Re: Is CW a Language? OT
Locked
12
12
 
|
"Mike Morrow" <[hidden email]> wrote
> > It is unfortunate that contest and DX rules in general don't mandate > complete call sign exchanges by both stations, each containing both station > call signs along with the proper prosigns. That would certainly be more Since the FCC has few monitors who can copy CW any more, they are pretty unconcerned how we ID. Thus our procedures change to meet our own needs. Is someone giving away Maserati's? I'll show upand shout my name too; why else would I be in the pileup? Properly, this requires a "DE" before the call, but I only need one of those after ten minutes -- and what the eye (ear) don't see (hear) the heart (Engineer) won't grieve (miss). FWIW, while the FCC may have given up on CW, the *FBI* had openings for CW ops two or three years ago. Cortland KA5S _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Mike Morrow-3
On Feb 8, 2006, at 9:07 AM, Mike Morrow wrote: > IMHO, this practice [dropping DE and K prosigns in contests] > reflects badly on the contester (on his Morse > "professionalism," if you will). Unfortunately, it also becomes > for many a > bad habit carried over into routine operation. We're only talking > about > taking a *small* additional fraction of a second to send a complete > and > proper exchange. My point is that the extra prosigns aren't necessary in this case. The contesters are already sending exchanges that conform to known patterns -- the overhead isn't needed. > In reality, most contest time and energy is utilized > sending unanswered calls over and over and over and over. But during the time that there are responders to those CQs, working the callers quickly and efficiently can make a huge difference in score. If several callers are there at the same time, they may not stick around if the operator isn't super-efficient. > It is unfortunate that contest and DX rules in general don't mandate > complete call sign exchanges by both stations, each containing both > station > call signs along with the proper prosigns. There are some contests which dictate the sending of both callsigns -- the NA Sprint is one. > That would certainly be more > appropriate than the totally perfunctory 599 report usually sent > with each > exchange. Not all contests use a 599 report. Many have much more interesting exchanges. NAQP, for example, uses the Name and State, Province or Country. Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Sandy W5TVW
On Feb 8, 2006, at 10:49 AM, Sandy W5TVW wrote: > | However, these days, operating zero-beat on a single frequency, the > | long call is just a waste of time. You call CQ DE W5TVW K. I'll > | answer AA4LR on the same frequency. Where's the confusion? > > Perhaps no confusion to you, the sending operator, but a > possible bit > of confusion to the operator who called CQ! I and many others have THOUSANDS of successful CW QSOs using these techniques. > Firstly, let's assume you have imperfect propagation conditions: > fading, static, > whatever. You might miss my call or get it confused if I sent it > just once. On 160m and sometimes 80m, perhaps I'll double the call to AA4LR AA4LR. If you only get part of it, you'll send the part you got: 4LR. I'll respond with my full call again: AA4LR AA4LR. The more times we repeat this, the more times I'll repeat my call. > Anything else might likely lead to asking > you to repeat your callsign, which takes up even more time? The point is, especially in a contest, the vast majority of the time, the first call works. And this protocol works well when there are multiple callers, too. > Just a one time sent callsign IS bad operating practice and > operating manners. Some of the very best operators I know are contesters, and they ALL do this. It can't possibly be a "bad practice". > Contest conditions are usually frantic, crowded and many times > plain RUDE. Well, that's true. > Such things as sections/states and unique member > numbers are exchanged. In the peak of the QRM/QSB I usually always > send State and my number TWICE. This is kinda a "QRP" mentality -- "I'm weak and in the noise, I better be redundant." That's not always so. Low power and QRP stations can have formidable and readable signals, given reasonable antennas and fair to good conditions. In some cases, such redundancy may be helpful, like on 160m. But, mostly, it just wastes time. > Otherwise, you > have to ask for a repeat which wastes more time. Fills can be done quickly and efficiently, too. > | The old "Novice Accent" advice was to do 3x3x3 - CQ CQ CQ DE W1ABC > | W1ABC W1ABC repeated three times. Again, that was with a lot of guys > | still rock-bound. These days, a single 3x3 with a few seconds of > | listening seems more appropriate. > | > I agree LOOOOOONG CQ calls or doing a 3 X 3 format three times > IS...repeat IS a waste of time and "overkill". Do the 3 X 3 and wait > 15-60 seconds and repeat the call. We do agree on this! > We still have a few people who > have "vintage" transmitters that are crystal controlled, but sadly > very few people who "tune around", even a couple of kHz. with > the RIT control. Or open up the filter bandwidth, at least. > Anyway, the sum of it is, nobody seems like they are teaching ANY > really good operating practices anymore. And we agree here, too. Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bill Coleman-2
AMEN! I can't agree more with Mike! Why get sloppy and why some guys trying
to run their keyers at 40 WPM? Why send your callsign just once on the initial call? Twice should be a matter of minimums, how does the sender know his signal is BOOMING in or in the clear? You just have to ask him to repeat, which RUINS the "speed" advantage, or wastes the time he's trying to save! E-S-P-E-C-I-A-L-L-Y during a QRP contest! Won't people EVER learn? Just how much time does sending a "DE" or a "K" take? 73, Sandy W5TVW ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Coleman" <[hidden email]> To: "Mike Morrow" <[hidden email]> Cc: <[hidden email]> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 8:34 PM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Is CW a Language? OT | | On Feb 8, 2006, at 9:07 AM, Mike Morrow wrote: | | > IMHO, this practice [dropping DE and K prosigns in contests] | > reflects badly on the contester (on his Morse | > "professionalism," if you will). Unfortunately, it also becomes | > for many a | > bad habit carried over into routine operation. We're only talking | > about | > taking a *small* additional fraction of a second to send a complete | > and | > proper exchange. | | My point is that the extra prosigns aren't necessary in this case. | The contesters are already sending exchanges that conform to known | patterns -- the overhead isn't needed. | | > In reality, most contest time and energy is utilized | > sending unanswered calls over and over and over and over. | | But during the time that there are responders to those CQs, working | the callers quickly and efficiently can make a huge difference in | score. If several callers are there at the same time, they may not | stick around if the operator isn't super-efficient. | | > It is unfortunate that contest and DX rules in general don't mandate | > complete call sign exchanges by both stations, each containing both | > station | > call signs along with the proper prosigns. | | There are some contests which dictate the sending of both callsigns | -- the NA Sprint is one. | | > That would certainly be more | > appropriate than the totally perfunctory 599 report usually sent | > with each | > exchange. | | Not all contests use a 599 report. Many have much more interesting | exchanges. NAQP, for example, uses the Name and State, Province or | Country. | | Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] | Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" | -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 | | _______________________________________________ | Elecraft mailing list | Post to: [hidden email] | You must be a subscriber to post to the list. | Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): | http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft | | Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm | Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com | | | | -- | No virus found in this incoming message. | Checked by AVG Free Edition. | Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.1/309 - Release Date: 4/11/2006 | | _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bill Coleman-2
We've been thru this before gentlemen.
In a VERY busy contest, there ain't no such thing as "a single frequency" There is signals every 20-50 Hz! The BIG 160 meter contests are examples of this. If you are a "DXer", how many times have you succeeded with only a 'single' call in a big pileup? You may have to send your call a bunch of times,and/or be running a bunch of power. If someone calls me just a single time and I send "QRZ", I expect the other chap to have enough sense to send his call at least 2-3 times. Usually because static is the culprit or two or more callers QRMing each other. Either way you gotta repeat the call. In a contest, the highly abbreviated procedures are commonplace, but I still say it is lazyness or stupidity to apply the same logic to an answer to an everyday CQ call. Whoever isn't familiar with the "protocol", it would behoove him to certainly learn it. What's the problem with that? It's just simple manners, like for example; Like learning not to pass gas loudly in church or on a crowded bus. (to cite a rather crude, but typical situation) If ARRL no longer teaches good operating skills, find out from an old timer, what they are. Sorry for the tirade, but I feel very strongly about this and think it a VERY large mistake that ARRL saw fit to take this section out of the "Handbook". Maybe its because there are more "LIDS" than "A1" operators in Newington now? 73, Sandy W5TVW ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Coleman" <[hidden email]> To: "Sandy W5TVW" <[hidden email]> Cc: <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 8:56 PM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Is CW a Language? OT | | On Feb 8, 2006, at 10:49 AM, Sandy W5TVW wrote: | | > | However, these days, operating zero-beat on a single frequency, the | > | long call is just a waste of time. You call CQ DE W5TVW K. I'll | > | answer AA4LR on the same frequency. Where's the confusion? | > | > Perhaps no confusion to you, the sending operator, but a | > possible bit | > of confusion to the operator who called CQ! | | I and many others have THOUSANDS of successful CW QSOs using these | techniques. | | > Firstly, let's assume you have imperfect propagation conditions: | > fading, static, | > whatever. You might miss my call or get it confused if I sent it | > just once. | | On 160m and sometimes 80m, perhaps I'll double the call to AA4LR AA4LR. | | If you only get part of it, you'll send the part you got: 4LR. I'll | respond with my full call again: AA4LR AA4LR. The more times we | repeat this, the more times I'll repeat my call. | | > Anything else might likely lead to asking | > you to repeat your callsign, which takes up even more time? | | The point is, especially in a contest, the vast majority of the time, | the first call works. And this protocol works well when there are | multiple callers, too. | | > Just a one time sent callsign IS bad operating practice and | > operating manners. | | Some of the very best operators I know are contesters, and they ALL | do this. It can't possibly be a "bad practice". | | > Contest conditions are usually frantic, crowded and many times | > plain RUDE. | | Well, that's true. | | > Such things as sections/states and unique member | > numbers are exchanged. In the peak of the QRM/QSB I usually always | > send State and my number TWICE. | | This is kinda a "QRP" mentality -- "I'm weak and in the noise, I | better be redundant." That's not always so. Low power and QRP | stations can have formidable and readable signals, given reasonable | antennas and fair to good conditions. | | In some cases, such redundancy may be helpful, like on 160m. But, | mostly, it just wastes time. | | > Otherwise, you | > have to ask for a repeat which wastes more time. | | Fills can be done quickly and efficiently, too. | | > | The old "Novice Accent" advice was to do 3x3x3 - CQ CQ CQ DE W1ABC | > | W1ABC W1ABC repeated three times. Again, that was with a lot of guys | > | still rock-bound. These days, a single 3x3 with a few seconds of | > | listening seems more appropriate. | > | | > I agree LOOOOOONG CQ calls or doing a 3 X 3 format three times | > IS...repeat IS a waste of time and "overkill". Do the 3 X 3 and wait | > 15-60 seconds and repeat the call. | | We do agree on this! | | > We still have a few people who | > have "vintage" transmitters that are crystal controlled, but sadly | > very few people who "tune around", even a couple of kHz. with | > the RIT control. | | Or open up the filter bandwidth, at least. | | > Anyway, the sum of it is, nobody seems like they are teaching ANY | > really good operating practices anymore. | | And we agree here, too. | | | Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] | Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" | -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 | | | | -- | No virus found in this incoming message. | Checked by AVG Free Edition. | Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.1/309 - Release Date: 4/11/2006 | | _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Re: Is CW a Language? OT
|
|
In reply to this post by Mike Morrow-3
As a new CW operator trying to figure it out, I am quite sad that the
various ARRL Handbooks don't cover CW operating practices in detail. I made this offer last time the topic came up, and will make it again: if an experienced operator would be willing to work with me, I'd love to write up a "current" version of "Your Novice Accent" - maybe it's "Your 5WPM Accent" now? The idea would be to cover much the same topics as Your Novice Accent, with modern updates, as well as covering common contest protocol. Please contact me off-list if you're interested. 73 de chris K6DBG _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, Chris Kantarjiev wrote:
> As a new CW operator trying to figure it out, I am quite sad that the > various ARRL Handbooks don't cover CW operating practices in detail. > I made this offer last time the topic came up, and will make it again: > if an experienced operator would be willing to work with me, I'd love > to write up a "current" version of "Your Novice Accent" - maybe > it's "Your 5WPM Accent" now? > > The idea would be to cover much the same topics as Your Novice Accent, > with modern updates, as well as covering common contest protocol. Since the original publication is on the web in many places....perhaps an addendum, rather than a re-write might work.... If you go that route, I'd be happy to give it some web exposure at as an addendum or link to the original article at www.zerobeat.net/novice_accent.html 73,Thom-k3hrn www.zerobeat.net Home of QRP Web Ring, Drakelist home page,Drake Web Ring, QRP IRC channel, Drake IRC Channel, Elecraft Owners Database www.tlchost.net/hosting/ *** Web Hosting as low as 3.49/month _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Mike Morrow-3
In a message dated 4/18/06 9:58:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [hidden email]
writes: > On Feb 8, 2006, at 10:49 AM, Sandy W5TVW wrote: > > > | However, these days, operating zero-beat on a single frequency, the > > | long call is just a waste of time. You call CQ DE W5TVW K. I'll > > | answer AA4LR on the same frequency. Where's the confusion? > > > > Perhaps no confusion to you, the sending operator, but a > > possible bit > > of confusion to the operator who called CQ! > > I and many others have THOUSANDS of successful CW QSOs using these > techniques. Me too - running both QRP and 100 W > > > Firstly, let's assume you have imperfect propagation conditions: > > fading, static, > > whatever. You might miss my call or get it confused if I sent it > > just once. > > On 160m and sometimes 80m, perhaps I'll double the call to AA4LR AA4LR. > > If you only get part of it, you'll send the part you got: 4LR. I'll > respond with my full call again: AA4LR AA4LR. The more times we > repeat this, the more times I'll repeat my call. > > > Anything else might likely lead to asking > > you to repeat your callsign, which takes up even more time? > > The point is, especially in a contest, the vast majority of the time, > the first call works. And this protocol works well when there are > multiple callers, too. > Yep. > > Just a one time sent callsign IS bad operating practice and > > operating manners. I disagree - and agree! See below. > > Some of the very best operators I know are contesters, and they ALL > do this. It can't possibly be a "bad practice". > I think it really comes down to "situational awareness" - matching the operating practices to the conditions. Under contest conditions where the station holding the frequency is doing a run and the conditions are good, the single-call works wonders. At other times, long calls are what's needed. It all depends on the situation. The skilled operator matches the technique to the situation, rather than insisting on one size fits all. In CW traffic handling, 35 years ago, I was taught to use an even briefer procedure during QNI. > > Contest conditions are usually frantic, crowded and many times > > plain RUDE. > > Well, that's true. > Maybe I'm missing something, because I really only do two contests seriously (FD and SS), but I find 99.9% of contest ops to be very disciplined and courteous. When VY1JA called for "QRP ONLY" in the CW SS.... > > Such things as sections/states and unique member > > numbers are exchanged. In the peak of the QRM/QSB I usually always > > send State and my number TWICE. > > This is kinda a "QRP" mentality -- "I'm weak and in the noise, I > better be redundant." That's not always so. Low power and QRP > stations can have formidable and readable signals, given reasonable > antennas and fair to good conditions. > > In some cases, such redundancy may be helpful, like on 160m. But, > mostly, it just wastes time. > Again - it all depends on the situation. 73 de Jim, N2EY _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
Operating Practices (WAS: Is CW a Language? OT)
|
|
In reply to this post by Thom LaCosta
Different practices apply to different situations.
Contributors to the thread have discussed how some contests have a procedure all their own that often do not apply to any other operating situation. Casual nets like the one ECN net that Kevin manages are quite different, general QSO's are quite different again and traffic nets line NREN require a whole different protocol. We've added another issue over the years; single frequency operation. Some people assume that anyone who calls them will do so on their frequency. After all, everyone has a VFO, right? Not right. There are still a lot of crystal-controlled stations out there who can't zero beat (or in SSB terms 'net') your frequency. I always tune around after calling CQ. If I find a rockbound station, I'll usually tell him/her that I'm going to QSY to their frequency and do so to avoid using up two frequencies. Being able to adapt to different operating protocols depending upon the situation is one sign of an experienced Ham operator. Ron AC7AC _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Thom LaCosta
"Your Novice Accent" was originally printed, in QST, in the mid 1950's. New
Novices were frequently sent reprints, by the league, shortly after they received their Novice license. It was reprinted in the 1990's. Some of the information found therein is a little dated, due to changes in technology. One still couldn't go very far wrong if he or she followed it today. Contests are a different ballgame. 73, Steve Brandt N7VS > On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, Chris Kantarjiev wrote: > > > As a new CW operator trying to figure it out, I am quite sad that the > > various ARRL Handbooks don't cover CW operating practices in detail. > > I made this offer last time the topic came up, and will make it again: > > if an experienced operator would be willing to work with me, I'd love > > to write up a "current" version of "Your Novice Accent" - maybe > > it's "Your 5WPM Accent" now? > > > > The idea would be to cover much the same topics as Your Novice Accent, > > with modern updates, as well as covering common contest protocol. > > Since the original publication is on the web in many places....perhaps an > addendum, rather than a re-write might work.... > > If you go that route, I'd be happy to give it some web exposure at > as an addendum or link to the original article at > www.zerobeat.net/novice_accent.html > > 73,Thom-k3hrn > www.zerobeat.net Home of QRP Web Ring, Drakelist home page,Drake Web Ring, > QRP IRC channel, Drake IRC Channel, Elecraft Owners Database > www.tlchost.net/hosting/ *** Web Hosting as low as 3.49/month > _______________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: [hidden email] > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com > _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Sandy W5TVW
On Apr 18, 2006, at 10:33 PM, Sandy W5TVW wrote: > Why get sloppy and why some guys trying > to run their keyers at 40 WPM? I never send that fast, because I can't copy that fast. But, I have been known to run CW as high as 32 wpm. I do know guys that can go a LOT faster. > Why send your callsign just once > on the initial call? Twice should be a matter of minimums, > how does the sender know his signal is BOOMING in or in the clear? If you get through, he's going to send your callsign back. If he gets it wrong, then you can send it again until he gets it right. By and large, though, he'll get it right the first time. > You just have to ask him to repeat, which RUINS the "speed" > advantage, or wastes the time he's trying to save! With contesting judging done by computers these days, it is much better to get things right than to do them quickly. > E-S-P-E-C-I-A-L-L-Y during a QRP contest! Won't people > EVER learn? Not everyone runs QRP in contests. And not every QRP signal is down in the noise. > Just how much time does sending a "DE" or a "K" take? Not much, but NOT sending them takes less time.... Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Sandy W5TVW
On Apr 18, 2006, at 10:51 PM, Sandy W5TVW wrote: > If you are a "DXer", how many times have you succeeded > with only a 'single' call in a big pileup? You may have to send > your call > a bunch of times,and/or be running a bunch of power. I NEVER do this. I send my call once and then listen. I may only listen for a second or so, but I do listen. Then I'll send my call again and listen. In a hugh pileup, I might send my call 2-3 times, but for most "normal" pileups its only once. The real LIDS are the guys who send their calls 3-4 times in a row, or continue to call and call and call and call, even when the DX has long since come back to someone else. Really poor operating practice. However, contests, by and large, do not resemble DX pileup operation. Contest pileups share some characteristics with DX pileups, but they aren't the same. Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bill Coleman-2
