[CQ-Contest] SIGNING CALLS

[Dale L. Martin]

>Does anyone know why so many people send TU ?

Convention? It's what we heard the 'big boys' use when we were
learning contesting.

>Maybe you think it
>is more polite than R but it takes a bit longer to send, and
what we're
>talking about here is efficiency in making Qs.

True, but "73" and "test" are much longer, but people still use
it; even the 'big boys'.

I catch myself sending
>TU sometimes, but only because everyone else seems to do it.

It's tough succumbing to peer group pressure, isn't it?  I hate
when that happens.

:-)

When
>I am concentrating on running a pileup (a rare enough thing from
>G-land) I use  R  or if the pile gets really busy, just send my
callsign as
>the invitation for the next call.

I like the idea of "R".  It's a more appropriate and correct form
of acknowledgement of the exchange received.  But, "TU" is so
pervasive that it's accepted also.  As to the length of one over
the other, I waste more time waiting for someone to sign their
call the second time.

Having spent much time as the caller in the QSO, I think I feel a
bit uneasy about the completeness of the QSO if the running
station 'acknowledges' my report by simply
sending his callsign to solicit the next QSO.  I WANT
acknowledgement.  I want recognition that what I sent has been
received.  A callsign doesn't cut it for me. Throw me a bone, be
it an "R" or "TU" or whatever, but not just the callsign.

73,
dale, kg5u





--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com