I don't have an answer to that, but I can say that a half dozen or more younger guys have gotten their ham tickets, gotten interested in contesting and DXing, learned CW, become proficient, and becom
1. Unnecessarily repeating phonetics. In most cases, you should be able to say nq6n five nine emm bee. Only if its really challenging or a fill has been requested does it make sense to say november q
Personally, I think it's simply a matter of effectiveness. CW allows far more QSOs in the same space with less irritating clutter, and CW is more effective in working a new multiplier (or a new count
Its use in traffic-handling not withstanding, "please copy" in contesting is like fingernails on the blackboard. Get on with it already! 73 from the desert, Fred/NA2U ________________________________
Author: Maarten van Rossum <pd2r.maarten@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 21:10:03 +0100
Good point Steve, many non native English speakers ask for a repeat when you read their call back to them in a non-phonetics way. As Dutch guy, we tend to have more difficulty with the "i", "e" and "
Back in the day, I handled a LOT of traffic, and "please copy" was never in my vocabulary. It's a LIDISM. Period. 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list
Even the ARRL NTS MPG deprecates "please copy". -- Michael Adams | mda@n1en.org Back in the day, I handled a LOT of traffic, and "please copy" was never in my vocabulary. It's a LIDISM. Period. 73, J
It can be pretty annoying. I did the math today. If you were running a 250 hour, and every station added a "please copy" your rate would be down by over 20 stations, it adds up. Marty KC1CWF Marty Th
And you can bet that "Please Copy" isn't their only time waster. :) 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contest
Jim, When you add to this the many stations that say "roger" (an improper CB import for "over" that just does not go away) the Q rate is even further diminished. Why can't the response be solely limi
OTOH - While the hair on the back of my neck raises up when someone starts a QSO with "Please copy", there IS another way of looking at it: Rather than considering the downside of the extra couple of
Agree 100% The only pet peeve is repeaters. People that repeat phonetically the exchange like three times SSSSLLLOOOWWWLLLLYYY UG! Joe WB9SBD Sig The Original Rolling Ball Clock Idle Tyme Idle-Tyme.c
I certainly hope all these.. ALL these comments are totally aimed at the improvement of the scores of the fellows that initiate them, and NOT solely for the singular reason of improving the commentat
Steve, these whiners don't want to talk to Amateurs..... They are Contesters, the Chosen. __73, de Hans, K0HB "Just a Boy and His Radio" _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest ma
That's the part that I think a lot of these posts miss. I hate those time wasters as much as anyone else, but I'm certain there are tons of casual ops who simply enjoy the extra activity, think they
I would like to call Herb's attention to the General Rules for All ARRL Contests: "3.2.All callsigns and exchange information must be sent, received, ACKNOWLEDGED and logged correctly by each station
In CW and RTTY contests we all know the "TU" at the end is the acknowledgement. The nearest phone equivalent is probably "QSL", or "Good Luck", but I know a lot, if not most of the big contesters ack
I believe Herb was referring to the following usage of "Roger": "CQ Kilo One X-ray Yankee Zulu, Contest" "Warshington America Five Xylophone Playing Monkeys" "WA5XPM 59 456" "Roger, Roger. Please cop
Right. And in contests like the CW Sprints, it's a dit, so that you don't QRM someone trying to call the station you just worked. The nearest phone equivalent is probably "QSL", or "Good Luck", The n
This is not correct. On phone I typically say either thanks or thanks followed by my callsign. Thanks confirms the QSO and means that I am ready for the next caller. Many stations use this technique.