I too noticed some stations did not confirm, or clearly complete the
QSO. I did accurately track the zones, I confirmed each, as I had 1
or 2 stations that sent zone info different that what was suggested
(mostly wayward numbered calls in other districts).
I did specifically hang about for the confirmation reply, and I did
receive it 95% of the time. A small percentage were when conditions
were bad, and I sent the exchange twice. So they may have transmitted
it before I finished.
But a half dozen or so, just disappeared in the middle of the QSO. I
made sure to explain that the QSO was not complete, and it was not in
the log. I will remember NIL next time.
David Wilburn
NM4M
http://www.nm4m.com
Roger Cooke wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I have lost some faith in contest exchanges. With the "joy" of modern
> technology, comes a major reduction in the skill of the operator. In the old
> days ( during the war! ) RTTY was a slower process admittedly, but the
> operator had to copy every exchange CORRECTLY. Now, for example, the 599 is
> completely redundant, meaningless use of 3 characters. Even the zone is the
> same, completely redundant, as most loggers put it in the box before it's
> given anyway!
>
> OK, so I'm moaning. There is a point however. The operator still has to
> copy the CALL SIGN plus the AREA code ( NY, NJ etc., ) and although I did
> not make that many Q's, it really was amazing how many stations did not stay
> around for confirmation OR, more importantly, a request for a repeat of
> either the call or exchange. Now in the quest for more speed, leaving out
> commas and periods etc., we have lost the plot! Those stations I wanted to
> request a repeat from will not be in my log. Tough, but they should have
> spent a few more seconds getting the QSO completed. There are also times when
> no call signs are used, leading to mix-ups with two or more stations on the
> freq at the same time. This can be eradicated by a better use of macros of
> course.
>
> Personally, I would like to see a more erudite and possibly dynamic
> exchange. This would enforce a little more accuracy at both ends and lead to
> a more convincing contact. It would also help to dispense some of the
> antagonism and criticism from the opponents of contests in that we would not
> have the usual comment "Oh, contests, yes you are 5 and 9 but I missed your
> call and my report".
>
> I do like contests of course, and take part in numerous ones during the
> year, so I am not one of the anti brigade. However I would be interesed in
> other people's comments
>
> Regards from Roger, G3LDI
> Swardeston, Norfolk.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|