[Fists] Re: Fists Digest, Vol 55, Issue 7//using .058
Steve
nebraskacw at gmail.com
Mon Aug 18 07:02:35 EDT 2008
Since .058 is the topic. I see nothing wrong with people using .058
for a QSO. Egads folks, if the frequency is busy, go to the next free
space. Please avoid 14.056.5 though. The County Hunters tend to get
a bit ticked off at FISTS on that frequency.
While I am on a rant.... is it just possibly time for certain persons
to check their keying ability? Some persons sound
terrible/unreadable. Maybe, just maybe it is time to work on
improving. Try taping yourself and see if you can copy what you are
sending. Oh well, that ought to bring the comments!
--
73/72 de WØOOW - Steve #7808
CW - It's still magic
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 1:33 PM, <fists-request at mailman.qth.net> wrote:
>
> Send Fists mailing list submissions to
> fists at mailman.qth.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fists
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> fists-request at mailman.qth.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> fists-owner at mailman.qth.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Fists digest..."
>
>
>
> Win a new Icom IC-756PROIII and help QSL/QTH.net
> Details at: http://mailman.qth.net/index.html
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: QSY'ing away from a calling freq. (David Ring)
> 2. Re: QSY'ing away from a calling freq. (David Ring)
> 3. LCWO Learn CW Online (Fernando Quinones)
> 4. Re: QSY'ing away from a calling freq. (w8fax at wildblue.net)
> 5. Re: QSY'ing away from a calling freq. (Ernie)
> 6. Re: QSY'ing away from a calling freq. (David Ring)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:49:52 -0400
> From: "David Ring" <n1ea at arrl.net>
> Subject: Re: [Fists] QSY'ing away from a calling freq.
> To: "Paul Carreiro, N6EV" <N6EV at montecarloss.com>
> Cc: fists at mailman.qth.net
> Message-ID:
> <b7e6a3ef0808161149n58060a7cx343fcf238d82a96c at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hello Paul,
>
> FISTS has long had a calling frequency - NOT a suggested working
> frequency. Although FISTS cannot enforce the clubs wishes, there are
> a long list of editorials and letters written by Geroge, G3ZQS on the
> subject.
>
> The calling frequencies are to be used to call and establish a contact
> and move off.
>
> Just like the national simplex calling channels on VHF and VHF SSB.
> Can and shift off frequency for the conversation. it is a very good
> system when it works. Hams historically have a great resentment with
> calling frequencies even though they work very well. The FCC gets
> complaints about people sitting on the SSB calling frequencies or
> 146.52 MHz for hours chatting and can do nothing about it though.
>
> However all the good instruction from Geo G3ZQS (now a silent key) and
> others has little good effect when there are others saying "just go
> ahead and have a QSO on the frequency".
>
> If that is what FISTS wants, then they should change "Calling
> Frequencies" to "Suggested Operating Frequencies". It is clear
> historically that FISTS wanted calling frequencies.
>
> You may disagree with that wish, and you may even disregard it without
> any penalty, but haiving a QSO on the calling frequencies destroys
> their effectiveness.
>
> What people should be getting is familiarity with a sound proceedure
> of shifting off frequency.
>
> 73
>
> DR
>
> David Ring, N1EA
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Paul Carreiro, N6EV
> <N6EV at montecarloss.com> wrote:
> > Sending CC's may delay your post. If you feel that your post needs to go to
> > more than one destination please send them separately.
> >
> >
> > At 02:56 AM 8/15/2008, David, N1EA wrote:
> >>
> >> Even if 14,058.0 isn't active where you are, having a QSO there will
> >> annoy those who are monitoring 14,058.0 kHz and cause them to turn off
> >> their radios. (snip)
> >
> > I'm sure this is a topic on which we'll never obtain consensus. I do think
> > the above line of thinking is a little over the top though.
> >
> > We're not talking about 500Kc where some important traffic may pop up any
> > second. .058 isn't an active net frequency 24/7. We have no more right to
> > it than anyone else. QSYing simply moves you to "someone else's frequency"
> > because I'm sure no matter where you go, someone has claimed it. David
> > mentions .050, .056 (not .055) and .060 as good examples. There are many
> > more I'm sure. Every year it seems more frequencies are considered sacred
> > ground by individual groups. It's compounded by encroachments by data and
> > voice transmissions as well as the loss of band segments to voice. It's
> > ridiculous that you have to tip-toe your way around the band. Be respectful
> > of established frequencies (especially in the case of QRP) of course... but
> > if it's open, use it.
> >
> > In my book.. if .058 is clear.. have a QSO there. If you don't want to
> > listen in, QSY or turn the radio off. If you want to make a call and .058
> > is busy, QSY up for down slightly, or (gasp) switch bands. That's how other
> > groups work. I don't know why some in this group continue to fanatically
> > hold .058 sacred. It's a focal point, but it's not the only frequency you
> > can contact a fellow FISTS member. Spread out for gosh sakes if the
> > frequency is in use. There is no protocol that says you must QSY from .058.
> > Perhaps we should just stop calling it a calling frequency. That term
> > seems to be the root of the confusion and fanaticism.
> >
> > Just my 2 cents. I certainly don't expect everyone to agree, and I won't be
> > so presumptuous to expect anyone let alone everyone to comply.
> >
> > Paul N6EV #1407
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:07:05 -0400
> From: "David Ring" <n1ea at arrl.net>
> Subject: Re: [Fists] QSY'ing away from a calling freq.
> To: "Paul Carreiro, N6EV" <N6EV at montecarloss.com>
> Cc: fists at mailman.qth.net
> Message-ID:
> <b7e6a3ef0808161507n6dc78cccvc647accc03100f5a at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Paul,
>
> I might agree with you - but your thoughts are the official FISTS
> thoughts on the matter. FISTS clearly lists the frequencies as
> calling frequencies and there have been requests made for years and
> years by Geo G3ZQS - founder of FISTS - and others for the members to
> use them as calling frequencies and not working frequencies.
>
> Never the less - no matter what you thing as it is not a matter of
> opiinion. The benefits of a calling frequency are all but completely
> lost when a station uses the calling frequency as a working frequency
> - not to mention that someone else in another part of the world might
> use it to call someone and cause QRM. But QRM on a calling frequency
> is usual.
>
> It does NOT help when FISTS has been trying to educate their members
> for 20 years or so when members say "go right ahead and talk on the
> calling frequency."
>
> Shift off the calling frequency after making a contact. Either that
> or convince the FISTS powers that be to change their stand on the
> matter. They want a calling frequency not a working frequency. They
> want it to be kept clear of conversation, just calling and replying.
>
> It really works very well - which is why Geo G3ZQS kept banging the
> drum for it. Try it. It is a fabulous system that works very well.
>
> I've had people call me blind on that frequency and I've answered them
> within 30 seconds because I leave several FISTS calling frequencies in
> the loudspeakers.
>
> FISTS officially wants it this way and has been trying to educate
> members to use it this way for about 20 years or however long FISTS
> has been around.
>
> 73
>
> David N1EA
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Paul Carreiro, N6EV
> <N6EV at montecarloss.com> wrote:
> > Sending CC's may delay your post. If you feel that your post needs to go to
> > more than one destination please send them separately.
> >
> >
> > At 11:49 AM 8/16/2008, David, N1EA wrote:
> >>
> >> (snip)
> >> If that is what FISTS wants, then they should change "Calling
> >> Frequencies" to "Suggested Operating Frequencies". It is clear
> >> historically that FISTS wanted calling frequencies.
> >
> > Well you have this dues paying member's vote on that idea.
> >
> >> (snip) haiving a QSO on the calling frequencies destroys
> >> their effectiveness. (snip)
> >
> > I disagree. In fact I see it completely the opposite. Keeping .058 active
> > only enhances the focal point.
> >
> > Oh well.. I didn't expect to part the red sea... or change certain minds...
> > just present the other side of the story from a long time member.
> >
> > 73
> > Paul N6EV
> > Proudly wearing #1407 for 20 years
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Fists mailing list
> > Fists at mailman.qth.net
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fists
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 20:04:17 -0700
> From: Fernando Quinones <n2fq at sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: [Fists] LCWO Learn CW Online
> To: skcc at yahoogroups.com
> Cc: KochMorse at yahoogroups.com, fists at mailman.qth.net,
> SolidCpyCW at yahoogroups.com, CW Reflector <cw at mailman.qth.net>
> Message-ID: <960F3EB6-A82A-448A-AD91-54923AA56147 at sbcglobal.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> If you like G4FON Koch method and RufzXP for keeping track of your
> progress,
>
> then you'd like this. Runs directly on the browser. Very slick.
>
> <http://lcwo.net/?p=main>
>
> Fernando N2FQ
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 14:17:36 -0400
> From: <w8fax at wildblue.net>
> Subject: Re: [Fists] QSY'ing away from a calling freq.
> To: <fists at mailman.qth.net>
> Message-ID: <006701c90095$9f8d8970$6500a8c0 at KINGPOOK>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Well, if it were 4 to 10 years ago, I would agree on the calling freq idea.
