Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+Upside\-down\s+RTTY\s+contest\s+QSO\'s\s*$/: 24 ]

Total 24 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: Tim Shoppa <tshoppa@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 12:40:39 -0500
I had maybe 20-30 callers this weekend (out of 1600+ Q's) who had what I call "upside down" exchanges. I call: CQ CQ TEST N3QE N3QE CQ These upside down guys come back to my CQ with: N3QE DE F1AKE 59
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00091.html (8,695 bytes)

2. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 11:45:23 -0600
Sure. Don't work them. If enough people just ignore them, they'll (hopefully) realize that their technique is lacking. -- Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train! _____________________
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00092.html (7,428 bytes)

3. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: "David G3YYD" <g3yyd@btinternet.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 12:56:40 -0500
I have a simple solution. If someone does this then I ignore them and carry on CQ or work another caller. Ok I may lose a Q but it is the only quick way to educate someone. I find ignoring them is es
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00093.html (9,170 bytes)

4. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: "john@kk9a.com" <john@kk9a.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 13:32:06 -0500
I noticed this in Roundup last month and now in WPX, except I do not recall seeing my callsign in their exchange, just their call and a report. I typically ignore these callers for a while, trying to
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00094.html (9,760 bytes)

5. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: "Jeff AC0C" <keepwalking188@ac0c.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 13:16:43 -0600
Bet this this is more new guys jumping into their first contest. Or maybe new to the logger in RTTY. What surprises me is that guys get so far into this without figuring out the proper sequence. I re
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00095.html (11,752 bytes)

6. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: Tim Gennett <timk9wx@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:55:31 -0500
Sadly, the ARRL's Contest Update email newsletter had this in the January 11 edition's Conversation" section. Quoting in part: "In last weekend's ARRL RTTY Roundup, as in past contests, I encountered
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00097.html (14,626 bytes)

7. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: John Merrill <johnn1jm@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 13:09:08 -0700
There are still some that do not send 599 when required by the rules. They seem to get confused when I REPLY RST? RST?. 73, John N1JM _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00098.html (17,557 bytes)

8. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:20:51 -0600
Yeah ... we need to work on sponsors to ditch that. Put in something else. Shoe size or something. BARTG is half-way there. :-) -- Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train! ____________
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00099.html (8,938 bytes)

9. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: Jim Preston <jpreston1@cox.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 12:28:03 -0800
In the WPX this weekend, there was one station sending "59" instead of the required "599". He is an active in contesting, so I don't think it was from not knowing the rules. 73, Jim N6VH 73, John N1J
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00102.html (9,017 bytes)

10. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Stai <wk6i.jeff@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 12:28:59 -0800
Somewhere along the way, in the past few months, I picked up the impression that one of the contest loggers had this exchange "style" as a default, and that that is why we are seeing it more. I know
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00103.html (10,111 bytes)

11. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: Jim Preston <jpreston1@cox.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 12:30:48 -0800
I have hit the wrong button at times. I hit the ESC key as soon as I realize it, but part of the exchange has already been sent. 73, Jim N6VH On 2/13/2017 11:16 AM, Jeff AC0C wrote: Bet this this is
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00104.html (9,246 bytes)

12. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: "Jeff AC0C" <keepwalking188@ac0c.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:46:38 -0600
If you are using N1MM and the ESM feature (common for RTTY operation setup), the default the program will pick once you have the run guy's call loaded is to send your call (correct in the sequence).
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00106.html (11,451 bytes)

13. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: Robert Chudek - K0RC <k0rc@citlink.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 15:24:16 -0600
Yes, an operation error. N1MM+ only moves the cursor into the RST field(s) if you use the *TAB* key. The operator should be using the *SPACEBAR* key to move between the call sign and the (unique) exc
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00108.html (12,283 bytes)

14. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Irving" <zl2bmh@xtra.co.nz>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:54:12 +1300
Perhaps F1AKE was trying to be as nice as possible and a new contester to boot. I hope that contact doesn't read your post as it tends to put people off contesting. If you feel that strong about doin
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00109.html (11,483 bytes)

15. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Stai <wk6i.jeff@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 13:53:39 -0800
It sounds more like a training or a documentation error, because the folks doing this are doing it consistently. Either the tool is too easy to misuse or the "how-to" is not directing them to the cor
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00110.html (13,499 bytes)

16. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 15:06:23 -0700
I had about 6 of these types of contacts in the Roundup. I think it is people not understanding the flow. Everything is wonderful when in sync. Not so much when this happens! HI! W0MU On 2/13/2017 2:
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00112.html (12,307 bytes)

17. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: "Jeff AC0C" <keepwalking188@ac0c.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:08:37 -0600
I'm with you - work them all, however it has to be done. A Q is a Q and guys who are setting "I won't work em" thresholds clearly have not ran into the case of having worked all the guys on the band.
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00113.html (14,953 bytes)

18. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: Hank Garretson <w6sx@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:11:17 -0800
Just work the guy for crying out loud. He either is a newbie, in which case work him and hopefully he'll get hooked. Or he made a mistake, in which case he is just like you and me. Or he is playing w
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00115.html (8,256 bytes)

19. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: "Phil Cooper" <pcooper@suremail.gg>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 14:18:29 -0500
Hi all, I know I was suffering from a bad cold, and also had lots of other things on my mind at the time, but I too noticed a lot of "odd" behaviour during the contest. Not only did I get more than a
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00135.html (10,769 bytes)

20. Re: [RTTY] Upside-down RTTY contest QSO's (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Irving" <zl2bmh@xtra.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 10:03:20 +1300
Good heavens. This is why I don't bother with contests. A number of participants want differing ways of answering. I have no doubt they are correct in what each says but they want it sent slightly di
/archives//html/RTTY/2017-02/msg00137.html (12,549 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu