[UK-CONTEST] Failure to Identify

[Rob Harrison]

Hi John,

Hope you've got your tin hat handy. I think you may need it, hi!

Bob

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Lemay" <john at carltonhouse.eclipse.co.uk>
To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Failure to Identify


> Perhaps I can be really old fashioned here, and suggest that a qso 
> requires
> a minimum exchange of both callsigns and a report ?
>
> John G4ZTR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Rob Harrison
> Sent: 05 December 2011 10:27
> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Failure to Identify
>
> Hi,
>
> I've just recently ventured on to 10M, from a long background on VHF/UHF.
> I've done a bit of SWLing over those years so I know how HF operates. I 
> was
> quite taken aback at the appalling operating of some stations, the usual
> calling and not listening, etc, etc. For example this morning VK6ANC on 
> 10M
> was peaking 57 here on my dipole at 4ft off the ground. Now if I can hear
> him, all these large Europeans stations can too, but calling whilst he's 
> in
> QSO, tuning up on the frequency, chatting over the top, and then he went 
> QRT
>
> and they were still calling!  Of course all that has been going on for
> years, but the ID situation is much worse than I can remember. I think
> that's due to the cluster spots and point and shoot software mainly.
> Stations feel they don't have to ID as they are spotted on the cluster. 
> Two
> or three QRZ's is acceptable before giving the call, but I listened to one
> station that was just saying QRZ every time until someone managed to get 
> in
> and ask for the call.
>
> Related to this is the practice of saying 73 etc at the end of a QSO and
> then not indicating you are listening for the final over, so all and 
> sundry
> drop their calls in over the final over. Then the calling station says 
> "the
> DL station with X in the call" or some such phrase. There's no control of
> the calling stations. I was lead to believe you should indicate when you 
> are
>
> ready to receive new callers, and if calling in, wait until the station
> indicates he's lookng for new callers. Some operators don't help their
> cause, and I'm left to decide whether to join the scrum or stick to my 
> guns.
>
> All it needs is the operator to NOT take any calls dropped in during the
> final over, and then when finished give call or QRZ.
>
> Am I a dinosaur and asking too much in these "modern times".
>
> Bob G8HGN
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Stewart GM4AFF" <stewart at gm4aff.net>
> To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 9:19 AM
> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] Failure to Identify
>
>
>>
>> I listened for a little while on 10m yesterday. This was outside any
>> contest
>> and conditions were superb. There were many stations who were ending 
>> their
>> QSOs with TU, rather than identifying. Some stations on SSB just go on 
>> and
>> on and never identify, in spite of not being under any particular pile-up
>> stress.
>>
>> So it's not just the desire to increase rate in contests that causes 
>> this.
>> In fact, that's just an excuse. I fully appreciate that to not identify
>> from
>> time to time is a means of pile-up control, but that's not what these 
>> guys
>> are doing. Sadly, they just don't know how to operate. Now that we have
>> good
>> conditions, I wonder how it will be in the ARRL 10m contest coming up 
>> next
>> weekend?
>>
>> During CQ WW SSB I noticed a station on the cluster who was entering 
>> loads
>> of bad, or busted spots. Everyone, including me, was annoyed by this. I
>> now
>> think that he may have been trying to make a point.
>>
>>
>>
>> 73
>>
>> Stewart
>>
>> GM4AFF
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature
> database 6684 (20111205) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature
> database 6684 (20111205) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature
> database 6684 (20111205) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest