[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [IRCA] Identifying a Station by Parallel Programming
I have had the same sort of situation from time to time with Cubans. The major difference there is that not having any completely credible info from that country and with multiple sources all differing, in at least two cases they've been logged as unid Cuban # 1 and unid Cuban # 2 both carrying the same network programming - once with R. Reloj; the other with R. Rebelde.
Thus I have no problem with # 4 either.
Russ Edmunds
Blue Bell, PA ( 360' ASL )
[15 mi NNW of Philadelphia]
40:08:45N; 75:16:04W, Grid FN20id
<wb2bjh@xxxxxxxxx>
FM: Yamaha T-80 & Onkyo T-450RDS w/ APS9B @15'
AM: Modified Sony ICF 2010 barefoot
--- On Fri, 2/20/09, WALTER SALMANIW <salmaniw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: WALTER SALMANIW <salmaniw@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [IRCA] Identifying a Station by Parallel Programming
> To: "Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America" <irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Friday, February 20, 2009, 12:26 AM
> Hi, John. Reporting in from San Diego tonight. Your
> examples are excellent. Personally, I have no problem with
> "presumed" loggings. For example, if I hear a
> specific language on a TA station, I then look up the
> possibilities on the EMWG and deduce from it what the
> station "has to be". I may be 99.5 or 100%
> certain of the ID. Many stations never give any sort of
> ID, but based on the content one can easily deduce who they
> are. Another method one can argue is using the exact
> frequency now available using programs like Spectravue and
> SDRs like Perseus to give us a pretty exact frequency.
> Many stations are bang on some slightly off frequency, and
> these lists now exist (see MW offsets list). One can
> "see" the carrier and be quite certain of the
> station. A classic example of this is the Australian
> X-band station, Radio Brisvaani always on the high side of
> 1701 kHz. Yet another ID method is with the various CBC
> low power retransmitters. Overnight one hears their WRN
> programming. Based on which program is being heard, you
> can narrow it down to which time zone is being heard, and
> from there hopefully to one or more stations. Just a few
> ideas! .....Walt Salmaniw.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John H. Bryant"
> <bjohnorcas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thursday, February 19, 2009 7:10 pm
> Subject: [IRCA] Identifying a Station by Parallel
> Programming
> To: "irca-hard-core-dx.com"
> <irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> "ultralightdx-yahoogroups.com"
> <ultralightdx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> > For each of our own hobbies, each of us judges just
> what level
> > of
> > identification we must hear before we accept that we
> have Heard
> > a
> > station. However, when we start comparing catches or
> having
> > awards
> > programs or lists of distance records, etc, it becomes
> necessary
> > to
> > follow loosely understood common definitions of what
> is minimum
> > identification of a station.
> >
> > To a degree, these definitions vary from one nation to
> another
> > (some
> > of the Scandinavians are VERY strict) and there are
> differences,
> > too,
> > between common practice in Domestic vs. International
> DXing.
> >
> > We've run into a situation concerning
> "identification by
> > parallels" with the awards where we would
> appreciate some
> > discussion.
> > Using Japanese examples:
> >
> > EXAMPLE A: 873//774 kHz, NHK2
> > We find it very acceptable, generally, to declare that
> we have
> > heard
> > 873-JOGB, NHK's Program 2 outlet in Kumamoto, when
> we hear the
> > same
> > Japanese programming on 873 that we do on 774, the
> Program 2
> > outlet
> > in Akita. No problem, all known references including
> NHK
> > itself
> > declare that there is only one Japanese station on 873
> and it is
> > in
> > Kumamoto, always running NHK2.
> >
> > EXAMPLE B: 1152//774 kHz, NHK2
> > When we find a situation where there are more than one
> NHK2
> > stations
> > on a channel (1152 has two small stations) we simply
> log "1152-
> > NHK2
> > Synchros, Japan." No problem there, either and,
> for our awards
> > and
> > records in Ultralighting, we count that as "one
> station
> > heard." If
> > we want to log the stations individually, we can try
> for a local
> > ID
> > at 1319UTC and then know that we have heard one or
> even both
> > stations.... so it is possible for the diligent and
> lucky DXer
> > to
> > eventually count two stations there.
> >
> > EXAMPLE C: Shangdong News Synchros - 918 kHz.
> > We have a situation on the Shandong Peninsula on the
> north China
> > coast where there are at least three, maybe four or
> five
> > synchronous
> > transmitters in use on one channel... and they are not
> well
> > synchronized, so when conditions are decent, we can
> hear classic
> > "synchro echos." It is a hoot-hoot-hoot!
> Since those
> > transmitters
> > apparently never carry either local IDs or local
> programming, we
> > will
> > always be referring to them only as synchros and
> counting them
> > altogether as "one station heard" for
> awards, etc. No problem
> > there,
> > as far as I can see.
> >
> > EXAMPLE D: 900-XEW//XEWB
> > Right now, when conditions are good, we can hear W
> Radio from
> > BOTH
> > stations simultaneously, with the stronger sound first
> and the
> > classic synchro echo considerably weaker, but clearly
> there
> > following. Every reference known on the planet shows
> XEW and
> > XEWB
> > simulcasting and that there are no other W Radio Grupo
> stations
> > on
> > 900. Can we log both stations as heard, as long as we
> have
> > unmistakably heard the echo??? If not, how is this
> > situation any
> > different from Example A???
> >
> > Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated!
> >
> >
> >
> > John B.
> > Stillwater, OK, USA
> > Rcvrs: Hotrodded NRD-535, Slider e100's
> > Antennas: Wellbrook Phased Array
> > _______________________________________________
> > IRCA mailing list
> > IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
> >
> > Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list
> are those of
> > the original contributors and do not necessarily
> reflect the
> > opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or
> officers
> >
> > For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
> >
> > To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> IRCA mailing list
> IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
>
> Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are
> those of the original contributors and do not necessarily
> reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing
> staff, or officers
>
> For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
>
> To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx