[Moon-Net] Are 73s needed for a "valid" contact?
k5qe at k5qe.com
Sun Nov 20 23:06:51 CET 2016
Hello Conrad and others interested in this thread.....I am NOT an ARRL
rules guru, but I thought that the posting of any contact information
was prohibited during the contests. You certainly cannot post, "I hear
your RO, so I am sending RRR"....or anything like that at all. I know
that we all agree on this.
Others have said that the posting of "thank you" after the contact is
complete is not allowed, because it tells the other station that you are
complete(which is a piece of contact information). I have not posted
the traditional "thank you" whenever I was in a contest, because I
believed that it was not allowed(but I may be very wrong on this).
During casual operating, I try to post a "thank you" so the other
station knows that we are done AND so that he can see his signal
It would be nice if we could get a definite ruling on this. Maybe
Bart-W9JJ could study this carefully and let us know what we can and
The rules for the CW WW VHF contest are slightly different from the
ARRL's rules, so we have another issue there.
On this last leg of the EME contest, I had a guest operator(Phil-W5RP)
at the helm of the 2M station. He worked about 100 stations for the two
days. That is pretty good for a new operator. I thank everyone for
calling and working him. It was a great experience for him and I know
that he enjoyed it a lot. He certainly got a wonderful introduction to
WSJT and pileups on 2M. It will be a while before he gets his home
station running, but when that happens, we will have another FB station
and operator on 2M.
73 Marshall K5QE
On 11/20/2016 3:23 PM, Conrad PA5Y wrote:
> The 73 are not required for a valid QSO. However they are useful as an
> indicator that all is well.
> During the contest if I call CQ I prefer the station that I am working
> to send 73 in response to my RRR even if just for a few seconds to let
> me know that they are happy. This happens a lot during the contest and
> is very thoughtful. If my QSO partner is participating in the contest
> and are loud with me it is completely unnecessary. Instead of
> responding to these 73 with 73 I just call CQ again or the next
> station if there is a queue. If my QSO partners are on the logger I
> will thank them for the QSO but only AFTER the QSO is complete. It is
> perfectly legitimate to do this once you have received RRR.
> DXpeditions prefer their QSO partner to send 73 after they have sent
> RRR just so that they know to move on to the next station.
> For normal everyday QSOs outside of contests and Dxpeditions 73 are
> polite and should be used unless you are running out of moon :-)
> A little watching and listening will soon having you developing your
> own feel for how things are done.
> Conrad PA5Y
> On 20/11/2016 21:55, Bob Atkins wrote:
>> During the EME contest one station I contacted suggested that the
>> final "73" wasn't required, just the exchangeable of "Call signs and
>> locators", "OOO", "RO" and "RRR". Is that generally accepted to be
>> the case? Usually at least one or both stations send "73", but is
>> this actually a requirement for a valid QSO (as least as defined by
>> the contest).
>> The "call, locator and OOO" confirms reception of "callls +
>> locator" in one direction and the "RO" confirms reception of that
>> report by the first station. "RRR" then confirms reception of that
>> information. Technically, isn't that all that is needed?
>> I'm not suggestion that dropping the final 73 (or exchange of 73s) is
>> a good idea. I just don't want to claim a contact where the other
>> stations didn't send the first "73" and suggested it wasn't required.
>> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are athttp://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
> Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Moon-net