Here is the counterpart to QRL?
QDR = Damn Right the Frequency is in use!!!
QDR? = Do You Have a Receiver???
;)
Don
N 6 I Produce Electrons
----------------------[Reply - Original Message]----------------------
Sent by:"Ronald D. Rossi" <rrossi@VNET.IBM.COM>
In a previous message, Fred Laun wrote:
> .
> .
> .
>Chalk me up as being against the use of "QRL?" or "Is the frequency
>in use?" in contests.
>
>When I started contesting 43 years ago, the procedure was unknown,
>and I can't see that anything in the intervening years has made it
>any more useful now than it would have been then.
>
>Here are my reasons:
>
>1. IT'S ILLEGAL IN THE USA
>
>Unless the station sending "QRL?" also signs his call immediately,
>he has made an illegal transmission. FCC Part 97.119 (a) clearly
>says: "Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand
>station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting
>channel at the end of each communication, and at least every ten
>minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making
>the source of the transmissions from the station known to those
>receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified
>communications or signals..."
I am not clear about what constitutes a channel in HF communications.
Part 97 is not clear about it either. There is reference regarding
frequency coordination where Tx/Rx channels are prescribed. In any
case each transmission need not be IDed only each communication.
I tend to QRL? and "Is frequency in use" (sometimes in a southern
drawl to draw out the good old boys that have too much fun messin'
with us Yankees!).
> .
> .
> .
>2. IT PUTS A STATION WHO IS ALREADY USING THE FREQUENCY IN A
>DILEMMA:
> .
> .
> .
I guess I miss the point here. I am on a countdown to being heavily
QRMed (maybe) if I don't respond anyway. A matter of timing for sure.
> .
> .
> .
>3. THE PROCEDURE IS USED AS A CRUTCH BY OPERATORS WHO ARE NOT
>SKILLED IN OPERATING IN "HEAVY TRAFFIC."
> .
> .
> .
Sure! One of the tools maybe. I agree with your assessment that
radiosport is competitive and you need to be good at receiving
as well as sending. Neighboring QRM is one of the challenges and
frustrations of the sport. My Omni-D and me do a good job of picking
out the weak ones off the wakes of the big guns. Makes my ears ring,
but I love it!
>
> Very 73,
>
> Fred Laun, K3ZO
>
73 de N1PBT...Ron (rrossi@vnet.ibm.com) ><>
>From David Robbins KY1H <robbins@guid2.dnet.lmco.com> Thu Jul 20 16:18:13 1995
From: David Robbins KY1H <robbins@guid2.dnet.lmco.com> (David Robbins KY1H)
Subject: more on exchanges
Message-ID: <199507201516.LAA02970@franklin.vf.mmc.com>
While someone was flaming K3ZO, they mentioned:
> Not necessarily. If operating one of the "exchangeless" contests, like
> CQWW, you know what the exchange is before you get it. In ARRL, if you've
> worked the guy on another band, CT fills in the exchange for you, so no
> need to copy it.
also, there are many stations now that report different powers on different
bands in arrl dx contests. so you can't always count on the automatic
power either.
73, Dave KY1H Robbins@guid2.dnet.lmco.com
>From Peter Reed <P.L.Reed@sussex.ac.uk> Thu Jul 20 16:32:30 1995
From: Peter Reed <P.L.Reed@sussex.ac.uk> (Peter Reed)
Subject: "QRL"?
Message-ID: <28612.199507201532@solx1.central.susx.ac.uk>
> Am I happy that someone asks "QRL?" before starting up? No, I
> would rather they just start up by calling "CQ TEST". That way I
> am not faced with the dilemma I described above. My attitude about
> this is "May the better man win." Contesting is, to a certain
> extent, war.
> Very 73,
> Fred Laun, K3ZO
Sheesh! Maybe next time Fred is working a contest you all (in the US)
should jump on his freq at every opportunity and start CQ'ing. Maybe
after 48 hours of that he would change his mind and realise that
a certain ammount of politeness makes the world a better place
.......even in contests!
73..Peter, G4BVH
>From De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> Thu Jul 20 17:09:02 1995
From: De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> (De Syam)
Subject: "Is the frequency in use?" or "QRL?"
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950720115143.27267E-100000@espresso.eng.umd.edu>
On Thu, 20 Jul 1995, Barry Kutner wrote:
>Fred Laun, K3ZO, writes:
>
> > Chalk me up as being against the use of "QRL?" or "Is the frequency
> > in use?" in contests.
> >
> > Here are my reasons:
> >
> > 1. IT'S ILLEGAL IN THE USA
> >
> > Unless the station sending "QRL?" also signs his call immediately,
> > he has made an illegal transmission. FCC Part 97.119 (a) clearly
> >
> Gimme a break! I suppose you've never exceeded the speed limit either...
Of course I have, but this is ham radio, not I-95
> And if you wanna play by the rules, you shouldn't be running a KW, as
> it's not the minimum power needed to sustain communications.
OK Barry, What is the minimum power needed to communicate with each of
the 120 stations I run in my best hour in a DX contest, and how do I
instantaneously determine which minimum power level is appropriate to
communicating with each of them? What power do I need to break through a
JA pile-up on a 3W8? If the intention is to have everybody run QRP
during an entire contest, then why have the 1500-watt power limit at all?
> > 2. IT PUTS A STATION WHO IS ALREADY USING THE FREQUENCY IN A
> > DILEMMA:
> >
> > Take the following example as an illustration of this:
> >
> > W5XYZ has been running Europeans on the frequency and has just sent
> > an exchange to PA3ABC, who is in the process of giving his exchange
> > when W5XYZ hears a loud "QRL?" on the frequency.
> >
> > If W5XYZ replies with "R" or "YES" he misses part of PA3ABC's
> > exchange and will need to ask for a repeat.
>
> Not necessarily. If operating one of the "exchangeless" contests, like
> CQWW, you know what the exchange is before you get it. In ARRL, if you've
> worked the guy on another band, CT fills in the exchange for you, so no
> need to copy it.
Shame on you, Barry! You mean you let CT fill in the blanks for you?
Now that's definitely not in the spirit of the contest rules!
>
> > 3. THE PROCEDURE IS USED AS A CRUTCH BY OPERATORS WHO ARE NOT
> > SKILLED IN OPERATING IN "HEAVY TRAFFIC."
> >
> > I remember particularly admiring WB2K on 75 meters in one Phone SS.
> > I moved in near him and he was loud, very loud, and I suppose I was
> > the same to him. But he sat there for a couple of hours and
> > continued to operate and knock them off without complaint, and in
> > the end it was finally I who moved. And I went away thinking: "Now
> > THERE is a real contester."
>
> You may be correct about SS Fred, but that's a different ballgame than a
> DX contest. Suppose you are on 3510 CQing in CQWW. You've already worked
> the first two tiers of Europeans, and now you are trying to copy those
> millions of 10-100W stations that barely exceed the noise level. You
> aren't gonna be a happy camper with WB2K adjacent to you now, are you?
>
If I'm not, I will move rather quickly!
> Bottom line, even though it is "war" of sorts, there's no reason to throw
> common courtesy out the window.
Of course not! But there are those less skilled who will try to take
advantage of one's "common courtesy" in order to set unreasonable
standards for minimizing QRM.
Very 73,
Fred Laun, K3ZO
>From mraz@maverick.aud.alcatel.com (Kris I. Mraz) Thu Jul 20 21:32:30 1995
From: mraz@maverick.aud.alcatel.com (Kris I. Mraz) (Kris I. Mraz)
Subject: Padre Is., TX = NA092 ?
Message-ID: <9507202032.AA08425@maverick.aud.alcatel.com>
Just wondering if someone can confirm the IOTA number for Padre Island,
Texas. Also, Mustang Island is the Northern part of Padre. Is it
considered the same as Padre for IOTA purposes? Need this info for the
upcoming IOTA contest. tnx.
73
Kris AA5UO
mraz@aud.alcatel.com
>From barry@w2up.wells.com (barry) Thu Jul 20 18:56:36 1995
From: barry@w2up.wells.com (barry) (barry)
Subject: "Is the frequency in use?" or "QRL?"
Message-ID: <2cuJ9c2w165w@w2up.wells.com>
De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> writes:
>
> > And if you wanna play by the rules, you shouldn't be running a KW, as
> > it's not the minimum power needed to sustain communications.
>
> OK Barry, What is the minimum power needed to communicate with each of
> the 120 stations I run in my best hour in a DX contest, and how do I
> instantaneously determine which minimum power level is appropriate to
> communicating with each of them? What power do I need to break through a
> JA pile-up on a 3W8? If the intention is to have everybody run QRP
> during an entire contest, then why have the 1500-watt power limit at all?
