>Contrary on SSB I usually say 'we worked before' and very rarely
>station comes back with another 'dupe call'. This means that
>correspondent recognised his 'dupe call'. I like keeping log
>clear if possible. It is also my belief that many casual
>low-power tribander stations do not use computer checking.
>On the other side, it happened several times that some
>recognised M/M stations called for 'dupe QSO' and saw it later.
Well, I'm one of the low-power stations (with dipoles, not even a
tribander). Currently I only use computer logging twice a year, when I
can get my friend's computer for the November Sweepstakes here in the
US. What I noticed when we did use computer logging for a M/S entry on
SSB was that we lost 2 or 3 Q's and a mult due to the fact that somehow
the exchanges got mixed up, and we didn't have the station in the log,
but they had us. I probably should have pushed a little, but I'm still
new at this game. In CQ WW, I log entirely with paper, and I was
grateful that all the stations I ended up duping all came back and gave
me a report the second time, because in the heat of the contest, it is
very hard to dupe-check accurately.
As to a point made earlier about blind calling, I've had it happen to me
as well. When I (accidently) do that, it's usually because I mis-copied
the call (on CW).
73
David Jones, KK7GW QRP-L #1350
kk7gw@hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|