From: "Mike Dennison" <mike.dennison@rsgb.org.uk>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:28:33 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: LF: Minimalist QSO, a process
Message-ID: <3A71B3C1.11895.1102764@localhost>
In-reply-to: <006301c087ac$296df2d0$0a00a8c0@ThreeLakes.ca>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

VA3LK wrote:
> After consultation with a number of peers I propose the following as
> the minimum for a QSO validation over the North Atlantic on LF.
> 
> Step 1     M0BMU VA3LK                    va3lk sending
> Step 2     VA3LK M0BMU O                m0bmu sending
> Step 3     RO O                                   va3lk sending
> Step 4     RO                                   m0bmu sending
> Step 5     E E                                   va3lk sending
> Step 6     E E                                   m0bmu sending

Hmmmm. I like the use of the Es, though perhaps something a little 
less prone to accidental reception (S?) would be better. 

However, the earlier part is a bit flawed. Are you assuming that this 
type of communication can only be done on sked, or can there be a 
random QSO?

If a sked, why send the complete calls? This has nothing to do with 
the legal requirement to identify - use 20WPM. You just need 
something unambiguous and if you already have a sked with 
M0BMU, the chances of another BMU turning up on frequency by 
chance are pretty remote. So just send the suffix. Jim will thank you 
for not having to spend an hour sending the zero!

If not a sked, there is no facility for acknowledging that it is M0BMU 
you are replying to. You could be sending the O to anyone.

Also, why send 'RO O'? Is the first 'O' a repeat back of the one sent 
to you? If so, there is no need to do this. Just 'R' will do - you either 
read it or you didn't. Incidentally, the convention for 'pse rpt' or 'agn' 
is just a question mark on its own. So if you didn't get the report and 
Jim was an 'M report with you, send '? M'.

If either sked or no-sked scenario is possible, and I think it is, you 
need to cater for both.

EG
> Step 1     BMU VA3LK                    va3lk sending
> Step 2     LK BMU O                m0bmu sending
> Step 3     BMU RO O                                   va3lk sending
> Step 4     RO                                   m0bmu sending
> Step 5     E E                                   va3lk sending
> Step 6     E E                                  m0bmu sending

Note that is common practice in Eu to use just suffixes in random 3s 
dot QRS QSO once the callsigns of both stations have been 
established beyond doubt.

Hope that is helpful and I have not misunderstood anything.

73


Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT)
http://www.lf.thersgb.net