Message-ID: <002c01c5101c$276227c0$3d540150@captbrian>
From: "captbrian" <captbrian@ukonline.co.uk>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <B333AB0EF6D4D4118BAF00508BAED8EA088DA1C2@mms12014.stv.uk.astrium.corp>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 09:29:13 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: LF: Re: QRSS - KN ?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Why not use what now seems to be standard practice and email him to ask his
intentions while telling him the next signal he sees will be yours ?

[half in humour ]

Bryan
----- Original Message -----
From: "OSBORN, Chris" <Chris.OSBORN@astrium.eads.net>
To: "LF Group (E-mail)" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: 11 February 2005 08:52
Subject: LF: QRSS - KN ?


>
>
>
> LF Group
>
> Just a thought - having used QRSS-3 for a few weeks I notice that K
> is used exclusively and KN not at all.
> I often catch the end of a transmission and consequently cannot tell
> whether the station is sending CQ or already in a QSO.
> I therefore have to wait several minutes to see whether the station
> repeats a CQ before replying.
>
> Is there not a case for using KN if passing transmission to a
> specific station, as in normal CW ?
> The additional time in sending the N is surely well worth removing
> the ambiguity of the situation.
>
> 73 Chris G3XIZ
>
>
>
> This email is for the intended addressee only.
> If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain,
disseminate or otherwise deal with it.
> Please notify the sender by return email.
> The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of EADS
Astrium Limited.
> Nothing in this email shall bind EADS Astrium Limited in any contract or
obligation.
>
> EADS Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
> Registered Office: Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS,
England
>
>