Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: TR QSO TIME

To: [email protected]
Subject: LF: Re: TR QSO TIME
From: "Sommereyns Ruddy" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:14:18 +0100
References: <000001c08d15$279241a0$2b0e883e@default>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: <[email protected]>
Hi Mal,

You also can lift a weight of let's say 2000 kg (1000 pound) to a height of
1 meter, with only a small dc motor from a tape-recorder coupled to an
enormeous reduction-box..
It will only  take several years, but it can be done. The design
,construction and testing is the the achievement but for the rest it is
totally useless.

73

Ruddy
----- Original Message -----
From: MAL HAMILTON <[email protected]>
To: rsgb <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 8:24 PM
Subject: LF: TR QSO TIME


    Someone has suggested a qso would be valid if it took 24 hours. I
think
this is rediculous, because it is not likely that any operator would
continuously try for this period of time. So for one signal to be copied
at
a particular time and a reply that came 24 hours later would not be valid
as
far as I am concerned.
I would agree that a qso on slow morse could take a few hours during a
session and that would be acceptable but to call back next day with a
reply
is stupid and not credible.
The next suggestion by some will be a week long qso!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This
is
hardly state of the art communications and puts the clock back, dont
suppose
it ever took anyone 24 hours plus to have a two way contact even druing
the
pioneering days!!!!!!!!
Not sure about smoke signals but I do not think so, they were probably
faster than slow morse.

G3KEV







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