ad: chuckmartin

FT8 RRR versus RR73 in a dispute with 3DA0AO

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by M0OXD, Sep 30, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
ad: L-Geochron
ad: L-MFJ
ad: HRDLLC-2
ad: abrind-2
  1. KA2IRQ

    KA2IRQ Ham Member QRZ Page

    I agree... well, ANY contact who's goal is a confirmation (like one with a DXpedition)... the mode doesn't really matter. The question is at what point is this back and forth considered a valid "contact." What information actually has to be exchanged?

    If you ask the DX folks, a lot will say "just the callsign." All the other required information is obvious (date, time, band, mode and the default 59 report) and does not need to be communicated over the air. A lot of FT8 folks will tell you that you need signal reports and grid square.

    But if you get into the contest world, often there is an official "exchange" for the contest- without all of that, it isn't a valid contact.

    The hallmark of communicators is, to me, more than just a callsign... you need to be able to demonstrate that you can actually communicate... grid square, signal report.... something!

    But hams will argue the point until they run out of electrons.
     
    M0OXD and ND6M like this.
  2. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    We make the computers fight so that humans can get along. :)
     
    M0OXD, F8WBD, W7UUU and 1 other person like this.
  3. KA2IRQ

    KA2IRQ Ham Member QRZ Page

    I think that's how Terminator got so pissed off.
     
    M0OXD likes this.
  4. KP4SX

    KP4SX Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Seems we have a growing bunch of different standards here. I think some contest DOES require Grid Square. And as Matt stated some 'write around' or change the parameters if not setting their own rules entirely. I might be beating the drum unnecessarily trying to get that final 73 out of Matt when in fact he has already logged me. Post #42 shows a logging sample that appears to be a JT65 contact? using it to validate what an ideal FT8 contact should be.
    The 3DA operation is bot operated at least part of the time. The 'bot' was on 40 Auto-CQing and not answering anybody the other night. And that indicates the op may use rules that others don't necessarily understand.
     
    M0OXD likes this.
  5. W4IOA

    W4IOA Ham Member QRZ Page

    I end my ft8 contact 73 de Memphis

    Confirm me or not, it's not a big deal. Someone else will.
    What surprises me more is the SWL notices I get from around the world. How bored does one have to be to listen to ft8?
     
    KC2IEB likes this.
  6. KP4SX

    KP4SX Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Award chasers.
     
  7. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    A couple of years ago, I set up some cheap SDRs to listen to FT8 for weeks at a time per band. I'd check in on them once per day or so, to see what the DX maps looked like.

    It's a great way to test one's receive antennas. :) It's also helpful to learn how propagation timing works on each band.

    That said, I would have to be very wealthy to afford sending QSLs to all the stations I heard. :eek:
     
    W4IOA and W2VW like this.
  8. VA3VF

    VA3VF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Exactly. The goal is to be in the other station's log. The callsign is the only required 'exchange' that matters.

    Oh yes...N1MM+ is telling me to 'parrot' 59 04 or 59 ON. That proves we had a valid contact.

    Amateur radio and hypocrisy: a partnership made in ether.:D
     
    M0OXD likes this.
  9. VA3VF

    VA3VF Ham Member QRZ Page

    This may explain the apparent unwillingness to check the ALL.TXT file to confirm the OP's contact. That file must be huge, if not deleted outright.
     
  10. VA3VF

    VA3VF Ham Member QRZ Page

    They don't. They are just 'processing' a text file and sending for a QSL perhaps.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page