"Is the frequency in use?" or "QRL?"

Zack Widup w9sz at prairienet.org
Sat Jul 22 13:05:00 EDT 1995

>So, possible frequencies should be prescreened by the operator by 
>listening some period of time, be it five seconds, 10 seconds, 20 
>seconds, to determine if it is at least "possibly clear," before either 
>calling QRL? or CQ.  Perhaps QRLers are more likely to listen less or not 
>at all.  My view is QRL? or a short, snappy CQ, after listening to 
>determine that the frequency is possibly or likely clear, accomplish the 
>same thing.  If so, why should QRL? be favored over CQ?
>Rich Boyd KE3Q

Hi All,
	Whatever happened to the once-suggested "didit  dit"? I still hear 
people use this once in a while, and those who know what it means reply 
accordingly. But it seems a lot of ops don't know what it means!  Takes 
up a lot less time to send.

					Zack W9SZ

>From Robert Penneys <penneys at brahms.udel.edu>  Sun Jul 23 04:31:20 1995
From: Robert Penneys <penneys at brahms.udel.edu> (Robert Penneys)
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 23:31:20 -0400
Subject: GZ-Int-A
Message-ID: <199507230331.XAA20797 at brahms.udel.edu>

Or, Int...... 'twas a dark and stormy nite..... had fun on Internet Sprint,
broken antenna, KD1IJ riding shogun, 88 Qs before the plurality get thrown
out, hey, it's only a hobby.......



Bob Penneys, WN3K           Internet:  penneys at brahms.udel.edu
      Frankford Radio Club    N.E.R.D.S.

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list