[Elecraft] Is CW a Language? OT
Tony Martin W4FOA
w4foa at comcast.net
Sat Jan 14 11:07:16 EST 2006
Sandy,
I agree with much of what you have said but I would ask "whom shall we
blame"?
Unfortunately, I think we, you and I, are to blame for the lack of skills
and know how
of many of the newcomers.
I don't know how long you have been in ham radio, but it wasn't too many
years
ago when most of us were "in" ham radio because of an "elmer". Someone that
introduced us to this wonderful hobby and nudged us along the way,
encouraged us
when we wanted to give up, and then tutored us as we got on the air. Even
corrected
us when we were not operating according to the standards of the day.
Today it is too easy to buy a book off the shelf, spend a day studying it,
spend 20 minutes
taking an exam and wait 24 hours to receive your own callsign. The radio
clubs are
ever so eager to have new members that many really don't spend the time to
insure that
the new member will ever be more than a "dues paying member" and never
realize there
is more to ham radio than 2 meters.
If there is a solution to the problem of poor operating habits by our
newcomers, it will
be for each of us to take them by the hand and teach them the correct
procedures. BUT,
please don't think for one minute that ALL of the bad operators are
newcomers.....not
by any stretch of the imagination!
My two cents worth..
Tony, W4FOA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandy W5TVW" <ebjr at i-55.com>
To: <N2EY at aol.com>; <kk5f at arrl.net>; <elecraft at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Is CW a Language? OT
> Operating "protocol" today is absolutely atrocious at times!
> A lot of the newer hams know nothing about really proper procedure and
> many are very short on manners!
> Biggest violation of all is when someone calls CQ, another station just
> answers "W1ABC W1ABC K". Who is he calling? I usually respond by
> sending: "QRZ? QRZ? DE W5TVW K".
> Often the other station will simply send
> "W1ABC W1ABC K" If the band is crowded, which it often is, this had NOT
> told me he is calling me! We have not yet established communication so
> the "DE W1ABC" or "W1ABC" IS NOT proper or polite procedure.
>
> Whether a station uses "OP", "NAME", "HANDLE" (or whatever) that is his
> preference, whatever turns his crank.
>
> Add to this the "Novice accent" heard STILL today "NNQ NNQ NNQ NNQ NNQ
> DE W1ABC W1ABC.." repeated several times. Then a 5 second
> pause for an answer, followed by the same long CQ call again! One chap on
> 40
> a few nights ago repeated this for maybe 5-6 times. I couldn't stand it
> any longer
> and fired up the 1/2 Kw and called him. He acted as if I was never there.
> Either deaf or has his receiver somewhere besides his frequency.
>
> Are ham license classes teaching proper procedures anymore? I KNOW the
> FCC doesn't give a damn. Perhaps a cell phone ringing, or someone passing
> gas loudly, or talking loudly in an office or church or theatre isn't
> considered
> RUDE anymore, so why try to have any manners in the ham bands?
>
> Sorry for the diatribe, but seems like too many of the newbies are not
> paying attention or don't care. More attention needs to be payed to
> the ARRL operating manual or have they rewritten it to reflect the
> times?
>
> This 2 cents worth on "Rotten Radio" from this "Old Man".
>
> 73 to all,
> Sandy W5TVW
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <N2EY at aol.com>
> To: <kk5f at arrl.net>; <elecraft at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 5:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Is CW a Language? OT
>
>
> | In a message dated 1/13/06 3:35:43 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> | kk5f at earthlink.net writes:
> |
> |
> | > The use of CL, KN, BK, or the use of both AR and K at the end of the
> same
> | > transmission is nonsense.
> |
> |
> | I disagree in part.
> |
> | CL means "closing station, will not listen for any calls" Equivalent to
> the
> | military use of "AR". How the amateur and military uses of "AR" got so
> | different is a mystery to me.
> |
> | KN has a definite use in amateur radio if someone is rare DX.
> |
> | BK is different from K in that it is used in rapid-fire exchanges rather
> than
> | with full callsign exchanges.
> |
> |
> | I do agree about combining "AR" and "K".
> |
> |
> | > >But "BK" is used in rapid-fire exchanges
> | > >*without* the formal callsign exchange:
> | > >".....FB MOJO OM BT IS UR RIG A K2 or K1? BK
> | >
> | > Once again...a simple K serves even better. There is no usage rule
> that
> | > states that K must only be used following a call sign.
> |
> | No, but it emphasizes the quick nature of the exchange.
> |
> | ----
> |
> | Couple of other points:
> |
> | Someone mentioned brevity.
> |
> | In my Novice days it was common to hear things like:
> |
> | "R R R TNX FER CALL BT UR SIGS RST 599 599 BT QTH IS WAYNE, PA WAYNE, PA
> BT
> | NAME IS JIM JIM"
> |
> | pounded out at 5-7 wpm.
> |
> | But the same thing can be sent as:
> |
> | "R R R TNX CL UR 599 599 IN WAYNE PA WAYNE PA OP JIM JIM"
> |
> | which still includes the repeats of the important stuff but is a bit
> | shorter....
> |
> | __ __
> | On "run together" prosigns like AR and SK:
> |
> | I propose that since plaintext doesn't allow us to overline easily, we
> adopt
> | the online convention of enclosing such signals in brackets. []
> |
> | So AR would mean didah didahdit
> |
> | and [AR] would mean didahdidahdit
> |
> | Agreed?
> |
> | --
> |
> | On standardization:
> |
> | It's interesting to see the variations in different military and
> commercial
> | Morse operations vs. amateur, as well as ITU standards.
> |
> | But I think it's pretty clear that nobody else is going to set standards
> for
> | Morse
> | much any more. Indeed, at least here in the USA, the FCC has backed down
> from
> | many old standards. For example, it used to be required by law that hams
> give
> | their own call last - that's gone. So is logkeeping as a legal
> requirement,
> | indicating most portable or mobile operation, indicating the station
> called,
> | and much more.
> |
> | IOW, the standards for Morse in the future are going to be mostly what
> we
> | hams say they are.
> |
> | 73 de Jim, N2EY
> | _______________________________________________
> | Elecraft mailing list
> | Post to: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> | You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
> | Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
> | http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> |
> | Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
> | Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
> |
> |
> |
> | --
> | No virus found in this incoming message.
> | Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> | Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.17/228 - Release Date:
> 1/12/2006
> |
> |
>
> _______________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Post to: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
>
More information about the Elecraft
mailing list