Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+WHY\s+put\s+CQ\s+at\s+the\s+end\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+WHY\s+put\s+CQ\s+at\s+the\s+end\?\s*$/: 33 ]

Total 33 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Wes Cosand <wz7i@arrl.net>; Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 15:21:03 -0500; Hi Jeff: I apologize for the lack of definition in the manual. If CQOnly=1 then only calls thought to be "CQ" calls are transmitted through the telnet port of RTTY Skimmer Server. But the normal way; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00106.html (10,648 bytes)
22. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Wes Cosand <wz7i@arrl.net>; Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 15:55:14 -0500; I do not understand why no skimmer picked up your CQ calls. I would have thought I would have received it during periods of the contest. The most likely call sign patterns for VE3NEA's skimmers are i; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00107.html (9,595 bytes)
23. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 21:00:23 +0000; No, the idea is that in tuning the band I see ")(*KHUYR%@*&9A KK9A CQ" I can call you back right away without waiting for your next CQ repeat. Al AB2ZY ________________________________________ From:; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00108.html (11,186 bytes)
24. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: iw1ayd - Salvatore Irato <iw1ayd@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:05:13 +0100; Hi all. My calling schema, if not forced by rules, is: {ENTELF}TEST IW1AYD IW1AYD CQ {RX}{ENTERLF} That's a way to say I am ready and calling, It's the same for my QSO closing schema: {ENTELF}UT5EPP; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00109.html (11,023 bytes)
25. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Jeff Stai <wk6i.jeff@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 13:41:04 -0800; No worries Wes, actually this is a very readable and understandable manual. I'm just making the observation that, now that the RTTY Skimmer is in the wild, you may have users who accepted the default; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00110.html (10,558 bytes)
26. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Michael Adams <mda@n1en.org>; Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:09:23 +0000; I just checked my cluster logs. Over 1000 spots for M7T appear from RTTY skimmers feeding the RBN. -- Michael Adams | N1EN | mda@n1en.org --Original Message de G3YYD-- In the recent CQWPXRTTY no skim; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00111.html (9,232 bytes)
27. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith N4ZR <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 07:56:55 -0500; A couple of points need to be made here. Precisely because of the relative verbosity of RTTY- things like repeating callsigns of both stations, adding CQ at the end of messages, and so on- RTTY Skims; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00118.html (12,472 bytes)
28. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Tom Osborne <w7why@frontier.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 09:32:42 -0800; With all the talk of Skimmers, Who's on First, etc, all I want is to see is a CQ on the end so I can tell when I tune on a station if they are calling CQ or not. 73 Tom W7WHY ________________________; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00120.html (8,602 bytes)
29. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: "Dave Hachadorian" <k6ll.dave@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 10:53:24 -0700; Hi Wes, Thanks for the informative post. What if EVERY S&P station, when they dump in their call sign, began it with a CR/LF? Would that solve the Skimmer issue completely? What if every S&P station; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00121.html (9,817 bytes)
30. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 10:25:54 -0800; -- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: Which makes me wonder whether we really need a CQ at the start of the macro? I've seen the CW guys do it like W6WRT TEST, although I like to send my call; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00122.html (8,925 bytes)
31. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Jim Preston <jpreston1@cox.net>; Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:10:05 -0800; Same here. 73, Jim N6VH _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty _______________________________________; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00123.html (8,828 bytes)
32. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Jeff Stai <wk6i.jeff@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:50:57 -0800; My preference is: WPX WK6I WK6I CQ The WPX prefix indicates I am in the contest and not seeking a casual contact. The CQ suffix has been beat to death. ;) Obviously substitute RU, WW, WAE, JARTS, NA,; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00126.html (9,313 bytes)
33. Re: [RTTY] WHY put CQ at the end? (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>; Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 19:36:15 -0800; -- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: That has always been my preference too, but why not just put the WPX at the end: W6WRT W6WRT WPX Bill W6WRT _____________________________________________; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-02/msg00127.html (9,001 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 33
Page: [1] [2]