>
We're getting into sematics too much here Fred. Part 97 says nothing
about maintaining a run rate, just communicating.
Why have 1500W. In all honesty, we only need it to get thru your neighbor
running 1500W. I ran last CQWW barefoot (for first time) and was
pleasantly surprised how well one can do with "low power."
>
> Shame on you, Barry! You mean you let CT fill in the blanks for you?
> Now that's definitely not in the spirit of the contest rules!
>
Yes, I let CT fill in the blanks, but if I copy differetnly, I certianly
make the appropriate changes. I'm not aware of a flag in CT that let's
you NOT fill in the blanks automatically. Maybe we can call it -PL for
paper log.
> >
> > You may be correct about SS Fred, but that's a different ballgame than a
> > DX contest. Suppose you are on 3510 CQing in CQWW. You've already worked
> > the first two tiers of Europeans, and now you are trying to copy those
> > millions of 10-100W stations that barely exceed the noise level. You
> > aren't gonna be a happy camper with WB2K adjacent to you now, are you?
> >
> If I'm not, I will move rather quickly!
>
If I lose my frequency, I have a hard time finding a "clear spot" in the
lower 25. If not WB2K, then K3WW, W3BGN, K1AR, N2RM, W3LPL, etc. etc.
Hope I caught everything I wanted to comment on. All these > > makes it
tough to follow with my editor, hi.
Interesting thread you started, Fred. 73 Barry
--
Barry N. Kutner, W2UP Internet: barry@w2up.wells.com
Newtown, PA Packet Radio: W2UP @ WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA.NA
Packet Cluster: W2UP >WB2R (FRC)
.......................................................................
>From aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR) Thu Jul 20 22:40:57 1995
From: aa4lr@radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR) (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Subject: "Is the frequency in use?" or "QRL?"
Message-ID: <v01520d01ac347dda59dd@[205.160.29.40]>
>Fred K3ZO Wrote:
>
>Chalk me up as being against the use of "QRL?" or "Is the frequency
>in use?" in contests.
Fred, I'm in shock that someone of your experience would take this
position. Kind of the same way I reacted to the "I don't ID but every two
to ten QSO's" thread that came down the reflector a few months ago.
>When I started contesting 43 years ago, the procedure was unknown,
>and I can't see that anything in the intervening years has made it
>any more useful now than it would have been then.
I don't have the longevity that you do, since I'm only 34 years old. But I
remember learning the courtesy of the "QRL?" Di-dit dit or "Is this
frequency in use?" from the very start of my hamming. This procedure was
advocated for ALL operating prior to calling CQ, not just contesting.
>Here are my reasons:
>
>1. IT'S ILLEGAL IN THE USA
>
>Unless the station sending "QRL?" also signs his call immediately,
>he has made an illegal transmission.
Has he? The FCC has long dropped the requirement for an ID at the end of
every TRANSMISSION.
>FCC Part 97.119 (a) clearly
>says: "Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand
>station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting
>channel at the end of each communication, and at least every ten
>minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making
>the source of the transmissions from the station known to those
>receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified
>communications or signals..."
Consider the following scenarios:
SCENARIO 1:
Me: "Is this frequency in use?"
<Silence>
Me: "CQ CQ CQ Contest from AA4LR..."
SCENARIO 2:
Me: "Is this frequency in use?"
Someone: "Yes it is, thanks for asking."
Me: "Thanks, AA4LR"
In scenario 1, the communication didn't end after my query, since I'm still
on frequency. And ten minutes certainly didn't elapse. Plus I'll identify
immediately after I start calling CQ.
In scenario 2, the communication ends when I'm just about to QSY, and I
respond by signing, since it is a legal requirement as you cited.
So, asking if a frequency is in use is NOT illegal in the USA.
>2. IT PUTS A STATION WHO IS ALREADY USING THE FREQUENCY IN A
>DILEMMA:
>
>Take the following example as an illustration of this:
>
>W5XYZ has been running Europeans on the frequency and has just sent
>an exchange to PA3ABC, who is in the process of giving his exchange
>when W5XYZ hears a loud "QRL?" on the frequency.
>
>If W5XYZ replies with "R" or "YES" he misses part of PA3ABC's
>exchange and will need to ask for a repeat.
>
>If W5XYZ says nothing in order to continue copying PA3ABC's
>exchange, he has, according to one point of view, implicitly
>assented to the station asking "QRL?" taking over "his" frequency.
I fail to see the dilemma. Consider the alternative:
SCENARIO 3
<W5XYZ running europeans who I can't hear with PA3ABC just about to
respond>
Me: CQ TEST CQ TEST DE AA4LR AA4LR K
Now, by folling your instruction and not politely asking QRL?, I've really
broken W5XYZ's rythym. Not only that, but in order to get me OFF the
frequency, he has
to call me, get my attention and ask me to QSY. In the meantime, stations that
might have been standing by for him might call me instead.
This is better? By calling QRL?, W5XYZ is inconvienienced by having to respond
and then ask PA3ABC for a fill. By just calling CQ, W5XYZ has lost the response
of PA3ABC, and he may have lost the frequency completely. He'll not only
have to ask for a fill, but he'll have to take time out to call the
interloper (Me). Where is the dilemma?
>According to this theory, if a station has not specifically replied
>to the "QRL?" indicating that the frequency is in use, the newcomer
>has a clear "right" to take it over, and is clearly resentful when
>W5XYZ, who was there all the while, attempts to continue to use it.
Yup. Clearly, responding to a QRL? is better than ignoring it, because the
next thing coming is a CQ TEST call. The QRL certainly will go a long way
toward keeping an orderly run going.
>3. THE PROCEDURE IS USED AS A CRUTCH BY OPERATORS WHO ARE NOT
>SKILLED IN OPERATING IN "HEAVY TRAFFIC."
>
>Contests, especially the popular ones like CQWW and CQWPX, and, for
>American hams, the ARRL DX and ARRL SS, are noted for the way they
>fill up the bands, or at least those portions of the bands
>generally used in contests. In my humble opinion, anyone who
>considers himself a good contest operator should be willing to put
>up with a fair amount of QRM without complaint.
I agree that contestors should be willing to put up with QRM without
complaint. However, not everyone who inhabits the bands during a contest is
a contestor. In my mind, the "QRL" or "Is this frequency in use?" courtesy
is pointed more toward them than fellow contestors. (In a contest,
exchanges come so rapidly that one or the other party should be audible
frequently -- non contestors are more prone to long periods from one side)
Since we contestors do take extreme liberty with the bands duing a contest,
we should be more considerate to those who find enjoyment in other aspects
of our hobby.
We have enough bad blood with the non-contesting crowd. Nothing gets them
madder than to be in the middle of a ragchew, SSTV picture, or whatever and
have someone pop with with CQ CONTEST, CQ CONTEST without so much as a peep
beforehand. On the other hand, they probably don't even remember the folks
who stop by, ask "Is this frequency in use?" and then wander off for better
parts of the band.
> Yet I have noticed
>that, particularly on SSB, stations more than one KHz. away will
>move to zero-beat with me to tell me that the "frequency is in
>use".
I've had a similar incident in SS with someone running high power. I had
run a couple of Q's when he came one and told me I was QRM'ing him 1 kHz
away. I tried to ignore him (figuring he was a fellow contestor and should
put up with QRM without complaint!) but he insisted that he would be back
on the frequency calling me and interfering with my QSOs until I moved.
Although I was dead to rights with a case of intentional interference -- I
made a strategic decision. My rate was certainly going to be higher
somewhere else without this guy pestering me. I moved.
>My good friend Jim Talens, N3JT, has argued this point with me,
>saying that it's not fair that I, with high power, land near some
>QRP'ers frequency and proceed to take it over; that I will
>obviously bother him a lot more than he will bother me. This is a
>dilemma that is insoluble, in my opinion. If indeed I had asked
>"QRL?" at first, I might not have heard the QRP'ers reply anyway.
Yes, but you have a better chance of hearing a QRP response to a QRL? than
you will to picking out the poor QRP stations from others responding to
your initial CQ. Unless, of course, you really don't WANT to hear the QRP
station.
>I feel that for years I did my penance in contests with 100 watts
>and a trap dipole without complaint, and I don't think I should
>have to apologize for using the maximum power permitted now. I
>paid my dues.
So, "paying dues" means you now have the right to be rude and inconsiderate
to other amatuers on the bands? I thought it meant that you had accumulated
superior experience and could run up high scores while still being a clean,
polite and efficient opeartor.
>And how do I find a clear frequency? I tune carefully, and when I
>think I have found one I listen for several seconds before starting
>to use it.
By using it, you mean you call CQ CONTEST.
>If what I hear after I stand by the first time clearly
>indicates that someone else had been using it all along, I move.
Which probably means non-contest operators involved in a rag chew with a
weak station probably come back to you with angry voices.
>What happens if I am using a frequency and someone says "QRL?" on
>it? If I am copying someone else's exchange at the time, I don't
>answer, preferring to copy the exchange rather than feeling forced
>to answer. If I am trying to copy a caller I may or may not answer
>"R", depending on how loud the caller is.
You're better off answering. Because you know the CQ CONTEST response is
coming next.
>Am I happy that someone asks "QRL?" before starting up? No, I
>would rather they just start up by calling "CQ TEST". That way I
>am not faced with the dilemma I described above.
What dilemma? If they had cranked up with CQ TEST, you wouldn't be able to
copy anything.
>My attitude about
>this is "May the better man win." Contesting is, to a certain
>extent, war. I have a well-honed bag of tricks for making it
>excruciatingly difficult for someone who has landed on the same
>frequency I am using to stay there.
This sounds like a great topic for discussion. Would you mind disclosing a
few of these tricks?
Bill Coleman, AA4LR Mail: aa4lr@radio.org
Quote: "The same light shines on vineyards that makes deserts." -- Steve
Hackett
>From De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> Thu Jul 20 18:27:07 1995
From: De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> (De Syam)
Subject: "QRL"?
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950720132517.17820B-100000@espresso.eng.umd.edu>
On Thu, 20 Jul 1995, Peter Reed wrote:
>
> > Am I happy that someone asks "QRL?" before starting up? No, I
> > would rather they just start up by calling "CQ TEST". That way I
> > am not faced with the dilemma I described above. My attitude about
> > this is "May the better man win." Contesting is, to a certain
> > extent, war.
> > Very 73,
> > Fred Laun, K3ZO
>
>
>
> Sheesh! Maybe next time Fred is working a contest you all (in the US)
> should jump on his freq at every opportunity and start CQ'ing. Maybe
> after 48 hours of that he would change his mind and realise that
> a certain ammount of politeness makes the world a better place
> .......even in contests!
>
> 73..Peter, G4BVH
>
I admit, Peter, that the thought did occur to me that what you suggest
might indeed happen. If it does, guess I'll just have to QSY (again,
again, and again!!)
Very 73,
Fred Laun, K3ZO
>From De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> Thu Jul 20 18:24:15 1995
From: De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> (De Syam)
Subject: Apologies to WE9V
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950720132132.17820A-100000@espresso.eng.umd.edu>
I had criticized Chad for taking my words out of context and for using a
sentence falsely. After going off-line and re-reading my comments, I
realize that I was indeed correctly quoted, and I abjectly and sincerely
aplogize to Chad for saying otherwise.
Very 73,
Fred Laun, K3ZO
>From John Barry <jbarry@curia.ucc.ie> Thu Jul 20 18:58:10 1995
From: John Barry <jbarry@curia.ucc.ie> (John Barry)
Subject: IOTA from UK??
Message-ID: <199507201758.SAA09084@curia.ucc.ie>
Hi
Does anyone know of groups in the UK who are entering the
upcoming IOTA contest?
EI8GS and myself will be in London around that time, and it
would be nice to drop in an visit the contest!
Please drop me a line directly before the Sunday ..?
73's John EI7DNB
jbarry@curia.ucc.ie
>From De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> Thu Jul 20 18:11:01 1995
From: De Syam <syam@Glue.umd.edu> (De Syam)
Subject: "Is the frequency in use?" or "QRL?"
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950720124306.5712A-100000@cappuccino.eng.umd.edu>
On Thu, 20 Jul 1995, Chad Kurszewski wrote:
> >
> > 1. IT'S ILLEGAL IN THE USA
>
> If you go by the letter of the law Fred, and read very closely your
> quote from the FCC Part 97, asking QRL? is not against the ID rule.
> If you read close enough, you can see that I only have to ID AFTER
> 10 minutes from my first transmission, and at the end of the transmission.
> I do NOT have to ID immediately.
Wrong Chad! An unidentified transmission OF ANY LENGTH is ILLEGAL. The
10-minute rule kicks in only after you have been on the frequency and
have already identified once. Of course you can solve the problem
easily by just saying: "QRL? de WE9V" instead of just "QRL?"
