Enhancement Request


Gerhard "Gary" Jaeger, DF2RG
 

Hello Dave and all,

 

what do you think about the following change in the progress table:

Rename the column DIGI to RTTY, listing only real RTTY contacts, and rename the column PSK to show all other digital modes combined (PSK all flavors, FT4/8 etc etc.).

Real RTTY has NOT died completely, but in my view, the relevance of PSK has decreased. This would help the (old fashioned) RTTY-DX’er to get a quick view about his need in this mode.

 

What are your thoughts about this?

 

Happy Easter to all,

73 de Gary, DF2RG


Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

what do you think about the following change in the progress table:

Rename the column DIGI to RTTY, listing only real RTTY contacts, and rename the column PSK to show all other digital modes combined (PSK all flavors, FT4/8 etc etc.).

Real RTTY has NOT died completely, but in my view, the relevance of PSK has decreased. This would help the (old fashioned) RTTY-DX’er to get a quick view about his need in this mode.

 

What are your thoughts about this?

+ If you're referring to the DIGI column on the DXCC tab of DXKeeper's Realtime Award tracking window, there is no RTTY-only DXCC award; RTTY QSOs apply towards the DXCC DIGI award; see rule #1 in

http://www.arrl.org/dxcc-rules

+ Enabling the "user-specified digital mode family" selector (Configuration window, Awards tab) to be set to RTTY -- meaning "I seek to obtain DXCC award credit for every entity in RTTY" -- is on the list, but not imminent.

     73,

            Dave, AA6YQ

 

 


Gerhard "Gary" Jaeger, DF2RG
 

Yes Dave, I am aware of this unfortunate DXCC Award decision from back in 2011, way before anyone ever thought about the FT-modes.

But you can still get the WAZ Award in true RTTY. I worked hard to accomplish WAZ 30m RTTY #1 last year, same time WAZ 17m RTTY #2 and WAZ 12m #2.

On the WARC bands, I think it is no longer possible to achieve this, but the traditional bands still have RTTY activity during contests.

 

Actually, I was referring to the progress table in DXView, but thanks for pointing me to the Realtime Award Tracking, that gives me some of the info I need.

 

But still I think that RTTY should be given more “respect” and PSK is more or less outdated these days. Just my humble opinion 😉

 

Thanks for all the effort you put into the BEST DX-related set of programs.

 

73 de Gary, DF2RG  

 

Von: DXLab@groups.io <DXLab@groups.io> Im Auftrag von Dave AA6YQ
Gesendet: Freitag, 15. April 2022 18:31
An: DXLab@groups.io
Betreff: Re: [DXLab] Enhancement Request

 

+ AA6YQ comments below

what do you think about the following change in the progress table:

Rename the column DIGI to RTTY, listing only real RTTY contacts, and rename the column PSK to show all other digital modes combined (PSK all flavors, FT4/8 etc etc.).

Real RTTY has NOT died completely, but in my view, the relevance of PSK has decreased. This would help the (old fashioned) RTTY-DX’er to get a quick view about his need in this mode.

 

What are your thoughts about this?

+ If you're referring to the DIGI column on the DXCC tab of DXKeeper's Realtime Award tracking window, there is no RTTY-only DXCC award; RTTY QSOs apply towards the DXCC DIGI award; see rule #1 in

http://www.arrl.org/dxcc-rules

+ Enabling the "user-specified digital mode family" selector (Configuration window, Awards tab) to be set to RTTY -- meaning "I seek to obtain DXCC award credit for every entity in RTTY" -- is on the list, but not imminent.

     73,

            Dave, AA6YQ

 

 


Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below
Yes Dave, I am aware of this unfortunate DXCC Award decision from back in 2011, way before anyone ever thought about the FT-modes.

But you can still get the WAZ Award in true RTTY.

+ DXLab supports the WAZ-RTTY objective, as well as the WAZ-RTTY-80m through WAZ-RTTY-10m objectives.

Actually, I was referring to the progress table in DXView, but thanks for pointing me to the Realtime Award Tracking, that gives me some of the info I need.

+ The Progress table displayed on DXView's Main window contains the same information displayed on the DXCC tab of DXKeeper's Realtime Award Tracking window.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Pat
 

On a none contest weekend
Here, there is more psk activity then rtty
i think rtty has become a contest mode
murf


dl8le
 

It is my impression as well that there is more PSK-activity outside of contests than RTTY. But the only real popular digital mode activity is in FTx with a still increasing number of stations making it difficult quite often to find a free spot for the own tx-signal (in particular with the improving conditions).

Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real time award tracking for WAZ ..m RTTY and similar is an acceptable way (even though I am still missing some zones in RTTY on some bands, missing many more than you, Gary). It avoids an overloading of the information shown in the DXView window. Might be it could be interesting to implement one additional line for FTx with PSK, RTTY and all other digital modes like Amtor, Throb, Olivia etc. would be summarized in Digi. I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest in June. But let's see.

Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that band. But before doing so a different idea would be, if there could be possible user-defined columns, e.g. keep the number of columns and let the user decide if they would like to have 6m and 2m or they prefer 6m and 4m or whatever would be the personal preference, i.e. changing the present default bands.

73

Juergen, DL8LE


Joe Subich, W4TV
 

Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that band.
I don't think that 60m should be implemented until ARRL begin accepting
single band 60m DXCC. That is not likely to happen until the US get a
true "band" at 60m without channelized operation, severe antenna and
power limits, and frequency sharing with government users.

I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest
in June.
I would hope that any change in the DXCC program would be to return
the real "RTTY" award and keep Digital as is - or return to RTTY only
and make Digital "modes other than RTTY".

Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real time award tracking for WAZ
If changes were to be made in the "Progress Table" display of DXView,
my choice would be to allow the user to select which of the "tabs"
in DXKeeper's RealTime award tracking table was displayed. That
could take some time as IOTA, Marathon, and WPX are not currently
implemented.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2022-04-17 6:47 AM, dl8le wrote:
It is my impression as well that there is more PSK-activity outside of contests than RTTY. But the only real popular digital mode activity is in FTx with a still increasing number of stations making it difficult quite often to find a free spot for the own tx-signal (in particular with the improving conditions).
Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real time award tracking for WAZ ..m RTTY and similar is an acceptable way (even though I am still missing some zones in RTTY on some bands, missing many more than you, Gary). It avoids an overloading of the information shown in the DXView window. Might be it could be interesting to implement one additional line for FTx with PSK, RTTY and all other digital modes like Amtor, Throb, Olivia etc. would be summarized in Digi. I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest in June. But let's see.
Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that band. But before doing so a different idea would be, if there could be possible user-defined columns, e.g. keep the number of columns and let the user decide if they would like to have 6m and 2m or they prefer 6m and 4m or whatever would be the personal preference, i.e. changing the present default bands.
73
Juergen, DL8LE


Bill N5IR
 

FWIW, don’t we still share 30m?

Bill, N5IR

On Apr 17, 2022, at 08:40, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@...> wrote:


Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that
band.
I don't think that 60m should be implemented until ARRL begin accepting
single band 60m DXCC. That is not likely to happen until the US get a
true "band" at 60m without channelized operation, severe antenna and
power limits, and frequency sharing with government users.

I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest
in June.
I would hope that any change in the DXCC program would be to return
the real "RTTY" award and keep Digital as is - or return to RTTY only
and make Digital "modes other than RTTY".

Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real
time award tracking for WAZ
If changes were to be made in the "Progress Table" display of DXView,
my choice would be to allow the user to select which of the "tabs"
in DXKeeper's RealTime award tracking table was displayed. That
could take some time as IOTA, Marathon, and WPX are not currently
implemented.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2022-04-17 6:47 AM, dl8le wrote:
It is my impression as well that there is more PSK-activity outside of contests than RTTY. But the only real popular digital mode activity is in FTx with a still increasing number of stations making it difficult quite often to find a free spot for the own tx-signal (in particular with the improving conditions).
Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real time award tracking for WAZ ..m RTTY and similar is an acceptable way (even though I am still missing some zones in RTTY on some bands, missing many more than you, Gary). It avoids an overloading of the information shown in the DXView window. Might be it could be interesting to implement one additional line for FTx with PSK, RTTY and all other digital modes like Amtor, Throb, Olivia etc. would be summarized in Digi. I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest in June. But let's see.
Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that band. But before doing so a different idea would be, if there could be possible user-defined columns, e.g. keep the number of columns and let the user decide if they would like to have 6m and 2m or they prefer 6m and 4m or whatever would be the personal preference, i.e. changing the present default bands.
73
Juergen, DL8LE





Gilbert Baron W0MN
 

Yes, we share it, are channelized, and ERP is severely restricted. I for one find it not worth the effort. It is also complex for many. Maybe one day. On the other hand, with propagation improving the 60M spectrum is not all that important.

Outlook LT Gil W0MN
Hierro Candente Batir de Repente
44.08226 N 92.51265 W EN34rb

-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io <DXLab@groups.io> On Behalf Of Bill N5IR
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2022 9:14 AM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] Enhancement Request

FWIW, don’t we still share 30m?

Bill, N5IR
On Apr 17, 2022, at 08:40, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@...> wrote:


Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column
for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that
band.
I don't think that 60m should be implemented until ARRL begin
accepting single band 60m DXCC. That is not likely to happen until
the US get a true "band" at 60m without channelized operation, severe
antenna and power limits, and frequency sharing with government users.

I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a
FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest in June.
I would hope that any change in the DXCC program would be to return
the real "RTTY" award and keep Digital as is - or return to RTTY only
and make Digital "modes other than RTTY".

Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real
time award tracking for WAZ
If changes were to be made in the "Progress Table" display of DXView,
my choice would be to allow the user to select which of the "tabs"
in DXKeeper's RealTime award tracking table was displayed. That could
take some time as IOTA, Marathon, and WPX are not currently
implemented.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2022-04-17 6:47 AM, dl8le wrote:
It is my impression as well that there is more PSK-activity outside of contests than RTTY. But the only real popular digital mode activity is in FTx with a still increasing number of stations making it difficult quite often to find a free spot for the own tx-signal (in particular with the improving conditions).
Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real time award tracking for WAZ ..m RTTY and similar is an acceptable way (even though I am still missing some zones in RTTY on some bands, missing many more than you, Gary). It avoids an overloading of the information shown in the DXView window. Might be it could be interesting to implement one additional line for FTx with PSK, RTTY and all other digital modes like Amtor, Throb, Olivia etc. would be summarized in Digi. I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest in June. But let's see.
Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that band. But before doing so a different idea would be, if there could be possible user-defined columns, e.g. keep the number of columns and let the user decide if they would like to have 6m and 2m or they prefer 6m and 4m or whatever would be the personal preference, i.e. changing the present default bands.
73
Juergen, DL8LE











--
W0MN EN34rb 44.08226 N 92.51265 W

Hierro candente, batir de repente

HP Laptop


Joe Subich, W4TV
 

On 2022-04-17 10:13 AM, Bill N5IR wrote:
FWIW, don’t we still share 30m?
Not with the US Government (NTIA) as the primary user.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2022-04-17 10:13 AM, Bill N5IR wrote:
FWIW, don’t we still share 30m?
Bill, N5IR
On Apr 17, 2022, at 08:40, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@...> wrote:


Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that
band.
I don't think that 60m should be implemented until ARRL begin accepting
single band 60m DXCC. That is not likely to happen until the US get a
true "band" at 60m without channelized operation, severe antenna and
power limits, and frequency sharing with government users.

I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest
in June.
I would hope that any change in the DXCC program would be to return
the real "RTTY" award and keep Digital as is - or return to RTTY only
and make Digital "modes other than RTTY".

Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real
time award tracking for WAZ
If changes were to be made in the "Progress Table" display of DXView,
my choice would be to allow the user to select which of the "tabs"
in DXKeeper's RealTime award tracking table was displayed. That
could take some time as IOTA, Marathon, and WPX are not currently
implemented.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2022-04-17 6:47 AM, dl8le wrote:
It is my impression as well that there is more PSK-activity outside of contests than RTTY. But the only real popular digital mode activity is in FTx with a still increasing number of stations making it difficult quite often to find a free spot for the own tx-signal (in particular with the improving conditions).
Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real time award tracking for WAZ ..m RTTY and similar is an acceptable way (even though I am still missing some zones in RTTY on some bands, missing many more than you, Gary). It avoids an overloading of the information shown in the DXView window. Might be it could be interesting to implement one additional line for FTx with PSK, RTTY and all other digital modes like Amtor, Throb, Olivia etc. would be summarized in Digi. I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest in June. But let's see.
Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that band. But before doing so a different idea would be, if there could be possible user-defined columns, e.g. keep the number of columns and let the user decide if they would like to have 6m and 2m or they prefer 6m and 4m or whatever would be the personal preference, i.e. changing the present default bands.
73
Juergen, DL8LE


Joe Subich, W4TV
 

On 2022-04-17 10:47 AM, Gilbert Baron W0MN wrote:
Yes, we share it, are channelized, and ERP is severely restricted.
No, 30 meters is not channelized and ERP is not restricted (only
transmitter power output is restricted).

There is a big difference between the restrictions on 60 m and 30 m.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2022-04-17 10:47 AM, Gilbert Baron W0MN wrote:
Yes, we share it, are channelized, and ERP is severely restricted. I for one find it not worth the effort. It is also complex for many. Maybe one day. On the other hand, with propagation improving the 60M spectrum is not all that important.
Outlook LT Gil W0MN
Hierro Candente Batir de Repente
44.08226 N 92.51265 W EN34rb
-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io <DXLab@groups.io> On Behalf Of Bill N5IR
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2022 9:14 AM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] Enhancement Request
FWIW, don’t we still share 30m?
Bill, N5IR
On Apr 17, 2022, at 08:40, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@...> wrote:


Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column
for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that
band.
I don't think that 60m should be implemented until ARRL begin
accepting single band 60m DXCC. That is not likely to happen until
the US get a true "band" at 60m without channelized operation, severe
antenna and power limits, and frequency sharing with government users.

I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a
FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest in June.
I would hope that any change in the DXCC program would be to return
the real "RTTY" award and keep Digital as is - or return to RTTY only
and make Digital "modes other than RTTY".

Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real
time award tracking for WAZ
If changes were to be made in the "Progress Table" display of DXView,
my choice would be to allow the user to select which of the "tabs"
in DXKeeper's RealTime award tracking table was displayed. That could
take some time as IOTA, Marathon, and WPX are not currently
implemented.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2022-04-17 6:47 AM, dl8le wrote:
It is my impression as well that there is more PSK-activity outside of contests than RTTY. But the only real popular digital mode activity is in FTx with a still increasing number of stations making it difficult quite often to find a free spot for the own tx-signal (in particular with the improving conditions).
Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real time award tracking for WAZ ..m RTTY and similar is an acceptable way (even though I am still missing some zones in RTTY on some bands, missing many more than you, Gary). It avoids an overloading of the information shown in the DXView window. Might be it could be interesting to implement one additional line for FTx with PSK, RTTY and all other digital modes like Amtor, Throb, Olivia etc. would be summarized in Digi. I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest in June. But let's see.
Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that band. But before doing so a different idea would be, if there could be possible user-defined columns, e.g. keep the number of columns and let the user decide if they would like to have 6m and 2m or they prefer 6m and 4m or whatever would be the personal preference, i.e. changing the present default bands.
73
Juergen, DL8LE


dl8le
 

I don't understand why we consider sharing and restriction as reason for not implementing 60 m if we look at 30m (thanks for Bill to remind us), at 6m and at 160 m, which are all shown in the table and are considered for many awards. I don't know about the US but at least in Germany the power and sometimes antenna limitations are very rigid on those bands.Therefore I hope that the ARRL will consider this when deciding about 60m awards as well.

If the table in DXView would change to include IOTA, Marathon, WPX etc. it would loose the function of providing a simple but very good overview. We have programs such as SpotSpy for IOTA, RDA's etc., if somebody is interested (remark: I like SpotSpy very much and use it). Therefore the approach of having some columns for the bands as user defined would be a compromise somehow to keep the very good functionality (and if a line would be user defined as well it could even help to implement Gary's enhancement request for RTTY, and this is independent of my personal view on RTTY compared ot PSK, FTx and other digital modes). I am aware of the fact that the table would not be full in line with the DXCC award criteria, this means a little bit different compared to the original approach.

Just my two cent for this discussion

73

Juergen, DL8LE


Gilbert Baron W0MN
 

Sorry, I was confused or did not read carefully. I was referring to the 5Mhz band for sure.

Outlook LT Gil W0MN
Hierro Candente Batir de Repente
44.08226 N 92.51265 W EN34rb

-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io <DXLab@groups.io> On Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2022 10:04 AM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] Enhancement Request

On 2022-04-17 10:47 AM, Gilbert Baron W0MN wrote:
> Yes, we share it, are channelized, and ERP is severely restricted.

No, 30 meters is not channelized and ERP is not restricted (only transmitter power output is restricted).

There is a big difference between the restrictions on 60 m and 30 m.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2022-04-17 10:47 AM, Gilbert Baron W0MN wrote:
Yes, we share it, are channelized, and ERP is severely restricted. I for one find it not worth the effort. It is also complex for many. Maybe one day. On the other hand, with propagation improving the 60M spectrum is not all that important.

Outlook LT Gil W0MN
Hierro Candente Batir de Repente
44.08226 N 92.51265 W EN34rb


-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io <DXLab@groups.io> On Behalf Of Bill N5IR
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2022 9:14 AM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] Enhancement Request

FWIW, don’t we still share 30m?

Bill, N5IR
On Apr 17, 2022, at 08:40, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@...> wrote:


Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column
for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that
band.
I don't think that 60m should be implemented until ARRL begin
accepting single band 60m DXCC. That is not likely to happen until
the US get a true "band" at 60m without channelized operation, severe
antenna and power limits, and frequency sharing with government users.

I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a
FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest in June.
I would hope that any change in the DXCC program would be to return
the real "RTTY" award and keep Digital as is - or return to RTTY only
and make Digital "modes other than RTTY".

Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real
time award tracking for WAZ
If changes were to be made in the "Progress Table" display of DXView,
my choice would be to allow the user to select which of the "tabs"
in DXKeeper's RealTime award tracking table was displayed. That
could take some time as IOTA, Marathon, and WPX are not currently
implemented.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2022-04-17 6:47 AM, dl8le wrote:
It is my impression as well that there is more PSK-activity outside of contests than RTTY. But the only real popular digital mode activity is in FTx with a still increasing number of stations making it difficult quite often to find a free spot for the own tx-signal (in particular with the improving conditions).
Keeping this in mind I believe that Dave's proposal to use the real time award tracking for WAZ ..m RTTY and similar is an acceptable way (even though I am still missing some zones in RTTY on some bands, missing many more than you, Gary). It avoids an overloading of the information shown in the DXView window. Might be it could be interesting to implement one additional line for FTx with PSK, RTTY and all other digital modes like Amtor, Throb, Olivia etc. would be summarized in Digi. I am quite sure that sooner or later the ARRL will start with a FTx-Award, in particular after they announced a new Digi-Mode Contest in June. But let's see.
Looking at FTx, by the way, it would be interesting to have a column for 60 m implemented, because there is a lot of FT8 activity on that band. But before doing so a different idea would be, if there could be possible user-defined columns, e.g. keep the number of columns and let the user decide if they would like to have 6m and 2m or they prefer 6m and 4m or whatever would be the personal preference, i.e. changing the present default bands.
73
Juergen, DL8LE










--
W0MN EN34rb 44.08226 N 92.51265 W

Hierro candente, batir de repente

HP Laptop


W0MU
 

Other countries also have access to the 60m band.  Have they all adopted the channels or do they have some actual band segments to use?  Why is the award based about what the USA is doing?  If it is a place we can legally operate why not have an award?  Is it just to attempt to keep people from flooding the band?  Obviously the FT modes are great as you can get a bunch of people in a small section of the spectrum.

W0MU



On 4/17/2022 9:28 AM, dl8le wrote:
I don't understand why we consider sharing and restriction as reason for not implementing 60 m if we look at 30m (thanks for Bill to remind us), at 6m and at 160 m, which are all shown in the table and are considered for many awards. I don't know about the US but at least in Germany the power and sometimes antenna limitations are very rigid on those bands.Therefore I hope that the ARRL will consider this when deciding about 60m awards as well.

If the table in DXView would change to include IOTA, Marathon, WPX etc. it would loose the function of providing a simple but very good overview. We have programs such as SpotSpy for IOTA, RDA's etc., if somebody is interested (remark: I like SpotSpy very much and use it). Therefore the approach of having some columns for the bands as user defined would be a compromise somehow to keep the very good functionality (and if a line would be user defined as well it could even help to implement Gary's enhancement request for RTTY, and this is independent of my personal view on RTTY compared ot PSK, FTx and other digital modes). I am aware of the fact that the table would not be full in line with the DXCC award criteria, this means a little bit different compared to the original approach.

Just my two cent for this discussion

73

Juergen, DL8LE


Joe Subich, W4TV
 

On 2022-04-17 11:28 AM, dl8le wrote:
I don't understand why we consider sharing and restriction as reason for not implementing 60 m if we look at 30m (thanks for Bill to remind us), at 6m and at 160 m, which are all shown in the table and are considered for many awards.
Quite simply, the ARRL Board of Directors with input from legal counsel
and regulatory affairs department long ago decided that, given the
regulatory restrictions, 60m is not suitable for DXing (or any other
"competitive" activity.

Given the strict interpretation of the rules ... operation on the center
of the channel, one user at a time, etc., 60m is not suitable for DXing.
I consider the multi-user digital operation for US licensees to be
questionable at best under the current regulations and, like Gil, do
not find that band to be worth the effort.

Remember, DXCC, WAS, VUCC are all ARRL Awards and will be, by their very
nature, based on US regulations. If another organization outside the
US wanted to create their own awards program and accept QSOs on 60m,
8m, 4m, etc. for those awards, that is their prerogative. I don't know
that Dave will provide award tracking support for those programs - that
is his prerogative.


73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2022-04-17 11:28 AM, dl8le wrote:
I don't understand why we consider sharing and restriction as reason for not implementing 60 m if we look at 30m (thanks for Bill to remind us), at 6m and at 160 m, which are all shown in the table and are considered for many awards. I don't know about the US but at least in Germany the power and sometimes antenna limitations are very rigid on those bands.Therefore I hope that the ARRL will consider this when deciding about 60m awards as well.
If the table in DXView would change to include IOTA, Marathon, WPX etc. it would loose the function of providing a simple but very good overview. We have programs such as SpotSpy for IOTA, RDA's etc., if somebody is interested (remark: I like SpotSpy very much and use it). Therefore the approach of having some columns for the bands as user defined would be a compromise somehow to keep the very good functionality (and if a line would be user defined as well it could even help to implement Gary's enhancement request for RTTY, and this is independent of my personal view on RTTY compared ot PSK, FTx and other digital modes). I am aware of the fact that the table would not be full in line with the DXCC award criteria, this means a little bit different compared to the original approach.
Just my two cent for this discussion
73
Juergen, DL8LE


dl8le
 

Last comment marked with ** before closing this topic from my side:

Quite simply, the ARRL Board of Directors with input from legal counsel
and regulatory affairs department long ago decided that, given the
regulatory restrictions, 60m is not suitable for DXing (or any other
"competitive" activity.

