CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] 599

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 599
From: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:36:44 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I suppose because in many contests a signal report is part of the exchange.

why 599?

I guess because most times you have to have a signal strength of 9 just 
to be heard at all.

I guess real RST's should be a variance, and this would really mess 
everyone up would it not,  but to sent a true "R" value.

i always loved hearing the exchage,

Ur 59,  i need my report,,,,,,

thanks I still need ur section ur 59.

he he he

Obviously the station is NOT a 5 on readability or why would the guy 
need soo many repeats.

But wow, imagine a cw test where the R value is constantly changing?

YIKES! he he he

Joe WB9SBD

The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com

On 7/21/2010 12:18 AM, al_lorona@agilent.com wrote:
>    
>> With so much interesting the recent WRTC competition in Moscow I thought
>> people may be interested in hearing what it sounded like from inside the
>> tents.  I.e., the same thing the referees were listening to.
>>      
> Very cool!
>
> Serious question: why was '599' part of the exchange? The larger question is: 
> why is '599' ever a part of any contest's exchange?
>
>
> Al  W6LX
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

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