On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 04:33:36 -0700 James Rodenkirch
<rodenkirch_llc@msn.com> writes:
> Agree, Larry, with all of your points ..... but.....just where ARE
> other ops, like you, who subscribe to the position that having a >
> 15 second QSO on 160 is a good thing?
>
I have never been a fan of the 15 second QSO, of course when you run
ancient equipment and paper logs you have a different view on radio in
general. my foggy brain feels need of longer QSOs at least for contact
verification. i have not been DX for quite a while now, but my usual
evening 40 meter activity while Lovely Carol had her nose in a book was
to go up the band and answer some haltingly sent CQ.
worked my first 160m only CQWW in 1958, and i must say i have had lots of
FB QSOs on that band many years ago. even in my last contest surge
(retired from Boeing in 1995) i would try to add extra "Rs" and "TUs" to
the almost non exist ant contest QSO.
nowadays you can find me most every night rockbound on 3560 while combing
the Barry the cat.
mike w7dra
____________________________________________________________
Map Your Flood Risk
Find Floodplan Maps, Facts, FAQs, Your Flood Risk Profile and More!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/545ba9577e5ff295727d1st02vuc
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|