| Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Don't we need to change the sprint protocol? |
|---|---|
| From: | John Laney <k4bai@worldnet.att.net> |
| Date: | Fri, 17 Sep 2004 14:17:04 -0400 |
| List-post: | <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
|
Hello all: One very helpful thing to avoid the confusion as to acknowledging Sprint QSOs would be if everyone possible used full QSK. I know a number of very good contest operators who do not like to use QSK, but they are losing out on the opportunity to hear that station who sends a quick R or dit-dit at the end of their Exchange, as well as the one who doubles with them or who was actually calling someone else and calls again while they are transmitting. I know it may be a distraction with SO2R and that may be a trade-off that you make for SO2R, but I highly recommend that every CW contester use full QSK whenever possible. My doubtful Sprint exchanges or acknowledgements have been significantly reduced since I got an Alpha 78 full QSK amplifier. 73, John, K4BAI. _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest |
| Previous by Date: | [CQ-Contest] CW Sprint logs, Tom Frenaye |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Don't we need to change the sprint protocol?, Mike Gilmer |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Don't we need to change the sprint protocol?, Dave Hachadorian |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Don't we need to change the sprint protocol?, Dennis Younker |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |