[UK-CONTEST] Operating Practices

[Paul Higginson]

In message <01FF01D83CCC1E4381DA10C0264A929A797F at odlmail1.odlabz.co.uk>, 
"Cooper, Stewart" <coopers at odl.co.uk> writes
>
>Yes, sorry Chris, but this really did raise my eyebrows. How can the 
>adherence to a set of procedures be construed as mis-operating? The 
>reason for the 'procedures' (used to positively confirm that a meteor 
>scatter VHF/UHF QSO has been completed) help to draw a boundary between 
>a real QSO and a failed QSO. These procedures are not used in contests, 
>but in Meteor Scatter QSOs. HF contest QSOs only just scrape through 
>any examination of whether real communication occurred between two parties.
>The VHF MS procedure is certainly not mis-operation.
>



Robust confirmation is essential for all modes where the circuit is 
likely to disappear or fade at any time.

If I'm in doubt I always confirm and I kind of -do- model a successful 
1.3G or 2.3G contest qso on the EU MS practice.

I recently completed an SHF CW contest qso. Its completion gave the 
other station a new country, new square and his contest ODX.

To be honest I've worked stronger EME qso's.

It took 27 minutes to complete and the RST part of the exchange took the 
last 15 minutes of the qso.


QSO's at so close to ( and below ) the noise level are hard won.


They require a bit more persistence and effort than reading an 80m afs 
cw call, tapping it into SD and pressing F4 (or whatever software you 
choose )

Frankly Chris's dismissal of such efforts as "mis-operation" was 
insulting. There are a number of us Class "B" men who are making efforts 
to learn the HF world and not by just using SSB, quite the contrary..

Chris, you might take time to learn "our" ethics, developed in some 
cases by 30 odd years of damned hard work before dismissing them as you 
did.

Regards
-- 
73 de Paul GW8IZR
(IO73TI Anglesey)