If not set already, we recommend you configure your home computers and other devices for automatic updates so that you never have to manually do it.

 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact your office’s IT help desk.

 

Sincerely,

 

Christopher C. Krebs

Director, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency

 

R.D. Alles

Deputy Under Secretary for Management

 

FW: Windows 10

Bob Main
 

Had this sent to me from another ham and thought it might be of interest to those of you running Windows 10.

 

From: Office of the Under Secretary for Management [mgmt.under.secretary@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 9:32 AM
Subject: IT Update: Critical Windows Vulnerability Patch Recommended

 

 

January 15, 2020

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

Yesterday, Microsoft announced a critical vulnerability in their Windows 10 operating system that can potentially be exploited to undermine trust across the system and other software. This flaw allows threat actors to bypass security tools by spoofing legitimate digital signatures. New vulnerabilities are continually emerging, but the best defense against attackers exploiting vulnerabilities is simple: keep software up to date. Timely patching is one of the most efficient and cost-effective steps an organization or an individual can take to minimize exposure to cybersecurity threats.

 

As a Department we are rapidly patching all affected Windows systems and recommend you do the same on your home windows-based computers using the Windows update feature. In Windows 10, Windows Update is found within Settings. To get there, select the Start menu, followed by the settings icon (picture of a “gear”) to the left. In there, choose Update & Security and then Windows Update on the left. Check for new Windows 10 updates by choosing Check for updates and follow the instructions on the screen. If not set already, we recommend you configure your home computers and other devices for automatic updates so that you never have to manually do it.

 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact your office’s IT help desk.

 

Sincerely,

 

Christopher C. Krebs

Director, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency

 

R.D. Alles

Deputy Under Secretary for Management

 

Re: Backup API?

 

Thanks for the comments Dave.  So, if the workspace is backed-up, is there anything that isn't available in a file restore?  In other words, are all of the registry settings saved as part of the workspace?

Thanks and 73,
Greg, KM5GT

Re: Internet Stack

Julio Peralta
 

Dave there has been some misunderstanding I think.
The only problem I have or had was that when
invoking the ctrl+"Sync LOTW QSL's" process, the
process never began and times out after about 3
seconds. At this point I'm not sure but I think
"Sync LOTW QSL's" was not changing the LOTW rcvd
box to verified.

I'm able to upload new Q's to LOTW without any
problem.

You recommended fixing the internet Stack issue
which I think I have done, but the ctrl+"Sync LOTW
QSL's" continues to time out.

"Sync LOTW QSO's" is working as I see the LOTW
rcvd box change to Y from time to time as DXK
downloads info from LOTW.

Julio, W4HY

-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io [mailto:DXLab@groups.io] On
Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 5:50 PM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] Internet Stack

+ AA6YQ comments below

Today I had some time and researched the internet
stack fix. I followed instructions I found on the
net and the results seemed to
follow what the instructions called for.

I then tried the ctrl "Sync LOTW QSL's" and again
after the process reached the 58 second of the
countdown it faulted with the
connection timeout message.

Everything else in DXLabs seems to be working as
it should. I'm able to upload Q's to LOTW and Sync
LOTW QSL's without getting the
timeout message. I can see where the LOTW rcvd box
changes to a Y in recent uploaded Q's.

Is there anything else I might try?

+ In the private email exchange that followed
public thread here

<https://groups.io/g/DXLab/message/189768>

+ You initially reported that Google's Chrome
Browser also- timed out when attempting to
download QSLs from LoTW using the same URL
that DXKeeper uses; this further confirmed the
"broken or misconfigured internet stack" theory.

+ Then you reported that Google's Chrome Browser
was now able to download QSLs from LoTW, but you
couldn't say what you changed to
enable this. You reported that DXKeeper still
experienced timeouts.

+ The evidence still points at a broken or
misconfigured internet access mechanism in
Windows.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

GPS in winwarbler problem

Craig Wallen
 

I purchased a Garmin 18x gps receiver and verified it is working with another software but not sure why I'm not receiving data on winwarbler it is NEA compliant. I'm not sure if I have the setting correct or not. My gps is on com3. baud at 4800 .word lenght 8. stop bit 1 .parity none.  Anyone have any ideas?

