DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=btinternet.com;
  h=DKIM-Signature:Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE;
  b=Ga7mLWBSjo5T58P7hn8pJBl2YNNF8aapQXAQBTG54fAfbj0cj3lSFvCn2jphfmvIVo3Djq9fyx4Wa4XhuA6MxUwASU9+ab/PKXvf1pkjwldkPf92mSzy+P9eid/0UpI4DSeq/4S+A+DLAdshhhZ39I28WPOSd8JZbeJTYRcZ4xg=  ;
Message-ID: <001301cacf4c$67d1d770$0901a8c0@lark>
From: "Alan Melia" <alan.melia@btinternet.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.3.95.1100329111459.266B-100000@noname.nodomain.nowhere> <38A51B74B884D74083D7950AD0DD85E82A1BB6@File-Server-HST.hst.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:30:30 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
DomainKey-Status: good (testing) 
Subject: LF: Re: Minimum content of a valid QRSS/DFCW QSO?
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Hi Stefan that would align with what was done in the TA contacts (as=
 far as
I remember) unlike other modes it is also useful to capture the waterf=
all
and store for posterity. There can always be a question about recognis=
ing a
smudge on the waterfall when you do actually know who is calling. and=
 though
some do not realise having a local post a clean picture may be conside=
red by
some to compromise the QSO. I was always in favour of the trasfer of=
 an
unknown to the receiver element of information. This used to be done=
 on ATV.
Markus did devise a way of validating very weak traces with reference=
 to the
locally received element timing. It is legitimate to lay a timing temp=
late
against the waterfall and chech the edge positions to define the chara=
cter
when you somtimes get a fade or interference in the middle of a long=
 dash,
for instance.

I dont expect itwill count for DXCC :-))

Alan G3NYK

----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Stefan Sch=E4fer" <schaefer@hst.tu-darmstadt.de>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 2:52 PM
Subject: LF: Minimum content of a valid QRSS/DFCW QSO?


Dear Group,

Recently i talked to Markus/DF6NM what has at least to be transmitted=
 within
a valid QSO in very slow DFCW. I mean a 2way contact, not a beacon rec=
eption
report!

Those of you (and others) who have done successful TA QSOs may give me=
 an
example. Are there official rules/laws about that?

If i would do a QSO with Markus like that, would it be valid?:

Me: "dk7fc/p k"  (the /p may be cancelled but it is "my label" ;-) )
Markus: "fc df6nm O k"
Me: "nm fc r M sk"
Markus: "r sk"


73, Stefan/DK7FC