Message-ID: <3A91711C.4C7DEF4B@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:16:44 +0000
From: "gii3kev" <gii3kev@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Organization: Netscape Online member
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: First Trans-Atlantic QSO
References: <ijTmUHA9rNk6EwGQ@telemetry.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>


Tom Boucher wrote:

> Laurie and Larry
>
> Many congratulations on an incredible achievement.

Has anyone else noticed that it is the same few congratulating each
other over and over again for minding a machine that is making the qso
and takes at least 2 weeks!!!!!!!!! Not my idea of a qso, where you go
away and come back weeks later to give an acknowledgement. It also
appears that only part callsigns were identified and that is because the
calls are already known and the rest is guesswork.
This is the only band where part callsigns are acceptable for a qso, any
other band because the calls are unknown would not count as a valid qso.
Positive identification of the full call is necessary.
Last week you were claiming that G3LDO had made the first qso across to
VE, now this week you have changed your mind. What do you predict for
next week???
I will be the first to congratulate anyone that makes a credible two way
aural qso between Europe and W/VE but not an unattended computer to
computer contact. I am only quoting the facts as published on this
reflector list, in fact this mode of unattended communications might not
be legal
Let us all get real on LF and follow 160 metre dx procedures, a qso is
only valid when callsign and rst exchanges takes place at one session,
normally seconds but could be minutes and certainly not hours or days or
weeks.
Discussions with other radio amateurs agree with my observations and I
do not see any rush on this list to contradict me except the same FEW.

G3KEV


>
>
> 73, Tom G3OLB