Re: monitor 60M for new DXCC

Hasan Schiers N0AN
 

The purpose of my post was to explain to Wolf why, in my estimation,  Dave may have chosen not to include 60 meters in the Suite.(and to agree with it)  My comments were not to start a rehash of this worn out topic on the DXLab list! This is not the place for debate on 60m privileges, I didn't start a debate and won't continue one. This is my last post on the matter. Suffice it to say, while I personally follow the 1500 Hz approach, and as a very active 60m FT8 operator with hundreds of qsos, 99% of the USA stations I work are not transmitting on 1500 Hz exclusively, nor am I aware of any enforcement actions taken against them.

Where, precisely, did the following statement come from, or is it your own conclusion?
Is this word for word from a rule or interpretive guideline (please cite the reference), or your interpretation of something else?

<Begin quote>:
The use of any of the 60 meter "channels" as a 3 KHz wide CW/digital
band or for ACDS (automatically controlled digital operations) is
*ILLEGAL* for *ANY* amateur station licensed by the United States.
<End quote>

If you have such a source, please email me privately, as this whole thing appears to be way off topic for DXLab, and I apologize to the list members for this kind of distraction.

73, N0AN
Hasan



On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:59 AM Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@...> wrote:
On 2020-01-16 8:08 AM, Hasan Schiers N0AN wrote:

> There has been considerable debate in the USA as to whether operation
> on any other frequency than 5357 kHz with a 1500 Hz tone is
> permissible. Taking this position means only one freq (audio
> included) may be used in the USA. There is no 3 kHz spread allowed,
> single frequency means single frequency, not a band from 200 to 3000
> Hz. So there is no room, according to this way of thinking.

*THERE IS NO DEBATE*  That is exactly what the US Rules state - one
user per channel and that user must monitor in USB for primary users
(US Government).

The use of any of the 60 meter "channels" as a 3 KHz wide CW/digital
band or for ACDS (automatically controlled digital operations) is
*ILLEGAL* for *ANY* amateur station licensed by the United States.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-01-16 8:08 AM, Hasan Schiers N0AN wrote:
> Wolf, (not speaking for Dave, just my own assessment of the issue you
> raised)
>
> Your comments about being USA centered certainly have merit. At first, I
> had the perspective that you used, i.e.. there is plenty of room in a 3 kHz
> bandwidth ...and I myself have worked tons of DX on 60m with a dipole and
> 80w  It is a super band for FT8 on 5357 kHz
>
> I think the general idea is to prevent 60m (a shared resource in the USA),
> from becoming a mad-house of DX award chasers. Since the resource is so
> limited there is a fear that encouraging mass dx chasing ops will cause
> real issues, again, inside the USA.
>
> Another scary issue:
>
> There has been considerable debate in the USA as to whether operation on
> any other frequency than 5357 kHz with a 1500 Hz tone is permissible.
> Taking this position means only one freq (audio included) may be used in
> the USA. There is no 3 kHz spread allowed, single frequency means single
> frequency, not a band from 200 to 3000 Hz. So there is no room, according
> to this way of thinking.
>
> Secondly, this is a shared resource with other services and we (USA) are
> SECONDARY and must not cause interference to these other services. When I
> examine the entire 3 kHz span around 5357 kHz, I do see commercial or other
> services sending data. We have been told NOT to interfere with those
> services and if they are on 1500 Hz to stop transmitting.
>
> So it's not just narrow (3 kHz) that is the issue. Narrow may, in fact be a
> single audio freq of 1500 Hz (which is often ignored)
> It is also the "shared" allocation on a non-interference basis.
> Both of which are terribly compromised by encouraging DX style/Award Style
> or congested operations on 60m inside the USA
>
> Your USA-centric comments are accurate, but the restrictions and
> limitations imposed are not driven by whim.
>
> ...and before someone asks, "Why doesn't someone like ARRL take this up
> with the FCC?"   The answer is "never ask an authority a question you can't
> afford the answer 'NO' to". The point being,  we could lose the ability to
> use FT8 on 60m altogether if we ask the wrong question to the wrong
> authority. For now, we can use it with care. Encouraging DX operating or
> award operating is not "using it with care".
>
> 73, N0AN
> Hasan
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 5:19 AM Wolf, DK1FW <dk1fw@...> wrote:
>
>> Due to the channelized 60m situation in the US I understand ARRLs
>> decision to not issue a 60m DXCC to some extent. After all US hams are
>> ARRL's prime customers.
>>
>> However, there is DXing following personal targets beyond DXCC and a
>> world outside FCC jurisdiction. It is a pity that DXLab is too focused
>> on the US situation.
>>
>> A blunt statement that 60m  "is too narrow for DXing" is simply
>> narrow-sighted (even Dave is not perfect).
>> 30m is only 3 times as wide as 60m and is almost the backbone of DXing
>> during the present sunspot minimum.
>> Monitoring 60m from Europe the band is NEVER overcrowded with DXing and
>> would show almost no actitivity without DXing.
>>
>> Fortunately SpotSpy (in the licensed version - a beer or a pizza) offers
>> 60m DXCC alerts and tracking of 60m worked /confirmed status for those
>> of us, who are interested in 60m DX.
>>
>> 73 de Wolf, DK1FW
>>
>>
>> Am 15.01.2020 um 16:59 schrieb Dave AA6YQ:
>>> + AA6YQ comments below
>>>
>>> How can I monitor 60M for new DXCC's?
>>> Creating a filter in Spotcollector?
>>> I'm not good at SQL.
>>>
>>> + 60m QSOs do not count for ARRL awards like DXCC. DXLab does not
>> support realtime award tracking for DXCC on 60m. The ARRL considers this
>> band to be too narrow for DXing; I agree.
>>>
>>>             73,
>>>
>>>                      Dave, AA6YQ
>>>





