While thinking about this.. a quick, fast, blast of thought...
there were a number of stations blasting out cqs... in an attempt to save
time...
running along at 35 or more wpm... .. using the common method that is being
sported about..
an answer at the same speed, with the exchange following.. in the proper
manner.. often yielded long delays.. while the "fast and effecient" operator
got it right... often followed by queries to repeat, many times the entire
exchange... now.. honestly.. there was some qsb... and yes.. sometimes the path
isn't totally receprical.. however.. if the "fast and therefore totally focused
on saving seconds" station is 40 or more over 9.. the chances are... that he is
hearing me ....pretty well... normally a 30 over 9 signal is copyable. So..
what is the lesson? When I learned to be an operator of a radio... I was taught
that if I wanted to be answered at XXX speed.. I would send at that speed...
and it was extremely embarassing to admit to the world.. that I had been caught
sending at a speed higher than I could rx...
so.. is it really worth cqing at XX.. when you can only rx at 22??????
Someone may come along, answer you at XX.. and not QRS to repeated requests for
QRS... when the QRS is sent at XX...
maybe, just maybe... we need to bring along our courteous side with our
competitive side?
--... ...-- Dale - WC7S in Wy
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|