[CQ-Contest] "please copy"

Kevin Brown kbrown at powerhouseproductions.com
Tue Jun 25 15:30:29 EDT 2002

While we're on the subject, and understand I don't consider myself of
your crème de le crème contester types.  I do enjoy contesting and work
hard to get the rate up and keep it there... HOWEVER, most noticeable to
me during the just passed field day are the number of stations who call
a station running a frequency and immediately sending their report as
part of their initial call - even during a pileup.  So, in the middle of
our pileups, a station is trying hard to work us, but cannot seem to
wait until he knows we're calling him. This appears more pervasive and
critical than some simple grammar "you are" stuff.  If you're calling a
station, you best make darned sure he's talking to you before you send
your exchange. On a couple of occassions, stations that did that to
me... Often waited until they were the ONLY ones left trying to work me,
and then were told to "make sure I've got your callsign before you go
sending a report" That technique to me, is MUCH more important than "you
are blah blah."  I can ignore the grammar issue...  The other however is
annoying, and happens VERY too often.

And how many of us (myself included) actually sent the report correctly
each time? 

(using N0SS since he can take it out on me personally if he so desires!)


Suffix-only dropping is also pervasive and annoying.  That isn't a
callsign.  What's your FULL callsign?  Surely you guys realize how
annoying it is to have to back up in your logging software and fix the

And what about stations that REFUSE to use phonetics even when asked...
Can't begin to tell you how many times that happened this past weekend.

All in all however - those issues are good for receivers to deal with as
prepping them for real disasters when calling stations will not follow
your requested formatics.

However, I totally realize that this is NOT a contest... The desire to
get and maintain a high-rate is more as a training and exercise in
technique to ensure that operators are efficient handling messages
rapidly (in whatever method works best), though formatted exchanges go a
LONG way to conditioning that listening to only expect certain things...
In a real disaster, there wouldn't be any pre-conditioned formattics
(especially in a tactical environment).  But, again, it's not a contest
-  it's a disaster preparedness exercise.  Again - our primary interest
in ALL of this is to GET THE MESSAGE THROUGH.  For Field Day.. I tend to
make some exceptions, and remember them as training points later.

Of more interest to me... How many of your clubs actually treated your
setup and/or tear down as a disaster response?  I suspect not nearly

-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-admin at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-admin at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Barry 
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:37 AM
To: mwdink at eskimo.com; cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] "please copy"

On 25 Jun 2002 mwdink at eskimo.com wrote:

> Just more reasons to stick with CW and forget that SSB stuff.
> :>)
> Then again, I copied some really weird code this weekend.
> dink

Speaking of which, I think I heard more bugs and Lake Erie swings over 
the weekend than I've heard in the last year.
Barry W2UP (the only CW op at W2ZQ on Saturday afternoon)--
Barry Kutner, W2UP              Internet: w2up at mindspring.com
Newtown, PA                     Frankford Radio Club

CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list