Precisely, Mark.
To quote the rule,
4. Exchange: The required exchange consists of:
4.1. A consecutive serial number;
4.2. Precedence;
4.2.1. "Q" for Single Op QRP (5 Watts output or less);
4.2.2. "A" for Single Op Low Power (up to 150 W output);
4.2.3. "B" for Single Op High Power (greater than 150 W
output);
4.2.4. "U" for Single Op Unlimited;
4.2.5. "M" for Multi-Op;
4.2.6. "S" for School Club;
4.3 Your Callsign;
4.4. Check
4.4.1. The last 2 digits of the year of first license for
either the operator or the station.
4.4.2. The same Check must be used the entire contest.
4.5. ARRL/RAC Section
(Example: NU1AW would respond to W1AW's call by sending: W1AW 123 B NU1AW 71
CT, which indicates QSO number 123, B for Single Op High Power, NU1AW, first
licensed in 1971, and in the Connecticut section.)
That pretty well explains it and also gives the order in which the data is
to be sent. Deviating from that pattern only serves to throw people off of
the generally accepted format and why would anyone want to do that except to
be difficult?
73 -- Paul VO1HE
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Mark Beckwith
> Sent: November 18, 2008 00:21
> To: CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SS SSB And Your Callsign In The Exchange
>
> > I may have been dreaming again, but didn't Sean from the
> ARRL post on
> > here before the contest saying that your callsign during
> the exchange
> > was required ????
>
>
> Sean said the callsign is part of the exchange. Sean said
> the rules did NOT say when you had to exchange the callsign.
> The rules suggest an order for the exchange. In the
> suggested order, the callsign comes after the precedence and
> before the check.
>
> Sean said "we're not going to disqualify you if you send all
> the items in the non-standard order" then explained why he
> thought it was a good idea to send them in the standard order.
>
> Ops who sent their callsigns in a way that the receiving
> operator logged their callsign, but who did not put their
> callsign after their precedence and before their check, have
> satisfied the exchange requirement and are not in violation
> the rules. If the other op got your call, then you obviously
> exchanged it with them at some point, albeit out of order.
>
> After Sean stated all this so clearly, the discussion is
> about whether or not it is a good operating technique or a
> bad operating technique to not put your call in the standard
> order. I personally think sending your call when it is
> expected, after the precedence and before the check, is the
> best choice, and I don't think omitting it gains any
> advantage in reality. Or to quote Sean: "why would you want to?"
>
> 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
|