> A "CQ FISTS" on .058 or 1Khz up or down more or less would rarely go
> unanswered, especially on 40 or 20 meters, and at night 80 also. Now an op
> can often call til his finners are sore and rarely get an answer, and often
> times the reply is from a non FIST member. I have found that ops new to CW,
> or those who have trouble copying Morse, rarely have any idea what you are
> trying to tell them. They are having enuff problems trying to get the RST,
> name and QTH correct. Time and again the last few years I have made efforts
> to ask ops questions about their equipment, antennas, bands of operation,
> etc etc, only to have these questions ignored, while the op tells me the
> usual WX etc. This tells me that he is NOT getting it. Trying to QSY with
> the diminished skills of todays new ops are just an excercise in futility.
> Besides, trying to do this at 5 to 8 WPM just takes too long. Nobody HAS to
> learn Morse anymore, and I applaud the ops who do, however there is no
> longer any stress put on P-R-O-C-E-E-D-U-R-E. I just have a QSO wherever I
> happen to get it and move on. Like I said, it's not like .058 is packed like
> in days gone by, or the band is full of prioficient ops, so lets just help
> the new guys along and keep things simple. Plus, we sure don't need anymore
> frequency cops as I believe those jobs are filled, and still have long
> waiting lists. Keep QSO's simple unless you know the other guy is
> understanding WHAT you are sending. New ops have a tendency to send faster
> than they can copy, which ends up meaning they don't copy much at all, and
> are usually nervous to boot, so don't make it worse with a bunch of useless
> jibberish that was not needed in the first place...........Tap
> on.....Al/W8FAX/2192
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Ring" <n1ea at arrl.net>
> To: "Paul Carreiro, N6EV" <N6EV at montecarloss.com>
> Cc: <fists at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 2:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [Fists] QSY'ing away from a calling freq.
>
>
> > Sending CC's may delay your post. If you feel that your post needs to go
> > to more than one destination please send them separately.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hello Paul,
> >
> > FISTS has long had a calling frequency - NOT a suggested working
> > frequency. Although FISTS cannot enforce the clubs wishes, there are
> > a long list of editorials and letters written by Geroge, G3ZQS on the
> > subject.
> >
> > The calling frequencies are to be used to call and establish a contact
> > and move off.
> >
> > Just like the national simplex calling channels on VHF and VHF SSB.
> > Can and shift off frequency for the conversation. it is a very good
> > system when it works. Hams historically have a great resentment with
> > calling frequencies even though they work very well. The FCC gets
> > complaints about people sitting on the SSB calling frequencies or
> > 146.52 MHz for hours chatting and can do nothing about it though.
> >
> > However all the good instruction from Geo G3ZQS (now a silent key) and
> > others has little good effect when there are others saying "just go
> > ahead and have a QSO on the frequency".
> >
> > If that is what FISTS wants, then they should change "Calling
> > Frequencies" to "Suggested Operating Frequencies". It is clear
> > historically that FISTS wanted calling frequencies.
> >
> > You may disagree with that wish, and you may even disregard it without
> > any penalty, but haiving a QSO on the calling frequencies destroys
> > their effectiveness.
> >
> > What people should be getting is familiarity with a sound proceedure
> > of shifting off frequency.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > DR
> >
> > David Ring, N1EA
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Paul Carreiro, N6EV
> > <N6EV at montecarloss.com> wrote:
> >> Sending CC's may delay your post. If you feel that your post needs to go
> >> to
> >> more than one destination please send them separately.
> >>
> >>
> >> At 02:56 AM 8/15/2008, David, N1EA wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Even if 14,058.0 isn't active where you are, having a QSO there will
> >>> annoy those who are monitoring 14,058.0 kHz and cause them to turn off
> >>> their radios. (snip)
> >>
> >> I'm sure this is a topic on which we'll never obtain consensus. I do
> >> think
> >> the above line of thinking is a little over the top though.
> >>
> >> We're not talking about 500Kc where some important traffic may pop up any
> >> second. .058 isn't an active net frequency 24/7. We have no more right
> >> to
> >> it than anyone else. QSYing simply moves you to "someone else's
> >> frequency"
> >> because I'm sure no matter where you go, someone has claimed it. David
> >> mentions .050, .056 (not .055) and .060 as good examples. There are many
> >> more I'm sure. Every year it seems more frequencies are considered
> >> sacred
> >> ground by individual groups. It's compounded by encroachments by data
> >> and
> >> voice transmissions as well as the loss of band segments to voice. It's
> >> ridiculous that you have to tip-toe your way around the band. Be
> >> respectful
> >> of established frequencies (especially in the case of QRP) of course...
> >> but
> >> if it's open, use it.
> >>
> >> In my book.. if .058 is clear.. have a QSO there. If you don't want to
> >> listen in, QSY or turn the radio off. If you want to make a call and
> >> .058
> >> is busy, QSY up for down slightly, or (gasp) switch bands. That's how
> >> other
> >> groups work. I don't know why some in this group continue to fanatically
> >> hold .058 sacred. It's a focal point, but it's not the only frequency
> >> you
> >> can contact a fellow FISTS member. Spread out for gosh sakes if the
> >> frequency is in use. There is no protocol that says you must QSY from
> >> .058.
> >> Perhaps we should just stop calling it a calling frequency. That term
> >> seems to be the root of the confusion and fanaticism.
> >>
> >> Just my 2 cents. I certainly don't expect everyone to agree, and I won't
> >> be
> >> so presumptuous to expect anyone let alone everyone to comply.
> >>
> >> Paul N6EV #1407
> > _______________________________________________
> > Fists mailing list
> > Fists at mailman.qth.net
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fists
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 14:26:07 -0400
> From: Ernie <w8eh.ernie at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Fists] QSY'ing away from a calling freq.
> To: fists at mailman.qth.net
> Message-ID: <48A86D3F.7080300 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
> If every group has a calling frequency, where do we work? That is what
> it is about. If there was one calling frequency on the band that
> everyone observed, that's one thing, but to have every little group
> keeping a calling frequency is another. Then we have to worry about
> stepping on someone's toes because they want to listen to a silent
> radio. How about just calling it "Fists - center of activity", instead
> of insisting that it is Fists private calling frequency. The private
> club calling frequency goes against standard amateur practice, doesn't it?
>
> It is starting to sound like the old net wars on 20 &75 meter phone, and
> the reminders from the FCC that even the nets didn't own the
> frequencies. "You can't talk on here, I'm waiting for a net to start".
> How many times did Riley say in his speeches, ".... you have a knob on
> your radio, turn it."
>
> Move around on the band, maybe it will give you a better outlook. :-)
>
> Ernie
>
>
> David Ring wrote:
> > Paul,
> >
> > I might agree with you - but your thoughts are the official FISTS
> > thoughts on the matter. FISTS clearly lists the frequencies as
> > calling frequencies and there have been requests made for years and
> > years by Geo G3ZQS - founder of FISTS - and others for the members to
> > use them as calling frequencies and not working frequencies.
> >
> > Never the less - no matter what you thing as it is not a matter of
> > opiinion. The benefits of a calling frequency are all but completely
> > lost when a station uses the calling frequency as a working frequency
> > - not to mention that someone else in another part of the world might
> > use it to call someone and cause QRM. But QRM on a calling frequency
> > is usual.
> >
> > It does NOT help when FISTS has been trying to educate their members
> > for 20 years or so when members say "go right ahead and talk on the
> > calling frequency."
> >
> > Shift off the calling frequency after making a contact. Either that
> > or convince the FISTS powers that be to change their stand on the
> > matter. They want a calling frequency not a working frequency. They
> > want it to be kept clear of conversation, just calling and replying.
> >
> > It really works very well - which is why Geo G3ZQS kept banging the
> > drum for it. Try it. It is a fabulous system that works very well.
> >
> > I've had people call me blind on that frequency and I've answered them
> > within 30 seconds because I leave several FISTS calling frequencies in
> > the loudspeakers.
> >
> > FISTS officially wants it this way and has been trying to educate
> > members to use it this way for about 20 years or however long FISTS
> > has been around.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > David N1EA
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:26:28 +0000
> From: "David Ring" <n1ea at arrl.net>
> Subject: Re: [Fists] QSY'ing away from a calling freq.
> To: fists at mailman.qth.net
> Message-ID:
> <b7e6a3ef0808171126x499d30d5s4a1249861eec0b62 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Three points remain:
>
> FISTS policy is to have their frequencies as "Calling Frequencies" not
> working frequencies.
>
> If the membership wants working frequencies they should persuade the
> powers that be within FISTS to change that.
>
> Advocating working on the calling frequencies actively counters the
> many FISTS editorials throughout the years reminding members that they
> should call and answer ONLY on the calling frequencies and then shift
> off.
>
> OK points ended. Now one example:
>
> If every member on this list tuned into 14,058 today and just used the
> calling frequencies to call - say a friend at random - you'd be amazed
> at the results.
>
> You could give a short call - CQ UTAH CQ UTAH de N1EA N1EA K
>
> You could probably arrange 3 to 6 contacts a MINUTE if it were used so.
>
> 73
>
> DR
>
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 6:17 PM, <w8fax at wildblue.net> wrote:
> > Sending CC's may delay your post. If you feel that your post needs to go to
> > more than one destination please send them separately.
> >
> >
> > Well, if it were 4 to 10 years ago, I would agree on the calling freq idea.
> > A "CQ FISTS" on .058 or 1Khz up or down more or less would rarely go
> > unanswered, especially on 40 or 20 meters, and at night 80 also.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fists mailing list
> Fists at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fists
>
>
> End of Fists Digest, Vol 55, Issue 7
> ************************************
--
73/72 de WØOOW - Steve
CW - It's still magic!
More information about the Fists
mailing list