Posts by CT1EAT

    I think so. I used the standard ADIF fields, but as long as it is clear the QSO was made via Satellite and what satellite was, anything goes (eg "Via QO-100 Sat"). On QO-100 particular case there is only one Sat mode, so the information is not absolutly required, although it's nice to have. I mentioned it because my post want intended to be generic (for any sat, particularly those with several SAT modes).

    i'm angry about OM's who have the note "Live is too short for paper cards" with a tombstone on their QRZ-site

    Yes, I agree with you. I also respect other opinions and their particular reasons. But sending a paper QSL to confirm a QSO is part of the amateur spirit and refusing to do so it does not seem right... but this is my personal view (you can call me old fashion, hi).

    73 FCosta, CT1EAT/M0HOJ

    Dear All

    For those (like me) who still believe the paper "QSL is the finally cortesy of the QSO" (without prejudice of other ways of confirmation), please make sure when you confirm a QSO via Satellite to include the following information:

    Propagation Mode: Satellite

    Satellite name: (eg QO-100)

    Grid Locator: (eg JO02bf)


    Sat mode: (eg XS)

    Without those informations the QSL will not be able to fulfill it's full mission (eg be used to claim awards) because it lacks the relevant information.

    Thank you for your cooperation.

    Season Greetings

    73 FCosta, CT1EAT/M0HOJ


    Today marks 6 months since we lunched our web site. To celebrate the date we decided to do a live meeting with our members. You are welcome to join us next Wednesday (10 Nov 2021) at 20z. Just follow this link.

    Please identify yourself with Member number, Name and Callsign, as the following exemple"#3 Hugo CT7AOV". If you don't do so, you will not be allowed into the meeting!

    73 QO-100 Dx Club team

    Thank you for reply.

    So u iam using the dx patrol ground station, it does not show the exact tx freq with offset. So can I just log all qso as 2.4ghz ?

    Yes, or 13cm only, if you prefer. Again, it will depend on the log you are using. In my case I use DX4WIN. See an example below.

    73 FCosta, CT1EAT/M0HOJ


    You should log the Uplink frequency/band.

    If your log allows, you can log also the Downlink frequency/band and/or the Sat mode (eg SX, for QO-100).

    In any case, your should always log the Sat name (and export/print it on the QSL Card).

    I hope this helps.

    73 FCosta, CT1EAT/M0HOJ


    For some unknow reason to me, I only paid attention to this post last nigh. I downloaded the software but it was too late to figure out "what does what". Today morning I was fresh to give it a try. And, in less than an hour, I had sent my very first email via QO-100!!!

    This is bloody brilliant!!! My congratulations to all who devised this system, specially to Roberto who made it available via the satellite.

    Since the 90s, when I sent my first msg via Pacsats (using Wisp), I didn't felt this thrill.

    73 FCosta, M0HOJ (also CT1EAT)

    The QO-100 Dx Club is a new project aimed for those who like to Dx via QO-100 satellite. The goal is to promote informed and responsible Dxing on the NB transponder. There are News, Ranking Tables, Awards and much more.

    Member #1 was assigned posthumously to Pedro CT1DBS, SK almost an year ago.

    Come check it and join us at

    73 de CT1EAT and CT7AOV

    Dear All

    I few minutes ago I heard the unbelivable pileup of ZP/PY5ZUE/P. Despite Conrad's best intentions, if he is not prepared to handle a pileup, his efforts are worthless. Specially when you have less then 1 deg of elevation. This event reminded me of a text written nearly 20 years ago but (unfortunately) still actual:

    The Price to Run and Work a Pileup

    from Jose Nunes, CT1BOH on May 9, 2000

    View comments about this article!

    There is a price to be paid when a DX operator runs a pileup. That price is QRM and is totally dependent on the DX pileup operator skill. The better the skills of the pileup DX operator the cheaper will be the price he has to pay for his show. At the same time the better the skills of the DX pileup operator the better the pileup will behave because everybody will try to mimic him in admiration of his skills

    There is a price to be paid when a DXer tries to break through a pileup. That price is TIME and is totally dependent on two factors. The first one is the skills of the Dxer. The second one is the skills of the DX pileup operator.

    The rarity of the DX entity has nothing to do with the difficulty to run a pileup. It only serves as an excuse to the not so skilled operators who cannot match the difficulty.

    The area of the world to be worked has nothing to do with the difficulty to run a pileup. It only serves as an excuse the not so skilled operators who cannot match the difficulty.

    The power level and antenna gain has little to do to the difficulty of breaking a pile when compared to the skills of the DXer. It only serves as an excuse to the not so skilled DXer.

    A European pile up is the ultimate measure to a pileup operator skill.

    A skilled operator is able to work everybody everywhere. 10/10 of the Dxers will either be listening in admiration or trying to break through. Rates of 200 plus on CW and 300 plus on SSB will be achieved.

    A not so skilled operator will work by numbers. 9/10 of the Dxers will be potential QRMers while 1/10 of the others will try to listen trough the mess created on the DX transmitting frequency, by the lack of skills of the pileup operator to match the difficulty of the pileup.

    The not so skilled pileup operators DESERVE all the QRM they generate and get. It should be seen as an incentive to improve.

    Unfortunately some of the operators of the big DX Pedition are chosen because of the amount of time and money they have. There is nothing wrong with this though. It only increases the price a DXer has to pay to work him.


    Jose Nunes


    PS. It is better to have a not so skilled operator running a pileup than no operator at all.