** I strongly believe that this decision was made - long time ago, as you say - without considering or even knowing the rapid development of FTx. DXing, however, defined in Wikipedia (English version) as "DXing is the hobby of receiving and identifying distant radio or television signals, or making two-way radio contact with distant stations in amateur radio" is both possible and suitable. If not allowed I wonder how so many call signs from the US can be worked at night on 60 m in FT8. Are they all operating illegally? And: why is there a bandplan explicitly allowing digi-modes there? Hard for me to believe that all this is not following given rules and regulations. But I might be wrong. "not suitable" in the common sense that it is extremely difficult or even impossible to work DX-stations is not correct when looking at the number of stations active in FT8 on 60 m at night. During some antenna tests I have worked more than 50 DXCC's within two nights with low power (10 W, antenna was non resonant dipole about 30 m above ground)

Given the strict interpretation of the rules ... operation on the center
of the channel, one user at a time, etc., 60m is not suitable for DXing.
I consider the multi-user digital operation for US licensees to be
questionable at best under the current regulations and, like Gil, do
not find that band to be worth the effort.

** Based on my personal experience 60m is worth the effort, might be in FT8 only. Just give it a try. I was extremely surprised to find so many stations very active on 60 m. This might change with improving band conditions. If somebody doesn't like FTx, however, the way it could be seen would be different most probably.

Please understand that my comments are based on my personal knowledge as simple radio amateur, not as legal counsel and not knowing the detailed rules and regulations in the US. So if one of my statements is legally not ok I already apologize for it, but I did not want that as result of a side discussion starting at RTTY vs other Digi-Modes a nice band like 60 m became rated so poorly. If Dave would not like to accept the enhancement request to implement user defined columns or even lines for some other reasons it would be ok for me, discussion will be stopped from my side anyway.

73

Juergen, DL8LE


Dave AA6YQ
 

If you wish to track your RTTY-only DXCC progress, filter the Log Page Display with the SQL expression

MODE='RTTY'

and then click the Progress button in the "DXCC, Challenge, & TopList" panel on the Main window's "Check Progress" tab; decline DXKeeper's offer to remove the filtering. The Mixed and Digi statistics will be "RTTY only", and the by-band statistics will be "RTTY only".

If you wish to track your 60m DXCC progress, filter the Log Page Display with the SQL expression

BAND='60m'

and then click the Progress button in the "DXCC, Challenge, & TopList" panel on the Main window's "Check Progress" tab; decline DXKeeper's offer to remove the filtering. The Mixed and by-mode statistics will be "60m only"

Each of the above operations can be automated with a script that performs the filter operation and invokes the DXCC progress report.

DXKeeper's Realtime Award Tracking for the CQ DX Marathon and CQ WPX competitions already support 60m, as required by the rules for those awards. As previously stated here, I don't plan to extend DXKeeper's Realtime Award Tracking for DXCC or WAS to support 60m unless the ARRL expands those awards to include 60m.

I plan to make it possible to select RTTY in the "User-specified digital mode family" selector ion the "DXCC Bands & Modes" panel on the Configuration window's Awards tab. This will extend Realtime Award Tracking to support the objective of obtaining DXCC award credit for every DXCC entity in RTTY. This is not imminent.

I plan to extend DXView to make it possible to optionally replace the DXCC progress table on its Main window with an IOTA, Marathon, VUCC, WAS, WAZ, or WPX progress table. WAZ will be the first implemented; this is not imminent.

"Imminent" means "implemented, tested, documented, and in the hands of at least one user".

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Barry Murrell ZS2EZ
 

Sorry only catching up with this thread now – have been laid up with a nasty bout of ‘flu!!! (Plus a week of Rolling Blackouts have kept the email PC switched off!!)

 

During a recent exchange with LoTW Support over some problems with TU5PCT uploads (one of which was on 60m) I was quite shocked at their response and comments regarding 60m – it appears that the ARRL are TOTALLY oblivious to developments worldwide on this band!!! 

 

These are their comments:

There are no awards or any plans to add awards to 60m for a variety of reasons.

  • The Amateur Radio Service is a secondary user on this band.  TRUE
  • Most 60m allocations were permitted to fill the void between 7 and 3.5 MHz to provide communications during emergencies and to enable government agencies communicate directly with operators from the Amateur Radio Service.  This was demonstrated most recently during the response to Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico.    NOT REALLY APPLICABLE OUTSIDE THE AMERICAS
  • Many countries are still trying to get a 5 MHz allocation.  Competitive activity would only hurt their chances to be granted access to 60m.  MOST COUNTRIES HAVE 5MHZ ALLOCATION ALREADY
  • Allocation on 5 MHz is channelized.  COMPLETELY FALSE OUTSIDE THE USA – ZS FOR EXAMPLE HAS 5350-5450 CONTIGUOUS.
  • Some countries are only permitted domestic communications on this band. NOT THE CASE IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF ENTITIES

And finally, there are not even 100 countries with a 60m allocation so earning DXCC is impossible. ABSOLUTE RUBBISH – I PERSONALLY HAVE 107 CONFIRMED VIA LoTW (119 WORKED), MANY OPS HAVE UPWARD OF 150 CONFIRMED. OZ1ABE reports 233 WORKED.

 

Really, 60m is a great band – especially via FT8. The ARRL however seem to have their own agenda regarding this band, and choose to keep their heads buried firmly in the sand. This is quite sad, but it is their prerogative. Dave has stated several times that until the ARRL change their stance 60m will not be supported within the Award Tracking of DXKeeper – he has however provided the tools to follow our activity via scripts.

Incidentally there are 60m Awards available via https://60metersonline.com …. As this is a very rudimentary website, don’t ever expect Dave to support these awards!!  (NOTE : despite my interest in 60m, I WHOLLY appreciate and support Dave’s stance this band!!!)

 

So, if you are into DXing for fun (not for DXCC / WAS etc) 60m is great – but if Awards are your sole interest this band is not for you!

 

 

73 de BARRY MURRELL ZS2EZ

KF26ta - Port Elizabeth, South Africa

EPC#0558 DMC#1690  30MDG#4081

DXCC HONOR ROLL (332/340)

website : www.zs2ez.co.za

 

 

From: DXLab@groups.io <DXLab@groups.io> On Behalf Of dl8le
Sent: Sunday, 17 April 2022 21:06
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] Enhancement Request

 

Last comment marked with ** before closing this topic from my side:

Quite simply, the ARRL Board of Directors with input from legal counsel
and regulatory affairs department long ago decided that, given the
regulatory restrictions, 60m is not suitable for DXing (or any other
"competitive" activity.

** I strongly believe that this decision was made - long time ago, as you say - without considering or even knowing the rapid development of FTx. DXing, however, defined in Wikipedia (English version) as "DXing is the hobby of receiving and identifying distant radio or television signals, or making two-way radio contact with distant stations in amateur radio" is both possible and suitable. If not allowed I wonder how so many call signs from the US can be worked at night on 60 m in FT8. Are they all operating illegally? And: why is there a bandplan explicitly allowing digi-modes there? Hard for me to believe that all this is not following given rules and regulations. But I might be wrong. "not suitable" in the common sense that it is extremely difficult or even impossible to work DX-stations is not correct when looking at the number of stations active in FT8 on 60 m at night. During some antenna tests I have worked more than 50 DXCC's within two nights with low power (10 W, antenna was non resonant dipole about 30 m above ground)

Given the strict interpretation of the rules ... operation on the center
of the channel, one user at a time, etc., 60m is not suitable for DXing.
I consider the multi-user digital operation for US licensees to be
questionable at best under the current regulations and, like Gil, do
not find that band to be worth the effort.

** Based on my personal experience 60m is worth the effort, might be in FT8 only. Just give it a try. I was extremely surprised to find so many stations very active on 60 m. This might change with improving band conditions. If somebody doesn't like FTx, however, the way it could be seen would be different most probably.

Please understand that my comments are based on my personal knowledge as simple radio amateur, not as legal counsel and not knowing the detailed rules and regulations in the US. So if one of my statements is legally not ok I already apologize for it, but I did not want that as result of a side discussion starting at RTTY vs other Digi-Modes a nice band like 60 m became rated so poorly. If Dave would not like to accept the enhancement request to implement user defined columns or even lines for some other reasons it would be ok for me, discussion will be stopped from my side anyway.

73

Juergen, DL8LE