On Tuesday, March 28, 2000 10:53 AM, Bill Coleman AA4LR
[SMTP:aa4lr@radio.org] wrote:
>
> On 3/27/00 9:17 PM, Jon Ogden at jono@enteract.com wrote:
>
> >And what really frustrated me is best described by the following:
> >
> >KE9NA: CQ Contest from KE9NA
> >Other: Tango Foxtrot
> >KE9NA: Tango Foxtrot full call
> >Other: Italy Bravo Zero Juliet Tango Foxtrot (I made up this call just
now)
> >...SILENCE.....
> >KE9NA: IB0JTF 591245
> >
> >This happened numerous times. The guy was given the mic to give his call
> >and my report but only gave his call. And there was no need to do it
that
> >way. It made for an extra transmission for him and for me.
>
> As a little pistol, I disagree.
>
> Ills of the last 2 aside, there's no way a CQing station is going to get
> a report from me until I'm reasonably sure he has my callsign right.
The difference I see is that in Jon's scenario, the imaginary IB0 station
KNOWS he gave a partial call. Therefore it's not unreasonable for Jon to
expect the IB0 to complete his call AND send the exchange on the first OVER.
In my experience, the IB0 won't, however, so I'd respond with, "Tango Fox,
you're Five Nine...Over" If you don't get the full call on *that* "over"
(QRM, accent, etc.), he'll probably be hanging around long enough for you to
badger it out of him.
If I respond to a CQ with my full call (always) and the CQing station comes
back with, "Mike Germany" then I know there's an RX problem and then, IMO,
Bill is correct: make sure the other guy has gotten your call correct before
you send the exchange.
73,
Mike
N2MG
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|