Re: Topband: Conditions last night

[Steve Lawrence <smlx@earthlink.net>]

On Feb 12, 2004, at 9:33 AM, Ford Peterson wrote:


It would be even better if people would abandon the annoying practices 
of tail ending, doubling to sneak their call in, and calling out of 
cadence, regardless of split width.  The term "Lid" comes to mind when 
considering the QRM generated by these ugly practices.

Ford-N0FP

__________________________________

On the contrary. Diagnosing how the DX is listening and utilizing that 
to pick your spot and timing is a tried and true method of experienced 
ops. On CW, tail ending a  few hundred cycles off the current Q can be 
very effective. For the proficient ops on the DX end, this increases 
the Q rate without causing QRM to the current Q. Often, precision tail 
ending produces a Q when propagation is not as favorable as it is to 
those who are part of the existing "curtain."

The "lids" that concern me are those who call non-stop over the current 
Q necessitating repeats and slowing the rate; the cops whose timing on 
the DX's frequency is impeccably bad - if you must send "Up," please do 
it on the DX's frequency when he's listening and not transmitting, and 
sending it once only; and those who failed their elementary school 
alphabet tests. These traits seem to be independent of how long the 
DXer has been licensed.

We all have made mistakes in timing, thinking we hear our call or using 
the wrong VFO. And most of us shut up when we realize our mistake. 
There are unfortunately still a few who won't.

I, for one, will continue to tail end as long as the DX takes 'em. It 
can be a thing of beauty.

73, Steve WB6RSE

_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband