Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: CQ WW

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: CQ WW
From: "mal hamilton" <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 23:16:31 -0000
References: <00c301cbcb04$b57989a0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <[email protected]> <00dd01cbcb0a$b7f1f4f0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <[email protected]> <00eb01cbcb0d$6a82ee10$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <[email protected]> <012001cbcb15$e63c14c0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <433CFC410770450186BB307A8AD28484@JimPC> <002d01cbcb72$87e2f760$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <001101cbcb7d$2fbc4810$8d01a8c0@JAYDELL> <004001cbcb86$5239b180$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <[email protected]> <593235B756434CCCA2828E3C694D16C3@MaynePC>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Microwave activity in the UK consists of a talk back link usually on 2
metres for setting up and alignment purposes and corrections throughout the
QSO
Using some imagination I suppose one could restart the QSO at intervals,
whether it be LF or EME etc. Repeating the report a number of times in
between talk back counts as a restart and each time counts as a QSO.
Loop holes galore
G3KEV


----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2011 7:53 PM
Subject: Re: LF: CQ WW


> >the constant chatter (from Mal) on the reflector about when to stop
> >transmitting and send report doesn't really seem like a valid attempt at
a
> >QSO to me.
>
> It's not. The rules for a valid QSO have been well-established within the
> VHF/eme/meteor-scatter world that once a sked has begun, any
communications
> outside of the sked invalidates the attempt and it must be restarted.
Seems
> some have forgotten this very basic concept.
>
>
>
>
> WEB - "The VE7SL Radio Notebook":  http://members.shaw.ca/ve7sl
>
>



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