Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: transatlantic qso

To: [email protected]
Subject: LF: Re: transatlantic qso
From: "Petr Maly" <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:42:23 +0100
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: <[email protected]>
I hope the reflector is a place where everybody can say his word without
being afraid. I would burn myself into exhilaration to celebrate the first
2-way QSO, but the fact that it took so long prevents me from that. After a
big hesitation I must admit that I agree with John.
It doesn't mean that this QSO had no meaning. No doubt it is another step
forward. Congrats to both operators.

73 Petr OK1FIG

----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 5:36 AM
Subject: LF: transatlantic qso


Hi all,    I am writing this email with great trepidation.  Firstly what
I am about to write  could be to my benefit because I have been involved
with a previous claim for a transatlantic exchange of information.  I
must,  however,  say what I firmly believe.   As stated in a previous
email Earth Moon Earth (EME) operators , the inventors of the TMO system
of weak signal reports along with other weak,  or itermittent,   signal
operators  such as meteor scatter operators have all called for an
exchange of COMPLETE calls plus a signal report as the minimum
requirement for a QSO.
          They have also never to my knowledge looked at 8 or ten days
of data to pile up enough dots and dashes to constitute a QSO .
           I feel the  most that cas be ascribed to the  marathon effort
is four or five
25 per cent completed QSOs.
           73 de John VE1ZJ






<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>