Message-ID: <3A92A910.108E46E9@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 17:27:45 +0000
From: "gii3kev" <gii3kev@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Organization: Netscape Online member
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "rsgb rsgb" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Subject: LF: TR QSO
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>

Hello all
As John points out EME procedure(TMO reporting) means full callsigns and
reports must be fully exchanged between the two parties at the time of
contact, which does not mean days or weeks later when someone has put
together bits and pieces of callsigns and reports.
On the vhf and hf bands a qso also means the same thing but using the
RST procedure.
If I am correct, Larry claims the first transatlantic qso has taken
place. Who made it ? and what rules applied ? TMO reporting or RST with
full call signs exchanged. If this is not the case then what procedures
were followed and who invented or agreed them. Since I am a keen LF
operator with 21 countries worked to date on 136 khz and 167 on 160
metres I used the established RST procedure with full callsigns and
reports exchanged and each qso lasted only a few minutes at the most.
For a qso to be VALID regardless of circumstances we must stick to
established procedures to be fair to all involved. The rules cannot be
made up as we go along and LF is no different to obstacles encountered
on other bands especially the very high GHZ bands and EME etc.
Others involved in amateur radio and especially LF might like to express
an opinion about what constitutes a valid qso. I can assure you that I
am not the only one that thinks this way and I will be sticking to the
established rules for any qso transatlantic or otherwise.

73 de Mal/G3KEV