Oh - and another one - don't use Q signals on phone..... Known this for 50 years - but still use QRZ - not trainable I guess!! Russ KD4JO
There is absolutely nothing wrong with using Q signals on phone. Should we change this site to "Who is calling me.com"?
I have quite a few DX conversations outside of contests. In case you missed it, I said "DX that I might not normally be able to." I'd like to get to 300 entities. To do that, I'm going to have to work a bunch of those 3 second QSOs in contests, or a 3 second QSO with a DXpedition. When a team finally gets to Bovet, Crozet, etc, they're not going to want to talk about the weather, or what kind of tea you had with breakfast. To get them in the log it's going to take a contest mentality. Boorish? Have you ever listened to the asshats who interrupt a contest station who happens to be on the same freq where they want to have their daily conversation about how their ulcer is acting up?
You have no idea as to how many "rare" DX stations I've chatted with and had discussions which were similar to what you just posted.... The problem these days is that many hams want the contacts immediately and don't have the patience to make contacts by working the bands. It's now a shooting fish in the barrel methodology. Your contest driven DXCC doesn't hold the same weight as actually having a qso with the one hundred stations... The new ham radio should be called "Entitled Ham Radio"! "interrupt a contest station"... You should do a QRZ lookup on those contest stations... They are professionals with the ultimate in technology... I thought that ham radio was a hobby, not a profession!!!!! An after thought... Perhaps we should have two DXCC' awards. One for those who make the 100 countries the easy way (fish barrel mechanism) and another for people who actually have a QSO with the 100 countries. Come to think about it, there should be a third DXCC. This would be awarded to the computer running Digital communications as we know that those 12 second QSO's don't require human intervention...
The title of this thread says it all. 14 Common Phone "Mistakes". Mistakes according to whom??? Part 97 and more broadly, the Communications Act define what we can and cannot do from an administrative and legal perspective. Everything else in the eye of the beholder. No longer a cold war era "training" ground for communicators and engineers, Ham Radio is a hobby pure and simple. There are no "mistakes" that need to be adjudicated and no operators that need to be chastised by self righteous elitists. If someone wants to use Q codes on phone, so what? If someone uses non standardized phonetics, so what? The "I'm better than you because I had to learn Morse code" crowd and the "I'm better than you because I talk to my DX contacts" is nothing short of bizarre, IMHO. Are some of you guys so insecure that you need to belittle others to make you feel better about yourselves? Are you so resistant to change that anything that deviates from the way you did things 50 years ago is "wrong"? Those were rhetorical as I already know the answers . Recently I had a discussion on a WSPR site about reference floor noise. We disagreed on a technical point, and the guy said "The problem with you young newbies is you don't want to learn from older more experienced Hams when we try to teach you something". (he knew neither my age, experience, nor my technical background). That is the epitome of what this thread seems to be about, plus he was wrong
Actually, having only ONE is exactly and the only meaning of "standard". There is indeed a single global standard for the phonetic alphabet. I have flown jets all over this planet of ours and I speak to controllers that barely speak English. When they need to convey a place for fix, they spell it out with the GLOBAL standard phonetic alphabet. I have worked with militaries all over this earth, and when they need to covey something, they too use the ONLY global standard phonetic alphabet. I like to sail...same. Only one global phonetic alphabet. So.... In the hobby of HAM radio, you indeed may use non-standard phonetics. That said, you sound like a bunch of CB clowns. If your goal is to convey a letters during bad conditions, you'll do better if everyone uses the one global standard alphabet. 10-4 good buddy?
And yet the world's most accomplished DXers and Contesters more often than not use a different "standard" because it works better for them. Further, some operators use personalized phonetics that have nothing to do with "bad conditions". So then, in the heterogeneous environment of Ham Radio there can indeed be multiple "standards" that are application specific, and even the use of non standards. Your ad hominem "That said, you sound like a bunch of CB clowns." made the point from my previous post beautifully. Do you subscribe to such homogeneity in AR that you advocate the wearing of Ham Radio uniforms too?
Quick Reference Operating Aids (arrl.org) ARRL Communications Procedures International Telecommunication Union Phonetic Alphabet The RST System Time Conversion Chart Used world wide NTS.
i THINK ONE OF MY FAVORITE " WHY DID HE SAY THAT" IS WHEN THEY SAY "FOR id" AFTER THEIR CALL..........
Of all the mistakes that are made on phone...these nit-picky things are the ones you felt it necessary to make a video about? Really?
also @WW1I - I agree on the standard That is correct as there is no defined or regulated version of phonetics that are to be used nor are there any regulations requiring phonetics. However, it is commonly expected, not required, that if phonetics are to be used that the NATO standard version should be used which would be Sierra for S and not Sugar for S. But we all know what people mean on the air so who cares ultimately. Because this is not military, this is a hobby. Howeverm being that ham radio is also a public service for safety and national emergency etc... in the event you have to interface with military you should be fully versed in NATO phonetics as you will be able to better and more clearly communicate with less errors during information exchange. One of my biggest pet peeves I think of all peeves is the most annoying one of all. In fact I will completely leave a conversation when people over 2m/70cm/DMR/Dstar/whatever use "KK4YDR for ID" Just say your ID and stop saying "For ID" my god this is a peeve. Don't get me started on 7200khz - my god dont get me started on that either. Lastly, why in the hell do people use Q codes over freaking side band phone? They are for CW, hell even digital. When you say something to someone and your done dont say QSL? Just hush and let them reply for crying out loud as you will quickly find out if they copied you. I have done thousands of voice, digital, and other conversations over HF so im not just harping to harp. Well maybe I am. But I dont get my panties in a wad over improper Q codes. I can easily just ignore it and keep being friendly etc... its when people say "callsign for ID" that just grinds my gears. I will defend the use of QRZ for when your turning over rapid contacts, moving on from one to the next real fast, like trying to work through a pileup. It is universally understood that you say "73 station, this is KK4ydr, QRZ" then everyone knows that your done and ready for the next station, and since you dont know who the next station is but you do know there are many calling you, it is proper to use the "Who is calling me?" QRZ code.
"commonly expected" ...Thanks for your opinion. If you belong to some sort of emergency communications group that has a standard for phonetics you should follow what they prescribe. When it comes to day-to-day routine ham radio communication there is no "commonly expected" phonetic alphabet. The choice is yours. Kilo 3 Xray Radio