Just how much time does sending a "DE" or a "K" take? Not much, but NOT sending them takes less time.... Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 Bill and others: I am very much a traditionalist on CW operating procedure. However, in contesting I find that a standard formatted call (such as AA4LR DE AA4AK AR, or even worse, AA4LR DE AA4AK/QRP AR is ineffective in attracting replies. Typically, the rate conscious big gun contesters hearing several calls at once instinctively answer the call that finishes first. To test this notion, I've tried various combinations of standard and abbreviated call formats in contests. When I send a single unadorned AA4AK and nothing else, the rate at which I receive replies in contest goes up dramatically. 73, Steve AA4AK _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
Why even send the call of the station you are calling, especially if it is a
contest? He knows his(her) call. And in contesting why send QRP, unless the contest requires it? It just slows things up. The person on the receiving end is going to pick out the loudest and shortest call first. Also there seems to be more than one definition of QRP. It would seem what one considers to be QRP is most important to the person who is running QRP. So therefore you don't need to send it. When you are on the side calling CQ you can't tell by signal strength if the station calling you is running full power, has big antennas, running mobile or QRP. The ionosphere is a big equalizer depending on the band, time of day, where the signals are coming from, etc. There is nothing wrong with being a traditionalist. It just may mean you don't get through the pileup as soon. And greater chance your call will be copied incorrectly. One thing that I can't figure out is when someone gives my call a few times when calling me and sends their call one time. I'm not sure what that is about. I do not consider myself a good CW op. I wish I were. But CW is my favorite mode. So when I operate off shore and several are calling at once I am just trying to get a few letters out of the mess if the signals aren't strong. Think how much more confusion is added when you are sending " AA4LR DE AA4AK/QRP AR" instead of "AA4AK". Steve, it seems you have discovered the best way to get the quickest response. 73, N2TK, Tony -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Stephen W. Kercel Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2006 7:05 PM To: Bill Coleman; Sandy W5TVW Cc: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Is CW a Language? OT Just how much time does sending a "DE" or a "K" take? Not much, but NOT sending them takes less time.... Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: [hidden email] Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 Bill and others: I am very much a traditionalist on CW operating procedure. However, in contesting I find that a standard formatted call (such as AA4LR DE AA4AK AR, or even worse, AA4LR DE AA4AK/QRP AR is ineffective in attracting replies. Typically, the rate conscious big gun contesters hearing several calls at once instinctively answer the call that finishes first. To test this notion, I've tried various combinations of standard and abbreviated call formats in contests. When I send a single unadorned AA4AK and nothing else, the rate at which I receive replies in contest goes up dramatically. 73, Steve AA4AK _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
N2TK, Tony wrote:
> Why even send the call of the station you are calling, especially > if it is a contest? He knows his(her) call. Months ago, I started the thread in the subject line, it got beat to death, and I'm surprised it got resurrected. I'm not surprised, however at how it has morphed. On the current and hopefully transient subject: A station who wants to win in a contest wants to make sure that A) he has your call right; B) that you have his right; C) you got his exchange right; and D) that you submit your log. He undoubtedly believes he can copy your exchange perfectly. He can't do anything about "D", and if you QSL his exchange, he has to assume you got it right, or at least think you did. The ideal and most efficient contest exchange is then: When you call him, he replies "<yourcall> <exchange> K" If he wants to be polite, he replies "<yourcall> TU <exchange> K". At this point, you reply "<hiscall> R <exchange> K" If you want to be polite, you reply <hiscall> R TU <exchange> K" Note that your reply is the only time he gets to hear you send your rendition of his call. We all know he knows his call ... well if he's a charter member of SOC, maybe not, but he probably thinks he does anyway. What he really wants to know is that you got his call right, so you tell him by sending it. If you'd also like to win, it's important that he correct you if you got it wrong, and this is his and your one and only chance. Some contests assess higher penalties for busted calls vs busted exchanges. Note also that some contests (e.g. Sprints) REQUIRE that you send his call, whether or not you think he knows it, or, I guess, that you do too. Best Regards, Fred K6DGW Auburn CA CM98lw SOC # <something in the 600's> _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |