Hello Group,
Hi Mike,
Mike Dennison wrote:
[...]
This makes two points:
1) What a good idea it was to have reports using just dashes.
That's what I suggested some month ago: *Four* dashes for
indicating "just audible".
2) There does appear to be an advantage in a practical situation
when dot lengths are increased to 10s or so.
Fully agreed! This corresponds to my own experiences
especially under man made noise.
On the subject of QRSs, it may be useful to list a few abbreviations
which are acceptable. For instance, DJ5BV did not send QRZ? to
me, he just sent ?? which was clearly understood. A replacement
for 73 would be useful - what about just TU (meaning 'thank you' for
anyone who hasn't done HF CW recently)?
I'm preferring CU (*SEE* YOU) since that's what has happened
or should be...
54°16'N / 10°04'E, JO54ag
73 es gl de Peter, DF3LP
| 