[CQ-Contest] WAE QTC tactics

Mats Strandberg sm6lrr at gmail.com
Wed Aug 12 05:51:27 EDT 2015

I think such mistakes are more exclusions than a rule... I maintain my view
that most serious EU participants have good control of from whom to receive

Imagine if all started using this long message QTC? DE R3/SM6LRR (or
similar) - and when you have 2-3 stations doing it simultaneously.... The
delay and loss of RUN rate is inevitable.

A short QTC?  Or even homemade abbreviation "Q?", even sent by 3-4 stations
at the same time, can easily be answered "R" or "NO".  If yes, I just reply
"DE RM2D".

If God Forbid.... I don't keep track of received QTC, the DX can just
answer (SRI) B4.

Can it be much easier? Why complicate things more than necessary just
because some exceptional EU can not check if QTCs are available or not.

Just my 5 cents on how to make dialogue faster and more efficient...

73 de RM2D, Mats

On Wednesday, August 12, 2015, Katsuhiro Kondou <kondou at voyackey.net> wrote:

> In article <
> CAGFPXLJFPPcpZ6k1X4O1AAYeFJ3kef_yP74OZN9GPBNyauscoQ at mail.gmail.com
> <javascript:;>>,
>         Mats Strandberg <sm6lrr at gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote,
>         on "Wed, 12 Aug 2015 08:10:09 +0300";
> > QTC? without a call from us EU is nothing bad at all. We have full
> control
> > of which stations that still have available QTC, so what's the point to
> > bother him or her with my call?
> For my situation, some stations asked me QTC several times even if shi/he
> already had 10 QTCs from me.  So, I could not trust all stations completely
> were aware of available QTC.
> The point is that it takes more time to know who she/he is.  If I could get
> her/his call sign at the same time, I might have ignored her/him and picked
> up another possible station instead.
> --
> Katsuhiro 'Don' Kondou, JH5GHM (JH1GBZ for contesting)

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list