Hi Marshall,
I applaud you for your positive approaches to the betterment of VHF contesting
and operating in general.
I respectfully disagree with you regarding "what constitutes a VHF QSO."
As I mentioned while commenting on another thread today, I don't think that we
need to necessarily hold to Tilton's layout of what should constitute a VHF
QSO. Tilton certainly had his reasons for coming up with the structure that he
did and it made sense to have it that way then.
But this is 2009, not 1950. Virtually all transmitters use VOX now and the
bands are no longer filled with screaming heterodynes when the propagation gets
good. For most operating conditions, a streamlined operating procedure makes
sense.
Now, let's cut to the chase. FCC requires that you send your call at least once
during a QSO. If, during a contest QSO, you say your call and the other station
says his call, the FCC is fully satisfied that it's rules about signing have
been followed. (Longer QSOs require that each station signs at least every 10
minutes and at the end of the QSO.) On SSB or CW, here is no practical need to
say the other station's call IF IT'S UNDERSTOOD THAT YOU ARE CALLING HIM. (I
apologize about the caps, but I don't have the use of italics for email.) I can
think of only one occasion where I had to ask if a station was responding to
me. We got it answered and continued. So, for normal and contest QSOs, there is
no need to follow Tilton's QSO construction.
I do think that there should be exceptions to the above. The exceptions are for
meteor scatter and EME QSOs. The reason that regimentation in calling is needed
during these activities is that it isn't always clear that information you
copied is being sent to you. Also, operators know what the expect to hear next
if there is a specific structure to QSOs. This is important when dealing with
extremely weak or momentary signals. In these two cases, I would continue to
hold to the standards already set up for meteor scatter and EME QSOs.
During contests, it just makes sense to get all NEEDED information across as
quickly as possible. Let's say you call CQ and another station responds. Since
you know that the other guy is calling you, why would you need to hear him say
your call? The answer is you don't need to hear it. It would be just a waste of
time for him to say it. All you need to hear is his call only! This is one of
the ways successful contesters operate. You keep is short and move on.
So, to wrap it up. Legally, you need only send your own call. Beyond that,
contest rules state what is needed to be sent in the exchange. And that is the
way it needs to stay! There is no need at all to slow things down by insisting
on sending information that is already known!
So, instead of asking what should constitute a VHF QSO, we ought to be asking
why in the world do VHF QSOs have to be different? With the exceptions that I
mentioned above, they don't.
73,
Paul, K7CW
--- On Mon, 3/16/09, Marshall Williams <k5qe@sabinenet.com> wrote:
From: Marshall Williams <k5qe@sabinenet.com>
Subject: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule
To: "VHF Contesting" <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Date: Monday, March 16, 2009, 7:30 PM
Hello again to the VHF contesters on the list....
A month or so ago when I posted my first thoughts on this, I made a
point of following a careful definition of what constitutes a valid VHF
contact. Ron, W4WA, has elicited several responses on this on this
reflector on this matter. It is clear that this idea needs to be
revisited carefully. We need to have a standard and we need to follow
it. If the VHF community wants to permit contacts like those done in HF
contests, that is OK, we just all need to be sure of exactly what is the
correct procedure.
In the HF world, the following is accepted procedure:
ME: CQ CQ K5QE K5QE over
DX: W1XYZ
ME: W1XYZ EM31
DX: ROGER FN10 FN10 -- Sometimes this is just abreviated to FN10 FN10
ME: QRZ Contest from K5QE over
It is clear that several elements of Tilton's Rule for a valid VHF
contact are missing here. I never received my call from W1XYZ and he
never received a ROGER from me. If the abbreviated version of line 4 is
employed, then I never got a ROGER from the DX station.
A much better version of this is:
ME: CQ CQ K5QE K5QE over
DX: K5QE W1XYZ
ME: W1XYZ K5QE EM31
DX: ROGER FN10 FN10
ME: ROGER QRZ Contest from K5QE over (Variations: ROGER ROGER QRZ from
K5QE over and ROGER your FN10, QRZ from K5QE over)
Here, W1XYZ has given my call, and I have given him a ROGER. I believe
that the required elements are all here. W1XYZ his given both calls, a
grid, and a ROGER. I have given the same information. It looks like we
have added about 3 sec to the entiere contact time. I realize that when
6M is wide open for hours and hours, this procedure will cause a few
less contacts to be made in an hour. There are some advantges here
too....The DX station has given my call and I have given my call as part
of the exchange. That allows other stations to know who I am and to get
ready to work me. Don't you just hate it when you hear an HF station
running stations like crazy and he does not give his call for a very
long time(or that fact that he is actually listening up 20KHz!!!).
I believe that this is the correct form for a VHF contact, but I am not
trying to "force" this particular version on anyone. What I believe
we
need to do, is for the community to carefully consider this problem and
to come up with a "standard procedure" that we can all follow. We can
agree that the HF form is acceptable when 6M is wide open and you are
working stations like crazy. We can also agree that this form is not
acceptable on 2M and up where huge runs don't normally occur and things
are more "leisurely". We can agree that Tilton's Rule must be
followed
carefully on schedules. We can agree on whatever we want as long as
everyone is on the same page.
Personally, I would like to see Tilton's Rule upheld. For historical
and practical reasons, it is a good definition of what constitutes a
valid contact. Tilton's Rule has served us well in the past. It is
interesting that the MS and EME folks(digital and CW) are VERY strict on
these things. If you don't get all the required elements, it is not a
contact. ANECDOTE: When I was in Oklahoma City in the late 70's, I had
49 states worked and was running with RI for my WAS. I thought that the
contact was complete and I called the other station on the phone after
about 10 min of RRR, RRR, RRR. He told me that he did not have my ROGER
and that since we had talked on the phone, we would now have to start
over. I was heartbroken over this as the moon had gone beyond my
window. I never got RI from OKC and I still need that state for a
non-digital WAS on 2M. For want of a single R, my 2M WAS was
lost--however, the guy on the other end was just following the correct
procedure. He did everything right--he just needed a better set of
ears...HI.
As on my previous posts, rational thoughtful comments are appreciated.
Flames -----> bit bucket. I must compliment everyone on their
thoughtful replies to the previous issues. Keep it up guys!!
73 Marshall K5QE
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|