Is there maybe a semantic issue here, rather than a real one? I thought
Howie was describing something like the following - assume starting with
calling someone on 20 while CQing on 40:
on 20 N4AF sends "N4AF" [answering N5OT's CQ]
on 20 N5OT sends "N4AF N5OT 30 Mark TX" while simultaneously on 40 N4AF
sends "CQ NA N4AF NA"
on 20 N4AF sends "N5OT 21 AL NC N4AF" while simultaneously on 40 K5ZD sends
"K5ZD" [answering N4AF's CQ]
on 40 (after finishing on 20) N4AF sends "K5ZD N4AF 22 AL NC" while
simultaneously on 20 N6TR sends "N6TR" [calling N4AF]
on 20 (after finishing on 40) N4AF sends "N6TR N4AF 23 AL NC"
on 20 N6TR sends "N4AF 33 TREE OR N6TR"; meanwhile after >5KHz QSY, on 40
N4AF sends "CQ NA N4AF NA"
That looks to me like a legal couplet on 20 and a legal single QSO on 40,
followed by >5 KHz QSY on 40 before another CQ
Where's the rule violation?
By the way, if I could do ONE of those triplets I think I'd faint dead away
in amazement.
73, Pete N4ZR
At 11:11 PM 9/12/2007, Mark Beckwith wrote:
> > I will argue that you can't use that 20 meter frequency until the "one
> > subsequent QSO is made" and it isn't made until it is completed.
>
>It's a fine line, but, yeah, you can't call CQ on the same frequency until
>the other QSO is finished - not "in process." The whole point is to move.
>That should be obvious. If you move you can start your CQ whenever you have
>concluded satisfactorily that the frequency is available for use.
>
>Mark, N5OT
>
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|