[Moon-Net] Are 73s needed for a "valid" contact?

Conrad PA5Y g0ruz at g0ruz.com
Sun Nov 20 23:28:42 CET 2016


I really don't want this JT65B2 here in Europe unless we all switch 
together. The congestion during the contest here in EU has to be seen to 
be believed. We tend to use the same TX period depending on the window, 
it's not so bad at high elevations when the moon is in the south but 
having B2 mixed with normal JT65B periods will be an unmitigated 
disaster and will lead to frayed nerves and bad tempers.

I am a PA in JO21 and that is no catch or rare DX :-)

So far 201 QSOs and 83 multipliers.

Conrad PA5Y


On 20/11/2016 23:22, Paul Andrews wrote:
> Conrad et al,
>
> I completed 69 QSOs during the two weekends (4 moon passes) ARRL 
> Contest.  My goal was 100 QSOs - but I came up short. I'll blame the 
> shortfall on some bad wx and not wanting to die from exhaustion.  I'm 
> looking forward to calculating my score based on QSOs and multipliers.
>
> Regarding sending 73 during contests.  I didn't send 73 more than 3 or 
> 4 times out of 69 QSOs.    When I did send 73 - I transmitted it for 
> just a few seconds while I was searching MAP65 for my next QSO.   
>  Sending 73 wastes valuable time when stations are completing QSOs at 
> -18 or better.  Conditions were UFB this weekend.
>
> During pile ups & contests - experienced DX stations skip the final 73 
> and go back to CQ or sometimes even send OOO to the next calling 
> station that they see on MAP65.  It's a thing of beauty to see the 
> DXpedition Teams work 100s of calling stations.
>
> This ARRL contest was interesting for me since almost none of my CQs 
> were answered.  I guess a New Jersey station in FN20 is not much of a 
> multiplier.  And I'm probably not an initial for most of the stations 
> in the contest.
>
> 95% of my QSO were completed by my answering another station CQ and 
> waiting patiently (for 10 to 20 minutes) in queue to get a reply.  
> This was painfully slow when I saw so many other very strong stations 
> calling on MAP65 that I could have worked but I was stuck in queue.  
> The big stations are working dozens of calling stations back to back 
> without having to change frequency or period.   I completed 69 QSOs on 
> 33 different frequencies 1/2 in 1st period and 1/2 in 2nd period.  I'm 
> sure my locals loved my TX'ing in their RX period.
>
> In summary - I could have easily worked 120 to 150 stations during 4 
> moon passes "IF" the JT65 process was faster. JT65B2 would have been a 
> big help but we (the community) doesn't use it.    Contests are not a 
> weak signal exercise - except for Conrad.  :)
>
> The ARRL Contest was great fun.  I should be fully recovered before 
> the next one.   If any experienced contester has helpful hints for me 
> - please send them directly.
>
> IMHO - 73 - Paul - W2HRO
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Conrad PA5Y <g0ruz at g0ruz.com 
> <mailto:g0ruz at g0ruz.com>> 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.
>
>
>     Regards
>
>
>     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.
>>
>>
>>     Bob
>>
>>     KA1GT
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are athttp://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
>>     <http://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
>     <http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html> 
>

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



More information about the Moon-net mailing list