Qer" go again, time after time, thanks to my QSK. Only
the real "loudenboomers" were getting through.
Dave W7AQK
- Original Message -
From: Mecseri
To: radiodave.g4...@tiscali.co.uk
Cc: cwd...@gmail.com ; dx-chat@njdxa.org
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 5:2
day, February 23, 2011 8:39 PM
*Subject:* Re: [DX-CHAT] Continuous callers
Nobody has addressed the opposite side of the coin: Incessant
callers calling CQ TEST without giving a chance for people
wanting a qso to break their non-stop calling.. those are also
annoying...
e -
From: HK3CW
To: dx-chat@njdxa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Continuous callers
Nobody has addressed the opposite side of the coin: Incessant callers calling
CQ TEST without giving a chance for people wanting a qso to break their
n
--Original Message-
From: Ryan Jairam [mailto:rjai...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 8:40 PM
To: wn3...@verizon.net
Cc: dx-chat@njdxa.org
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Continuous callers
Believe it or not while you hear continuous calling, I hear a short
pause in between. I send out my cal
>
>
> And that’s something too many contesters seem to have forgotten.
>
>
>
> 73, ron w3wn
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Ryan Jairam [mailto:rjai...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 5:17 PM
> To: wn3...@verizon.net
&
From: Ryan Jairam [mailto:rjai...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 5:17 PM
To: wn3...@verizon.net
Cc: dx-chat@njdxa.org
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Continuous callers
No Ron, it is not a violation of Part 97, specifically 97.113. Perfectly
legal and not a violation of a
nd that's something too many contesters seem to have forgotten.
73, ron w3wn
_
From: Ryan Jairam [mailto:rjai...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 5:17 PM
To: wn3...@verizon.net
Cc: dx-chat@njdxa.org
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Continuous callers
No Ron, it is no
SO2R guys make you wait until they finish with the other contact. Many
times it is not a "seamless" operation.
Lou KE1F
On 2/23/2011 4:32 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
I noticed a few of those during the contest. What I found interesting
is that it would be an almost continuous, non-stop
No Ron, it is not a violation of Part 97, specifically 97.113. Perfectly
legal and not a violation of any contest rules either. Some Other countries
do have limits on transmission length though but even those are akin to blue
laws since they were designed for the cw only era. It may violate contro
I noticed a few of those during the contest. What I found interesting is that it would be an almost continuous, non-stop CQ for a few minutes (most 4 -5, some as many as 10)... and then all of a sudden, there'd be a pause and then they'd hear and work you.
Let's call this what it is: A sneaky
10 matches
Mail list logo
