[CQ-Contest] Thing that drive me nuts

[Jim Stahl]

The use of “TEST” at the end of a CQ seems to have evolved out of style. I just use the rule that if I hear the callsign twice, it was a CQ.

“Dit-Dit” is now a sort of “73” after a comment beyond normal QRZ. As in somebody says “TU JIM” after digging out my super weak 160 signal, I’ll send “DIT DIT”.

In Sprints and such, I like “R” as the QSL message. It doesn’t get lost as a single DIT does, and takes half as long as a “TU”. I don’t use it in a normal QRZ message - TU K8MR is clear, R K8MR gets me confused with a Russian station.



73  -  Jim  K8MR




> On Dec 2, 2016, at 6:07 PM, Gerry Treas K8GT <k8gt at mi.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> I dunno Dave, seems that I always remembered it from when I started contesting in CQWW CW 1989, that most were sendint TEST at the end of a CQ, but I agree with you, I usually also step on it and it throws my timing off.
> 
> The DIT DIT is supposedly faster than TU but I find that it gets lost in QRM and QRN especially when conditions are poor like CQWW CW was.  While I prefer TU, it's not a big deal, so whatever floats anyone's boat is fine.
> 
> 73, Gerry, K8GT
> 
> 
> On 02-Dec-16 12:54, n1ix at n1ix.com wrote:
>>  
>> Speaking of things that drive me nuts:
>> 
>> Sending an additional "TEST" at the end of a CQ.  IE "CQ TEST N1IX N1IX
>> TEST"
>> 
>> This seems to be a rather recent phenomenon.  I do mostly S&P and invariably
>> I send my call on top of the last "TEST".
>> 
>> It would be a lot easier if everyone sent a standard "CQ" string.
>> 
>>  
>> Also, what's with the "dit dit"  in response to a successful QSO.
>> 
>>  
>> Dave N1IX
>>