RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] CQWW exchange

To: "Claude Du Berger" <duberger.miousse81@globetrotter.net>, <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>, "RTTY" <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] CQWW exchange
From: "Robert Chudek - K0RC" <k0rc@pclink.com>
Reply-to: Robert Chudek - K0RC <k0rc@pclink.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:03:52 -0500
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
Merci Claude!

You're absolutely right. The confirmation macro (usually F3) should start 
with either TU or QSL and then whatever the operator deems "important".

{TX} TU {CALL} {MYCALL} CQ {RX}

That's all that is needed when using N1MM in running mode.

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Claude Du Berger" <duberger.miousse81@globetrotter.net>
To: <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; "RTTY" <rtty@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] CQWW exchange


> It would be nice if the RUN station reply with the
> TU or QSL  at the beginning of his confirmation, this way the S&P
> station could move faster... not waiting for the new way
> to reply giving the callsign twice...
>
> 73,
> Claude Du Berger VE2FK
> ve2fk@arrl.net
> http://www.contestgroupduquebec.com/
>
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Bill, W6WRT
>  To: RTTY
>  Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 11:11 AM
>  Subject: Re: [RTTY] CQWW exchange
>
>
>  I didn't notice this at all. To me, the confirmation is either QSL or
>  TU, and I wait for one or the other on every QSO. During the recent
>  contest I don't believe I had a single QSO without receiving one or
>  the other. Are you (Roger) looking for something more than that?
>
>  And I agree totally about the 599. Complete waste of time on RTTY. In
>  a CW or phone contest it does have some value because it sets the
>  rhythm and tone for the report which follows, but RTTY has no such
>  need. I think it's just a carryover from other contests.
>
>  73, Bill W6WRT
>
>
>  ------------ ORIGINAL MESSAGE ------------
>
>
>  On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:55:47 +0000 (GMT), Roger Cooke
>  <g3ldi@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>  >, it really was amazing how many stations did not stay around for 
> confirmation
>  _______________________________________________
>  RTTY mailing list
>  RTTY@contesting.com
>  http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> 

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>