ad: ProAudio-1

Am I in the Minority or Misunderstood?

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by KM6CND, Jul 10, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
  1. AD5HR

    AD5HR Ham Member QRZ Page


    Sure won't work on my 75M AM/CW homebrew transmitter.
    It has no PTT.
    I don't have enough tubes to implement that feature.
     
    W7CJD likes this.
  2. W7CJD

    W7CJD Ham Member QRZ Page

    ..have a recorded message SSB voice or CW.
     
  3. WD4IGX

    WD4IGX Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Is that a general observation? Because as a specific reply it's mystifying to me. K4KYV didn't attack anyone. He referred (correctly IMHO) to the image of CBers in popular consciousness, when such image existed. It was never completely true. Since CB was formed there have been some who were fairly technical. Most make their way to amateur radio but some, at least some I knew in the 70s barely pre-boom days, kept a foot in both pools as it were. But there were plenty who fit that stereotype too (I met some of 'em), enough to form the stereotype anyway.

    There are plenty of nasty hams too. But the average level of both technical knowledge and general civility was higher. Of course if one plotted those as curves, the curves overlapped.
     
  4. WD4IGX

    WD4IGX Premium Subscriber QRZ Page


    DoubleFacePalm.jpeg
     
  5. WD4IGX

    WD4IGX Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Me either, aside from the known cesspool frequencies on HF (and even those are very mild compared to what CB used to sound like back in the day.)
     
  6. WD4IGX

    WD4IGX Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I recall when this was a "shave and a haircut" exchange. One would send "dididahdidit..." and the other would reply "didit!" and that was it. It seemed to get shortened later to just "didit."
     
    WZ7U likes this.
  7. WA9SVD

    WA9SVD Ham Member QRZ Page


    No, I'm not saying that. Repeaters often ID in code, but can't sent an automatic ID at more than 20 WPM. A CW conversation (including ID) can be at any speed desired.
     
  8. WD4IGX

    WD4IGX Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    More like "dit dit dah-di-dit" I guess for the first part. I can sound it but I can't spell it! :D
     
  9. K9STH

    K9STH Platinum Subscriber Volunteer Moderator Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    In the later half of the 1950s, and even beyond that, a number of Novice Class operators started sending the "shave and a hair cut" at the end of a QSO waiting for the other station to send the "two bits" reply. Some operators would reply with the "two bits" and other operators, who definitely knew better, would not make any further transmissions.

    Then, instead of sending CQ, a number of operators started sending the "shave and a hair cut" without any identification and tune around for the "two bits". With crystal control, most QSOs were not on the same frequency and the "shave and a hair cut" would be sent a number of times before someone sending the "two bits" was copied. After confirming that the "two bits" was in reply to their transmissions, call signs would be sent. This was a blatant violation of the regulations and the FCC did issue a lot of "pink tickets" for the practice whenever a monitoring station caught an operator doing this.

    Eventually, operators ceased sending pseudo CQs but the "two bits" at the end of CW QSOs are still used by some operators. Definitely not proper operating procedures but, with the lack of FCC monitoring these days, no one is going to receive a notice.

    This practice even spilled over into repeater operation with a number of operators, after signing out, would "kerchunk" the repeater twice giving the same effect. Again, poor operating practice! I do NOT do this and have never, in 60-years of operating, done this. However, I don't get bent out of shape when someone does. Frankly, I just ignore that it has happened and go about my business!

    Glen, K9STH
     
    K6LPM likes this.
  10. KT1F

    KT1F Ham Member QRZ Page

    Even if they did enforce such a silly thing, how would they ever prove beyond a reasonable doubt who sent the dit dit? Some smartass third station might decide to cause trouble by sending dit dit just at the right moment.
     
    NL7W likes this.

Share This Page