RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] Two NA Sprint Questions

To: w0yk@msn.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Two NA Sprint Questions
From: Iain MacDonnell - N6ML <ar@dseven.org>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 10:40:21 -0700
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>

Ed Muns wrote:
[snip]
>> So here's my first question.. An odd part of the whole 
>> exchange is the final confirmation.  The CQ station sends 
>> their report. The new station sends their report. What 
>> happens next was either the CQ station confirmed and said QSY 
>> or another station would immediately call the new station and 
>> I wouldn't see a confirmation from the previous CQ station.  
>> I think there were 2 times this happened that the original 
>> CQing station needed to come back in the middle of the next 
>> exchange and ask for the info again.  How *should* it all work?
> 
> Well, this is a bit tricky.  The new station often has a 'CQ' or 'QRZ' at
> the end of their exchange message.  It's not really needed because their
> call is also at the end, per Sprint convention, to signify that they get to
> stay on the frequency and the QSO is over.  It is important though for the
> CQ station, who is now leaving the frequency, to give a 'TU' or 'QSY' to
> confirm they got the report before another QSO starts.  New callers SHOULD
> WAIT for this TU message from the prior CQ station before dumping their call
> sign it.  Otherwise, they cover up the prior CQ station who may need a fill.

I actually found the "CQ" on the end quiet offensive. In my opinion,
it should NOT be there. It's NOT their frequency until the QSO has
been completed by me confirming the exchange. The "CQ" gives others
the green light to call, and if I'm weaker than them, my "AGN?" is
probably not going to be seen.

Just my opinion...

     ~Iain / N6ML

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

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