Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Topband: QRQ vs. QRS

To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Topband: QRQ vs. QRS
From: Rolf Salme <sm5mx@yahoo.com>
Reply-to: sm5mx@yahoo.com
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:55:54 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
 --------   Lars, SM3BDZ wrote: ----------

>>With slow speed it can be a hard time to be able to copy all the 
>>letters in the call before diving into a QSB valley...
>>Any other thoughts?

Yes, definitely! - sorry Lars, hi! 

My experience from being on Top Band for some years as XV7SW is that it can be 
extremely hard to handle QRQ calls due to the high level of QRN most of the 
time in tropic or semitropic areas. QRN bangs are usually both loud and long 
enough to mask even quite long callsigns, and QRQ simply amplifies the problem. 

Thus, often when I sent a QRZ?, adding a "pse QRS", and found myself at the 
receiving end of another QRQ salvo, there was no chance on earth to get 
anything through. Another "QRZ? pse QRS", another swift rattle...and so on, and 
so on; I found this on-the-air Ping-Pong quite meaningless. 

If, on the other hand, the caller listened to my pleas for QRS, I sometimes had 
a fair chance to paste together bits and pieces to some plausible callsign 
between the crashes and  bangs. As I was normally handling pile-ups on higher 
bands at a reasonable QRQ pace, it seemed that callers on Top Band could simply 
not believe in my pleas, "QRS pse".

IMHO, ON4UN is commenting very wisely on this very problem in his "Low-Band 
DXing" (cf. p. 2-14, 4th Ed.) by concluding very Solomonically, "The DX station 
should determine the CW speed". He´s bang-on.

73,
Rolf
SM5MX, XV7SW etc.








      
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Topband: QRQ vs. QRS, Rolf Salme <=