My $0.02 worth: A single R is sufficient if signals are strong and QRM is not a major factor. In weak signal conditions RRR is more efficient than QSL or CFM. There is a reason a long sequence of RRRRRRRRRR was chosen for EME many years ago rather than a long string of QSLQSLQSL or CFMCFMCFM. The less complex the message, the greater the chances it will be received and understood. If a DX station on topband is obviously struggling to copy me and asks if he has my call right I will respond with RRRRRR as it has proven to be more effective than anything else in conveying that indeed he does have it correct.
73, Paul On 12/13/2011 10:42 AM, Doug Renwick wrote: > I prefer QSL or CFM over R or Roger. In cw if a letter is missed, the > missing letter can be 'filled in'. With R, if parts are missed, the missed > parts cannot be filled in. The same with SSB, but not to the same extent. > When I hear QSL or CFM it gives me a much higher level of confidence than R > or Roger. > > Doug > >> -----Original Message----- >> >> I agree with Roger. Both "QSL" and "CFM" are inefficient ways for >> indicating solid copy on CW. A simple "R" is all that's needed. _______________________________________________ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