    So, if Conrad returns, please ask him to WORK SPLIT (just like DP0POL/MM and many others did).

    Thank you.

    See you on QO-100

    73 FCosta, CT1EAT/M0HOJ

    I like contesting a lot. Having said this:

    No antenna to rotate, no propagation to observe, predictable footprint of the signal. Whats the point? It's a repeater, just not fm and not on the ground. Contest is useless there. Maybe that's why it is called "challenge".

    I also like contesting. During ARRL DX I never rotate my antenna and HF propagation is very predicatable. The point (for me) is to make short contacts, with stations you normally wouldn't do QSO. But all of that is a matter of personal preference and I will not discuss it.

    The important question is are contests (*) allowed or not?

    73 FCosta CT1EAT/M0HOJ

    (*) The fact someone call it challenge (or something else) is irrelevant. If there are rules, time limit and scoring, it's a contest.

    Dear All

    Are contests ok on QO-100?

    The reason for my question is I was under the impression contests (*) were not permited on amateur radio satellites.

    Yes, I understand QO-100 is different from previous amateur radio satellites, but it's still an OSCAR.

    Anyway, this is a genuine question. I just want to be sure before joining the ongoing "challenge".

    Thank you.

    73 FCosta, CT1EAT/M0HOJ

    (*) There was a contest on AO-13: a station transmitted a signal, progressively weaker, and the winner was the station who could decoded the lowest signal

    Dear All

    Today I heard a station on NB Transponder (despite his limited working conditions) with very poor operation practice:

    - rarely identifying itself

    - occasionally failing to acknowledge his correspondent correct call

    - often not giving his report

    - often not acknowledging his correspondent report
    - rarely giving is grid locator
    - working simplex (by numbers)

    Basically he often pick up a call and said "You are in the log"

    So I asked my self, is this a QSO?

    Looking at this document, clearly not. However that recommendation remits to the VHF Handbook. I spent most of my evening reading it but I couldn't say for sure if the Minimum Requirements of a Valid QSO (described under section 2.1) are applied to Satellite QSOs.
    My interpretation is yes, because despite the QSO is made via satellite, we are still using VHF/UHF/Microwave bands. But I wish there was a clear statement in that document saying what constitutes a valid Satellite QSO.

    So I urge the AMSAT organizations, if they haven't done it yet, to define it and spread the information to it's members.

    In the meantime, let's follow the VHF Handbook.

    See you on QO-100

    73 FCosta, CT1EAT/M0HOJ

    Dear All

    I am trying to compile a list of all the grids where DP0POL/MM operated from.

    Here is what I got so far (in chronological order).





























    Please let me know of any errors/omissions.

    Thank you.

    73 CT1EAT/M0HOJ


    ... may be, in Germany one speaks of greetings, but also many greetings (viele Grüße), so the "s" has its justification as an increase ...

    Same as Portuguese (Muitos Cumprimentos), but that still does not make "73s" correct.

    73 FCosta, CT1EAT/M0HOJ

    Hallo Flo

    Thank you for the correction. You are a good cop ;)

    73 F.Costa, CT1EAT/M0HOJ

    P.S. By the way, "73" is "plural", so you don't need the "s".

    FYI, I did the same mistake 30 years ago (after I became an amateur) and I was corrected by an american ham :)

    Dear All

    Everybody is aware of the amateur radio "policemen".

    They are on every band, on every mode and, of course, on QO-100.

    I don't want to discuss their reason to exist, but I want to say a few words about their activity.

    Today afternoon, one station was enjoying the first day of being active on this satellite. Unfortunately, the operator didn't not notice he was exceeding the typical SSB bw (3kHz).

    (Ok, we could argue that is not an excuse and all operators should operate according to the rules in all circumstances. Yes, fair enough. But we all know not all operators are young, bright, smart or tech savy. That is the reality and we can't ignore it.)

    As you can expect, It didn't took longer for a station to call the QO-100 newbie, not to welcome him, but to say he should reduce his bandwidth. He was not looking to make QSO, he didn't bother to gave his name, report or grid locator. No, he just asked to reduce the BW. He didn't asked if the newbie knew what he was talking about or offer any help/advice on how to fix the issue. No, he just asked to reduce the BW, again. (he did say his call, however. I aplaud that. Not all "policemen" identify themselfs)

    How do I know all of this? Because I heard that intereaction first, and then did QSO with the newbie station. He was clearly puzzled with the previous caller. So I explain him the problem and the usual ways to fix it.

    Having said that, I understand this is a cultural thing and I don't expect the "policemen" to be tolerant. But I would like them to be, at least, more helpful. Thank you in advance.

    See you on QO-100

    73 FCosta, CT1EAT/M0HOJ

    Hi Trevor

    Although this might have no relation with your Pluto, I will share my experience, just in case.

    After I did the GND mod to my Pluto, the computer no longer recognized it. Better said, the computer did recognize the USB device (for second or so), but then the disconnected, then connected again... I couldn't understand out what was going on.

    I searched the foruns, including this one, and I couldn't see anything similar. I decided to disconned the external antenna (Comet GP-3 V/UHF vertical) and, for my surprise it worked fine. I connected the external antenna again, just to be sure, and again the Pluto stop working! So I have no doubt, the antenna has caused the USB crashes!

    I have no explanation for this, but I am preety sure some clever guy will know what is going on.

    On another note, the suggested 1.8V_CLK point (to supply the new TCXO), close to C170, is dead on my unit. I used a point close to C150 instead and works fine.

    Good luck

    73 FCosta, CT1EAT/M0HOJ