I agree with Dave's point and do the same on the TU; VFO is on the move to
the next contact. However, I did use QRZ at the end of my TU macro. In the
1080 contacts I made, there was not one iota of confusion (either on mine or
the calling station) as to the QRZ at the end of the TU macro. Other than
splitting hairs about "absolute" proper protocol, I don't see an issue.
Everyone knows what is implied. I am all for proper protocol but I think
most stations could overlook this as poor operating practice. If saving the
fraction of a second is going to be clinically significant to making more
contacts, one should consider going to SO2R category.
Anthony - N2KI
www.n2ki.com
-----Original Message-----
From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On
Behalf Of David Levine
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 7:50 PM
To: rtty
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Another "macro" suggestion...
I agree but with a twist. I have it
xxxxx TU K2DSL CQ
That way there should be no confusion on who was logged and if you tune the
dial on TU and what was sent TU W6WRT K2DSL CQ, you just got yourself a NIL.
I also send the S&P'ers call at the front end of the exchange since it is
extremely valuable when other S&Pers are covering up the start of the
exchange. I tune away when I see my call and TU.
CQ RU K2DSL K2DSL CQ
N6HE 599 NJ NJ N6HE
N6HE TU K2DSL CQ
I would also appreciate the S&P op sending my call in the exchange vs this
minimal:
TU 599 TX TX
The mistakes would normally hurt them, not me, but that's how I work it. I'm
sure this can be debated ad infinitum.
David - K2DSL
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Ray Day <rayday@cox.net> wrote:
> ..... to help us "Search and Pouncers"....(and for the true
> afficionados of the RTTY game)
>
> How about the CQ-ing station on the QSL/QRZ transmission of the
> exchange send, rather than "N6HE QSL W1XXX CQ" send instead "TU N6HE
> W1XXX CQ" or "QSL N6HE W1XXX CQ?"
>
> Seems like a minor point, but when the rhythm of the QSO is
> established, I can tell when the station I worked is sending to me
> and all I want to know is (and quickly) "did I get my info QSL'd?" so
> sending TU or QSL first would allow me to quickly slide off looking
> for my next victim and yet the CQ-ing station wouldn't be slowed
> down. Lots of those 3-seconds periods really add up!!
>
> Don't get me started on the guys that send in this instance ". . . .
> . OK RAY . . . I QSL" or some such!
>
> I had a blast with the RU this last weekend - thanks to all the sharp
> ops and their dedication to our hobby!
>
> 73,
> Ray N6HE
>
>
>
> **********************************************************
> Ray Day rayday@cox.net
>
> Donna Day donnaday@cox.net
> **********************************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|