RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] CQ WW RTTY Questions

To: rtty@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] CQ WW RTTY Questions
From: Larry <lknain@nc.rr.com>
Reply-to: w6nws@arrl.net
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 05:58:22 -0400
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
Item III of the rules shows by example rst cqz state (state/province only for US/VE) but one might argue that the order is not mandated. Only the exchange elements are mandated. There were many variations sent (e.g., rst state cqz, rst cqz cqz state state, rst rst state state cqz cqz,....). I suspect the variations are more about which element an operator remembers first or thinks is important.

If you use USOS (unshift on space) then the order probably doesn't matter because you will get the ltrs and figs characters anyway.

73, Larry  W6NWS


On 9/30/2016 1:32 AM, Jim Hooper wrote:
Relatively new to RTTY … a little less than a year.

A CW WW RTTY question: Why were some NA Stations sending 599 state zone, while 
I sent 599 zone state?   I would have thought that keeping the numbers together 
would be better for efficiency.

73,
Hoop
K9QJS
San Juan Island, WA
_______________________________________________
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>