[RTTY] CQWW exchange

[David Wilburn]

I too noticed some stations did not confirm, or clearly complete the 
QSO.  I did accurately track the zones, I confirmed each, as I had 1 
or 2 stations that sent zone info different that what was suggested 
(mostly wayward numbered calls in other districts).

I did specifically hang about for the confirmation reply, and I did 
receive it 95% of the time.  A small percentage were when conditions 
were bad, and I sent the exchange twice.  So they may have transmitted 
it before I finished.

But a half dozen or so, just disappeared in the middle of the QSO.  I 
made sure to explain that the QSO was not complete, and it was not in 
the log.  I will remember NIL next time.

David Wilburn
NM4M
http://www.nm4m.com




Roger Cooke wrote:
> Hi.
> 
>   I have lost some faith in contest exchanges. With the "joy" of modern technology, comes a major reduction in the skill of the operator. In the old days ( during the war! ) RTTY was a slower process admittedly, but the operator had to copy every exchange CORRECTLY. Now, for example, the 599 is
> completely redundant, meaningless use of 3 characters. Even the zone is the same, completely redundant, as most loggers put it in the box before it's given anyway! 
> 
>   OK, so I'm moaning. There is a point however. The operator still has to copy the CALL SIGN plus the AREA code ( NY, NJ etc., )  and although I did  not make that many Q's, it really was amazing how many stations did not stay around for confirmation OR, more importantly, a request for a repeat of either the call or exchange. Now in the quest for more speed, leaving out commas and periods etc., we have lost the plot! Those stations I wanted to request a repeat from will not be in my log. Tough, but they should have spent a few more seconds getting the QSO completed. There are also times when no call signs are used, leading to mix-ups with two or more stations on the freq at the same time. This can be eradicated by a better use of macros of course.
> 
>   Personally, I would like to see a more erudite and possibly dynamic exchange. This would enforce a little more accuracy at both ends and lead to a more convincing contact. It would also help to dispense some of the antagonism and criticism from the opponents of contests in that we would not have the usual comment "Oh, contests, yes you are 5 and 9 but I missed your call and my report". 
> 
>   I do like contests of course, and take part in numerous ones during the year, so I am not one of the anti brigade. However I would be interesed in other people's comments
> 
> Regards from Roger, G3LDI
> Swardeston, Norfolk.
> 
> 
> 
>       
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>