[CQ-Contest] WPX SN...has to be a better way!

[Martin Luther]

With lousy conditions I prefer to keep repeating until you are sure. I
agree with Bob's comment on full numbers are better in bad conditions.
I do not like the other station sending my report back and asking if it
is correct. In lousy conditions at least half the time I am not sure
what he has sent. Just keep asking Nr Nr until you are happy you have it
okay. I will keep pressing F2 as long as you need it. I may even slow
the paddle and give it to you slowly as well. 

Bob's right, it's part of the game. Doug's suggestion will lead to other
confusions in tight QRMed QSO's. What did I hear? What does he want? The
result is I just hit F2 anyway!!

73
Martin VK7GN

-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Robert Chudek -
K0RC
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 7:54 AM
To: kr2q at optimum.net; cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX SN...has to be a better way!

I rather have the entire number resent over and over and over, until I
am 
confident I have it right.

Did you realize that fully-sent numbers have a built-in checksum? (as 
opposed to cut numbers)

If I know a string of numbers is coming, I am delighted. For example, I
know 
the number three is 3 dots and two dashes. So if I clearly hear the 3
dots 
and a dash, I'm 98% confident I'm going to hear two dashes. I listen for

them. Likewise, if I hear two dashes and a dot, I'm 98% confident this
is 
going to be the number 7 and listen for the 2 dots to "verify" the
number.

Where this fails is if QRM or QRN takes out the transition between the
dots 
and dashes in the middle of the number. That automatically generates a 
repeat request if the SN is only sent once. As soon as you start
throwing in 
letters or cut numbers, then the "checksum" feature goes out the window.

No, I will take the time to repeat or ask for a repeat. It's not a
problem 
and part of the game.

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kr2q at optimum.net>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 4:14 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] WPX SN...has to be a better way!


> If condx are tough, or if you're just weak (my signal comes to mind), 
> there has to be better
> way of "correcting" the sent serial number.
>
> Currently, it seems we all are limited to sending the complete SN over
and 
> over, even if only
> one (1) digit is wrong.  This can lead to too much stuff to send as
well 
> as having previously
> correct digits converted to incorrect digits.
>
> I'm thinking about a "cut number - like" solution.  So if I'm sending
SN 
> 123 but the other guy
> copied 112 and asks a CFM, I should be able to send something like RR3
or 
> KK3 or something
> so that he knows that he has the other stuff correct but that the last

> digit (in this case) is
> wrong.  Sending 1324 multiple times is a pain.  Sending RR2R would be
much 
> better (I think?).
>
> Comments?  And please don't tell me to just run more than 5 watts.
:-)
>
> de Doug KR2Q
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> 

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest