Stefan
You are late on the scene regarding 137 Kcs.
In the past active stations used proper CQ and FULL CALLSIGN and some still
do at QRS 3. After initial contact with full callsign then each station just
uses the suffix only. This has been the established procedure.
I do notice more recently that some stations are only using ONE LETTER as
you say and this is incorrect but of course if using the full callsign at
QRS 120 or 240 it takes a LONG LONG time also the call gets garbled with QSB
and QRM, again a case for higher speeds as already discussed.
All the experienced operators who knew how to communicate on LF have left
for other bands and in some case just BEACON and seldom go into QSO mode.
I do not bother at present although I have a fully equipped 137 Kcs
transmitter/amplifier home built capable of working TA, the one used in the
past  also 2 x Decca 5501 transmitters modified for 137 plus suitable
antennas.
de mal/g3kev



----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefan Schäfer" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:06 PM
Subject: Re: LF: QRSS120 and grabbers


> Hi Mike,
>
> Yes, some thoughts:
>
> Am 01.12.2010 15:36, schrieb Mike Dennison
> > I believe the danger is to regard this as the 'optimum' speed for DX
> > working, simply because the S/N ratio is good.
> Is that really a danger?
> >   In practice, there is
> > another factor in play. There is often rapid and deep fading on a DX
> > path, often resulting in only parts of letters being received at this
> > speed, even though the peak signal is quite strong (see many of the
> > pictures of transatlantic reception regularly posted on this group).
> >
> > The situation becomes worse if the final aim of experimenting with a
> > path is to have a two-way DX QSO. Even exchanging minimal
> > information, a QSO will take several hours, during which time the
> > conditions must hold up.
> When was the last real QSO done in QRSS >= 30? I rember the contact
> between VE7TIL and JA7NI but most of the active people are just
> transmitting a character (representing their callsign) in beacon mode. I
> have never seen a "CQ ... K" in 60 or 120.
> So if one just wants to transmit a beacon signal it doesn't matter if
> there is some QSB. As an example, XGJ is monitored very often most of
> the nights. If the G would be lost (X_J)and in the next turn the J would
> be lost (XG_), anyway everbody would know it't (XGJ). Furthermore the DX
> interested OMs gets the confirmation on the other grabbers.
> If a QSO is wanted, i fully agree with your opinion. But a QSO means
> that both stations are sitting in front of the PC, so they can change
> the RX to the wanted QRSS/DFCW mode.
> Anyway, i am providing both QRSS-60 and QRSS-120 for TA and EU, so
> people may chosse what they like :-)
> > Take a look at VE7TIL's excellent DCF39
> > graph to see how short a good DX opening usually is - perhaps an hour
> > if you are lucky.
> ...which wouldn't be enough for a (real) QSO in QRSS-60 but enough for
> "FC" or "NM" or "NI" in QRSS-120.
> >
> >
> > The very few who have had transatlantic QSOs have used QRSS30 or at
> > most QRSS60. I am not aware of a successful two-way involving a
> > longer dot length.
> >
> > I would suggest that DX beacons and grabbers use a =maximum= of 60s
> > dot length (though a second grabber screen could be provided for 120
> > etc if desired). In my opinion this would be more likely to result in
> > useful propagation data.
> >
> Done.
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > Mike, G3XDV
> > ==========
> >
>
> 73, Stefan
>