To: | "GEORGE WALLNER" <gwallner@the-beach.net>, <topband@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: Topband: QRQ vs QRS |
From: | "Lars Harlin" <lars.harlin@one.se> |
Date: | Wed, 21 Jan 2009 17:25:04 +0100 |
List-post: | <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com> |
Thanks for the responses! I agree that to high speed is no advantage. And I also can agree, that the upper limit should be about 25WPM, rather than 30. Ofcourse there can be situations when low speed is preferred - no rule without exeption. My point is that one can benefit from using higher speed a DX path with marginal signalstrength and QSB, when BOTH operators have that skill! Otherwise it's elementary... :-) 73 de Lars/SM3BDZ _______________________________________________ Topband mailing list Topband@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Topband: TB Conditions, GEORGE WALLNER |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: Topband: Recycled ferrites for 160m, Jim Brown |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Topband: QRQ vs QRS, GEORGE WALLNER |
Next by Thread: | Topband: arizona sunshine, PACER99 |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |