Yes, it is historic, and Randy is right. However, another way of looking at it,
for voice or cw.... is that it sets the ear(s) to listen to the following with
a whole lot more precision, and accuracy, (two different aspects) so the
following important information can be heard and comprehended, and reacted to
effectively and effeciently. Another way of looking at it, is that the 599,
voice or cw, allows the rx brain to adjust the automatic filters to compensate
for the qrn/qsb/qrm and allow the best possible reception, like using an audio
filter and adjusting it with the controls available, for the best information
transfer or most effective information transfer possible.
If you don't think this is anywhere close to being accurate, try doing a
39,000 mile per watt exchange without the rst first. For that matter attempt to
maintain a long, yet effective run with out fills, without the rst first. You
will find that without the rst, the rate drops noticable, because you are
asking for fills, from stations that you would normally not have to, because
their signal is such that it wouldn't normally need to be filled, according to
the s meter, or the signal to noise average.
And for those that think the rst is killing their ability to rise to the top
of the qso count, I would challange you to run without an rst, in say... any
larger contest that doesnt specify use one... just don't send it. see how many
fills you are asked for... for say a couple hours... then put it in, and send
it... for another couple hours... count the number of times you are asked for a
fill. Is this an accurate test? NO... yet if you do that simple test, from your
very own station... in every test that you can for the next year.. at least for
two hours each way... then map the responses... it would answer your very own
situation. Is it needed.... or not?
At your station now, not mine.. not Randy's, nor qrp, qro... or what... but
your very own.
--... ...-- Dale - WC7S in Wy
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
> Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:18:54 +0000
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 599
> It's a historical artifact. And it serves as a familiar marker to indicate
> the important part of the exchange will be coming next. :)
> Do a contest some time that doesn't include the 599 and you immediately
> realize how useful it is!
> Randy, K5ZD
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
CQ-Contest mailing list