Good question.
Personally, I find some of these types of calls to which you are referring to
be "cute" and immediately recognizable if I am familiar with it, that is I hear
it as a word or name rather than a sequence of letters and numbers.
A good example would be something like EI5E - all dits and has a nice rhythm
when sent in CW - BUT if the op hearing it does not immediately recognize the
call it tends to get lost in the noise.
These calls have their place and their proponents but they can also be counter
productive under some conditions. Sometimes taking the middle road is the
better compromise.
Cheers, Graham ve3gtc
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of John Geiger
Sent: February 15, 2012 10:49
To: DX-IS@yahoogroups.com; cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Can a call be too short?
I am helping with some research about ideal calls in terms of DXing and
contesting, and was rereading some of the old posts about ideal letters in a
callsign. I wonder if some combinations can be too short for CW? Do the single
character letters like E and T tend to get lost in pileups and require repeats
a lot? Would a suffix like EET or TET be problematic? Or does it help that
they are shorter to send?
73s John AA5JG
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|