CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Good vs Bad QSOs

Subject: [CQ-Contest] Good vs Bad QSOs
From: ku7y@dri.edu (Monte Stark)
Date: Mon Mar 16 22:20:55 1998
I am getting confused. (Nothing new it that! Been working on it for
almost 62 years now!)

But.... if you are "running" stations and you "work" XX1XX and then find
that you are not in the log, maybe you never heard your call.

>From what I've seen, a typical QSO goes like this:

CQing station:     CQ de KU7Y
Calling station:   XX1XX
CQing station:     XX1XX exchange
Calling station:   QSL exchange
CQing station:     TU de KU7Y

Very common format, for either CW or SSB. Is that really a QSO? After
all, I didn't really hear my callsign!

>From what I see of the log checks, maybe the calling station isn't
really hearing his call and isn't really making the qso.

This goes back to what was said a week or two ago about a QSO needing
both calls sent. Otherwise you can never be SURE it was you they called!

It would be interesting to see if something like this is part of the
problem.

One Question:

I worked about 15 people in the ARRL SSB DX. I wasn't going to send in
the log. Now I wonder if maybe it would be better if I did just to
remove one unique station?

How do log checkers view that?

cul,


-- 

73,  Ron, KU7Y

NRA Life------Ex W6JXO, DL4RF, N7CRV------SOWP #5545-M
QRP ARCI #8829----NorCal #330----QRP-L #17-----ARS #49
AR QRP #150--------DM09cg---------New Washoe City,  NV


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] Good vs Bad QSOs, Monte Stark <=