[RTTY] Three lessons from NAQP

[Ed Muns]

I understand your concern and agree that the messages should come across to
the other operators as making sense.  First of all, most of the time the
nominal messages will be used so there is no issue.  I am not advocating
that modular messages be the norm.  They are used when the situation
requires it ... like when I send my exchange message and think I hear QRM or
another transmission start at the same time.  I'll just chain their call
sign so it is sent again at the end of the exchange.  That almost always
saves a repeat.

That said, I haven't found that the momentary %E between chained message to
be a problem at all.  The chained message starts up so fast that the other
operator doesn't have a chance to reply too soon.  When I'm on the receiving
end of such transmissions, it doesn't bother or confuse me.  It would be a
problem, I think, if the pause were longer.

Ed - W0YK

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gary AL9A [mailto:al9a at mtaonline.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, 01 March, 2011 16:38
> To: ed at w0yk.com; rtty at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Three lessons from NAQP
> 
> I agree with the concept of modular macros, up to a point.  
> My problem with chaining together two or more macros is if 
> they contain a %E at the end which causes the TX to drop and 
> then quickly start up again when the chained macro starts.  
> It seems this has the potential to confuse the other op.  He 
> hears the diddles stop and then while reaching for his macro 
> key to send the reply the carrier comes back on and a new 
> string starts printing.  Or am I just overly concerned?
> 
> 73,
> Gary AL9A
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ed Muns" <ed at w0yk.com>
> To: <rtty at contesting.com>
> Sent: March 01, 2011 8:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Three lessons from NAQP
> 
> 
> >I agree with each of Mike's several very good points below.  A key 
> >inference
> > from all his comments is to make messages modular so that 
> two or more can 
> > be
> > dynamically combined to create the appropriate message 
> depending on the
> > situation.  Don't pre-suppose that the "perfect" exchange 
> message can be
> > programmed into one Fn key and used universally.  <your 
> call>, <his call>,
> > and each exchange element should be each on its own Fn key 
> just once. 
> > Then,
> > you can send them the appropriate number of times per the specific 
> > situation
> > and/or combine them with your nominal Fn messages (CQ, 
> exchange and QSL)
> > when needed.
> >
> > Ed - W0YK
> >
>