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

[Dale Martin]

This weekend, in my part-time effort, I was asked for repeats a lot...a
whole lot...more than I can ever recall.  If there was a contest in which I
did NOT feel loud, it was this one.  

Anyway, for a while I was just hitting F2 sending the exchange when asked
for a repeat.  

Then, I plugged # into F6 and hit only F6 when asked for a repeat.

If I didn't hear him in about a half-second or a second, I hit it again and
kept on until he interrupted me.  

I have also found that under very weak signal situations (my sig, of
course), slowing down to 26 wpm seemed to help.  I don't know if there's
magic in that speed or whether it just happened he could hear me on a peak
when I reduced speed or what, but it seemed to work.  I've noticed the same
when calling a station -- a sudden QRS to 26 or 28 seems to make the
difference between him sending the exchange and him sending kg-what? 

Of course, I don't envision doing a whole contest at 26wpm.  But, if anyone
wants to try that in order to validate my observations, have at it. 

It also ocurred to me that when a station is fishing for the number (he
sends 189?  You send 188.  he sends 187?  You send 188. etc....), maybe
sending that single digit a couple of times might work.  You and he know the
first two digits are right.  Only the third needs fixing.  I never got a
chance to try it.  If I think about it next time (IARU?) I'll give it a try.



73,
Dale, kg5u
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>