[Fists] USING THE Q-SIGNAL QRL? DUMMY LOADS ANYONE?]

[W2AGN]

Jozef Hand-Boniakowski, Ph.D. wrote:
>
> W8FAX presents evidence to support that QRL? fails in its intended
> purpose.  It is possible that the reason one does not get a response
> from a QRL? queerie is that the the statione being QRM'd the QRL? is
> mumbling expletives under their breath. On Sun, 23 Jul 1995 N6CQ
> bill.lumnitzer at paonline.com wrote:
>  
>  > QRL and all the other "Q" signals come from CW traffic handling, the
>  > precedent of contesting. "QRL?" means: "Are YOU busy?" (handling traffic)
>  > and was directed to a SPECIFIC station. Somehow, it has been transformed
>  > (incorrectly) over the last couple of decades to mean "Is this FREQUENCY
>  > busy?".  About half the time, if you send QRL? in a contest, a passerby
>  > will respond R and start CQing!
>
> See QRL from the 1936 handbook at http://www.cebik.com/tales/qsig.html 
> It's intent was to be used when a two way communications has already
> been established.  
>
> Jozef WB2MIC
The use of QRL? to ask if a frequency is in use has evolved, as have many things since 1936! The idea is, you may not, particularly on 20m, hear both sides of a QSO. A quick QRL? lets the other station respond "C" . It is a courtesy. You are the only one I have EVER heard of that finds offense at this usage. (And perhaps N6CQ, although I fail to see what makes him an "expert." He equates "incorrectly" with "evolved." )




---
  _    _    _    _    _  
 / \  / \  / \  / \  / \   John L. Sielke
( W )( 2 )( A )( G )( N )  http://w2agn.net
 \_/  \_/  \_/  \_/  \_/   http://www.blurty.com/users/w2agn