Message-ID: <000001c08d15$279241a0$2b0e883e@default>
From: "MAL HAMILTON" <MAL@g3kev.freeserve.co.uk>
To: "rsgb" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Subject: LF: TR QSO TIME
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 19:24:21 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

    Someone has suggested a qso would be valid if it took 24 hours. I think
this is rediculous, because it is not likely that any operator would
continuously try for this period of time. So for one signal to be copied at
a particular time and a reply that came 24 hours later would not be valid as
far as I am concerned.
I would agree that a qso on slow morse could take a few hours during a
session and that would be acceptable but to call back next day with a reply
is stupid and not credible.
The next suggestion by some will be a week long qso!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is
hardly state of the art communications and puts the clock back, dont suppose
it ever took anyone 24 hours plus to have a two way contact even druing the
pioneering days!!!!!!!!
Not sure about smoke signals but I do not think so, they were probably
faster than slow morse.

G3KEV