I believe the gentlemen I conversed with would qualify as holding a position,
Joel. I always understood a valid QSO to include receiving the otherham's call
sign and the RST but both gentlemen stated an RST wasn't required...think I'lln
go back and ask the question again...
By the bye - I am referring to a every day, garden variety QSO - not a
contest-related Q.
________________________________________
From: Joel Harrison <w5zn@w5zn.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2015 5:19 AM
To: James Rodenkirch
Cc: Top Band Contesting
Subject: Re: Topband: A "valid" QSO????
I would be very interested to know "who" at ARRL HQ told you than and
holds that position!
Is it someone in a position to render an "ARRL position"? I have always
been told, have understood and followed the same position Jim has so I'm
just curious if there was a "change" somewhere along the way when I may
have been taking a nap.
I guess exchange and acknowledgement of callsigns constitutes an "exchange
of data".
Lots of bad storms and heavy QRN here in Arkansas so not much Stew
consumption this year.
73 Joel W5ZN
> Jim K9YC wrote, "A valid contact is the exchange of callsigns and one
> additional piece of information, followed by acknowledgement by both
> stations. When running QRP at the limits of propagation, that exchange can
> take a while."
>
>
> Where would one find official documentation to support that posit?
>
>
> I see some verbiage stating that in some sort of ARRL operating manual
> written by Mark Wilson, Jim....is that your "source of support"? I've
> ntalked to ARRL staff who contend one doesn't need anything other than the
> exchange of call signs so....I'm just "axin'"!!
>
>
>
> 72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
www.w5zn.org
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|