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

wa3qpx at atlanticbb.net wa3qpx at atlanticbb.net
Mon Nov 21 00:58:12 CET 2016


Conrad, You may elaborate at a later  date but  dx stations  need the 73 to 
confirm rr so they can proceed to the next station  and not having to send 
rrr agn. Conrad  I did not work  you during contest I was try to work 
KH2/waz Kay but he had a  qrn problem sri . 73 paul, wa3qpx
On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 00:01:51 +0100
  Conrad PA5Y <g0ruz at g0ruz.com> wrote:
> I don't mind it if everyone uses it. But mixing the two 
>makes me 
> shudder. There will be several dead Germans!!
> 
> Conrad
> 
> 
> On 20/11/2016 23:54, Paul Andrews wrote:
>> Conrad,
>>
>> In my mind, your 200+ QSOs were a spectacular 
>>achievement. Saying 
>> thank you on the logger didn't make those QSOs happen.
>>
>> The ARRL Rules maybe dated and could be reviewed.  QRA64 
>>with embedded 
>> signal reports make a logger thank yous and signal 
>>report exchanges 
>> less necessary.
>>
>> I know your opinion on JT65B2.  I mentioned that just to 
>>get a rise 
>> out of you.  Yes - Let's have a JT65B2 Contest.  :)
>>
>> I'm looking forward to future "fast" Digital EME 
>>protocols that permit 
>> text message like rag chew.  Less talk on the logger. 
>>  Even EME based 
>> group discussions should be possible.
>>
>> Arthur Clarke - "The only thing that we can be sure of 
>>the future is 
>> that it will be absolutely fantastic."
>>
>> 73 - Paul - W2HRO
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Conrad PA5Y 
>><g0ruz at g0ruz.com 
>> <mailto:g0ruz at g0ruz.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Well if the posting of thankyou AFTER the contact is 
>>logged is not
>>     allowed then my 200+ QSOs will be invalid and I will 
>>be most cross
>>     as the action has absolutely no bearing on the QSO. 
>>The contact is
>>     logged and is history as far as I'm concerned.
>>
>>
>>     It certainly needs to be cleared up and next time 
>>preferably
>>     BEFORE the contest not at the 11th hour.
>>
>>
>>     ........assistance may not be used to facilitate the 
>>completion of
>>     any contact once the contact has commenced. This 
>>means such
>>     assistance may not be used to convey receipt or 
>>non-receipt of any
>>     required element of a contact or to request a repeat 
>>of any
>>     required element of a contact.
>>
>>
>>     That seems clear enough to me. Thanks are not a 
>>required element
>>     of the contact just polite.
>>
>>
>>     Regards
>>
>>
>>     Conrad PA5Y
>>
>>
>>     On 20/11/2016 23:06, Marshall-K5QE wrote:
>>>     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 
>>>strength, etc.
>>>
>>>     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 cannot do.
>>>
>>>     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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     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 
>>>>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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at 
>http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
> 




More information about the Moon-net mailing list