[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [TenTec] Re: FULL QSK? What it is

To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: RE: [TenTec] Re: FULL QSK? What it is
From: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Reply-to: tentec@contesting.com
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:24:14 -0700
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
> Next time you have a qso with another station just try 
> asking him a 
> question without ending the question with BK or a long call 
> exchange. Just 
> end it with a ? and STOP and wait. See what happens. 
> Eventually he will wake 
> up and realize he needs to do something like answer the question!
> In our next article we will discuss the qualities of a good QSK rig.
> Hope this helps.73
> Steve N4LQ

Yes, Steve, this is immensely helpful to the readers of this list. I've always 
felt that the seventeen of us have been talking about seventeen radically 
different ideas of QSK, and you have definitely clarified your position for the 

According to your definition, the vast majority of this group, when they talk 
about QSK, isn't really talking about QSK. Not according to this definition.

According to this definition, what transceiver/amp combination should I buy to 
attain this QSK nirvana? I want a rig, and an amp, that is as close to full 
duplex as you can get.

By the way, the last time I actually broke in with a '?' was in about 1975. 
Haven't felt the need to do that since. :^)

Al  W6LX

TenTec mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>