Re: monitor 60M for new DXCC

Joe Subich, W4TV
 

On 2020-01-16 8:08 AM, Hasan Schiers N0AN wrote:

There has been considerable debate in the USA as to whether operation
on any other frequency than 5357 kHz with a 1500 Hz tone is
permissible. Taking this position means only one freq (audio
included) may be used in the USA. There is no 3 kHz spread allowed,
single frequency means single frequency, not a band from 200 to 3000
Hz. So there is no room, according to this way of thinking.
*THERE IS NO DEBATE* That is exactly what the US Rules state - one
user per channel and that user must monitor in USB for primary users
(US Government).

The use of any of the 60 meter "channels" as a 3 KHz wide CW/digital
band or for ACDS (automatically controlled digital operations) is
*ILLEGAL* for *ANY* amateur station licensed by the United States.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-01-16 8:08 AM, Hasan Schiers N0AN wrote:
Wolf, (not speaking for Dave, just my own assessment of the issue you
raised)
Your comments about being USA centered certainly have merit. At first, I
had the perspective that you used, i.e.. there is plenty of room in a 3 kHz
bandwidth ...and I myself have worked tons of DX on 60m with a dipole and
80w It is a super band for FT8 on 5357 kHz
I think the general idea is to prevent 60m (a shared resource in the USA),
from becoming a mad-house of DX award chasers. Since the resource is so
limited there is a fear that encouraging mass dx chasing ops will cause
real issues, again, inside the USA.
Another scary issue:
There has been considerable debate in the USA as to whether operation on
any other frequency than 5357 kHz with a 1500 Hz tone is permissible.
Taking this position means only one freq (audio included) may be used in
the USA. There is no 3 kHz spread allowed, single frequency means single
frequency, not a band from 200 to 3000 Hz. So there is no room, according
to this way of thinking.
Secondly, this is a shared resource with other services and we (USA) are
SECONDARY and must not cause interference to these other services. When I
examine the entire 3 kHz span around 5357 kHz, I do see commercial or other
services sending data. We have been told NOT to interfere with those
services and if they are on 1500 Hz to stop transmitting.
So it's not just narrow (3 kHz) that is the issue. Narrow may, in fact be a
single audio freq of 1500 Hz (which is often ignored)
It is also the "shared" allocation on a non-interference basis.
Both of which are terribly compromised by encouraging DX style/Award Style
or congested operations on 60m inside the USA
Your USA-centric comments are accurate, but the restrictions and
limitations imposed are not driven by whim.
...and before someone asks, "Why doesn't someone like ARRL take this up
with the FCC?" The answer is "never ask an authority a question you can't
afford the answer 'NO' to". The point being, we could lose the ability to
use FT8 on 60m altogether if we ask the wrong question to the wrong
authority. For now, we can use it with care. Encouraging DX operating or
award operating is not "using it with care".
73, N0AN
Hasan
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 5:19 AM Wolf, DK1FW <dk1fw@...> wrote:

Due to the channelized 60m situation in the US I understand ARRLs
decision to not issue a 60m DXCC to some extent. After all US hams are
ARRL's prime customers.

However, there is DXing following personal targets beyond DXCC and a
world outside FCC jurisdiction. It is a pity that DXLab is too focused
on the US situation.

A blunt statement that 60m "is too narrow for DXing" is simply
narrow-sighted (even Dave is not perfect).
30m is only 3 times as wide as 60m and is almost the backbone of DXing
during the present sunspot minimum.
Monitoring 60m from Europe the band is NEVER overcrowded with DXing and
would show almost no actitivity without DXing.

Fortunately SpotSpy (in the licensed version - a beer or a pizza) offers
60m DXCC alerts and tracking of 60m worked /confirmed status for those
of us, who are interested in 60m DX.

73 de Wolf, DK1FW


Am 15.01.2020 um 16:59 schrieb Dave AA6YQ:
+ AA6YQ comments below

How can I monitor 60M for new DXCC's?
Creating a filter in Spotcollector?
I'm not good at SQL.

+ 60m QSOs do not count for ARRL awards like DXCC. DXLab does not
support realtime award tracking for DXCC on 60m. The ARRL considers this
band to be too narrow for DXing; I agree.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: monitor 60M for new DXCC

Hasan Schiers N0AN
 

Wolf, (not speaking for Dave, just my own assessment of the issue you raised)

Your comments about being USA centered certainly have merit. At first, I had the perspective that you used, i.e.. there is plenty of room in a 3 kHz bandwidth ...and I myself have worked tons of DX on 60m with a dipole and 80w  It is a super band for FT8 on 5357 kHz

I think the general idea is to prevent 60m (a shared resource in the USA), from becoming a mad-house of DX award chasers. Since the resource is so limited there is a fear that encouraging mass dx chasing ops will cause real issues, again, inside the USA.

Another scary issue:

There has been considerable debate in the USA as to whether operation on any other frequency than 5357 kHz with a 1500 Hz tone is permissible. Taking this position means only one freq (audio included) may be used in the USA. There is no 3 kHz spread allowed, single frequency means single frequency, not a band from 200 to 3000 Hz. So there is no room, according to this way of thinking.

Secondly, this is a shared resource with other services and we (USA) are SECONDARY and must not cause interference to these other services. When I examine the entire 3 kHz span around 5357 kHz, I do see commercial or other services sending data. We have been told NOT to interfere with those services and if they are on 1500 Hz to stop transmitting.

So it's not just narrow (3 kHz) that is the issue. Narrow may, in fact be a single audio freq of 1500 Hz (which is often ignored)
It is also the "shared" allocation on a non-interference basis.
Both of which are terribly compromised by encouraging DX style/Award Style or congested operations on 60m inside the USA

Your USA-centric comments are accurate, but the restrictions and limitations imposed are not driven by whim.

...and before someone asks, "Why doesn't someone like ARRL take this up with the FCC?"   The answer is "never ask an authority a question you can't afford the answer 'NO' to". The point being,  we could lose the ability to use FT8 on 60m altogether if we ask the wrong question to the wrong authority. For now, we can use it with care. Encouraging DX operating or award operating is not "using it with care".

73, N0AN
Hasan


On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 5:19 AM Wolf, DK1FW <dk1fw@...> wrote:
Due to the channelized 60m situation in the US I understand ARRLs
decision to not issue a 60m DXCC to some extent. After all US hams are
ARRL's prime customers.

However, there is DXing following personal targets beyond DXCC and a
world outside FCC jurisdiction. It is a pity that DXLab is too focused
on the US situation.

A blunt statement that 60m  "is too narrow for DXing" is simply
narrow-sighted (even Dave is not perfect).
30m is only 3 times as wide as 60m and is almost the backbone of DXing
during the present sunspot minimum.
Monitoring 60m from Europe the band is NEVER overcrowded with DXing and
would show almost no actitivity without DXing.

Fortunately SpotSpy (in the licensed version - a beer or a pizza) offers
60m DXCC alerts and tracking of 60m worked /confirmed status for those
of us, who are interested in 60m DX.

73 de Wolf, DK1FW


Am 15.01.2020 um 16:59 schrieb Dave AA6YQ:
> + AA6YQ comments below
>
> How can I monitor 60M for new DXCC's?
> Creating a filter in Spotcollector?
> I'm not good at SQL.
>
> + 60m QSOs do not count for ARRL awards like DXCC. DXLab does not support realtime award tracking for DXCC on 60m. The ARRL considers this band to be too narrow for DXing; I agree.
>
>            73,
>
>                     Dave, AA6YQ
>
>
>
>
>
>



Re: Best Spot Sources for use

Al Groff
 

I use WB8ZRL.no-ip.org port 7300  here in Iowa
AL, K0VM

On 1/15/2020 4:21 PM, Gilbert Baron W0MN wrote:

I am in MN

Many spot sources I had been using in SC just do not connect. They time out.

IRC does work.

 

On FT8 I usually use only WSJTX as I am looking for states and if WSJTX does not see them well not going to either with CQ only..

 

Looking for recommended sources when on HF, SSB or CW THAT ARE RELIABLE, AND FIT FOR THIS Ara.

 

TIA for suggestions.

 

Outlook Desktop Gil W0MN

Hierro Candente Batir de Repente

44.08226 N 92.51265 W EN34rb

 


--

W0MN EN34rb 44.08226 N 92.51265 W

Hierro candente, batir de repente

HP Laptop

Re: monitor 60M for new DXCC

Wolf, DK1FW
 

Due to the channelized 60m situation in the US I understand ARRLs decision to not issue a 60m DXCC to some extent. After all US hams are ARRL's prime customers.

However, there is DXing following personal targets beyond DXCC and a world outside FCC jurisdiction. It is a pity that DXLab is too focused on the US situation.

A blunt statement that 60m  "is too narrow for DXing" is simply narrow-sighted (even Dave is not perfect).
30m is only 3 times as wide as 60m and is almost the backbone of DXing during the present sunspot minimum.
Monitoring 60m from Europe the band is NEVER overcrowded with DXing and would show almost no actitivity without DXing.

Fortunately SpotSpy (in the licensed version - a beer or a pizza) offers 60m DXCC alerts and tracking of 60m worked /confirmed status for those of us, who are interested in 60m DX.

73 de Wolf, DK1FW


Am 15.01.2020 um 16:59 schrieb Dave AA6YQ:

+ AA6YQ comments below

How can I monitor 60M for new DXCC's?
Creating a filter in Spotcollector?
I'm not good at SQL.

+ 60m QSOs do not count for ARRL awards like DXCC. DXLab does not support realtime award tracking for DXCC on 60m. The ARRL considers this band to be too narrow for DXing; I agree.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ




Re: monitor 60M for new DXCC

aart wedemeijer PA3C
 

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 05:31 PM, Michael Raskin wrote:
but for only one year
That is not working for me thanks for the tip.

Aart

Re: WSJT-X > DXKeeper ...

Mike Flowers
 

Thanks, Dave. I’ll study this.

-- 73 de Mike Flowers, K6MKF, NCDXC - "It's about DX!"

On Jan 15, 2020, at 6:46 PM, Dave AA6YQ <@AA6YQ> wrote:

+ AA6YQ comments below

Would someone please direct me to the documentation for how to make the connection from WSJT-X directly to DXKeeper.

+ There is no direct connection between WSJT-X and DXKeeper.

+ There are two ways that WSJT-X can interoperate with DXLab. In the "direct" scheme, SpotCollector orchestrates the interoperation,
as described here:

<https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxlabwiki/GettingStartedwithK1JTModesDirect>


2. Alternatively, JTAlert can orchestrate the interoperation, as described here>

<https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxlabwiki/GettingStartedwithK1JTModesWithJTAlert>

73,

Dave, AA6YQ