>
> (I also like Barry's comment about using the lowest power necessary.)
Fine, Chad. Exactly what IS the lowest power necessary? How many watts?
> > 2. IT PUTS A STATION WHO IS ALREADY USING THE FREQUENCY IN A
> > DILEMMA:
>
> > If W5XYZ replies with "R" or "YES" he misses part of PA3ABC's
> > exchange and will need to ask for a repeat.
>
> Well, first of all, the timing would have to be perfect to have the
> QRL?er and PA3 finish at the same time.
Who said they are finishing at the same time? I didn't. That's
precisely the point. If I transmit on top of PA3ABC, then I miss his
exchange. The way it almost always happens to me is that the "QRL?"'er
asks his question AND starts his CQ before PA3ABC is finished.
>
> And if I'd miss it, I'd much rather ask for one fill than to constantly
> duke it out with someone the 'the' frequency.
Fine! That's what makes contesting interesting. Different people have
different preferences.
> > 3. THE PROCEDURE IS USED AS A CRUTCH BY OPERATORS WHO ARE NOT
> > SKILLED IN OPERATING IN "HEAVY TRAFFIC."
>
> WOW! That comment should open up a can of worms.
>
> > If indeed I had asked "QRL?" at first, I might not have heard
> > the QRP'ers reply anyway.
>
> Come on now. You can pick out DX stations that run 1 watt to a 10'
> piece of wire 3 feet above the ground, you'll probably hear the 5 watter
> with the tribander.
>
In most cases you're correct Chad, but there could be a situation where
the QRP'er is "skipping over".
> > I feel that for years I did my penance in contests with 100 watts
> > and a trap dipole without complaint, and I don't think I should
> > have to apologize for using the maximum power permitted now. I
> > paid my dues.
>
> So, someday when I can afford that big amplifier and antennas, does
> that give me the right to plop down on any frequency that I'm not
> zero beat with??
I have just as much right to determine what the proper separation between
signals is as the next guy. Because he says the frequency is in use does
not mean I have to agree with him. BTW, I do not use any CW filters in
my TS-830-S, so I feel my receiver is at least as wide open as the next
guy's. And, Chad, let's not be coy about the day when you can afford a
big amplifier. You may not own one, but you regularly use a station
which is among the best-equipped in the country.
>
>
>
> > Am I happy that someone asks "QRL?" before starting up? No, I
> > would rather they just start up by calling "CQ TEST". That way I
> > am not faced with the dilemma I described above. My attitude about
> > this is "May the better man win." Contesting is, to a certain
> > extent, war.
Let's be honest in our quotes Chad. The second-to-the-last sentence is
not mine at all, and the last is taken out of context. If we are going
to have a sincere argument, then let's be honest about everything we do!
If you are willing to do this here, what does that say about the conduct
I can expect from you on the air?
> So, may the person with the biggest amplifier and antennas win and
> throw all common courtesy out the window? I'm sorry, but that's just
> downright rude, and frankly, I'm surprised.
>
Again, Chad, you're putting words in my mouth. Go back and read
carefully again what I really said.
Very 73,
Fred Laun, K3ZO
>From Tim Coad" <Tim_Coad@smtp.svl.trw.com Thu Jul 20 18:36:12 1995
From: Tim Coad" <Tim_Coad@smtp.svl.trw.com (Tim Coad)
Subject: Freq in use thread.....
Message-ID: <n1405885628.20033@smtp.svl.trw.com>
Subject: Time:10:10 AM
>....Suppose you are on 3510 CQing in CQWW. You've already worked
>the first two tiers of Europeans, and now you are trying to copy those
>millions of 10-100W stations that barely exceed the noise level....
I dont think its fair at all that the guys in the east can work 10w Euros on
80.
The first two tiers? Half the time I cant even hear the "300" watt Italians
from Calif.
To even things out, I think only east coast guys shoud have to ask if the freq
is in use.
Tim - NU6S
>From yvk@WOLFE.net (John KE7V) Fri Jul 21 00:54:45 1995
From: yvk@WOLFE.net (John KE7V) (John KE7V)
Subject: QRL
Message-ID: <199507202354.QAA27671@mail1.wolfe.net>
In the heat of the battle it's really easy to forget or give into proper
operating techniques. Common courtesy must be maintained to have an
enjoyable event by all participants.
|