How about this-
As a result of fluttery signals the DX station has been miscopied multiple
times by the running stations on the first over. Correcting the call in the
most efficient way possible that Mike has laid out takes just as much time as
sending his call twice in the beginning.
I too noticed in this contest that it seemed to be happening alot more than
usual, but it could have just been due to the crummy conditions.
K0SN
> On Feb 18, 2025, at 1:42 PM, Mike VE9AA ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
> wrote:
>
>
> I disagree, respectfully with your analysis Stan.
> If I am running and this happens, you have a chance to correct me (2
> scenarios follow)
>
> Scenario #1
>
> me: TEST VE9AA
> you: K4SBZ
> me: K4SBZ 5NN <exchange>
> you: 5NN <exchange>
> me: TU VE9AA
>
> In scenario one, I haven't busted your call, so why would you want to send it
> to me twice? You've heard me send it back to you correctly.
>
> Scenario #2
> me: TEST VE9AA
> you: K4SBZ
> me: K4HBZ 5NN <exchange>
> you: K4SBZ (or if you're adamant, MAYBE send it twice in this scenario-could
> be QRM, QRN etc)
> me: K4SBZ 5NN <exchange>
> you: 5NN <exchange>
> me: TU VE9AA
>
> In scenario #2, I busted your call but you withheld the exchange until I
> corrected it. You heard your callsign come back to you.
> This is the most efficient way to ensure "acks" from both ends.
>
> You can do you, but time how long it takes you to send your callsign. Now
> multiply that by 3000 times in the ARRL DX CW. How much time have you used
> up sending it twice ?
>
> Oh, and to answer your question, as the OP, the obvious answer is I would
> like to hear your callsign only sent one time. If I bust it, give me a
> chance to correct it. That's how it works.
>
> 73 Mike VE9AA "NB"
>
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: k4sbz.stan@gmail.com
> To: ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18th 2025, 11:20 AM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] repeating callsign - what the heck?
> It’s been my experience that a high percentage of ops get my callsign wrong.
> This results in NILs in the final scoring. I now send it twice and this has
> improved the accuracy of my contacts. Which is worse for your log — a
> slightly longer call or a NIL in your log? Stan, K4SBZ "Real radio
> bounces off the sky." > On Feb 18, 2025, at 9:41 AM, Mike Smith VE9AA
> wrote: > > I've done the ARRL DX CW many times. (and do most of the majors;
> > CQWW,WPX,WAE,RDX many many times) >
>> Is some institution in EU (or some popular EU logging software)
> instructing > EU's to call you with their callsign twice? > (or if I am
> running, they'll again put their callsign in their message when > they come
> back to me yet one more time? > > I am hesitant to even complain (make note
> of is more like it) as they made > up 86.6% of my log this weekend (TU EU!!)
> but this weekend more than ever > before in my decades on the bands did I
> have (what seemed like) every 8th or > 9th caller doing this at times(maybe
> more at times). I ran anywhere from > 34wpm to 40wpm (mostly 38wpm) this
> weekend and especially on the high bands > I was coming back to the loudest
> guy just as soon as they had sent their > callsign ONCE. Occasionally when my
> rig was just going into TX, I'd catch > part of a CW character telling me
> they had sent their call again. No > response (I doubled with them) > > Thank
> goodness for the "=" key in N1MMLogger+ (repeats last message sent)
> I > about wore it out. > > Thoughts? > > VE9AA “NB” > > Mike - Keswick Ridge,
> NB, Canada > > > > > _______________________________________________ >
> CQ-Contest mailing list > CQ-Contest@contesting.com >
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|