Re: [IRCA] [NRC-AM] RIP DX Tests (was: Re: Rackley on Synchronous AM Boosters)

[Ira Elbert New III <ien3@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don't think I got one from them either.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 7, 2017, at 4:23 PM, Russ Edmunds <wb2bjh@xxxxxxx<mailto:wb2bjh@xxxxxxx>> wrote:


I also reported WBOB within 24 hours and never received a QSL. Anymore I only send for QSL's on DX Tests as the returns had gotten so poor.


Russ Edmunds

WB2BJH

Blue Bell, PA

Grid FN20id

________________________________
From: am-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:am-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> <am-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:am-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>> on behalf of Mark Connelly <markwa1ion@xxxxxxx<mailto:markwa1ion@xxxxxxx>>
Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2017 3:53:29 PM
To: les@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:les@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; mwdxer1@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:mwdxer1@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: am@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:am@xxxxxxxxxxx>; irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [NRC-AM] RIP DX Tests (was: Re: Rackley on Synchronous AM Boosters)

On the subject of DX tests, has anyone received a verification via any means from the WBOB 600 Jacksonville, FL test that ran about a year ago now?

I reported within 24 hours of the test with obvious identification material in the mp3 file and still have not received anything in mail or email.

Mark Connelly, WA1ION
South Yarmouth, MA

-----Original Message-----
From: Les Rayburn <les@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:les@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
To: Patrick Martin <mwdxer1@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:mwdxer1@xxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: National Radio Club NRC am@nrcdxas_org <am@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:am@xxxxxxxxxxx>>; IRCA Radio List - irca@hard-core-dx_com <irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Sent: Sat, Jan 7, 2017 3:36 pm
Subject: Re: [NRC-AM] RIP DX Tests (was: Re: Rackley on Synchronous AM Boosters)

One approach that has been successful in the past is to have the CPC offer to handle all verification and QSL duties on behalf of the station. This proved to be very successful in obtaining DX Tests simply because it removed the burden from the station. We further would take the lead on producing test materials (CW Morse Code ID’s, sweep tones, phonetic voice identifications, etc.) and providing that as an MP3 file, or on a CD. At the end of the test, the CPC would verify reception reports and send out QSL’s. The station personnel received a detailed report showing all receptions (often plotted on a map using Google Earth) The CPC Chairman is often more familiar with DXing, and better able to judge any questionable reception. This approach allowed us to obtain DX Tests for a number of smaller stations, with limited resources. Another tactic we employed as to produce :60 long “Test Material” that could be run by a station during the overnight hours at the TOH as their ID. No change in transmitter power, pattern, etc…just distinctive test material that could cut through clutter. All that was required was for the station to insert the material into their inventory. These often ran for weeks at a time during the overnight hours. These too resulted in a lot of “new ones” going into the logs. I’m sure there are other innovative approaches that could be successful as well. The key is to acknowledge that times change. We have to change our tactics as hobbyists if we want to remain successful. 73, Les Rayburn, N1LF 121 Mayfair Park Maylene, AL EM63nf Member WTFDA, IRCA, NRC. Former CPC Chairman for NRC & IRCA. Elad FDM-S2 SDR, AirSpy SDR, Quantum Phaser, Wellbrook ALA1530 Loop, Wellbrook Flag, Clifton Labs Active Whip. > On Jan 7, 2017, at 2:21 PM, Patrick Martin <mwdxer1@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:mwdxer1@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > Rick, > > Anytime people could always cheat. There were reports from back in the > 50s with faux reports. I like sending a cassette, reel to reel tape, > or now CD of what I heard so the CE could tell the reception quality > as well as it being accurate. But to give up totally on DX Tests > because of of a faux report or two, it ruins it for the rest of us. I > love catching the rare stations that could never be heard without a > test. One issue we are having is the reluctance of station personnel > to reply to any reports now. Even e mail replies are hard to obtain. > Even though I get fewer QSLs these days, I still go after them. But DX > Tests should still be viable in our hobby. We do not get many these > days as stations do not sign off like they did. I still look forward > to them when we get them. > > Patrick > > On 1/6/17, Rick Dau <drummer1965us@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:drummer1965us@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: >> Sorry, DXers of the world, but it's high time that DX tests be done away >> with.... >> >> >> >> Back in the day, some unscrupulous participants in the hobby made it a >> practice of waiting about 2-3 weeks after tests were conducted, looking >> through the pages of DX News, DX Monitor, and other print publications, >> jotting down the details of what OTHERS were hearing, then sending their own >> faux reports based from those details off to the testing stations. Very >> often, engineers would happily mail back QSLs to the offenders, totally >> unaware of what was going on. Fortunately, a select few DID get wise to the >> shenanigans being perpetrated and then began conducting tests with the >> caveat that reports had to be mailed within a scant few days (say, within a >> week or so) after the test, or they would simply not reply to the report. >> This was, in effect, to curtail the cheating. >> >> >> >> But with the progress of technology comes a downside. Through reflectors >> such as these, along with message boards, DX chatrooms (WHEN they work), and >> other means of instant communication, the cheaters are once again seeing the >> information that others are posting without making their OWN efforts to hear >> the stations. DX tests were fun while they lasted, but, IMHO, they need to >> be put down. >> >> >> >> 73, >> >> Rick Dau >> >> South Omaha, Nebraska >> >> ________________________________ >> From: ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> on behalf of >> wghauser@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:wghauser@xxxxxxxxx> [ABDX] <ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 5:48 PM >> To: ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ABDX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Subject: [ABDX] Re: Rackley on Synchronous AM Boosters >> >> >> >> To answer Todd`s question about anyone hearing KKOB Santa Fe, recently >> in my reports and DXLD: >> >> Also, I have repeatedly called for a DX test to be arranged on Santa Fe >> only, turning off the main Albuquerque transmitter, however briefly (without >> of course, trying to set it up, myself; maybe I would if I still lived in >> ABQ) And now there is no CPC chairman. Glenn >> >> __._,_.___ >> ________________________________ >> Posted by: wghauser@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:wghauser@xxxxxxxxx> >> __,_._,___ >> > _______________________________________________ > The 37th edition of the AM Radio Log is now shipping! > Info: http://www.nrcdxas.org > _______________________________________________ The 37th edition of the AM Radio Log is now shipping! Info: http://www.nrcdxas.org
_______________________________________________
The 37th edition of the AM Radio Log is now shipping!
Info: http://www.nrcdxas.org

_______________________________________________
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