eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???

Mark Derby (K8MHZ) on May 10, 2005
View comments about this article!

CQ on 2 meter linked repeater system:

I would like to share a story that supports my allegation that hams in the Michigan area are a great bunch of folks.

The other night I was listening to the W8HVG linked repeater system. For those of you that aren't aware, the system consists of about a dozen repeaters all linked together to form coverage of about 80 percent of the Lower Peninsula of the State of Michigan. It also seeps into the UP and our bordering states. I heard someone calling CQ on the system. They got a contact and called again. Now, calling CQ on a repeater system is not totally unheard of, but it is usually a request for information and results in only one exchange. It seems that the operator calling CQ had just got his license and was in the process of logging 50 call signs so he could send out QSL cards. Most of us know that this is not standard operation on a 2-meter repeater. The new ham did not know this.

As I sat and listened I was pleasantly surprised that no one harassed him for his somewhat unusual actions on this huge repeater system. -- Quite the contrary, actually. Ham after ham responded to his call and swapped info with him. None answering a CQ was so rude as to ruin a really good run on QSOs. After about 30 minutes of contacts, a ham that answered one of his CQs called him back and patiently explained to him that calling CQ was not standard procedure on a repeater. One would simply state their call and say 'monitoring'. The new ham was thankful to learn a new procedure and on his next transmission did just that. That call was also answered quickly. The new ham went about his business and explained that he was new to the hobby and wanted to send out QSL cards. Contacts kept coming in.

I finally got my chance and had a nice chat with Troy, KD8BHM. We exchanged info and I am sending out a card to him today. He explained that he is working on his Code and General Theory so he can get cards from all over the world.

Troy kept fishing for contacts and kept getting them, all welcoming him to the hobby. They came in from Evansville, IN to just south of the Big Mac. Contact after contact. Truck drivers, MARS operators, base stations, mobile travelers…I will bet he had his 50 before the night was over.

He was asking what type of rigs and antennas they were using. He was stunned to hear people over 200 miles away getting into his repeater. He did not know about the rest of the repeaters in the system. I called him back and explained the system to him. He was astonished to know about all the repeaters and very impressed. (The W8HVG system IS phenomenal). I knew about a web site for the system and couldn't remember the URL. No problem, a couple friendly breakers supplied the info for us.

This few minutes of listening made me glad to be a part of the hobby. -- For those of you that have had bad experiences with rude hams, my apologies. The hams around here are really great folks. How they worked with the new ham calling CQ on a linked repeater system proved it. I'm glad, too. Troy said he was having the time of his life with his new hobby. One rude ham could have burst his bubble. Instead they were making sure he had his fun, and still Elmered him so he could work the system properly. Great job, you all make me proud to be a ham. The spirit of ham radio is alive and well in Michigan!!!

73

Mark K8MHZ

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WILLY on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

It sounds like your area has just gained a fine new ham, with lots of potential. Excellent!

You expounded on how nice it was to hear no one was rude to him, and that some politely elmered him.
All well and good. This is as it should be.

But - it takes two to tango. I want to point out that you said the new ham was thankful. And he listened!
:) This is equally important.

With those with experience offering a hand, and the newcomers willing to listen and learn, you all have a formula for success. Congratulations!

Thank you for a positive story.

73
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by LNXAUTHOR on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
- very good, and you're a good ham for jumping in there, too!

- i was also fortunate to start off on a friendly repeater... i learned a lot, joined a local club, and make some great friends...

- what a great hobby, eh?

:-)
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by N8BOA on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I bet we (Myself included) can learn alot about good ham radio pratice from KD8BHM
Sean
N8BOA
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by AG4HY on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

Sure wish that was the case here, around adrian ga. you can use what ever proceedure you want and STILL, the silence is deafening, to say the least, need help? you better have a cb, else you can do the best you can. you're on your own.
73
willie
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WA6BFH on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
200 Miles, huh?
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K0BG on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Who says calling CQ is not allowed on a repeater? That depends on the group running it. I've called CQ on a repeaters many times, and I've been called down a few times too. However, when you ask for directions, and no one comes back to you, what else can you do? It's worked every time for me. Think about it for a moment and you'll see the advantages.

Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.xom
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K4JF on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I agree with Alan. There is (should be) NOTHING wrong with calling CQ on a repeater. CQ is what hams do. In many years of operating, I have never heard a coherent "why" calling CQ is frowned on. My own suspicion is that it is a holdover from 11m, where CQing is illegal.

I, for example, will not say "K4JF monitoring", as that is a one-way transmission and too close to broadcasting for my comfort.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KC9FSH on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I too was lucky like this HAM. I started out by listening to the local repeaters for a few days before my first transmission. I made sure that the fellow Ham (KE6IFC) knew that he was my first contact ever on the airwaves. He kindly corrected one of my minor errors that I didn't even notice I made until he did so.
There's nothing worse that could happen to a new Ham than to have their first contact be a negative one. I know if my first contact was a negative one I probably would have said screw it and sold my radio because it would be a discouragement.

73,
KC9FSH
Tim H
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KC8EMH on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I'm a Michigan Ham who has used the system, and I'll tell you, it's hard to find VHF hams anywhere else but the repeaters here in Michigan. I monitor them quite closely and rarely have I heard rude behavior on them. That repeater system is a valued part of Michigan in my opinion. 73's to all
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WY3X on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I was told early in my ham "career" that repeater etiquette varies from place to place. The person who "taught" me told me to listen to a few QSO's on a repeater to determine what local etiquette was before jumping in with both feet. In some cases this isn't practical- because of minimal repeater traffic. I think it's great that this new ham who called CQ on a repeater was welcomed into our ranks in this manner! I don't think you necessarily have to conform to etiquette ALL the time, so long as you make sure you run a legal ship. Sometimes it takes a peach in the apple barrel to make things interesting. But if I found a dead fish in there..... -KR4WM
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KC7FLR on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
That is a good story. That kind of story makes you feel good about the hobby.

Here in Tacoma, WA. our club, Radio Club of Tacoma, has a tradition that a new ham gets a certificate from the club on their fist contact. The person who makes that contact informs the club and the new ham is presented the certificate at the next club meeting. Most of these first contacts are on the club repeater.

The club also gives out certificates for each 10 contacts so a new ham can enjoy piling up contacts on the club's repeaters.

Occasionally we forget our first time on the air. How inexperienced we were. How excited we were. I try to think back, when I hear a new ham, and remember how I was and be patient just as others were with me when I was new.

73
Ed
KC7FLR
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KF4VGX on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Now that the spirit of Amateur radio!
welcoming a new ham to the hobby!

................................................

Web can find a dead fish in his own back yard , closet , toilet , etc!
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by N0AH on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Mark,

Cool call sign-

Any new blood is good. Here in Colorado, a lot the repeaters are up a few thousand feet on mountains. So making it into one from over a hundred miles away is not always that tough simplex. But in Michigan, ouch?

I think it is great to pass out cards to this guy- Now it's time for him to get on Echolink to motivate him to upgrade to HF.

73-

Paul N0AH

 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KF4VGX on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Now that the spirit of Amateur radio!
welcoming a new ham to the hobby!

................................................

Web ( KR4WM )can find a dead fish in his own back yard , closet , toilet , etc!
Edited by kf4vgx ,23.35
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by W3DCG on May 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Mark, thank you for a most excellent presentation of a wonderful real life story. I felt good reading it and still do feel good!
I had to grow up, have kids, live, have more kids, to appreciate the way of seeing one must have, in order to remain positive from beginning to end. It is so refreshing to hear that everyone on the repeater network that night had their valves turned on. People will have to read 'Sarah and the foreverness of friends of a feather' to know what valves turned on means. Now that it is past my bed-time, I'm going to go to sleep feeling good. Thank you again, K8MHZ and everyone who was a party to those 50+ Q's, you've turned my valve Full On.
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KA1EUI on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
It is a linked system.....

Jim KA1EUI
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KE4ZHN on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Nice story and its good to hear new blood is coming into the hobby. How many times have you thought the band is dead, only because everyones listening and not calling cq? While calling cq is not the norm on a repeater, Im glad the new ham got elmered in a friendly manner. Sounds like a good bunch of operators in Michigan. The 8 landers I have worked on hf all were quite corgial and friendly on the air, a pleasure to talk to.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WA8VBX on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I remember the first time I used a repeater, even though I had been a ham for several years and use to calling CQ on AM. I got on the local repeater in Anchorage Ak, called CQ the usually way(3x3). Well a fellow ham came back and explained how it was done on the repeater, and I have been doing that way since, but I see nothing wrong someone calling CQ on a repeater, not any different then hearing someone say, WA8XXX mobile looking for a qso on the 146.XX machine, which I hear alot.

Good story, and shows that goodwill in ham radio is still going strong.
Kurt
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by N0IU on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I, too, have always wondered why someone would give their callsign then say "monitoring"? By definition, monitoring assumes that all you want to do is listen. If that is the case, why announce it??

Generally, putting out a string CQ's is the norm on HF because you are hoping to capture the attention of someone who just happens to be spinning the dial. On FM, because of the capture effect, if someone has their radio set on a frequency with the squelch turned up, giving your call out once is all it takes to break the squelch so there is no reason to call CQ over and over.

It sounds like this was a potentially disastrous situation for the 'greenie' that turned into a huge positive for him. Thank goodness!

NØIU
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KE3HO on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Who says calling CQ is not allowed on a repeater? "

I don't see where anyone said that. Calling CQ on a repeater is, as stated in the article, not standard operating procedure, but it is certainly not prohibited. There is nothing *wrong* with calling CQ on a repeater, it just is not commonly done. The response you get will be mixed. I think that the more common "KE3HO monitoring" is assumed to mean that you are listening and would like to have a QSO with someone else who has some time to kill. In this new hams case, wanting to rack up a run of contacts to send cards out, I think calling CQ was probably more appropriate. It has a different implied intent.

73 - Jim
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by AA4PB on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Of course on a repeater you don't need to put out a long string of CQs (actually you don't on HF either). A simple "CQ this is W4XX" is quick and clearly identifies that you are looking for a contact. If you just announce your call, you might be just testing and not necessarily listening for a call. "Listening" isn't really very clear either - what are you listening for? Maybe thats why we often have the complaints of no activity on the repeaters - everybody is "listening" and nobody is calling "CQ" :-)

I never did understand why some have such a problem with using a 1X1 CQ on a repeater. Back when repeaters were first becoming popular it was done that way all the time. The change in "policy" seems to be something more recent. Perhaps it came about because somebody tied up their repeater with a string of 15 or 20 CQ's which no one could answer until he was done. I've heard that happen on HF as well. A few times I've gotten tired of waiting and moved on before he finished the CQ.

CQ = "calling all amateur radio stations". It seems to fit pretty well - provided you don't overdo it.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WA8ICK on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
W8HVG is indeed a great system.

I don't know where or why the meaning of CQ changed but I'll continue to call CQ on repeaters. Just because a station is "listening or monitering" dosn't address the fact that CQ is a general call. I'm not sure what the other is.

WA8ICK
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by W6TH on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
.
CQ is a short way to say "seek you".


With cw just send CQ QSX.
.:
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K8MHZ on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Thanks everyone for the comments.

There are a few different ways to check into a repeater, of course. Some just throw out their call, some add 'monitoring' and some go so far to come right out and ask 'is there anybody out there?'.

Regardless how I hear the check in, if I have time to chat with an old friend I will do so, if I hear a call I am not familiar with, I try to at least let the caller know someone is on the repeater even if I am a little busy.

Those of you that think 200 miles into a repeater is not much of an accomplishment, here in Michigan using a mobile the range is more like 20-45 miles. Some repeaters, like the Mighty '06 in Holland or the Allegan '24 can be stretched out over 50 miles but that is about the extent of the range of a non-linked repeater. Most of our repeaters are on buildings as we don't have much of a mountain range here.

So thanks again everyone, glad you enjoyed the read. If you are in the Penninsulas some time, give me a yell on the W8HVG system. See www.w8hvg.org for frequencies.

73 to all,

Mark K8MHZ

 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by TE9TEC on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
mark,
i am from wisconsin and travel to the U.P quite often. where could i find info on this repeater system? also I just got my call sign two weeks ago and bought the ARRL repeater directory, which in its first couple of pages instructs the operator to transmit the "KC9XXX monitoring" call if contacts are desired...I lean more towards the cq option.
73's
Nick
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WY3X on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>Web ( KR4WM )can find a dead fish in his own back yard , >closet , toilet , etc!
>Edited by kf4vgx ,23.35

None in my back yard, closet, toilet, etc. but I know where there's one in Little River Neck on 2 meters! Oops, my bad, I forgot. It's on the internet. Absolutely nothing to do with radio.

-KR4WM

P.S. Now watch someone accuse me of turning this into an Echolink bash when in fact, it was the poster I quoted who intitiated this course of action....
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by AC3P on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I have called CQ on a repeater once in a while. Nothing wrong with it.

The only difference is I will call CQ once followed by my callsign once. No need to repeat on a repeater.

CQ just means you are looking for a QSO with anyone and calling "CQ from AC3P" is certainly shorter than saying "This is AC3P looking for a QSO with anyone on the 147.24 Mhz. machine".



 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K9NYO on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I agree that it was great that nobody hopped in and dressed this new guy down. It's also good to hear that somebody diplomatically elmered him and the new ham responded in kind. Great example of how it really ought to happen everywhere.

It's too bad operating practices vary so much from local repeaters to the low bands. Working the repeaters should train you to have good etiquette on HF, but anyone who gives a listen to 80m at night knows that's not the case. This new ham is lucky he had his first QSOs up on 2m.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K0RGR on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
One place that CQing happens fairly often on 2 meter FM is via Echolink. There are a couple reasons for this - but I think the main one is that some of the early users were on simplex frequencies overseas, and their greeting messages advised people connecting to "please call CQ".

These days, we have so many repeaters and so little activity, I wonder if long-winded CQ's wouldn't actually be a good idea. One reason for them in the old days, was that we would have to tune around the band looking for people calling CQ. Now, I have 200 channels programmed in the radio, and it takes at least a few seconds to scan them all. If you just ID once on the local repeater, I will most likely miss your call! Perhaps we need a new way of doing things, that won't annoy people monitoring the frequency, but that will hold the repeater up long enough to stop the scanners as they go by.
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K8MHZ on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Who says calling CQ is not allowed on a repeater? "

I know of no one, it is just that we tend to operate with some unwritten procedures. We have both standard and out of the ordinary operating procedures. For instance, calling CQ for the purpose of sending / receiving QSL cards is almost exclusively HF simplex procedure. I have been a ham for 10 years, exclusively VHF / UHF and have never received a QSL card.

Even though the above is not dis-allowed by any means, it would certainly be fodder for a ‘seasoned’ ham with an ego problem to at least make light of the new guy on the air.

Troy, as a new ham, came up with a great way to get cards. He did so legally and with the resources he had with his license and equipment. I just may ask some of the guys on the link if they would be interested in a QSL swap. I never would have if it weren’t for Troy.

Another new ham has made a very good observation:

“the ARRL repeater directory, which in its first couple of pages instructs the operator to transmit the "KC9XXX monitoring" call if contacts are desired..”

This has been true for at least a decade. My 1995 copy mentions this on the first page of Chapter 1, page 10 in the 663 plus page book.

Nick,

The UP just north of the Big Mac can be worked with the Vanderbilt machine, 145.29 PL 103.5. If we get a band opening and you are in Wisconsin near Lake Michigan, try to hit the Muskegon machine, 145.33 PL 94.8. Check www.w8hvg.org for more machines.

Using high fidelity FM voice gives us the bandwidth to be understood very clearly if we can get into the machines well. Your hailing techniques will be quite different than that of a wavering QRN’d and QRM’d signal, which dictates a need to repeat calls, etc., to insure good copy. On the FM repeaters, I think that all here would agree to the following being proper:

This is K8MHZ, Kilo 8 Mike Hotel Zulu calling CQ on the ’94 repeater, anyone out there want to chat?

The reason I gave my call phonetically was that I tend to say my call too fast and most of the time people get it wrong, and the reason I mention the repeater frequency is that some people monitor more than one frequency at a time and this gives them a heads up as to what rig to look at.

I have also heard a twist on ‘broadcasting’ that I think I am in favor of. An example would be “This is K8MHZ, anyone around want to talk about the fact that the Wesco station on Sherman just dropped their gas prices to $1.65 a gallon?”

Thanks everyone for the great discussion,

Mark K8MHZ
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by W0FM on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Great story, Mark and an equally great experience for Troy. The icing on this cake will be the fact that Troy will, in all likelyhood, treat other new hams the way he was treated on your repeater. Good experiences and kind treatment are contageous.

Congratulations to KD8BHM for his accomplishments and to the Michigan hams who had the patience to accept him in the true spirit of our hobby.

73,

Terry, WØFM

 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KC5FUP on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Great Story: I had a similar experience my first time on 2 meters. I did not know that the repeater could also "Time Out".

I found out later that a ham was assisting me behind the scenes of my lengthy transmissions by resetting the repeater so the others could hear me.

They gently explained things to me and I was off to a fine start.

73 to all
KC5FUP
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by G0GQK on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I,m interested in knowing who was it, and when, it was decided that CQ calls would not be allowed on 2 metre repeaters, and why ? Why should saying monitoring be OK, and who decided, and why ? Is it just one of those special little things to be different than HF ?
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KF4VGX on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
None in my back yard, closet, toilet, etc. but I know where there's one in Little River Neck on 2 meters! Oops, my bad, I forgot. It's on the internet. Absolutely nothing to do with radio.

-KR4WM

P.S. Now watch someone accuse me of turning this into an Echolink bash when in fact, it was the poster I quoted who intitiated this course of action....



I said nothing about Echolink * YOU * did .


Gezzz ,Some peoples kids !!
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K8MHZ on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KF4VGX and KR4WM,

I have read all the posts and I for the life of me don't understand what you two are at odds about. Just in case I am not the only one, how about....

A) Putting it into simple terms so that my simple mind may perhaps understand it.

B) Explain what an 'Echolink bash' has to do at all with this thread.

Thanks in advance for entertaining my question, as I may have totally missed something here.

73,

Mark K8MHZ
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K8MHZ on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
G0GQK,

The way we operate on the 2 metre FM repeaters has just sort of evolved over time. The result has been that we use them as sort of a ham cell phone and leave the fishing for contacts to HF. That being said, and after reading all the posts discussing calling CQ on 2 metre repeaters, I say why not? How about doing it once in a while just to remind others of our heritage and our very basis for existence?

CQ CQ CQ....on a repeater???

Sure, why not?

73,

Mark K8MHZ
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KE4KVW on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
10 contacts(different calls) on our local repeater(147.090 Macclenny,Fla)would take you OVER a year I would guess.I have NOT heard 10 people on the thing in the last year I doubt! Little or NO interest in FM or VERY little interest even in HAM RADIO.More ham 2 meter radio's used in local hunting clubs for"IN"as well as"OUT"of band usages than HAMS using the bands!If you make 10 contacts with 10 different HAMS on this machine in a YEAR you DESERVE an AWARD or something else too do because it would be a full time day & night job IF possible then!Ham radio is DYING here & will NOT get BETTER when the FCC "GIVES" away HF privaleges SOON! Maybe WORSE! SSB is a "MUCH" better mode and CW even BETTER if you do NOT mind all the NOISE that CW is. 73's,ClaytonKE4KVW
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WY3X on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>KF4VGX and KR4WM,
>
>I have read all the posts and I for the life of me don't >understand what you two are at odds about. Just in case >I am not the only one, how about....
>
>A) Putting it into simple terms so that my simple mind >may perhaps understand it.
>
>B) Explain what an 'Echolink bash' has to do at all with >this thread.
>
>Thanks in advance for entertaining my question, as I may >have totally missed something here.
>
>73,
>
>Mark K8MHZ

Hi Mark,

I'd be more than happy to. I happen to be the ARES/RACES EC where I am. Johnny happens to be in the geographic area where my ARES/RACES group extends. Skywarn here falls underneath ARES/RACES. Johnny has a problem with authority figures, and enjoys taking pot shots at me and my group. I try to defend myself, and Johnny comes back with lame retorts. He got into trouble with a couple of hams over on QRZ.com by lying about all sorts of things. If anyone (and I do mean ANYONE) makes a negative comment about Echolink, Johnny is there with his fingers on the keys waiting to pounce on them. It's kind of biblical with him. Hard to explain. I tried offering him help, but he is very belligerent and refuses any help from anyone who happens to be in a position to offer help to him. I think he wants to be the teacher without having to sit through the class? (I think I'm correct...) Johnny's framework for ARES/RACES/SKYWARN is a free-for-all with no command structure, and that's not the way we operate it here. It angers him that we don't want to include Echolink in our emergency model to the point that he's written physically threatening e-mails to one local ham (who doesn't want to press charges). The group in charge here all agree (and have strong feelings) that we don't want to use VOIP for any emergency comms, and that should be our perogative. I've tried to bite my tongue and just steer clear of Johnny, but he keeps poking sticks at me and the nice folks I have working with me. What can you do with someone like this? Johnny- can't live with him, can't live with him!

-KR4WM
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KF4VGX on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KF4VGX and KR4WM,

I have read all the posts and I for the life of me don't understand what you two are at odds about. Just in case I am not the only one, how about....

A) Putting it into simple terms so that my simple mind may perhaps understand it.

B) Explain what an 'Echolink bash' has to do at all with this thread.

Thanks in advance for entertaining my question, as I may have totally missed something here.

73,

Mark K8MHZ

.............................

Webster * KR4WM *is using my comment as a tool to bring up his dislike of Echolink.

I run a Repeater with Echolink here in the Little River / N. Myrtle Beach area. I Enjoy hearing Amateurs using my Repeater.

When Websters post he states,


Sometimes it takes a peach in the apple barrel to make things interesting. But if I found a dead fish in there..... -KR4WM
.............................
The *dead fish* I can only assume is someone Webster doesn't feel is using a Repeater properly.

Of course He will intervene with his over the air opinions to the person on the Repeater as he feels need to be corrected. Not sure on this ?. but I do hear him over local Repeaters. He also records my conversations and sends them to others who post then on QRZ in attempts to reticule me .

Web likes to make comments degrading Echolink and myself when ever he gets the chance to :).

Please see ,

http://www.eham.net/articles/9642

- KF4VGX

 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WB2WIK on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Nice story. Operating protocol can vary with locality and conditions, and I don't see anything wrong with calling CQ on a repeater -- although I don't do it, myself.

If I'm desperately looking for an answer on a repeater (or on VHF-FM in general, even on simplex), I make a more pointed call, like, "Help, I'm desperately lost in East St. Louis. Anybody around for directions? <ID>"

If anybody's listening and has half a heart, they'll answer. If not, not.

Then, I've heard repeaters so dead that I've called, "Um, if I were dying of a heart attack right now, would anybody be out there to answer me? <ID>" That usually gets a rise, if anyone at all is listening.

WB2WIK/6

 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KF4VGX on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hi Mark,

I'd be more than happy to. I happen to be the ARES/RACES EC where I am. Johnny happens to be in the geographic area where my ARES/RACES group extends. Skywarn here falls underneath ARES/RACES. Johnny has a problem with authority figures, and enjoys taking pot shots at me and my group. I try to defend myself, and Johnny comes back with lame retorts. He got into trouble with a couple of hams over on QRZ.com by lying about all sorts of things. If anyone (and I do mean ANYONE) makes a negative comment about Echolink, Johnny is there with his fingers on the keys waiting to pounce on them. It's kind of biblical with him. Hard to explain. I tried offering him help, but he is very belligerent and refuses any help from anyone who happens to be in a position to offer help to him. I think he wants to be the teacher without having to sit through the class? (I think I'm correct...) Johnny's framework for ARES/RACES/SKYWARN is a free-for-all with no command structure, and that's not the way we operate it here. It angers him that we don't want to include Echolink in our emergency model to the point that he's written physically threatening e-mails to one local ham (who doesn't want to press charges). The group in charge here all agree (and have strong feelings) that we don't want to use VOIP for any emergency comms, and that should be our perogative. I've tried to bite my tongue and just steer clear of Johnny, but he keeps poking sticks at me and the nice folks I have working with me. What can you do with someone like this? Johnny- can't live with him, can't live with him!

-KR4WM

...............................

The above comments ,Mostly Websters B.S.


I enjoy hearing conversations on Repeaters . FM needs to be used as well . If I hear someone call CQ on my or any other Repeaters I will answer their call.

- KF4VGX


 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by GHOSTRIDERHF on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Just be happy he didnt say..

BREAKER BREAKER 147.150
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KG5JJ on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Years ago, I heard a new ham say break, break on a VHF repeater in the area, during a net one evening. Net control immediately had all net traffic stand-by and quickly asked the newcomer his emergency, so he could alert the proper authorities.

Silence...then the new ham stated he had no emergency and just wanted to join the round-table. ;-}

After that initial scare, he became familiar with procedures, and turned-out to be a first-class operator...still is today.

73 KG5JJ (Mike)
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WY3X on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>The above comments ,Mostly Websters B.S.
>
>I enjoy hearing conversations on Repeaters . FM needs to >be used as well . If I hear someone call CQ on my or any >other Repeaters I will answer their call.
>
>- KF4VGX

OK Johnny. It's BS. For anyone who wants to see a copy of what Johnny sent to one of our local hams, I'm going to post it on my website and put a link to it on here sometime tomorrow. Then you can read it for yourself and make up your own mind as to what kind of person he is. No editing, no changes by me except for the name and callsign of the recipient, who desires to remain anonymous.

Johnny is quite fond of mass e-mailing disparaging messages concerning local hams who hold appointed positions with ARES/RACES. Lets just see how the amateur community at large enjoys reading one of your "finer" e-mails. Johnny, you don't need me to do you in, you did it to yourself. You know, come to think of it, if we didn't have such a JERK running the local Echolink node, I probably would not hold such a negative opinion of it.

And Johnny, it's not me recording you, but thanks for all the laughs.

Apologies to all who have to put up with all this nonsense here on eHam. You can thank Johnny for it. I made no reference to Johnny being the stinky fish in the barrel. I did not ask to be attacked after my post. That was just a colloquialism. But hey, if the shoe fits Johnny- you're welcome to wear it.

-KR4WM
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KF4VGX on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
by KR4WM on May 11, 2005
>The above comments ,Mostly Websters B.S.
>
>I enjoy hearing conversations on Repeaters . FM needs to >be used as well . If I hear someone call CQ on my or any >other Repeaters I will answer their call.
>
>- KF4VGX

OK Johnny. It's BS. For anyone who wants to see a copy of what Johnny sent to one of our local hams, I'm going to post it on my website and put a link to it on here sometime tomorrow. Then you can read it for yourself and make up your own mind as to what kind of person he is. No editing, no changes by me except for the name and callsign of the recipient, who desires to remain anonymous.

Johnny is quite fond of mass e-mailing disparaging messages concerning local hams who hold appointed positions with ARES/RACES. Lets just see how the amateur community at large enjoys reading one of your "finer" e-mails. Johnny, you don't need me to do you in, you did it to yourself. You know, come to think of it, if we didn't have such a JERK running the local Echolink node, I probably would not hold such a negative opinion of it.

And Johnny, it's not me recording you, but thanks for all the laughs.

Apologies to all who have to put up with all this nonsense here on eHam. You can thank Johnny for it. I made no reference to Johnny being the stinky fish in the barrel. I did not ask to be attacked after my post. That was just a colloquialism. But hey, if the shoe fits Johnny- you're welcome to wear it.

-KR4WM
...................

Post your info here ! On Eham ! Your website ,Not a chance in Hell? You will change the context to benefit you ! ;->.

I have all the emails including your's.

-KF4VGX
.......................
Quote KR4WM ,
Johnny- can't live with him, can't live with him!
.......................

Easy there O.M. You Can ! You Can !

I apologize to the group for being of topic again !

-KF4VGX
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K9YEQ on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I have been a ham for 45 years, calling CQ on a repeater, doing so once, get's me responses when "monitoring" doesn't. We need to reconsider the "rules" if we are going to welcome or encourage new hams.

73,
Bill
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WB0M on May 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
What is the "standard" protocol on repeaters in UK or Europe (or elsewhere)?
Tnx & 73, Jeff/wb0m
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WD8DUP on May 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Nice story. We have alot of young (under 14) hams in this area (Northern Virginia) who like to get on occasionally when the commuters are on too. I like to hear the upcoming, young, new hams and have yet to hear one sour note about it.

BTW - In Germany, CQ is normal on a repeater when a ham checks in and there isn't anyone around. And "Break" ("Durch" in German) is used if you want to join a conversation.

Just remember to practice whistling at 1750 Hz to open the repeater.

73 from WD8DUP/4
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by AC7KZ on May 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
These days one almost has to call CQ just to get a conversation going. I say "monitoring" numerous times and never get a response.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KC8YBW on May 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I have been an occasional user of the W8HVG linked repeater system. It was the first repeater that I ever used after getting my license. It seems like there is always a friendy voice on the other end when I am "monitoring." I have always had cordial contacts on it, and have heard other newcomers being heartily welcomed to the hobby like Troy was in his first time as a ham. This is not an isolated incident on W8HVG. Here is my thanks to the people who keep it up and running for their good work, and to the the friendly people I have talked to through the system.

73 Jim
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KF4VGX on May 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
How nice of Web ! Thanks for caring enough not to include my phone number.
You really do need to get a life !

Good old Webster, always trying to stir the stink a little more.


I went to XXXX Front Door and talked to him Face to face , thats what happen. We discussed our issues like Men.
More than I can say for you.
You excluded all the other emails that led up to this!
How nice of you.
Three years worth emails and virus after virus from you or your group .
That email was none of your business, you just stuck your nose where it didn't belong. Like you always do!



The EC of Horry County,
Webster D Williams, III

Changed your entire website and devoted it to a one sided personal attack on me .
Your suppose to be The EC of Horry County .
Act like it ! Concern yourself with your own matters you might become a better person.
Perhaps in the Future you can devote your home page to Skywarn,or your duties as the EC of Horry County.


Gezzzzzzzz, Some peoples Kids.
Anyone with questions email me. I'll be happy to reply




- KF4VGX


 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by W8JJI on May 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Repeaters take the challenge out of making the contact.

No fun there.

And, ECHO-link is NOT ham radio.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by N2MWE on May 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
If only there were more hams like you guys! That posting made me feel REALLY good to be a ham.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WA2DYA on May 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I was once a repeater control operator. One day a station called me.

' I called CQ on the repeater the other day and was admonished for doing so. Am I allowed to do that here'?

My reply:

' You can call CQ here if you wish '.

--- CHAS
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by N2MG on May 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
'VGX and 'WM

Please cease your personal battle on this website. It's past tiring.

Mike N2MG
webmaster
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K4JF on May 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<These days one almost has to call CQ just to get a conversation going. I say "monitoring" numerous times and never get a response. >

Right! That's because "CQ" is active and "monitoring" is passive.

I think there should be more CQing, and think the story from Michigan is a good one. I had some nice QSOs mobile in Michigan last year. Friendly folk there....
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by NN6EE on May 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Sorry Guys!!! You're all WRONG!!!

If any person wants to access any one particular REPEATER all's they have to do is GIVE their call and say "LISTENING!!!"

The ARRL's cutsie term for "NEWBIES" on any one particular repeater saying their call and "MONITORING" is WRONG!!!

So much for informative and useful info from the ARRL!!! Especially in their (OUR) handbook!!!

Who out here has ever heard of a FCC "MONITORING STATION" yakking with anybody???

I rest my case!!!

Jim/ee
 
Monitoring vs Listening  
by N2MG on May 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
If I'm listening to a repeater, I am monitoring it. Why make a big issue over two terms that are probably in each other's listings in your thesaurus?

We should have better things to do.

Mike N2MG
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by N0IU on May 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
NN6EE: Sorry guy, but it is YOU who is so incredibly wrong on this issue!!!

You don't need to say anything after giving your call. You don't have to say 'listening' or 'monitoring'. Regardless of which term you use, they both imply a one-way, passive activity. Neither of them imply that you are standing by waiting for a QSO. If you just want to eavesdrop on a repeater, just turn on your radio and shut up! Or better yet, just go buy a cheap scanner and program in repeater frequencies and that way you won't be bothering us with your worthless lessons on semantics.

On the other hand, if it is your desire to participate in a QSO, just give your call... period! Giving your call alterts everyone else who happens to have their radio parked on that frequency that you exist and unless your are freaking deaf, it is assumed that once you unkey your mic, you will be paying attention to the sounds eminating from the radio's speaker and will be standing by waiting for some sort of response.

To the original poster, the bottom line is press the RTL (Release To Listen) button on the side of the mic and let your presence be known. If you want to know the correct method in your area, just listen to what most of the other people are doing and do it their way. As my grandmother used to tell me, "You have two ears and one mouth. Use them in those proportions."
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K4JF on May 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<If any person wants to access any one particular REPEATER all's they have to do is GIVE their call and say "LISTENING!!!" >

If the repeater is silent, what are you listening to? (I've heard that question asked on our repeater when someone signed on that way...).

That is no more (or less) valid than "monitoring". Both are passive, while "CQ" is actively seeking a QSO.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by N8VZL on May 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I was driving through Wintersville, Ohio not long ago and heard a fellow calling CQ 40 meters CQ 40 meters on the 146.940 SWARC 2 meter repeater. I of course came back and said this was 2 meters, but he was just trying to liven up the repeater. I now use his trick on some of the repeaters in the Ohio Valley.

N8VZL
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by TE9TEC on May 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
thanks for the info k8mhz,
i had the most exciting ham weekend of my life just sitting in my truck. I was talking to my uncle (read elmer) on the cell phone and just as he gets done telling me about linking repeaters, over the .31/.91 repeater from Milwaukee comes a man from Canada on a link, i made my first international contact on 2 meters from my pickup truck and didnt even have to say monitoring!!!! lol CQ CQ CQ all you hams who i havent talked to yet. hope to see you on 2 meters until I can pass my general.
73's and thanks for all the encouragement all you folks out there!
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by W1XZ on May 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Just a thought here: How about something like, er, say, "This is K8MHZ. Anyone want to chat?" or "This is K8MHZ. Anyone around?" What part about being an amateur operator means we have to speak in some special code. That is for marginal conditions in other circumstances.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by W5LJM on May 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I believe calling CQ is very effective on 2 mtr FM.. I don't do it myself, but have heard new hams do it and the cool thing about it is that it always catches someones' ear. Even when all other methods fail, This method wakes people up on the quietest repeaters. The caller may get a negative response with a long drawn out explanation as to why CQ isn't used, but by-golly the lad made a contact! Seems the terms "listening" and "monitoring" just don't cut it anymore. People hear it and will not respond most of the time. CQ catches peoples ear and says "I'm looking for someone to talk to, darn it!"
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K4JF on May 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Just a thought here: How about something like, er, say, "This is K8MHZ. Anyone want to chat?" or "This is K8MHZ. Anyone around?" >

Although I disagree with the part about CQ being a "special code" (it's not), I find nothing wrong with the above method. I've heard it and I'm a darn sight more likely to respond than when I hear someone just announce that his/her receiver is working! :o)
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by VE3XDB on May 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
It seems to me that we should not be judging based on what is "right" or "wrong". Right or wrong has nothing to do with it. "Effectiveness" is what is important. If the calling of CQ on a repeater had the desired effect for the individual using the repeater, then it was effective.

Troy is to be commended for his efforts to activate the repeater and use the spectrum in a positive way.

Best regards,

Doug Behl VE3XDB
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by W1XZ on May 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I believe CQ found its origins in telegraphers codes. It is a representation. The point of my post was to poke a bit at those of of us have to "speak radio" especially on 2 meter fm. There is nothing wrong with plain spoken word when conditions are good. FM repeaters provide clear channelized frequencies. The need for CQ, Q signals, and other types of reporting systems should be left to appropriate communications: CW, weak signal high frequency work, EME, calling a general call on SSB, etc.
And as I have said before...I am destinated at the home QTH, hihi....
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K4JF on May 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<It seems to me that we should not be judging based on what is "right" or "wrong". Right or wrong has nothing to do with it. "Effectiveness" is what is important. If the calling of CQ on a repeater had the desired effect for the individual using the repeater, then it was effective.
Troy is to be commended for his efforts to activate the repeater and use the spectrum in a positive way.
Best regards,
Doug Behl VE3XDB>

Absolutely correct, Doug. Thanx.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by N9YNG on May 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
What a nice story. There are a lot of good people out there. :)
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KD5NR on May 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"In many years of operating, I have never heard a coherent "why" calling CQ is frowned on"

It has nothing to do with the repeater per se, rather the emission mode. Calling CQ on FM is silly given the capture effect of the mode. Making a long CQ on an FM repeater is equally silly in my opinion. Either someone is there or they aren't and being FM, you are still only going to be able to hear the lodest station replying to your call.

In my many years of operating FM on other bands than 2 meters, specifically 10 meters, I have heard a great many 'coherent' reasons why the practice is frowned upon.
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KD5NR on May 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"In many years of operating, I have never heard a coherent "why" calling CQ is frowned on"

It has nothing to do with the repeater per se, rather the emission mode. Calling CQ on FM is silly given the capture effect of the mode. Making a long CQ on an FM repeater is equally silly in my opinion. Either someone is there or they aren't and being FM, you are still only going to be able to hear the loudest station replying to your call.

In my many years of operating FM on other bands than 2 meters, specifically 10 meters, I have heard a great many 'coherent' reasons why the practice is frowned upon.
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by VK3HGY on May 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is a great article.

Being a new ham in Australia myself the first rig I had was a VHF/UHF dual bander and the only contacts I could make was on the local repeaters accesible from my QTH. It just goes to show that the people involved in ham radio are excellent operators and that will help out any new operator just starting out in this excellent hobby. It also goes to prove that they still all remember that we all had to start somewhere.

Lets keep up the good spirit of amatuer radio and help out these new inducties into ham radio.

 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by W1XZ on May 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
More on the origins of CQ:

By 1904 a number of ships in the trans-Atlantic trade were equipped with wireless telegraphy. The British operators were nearly all landline telegraphers who had left railroad or post-office keys to go to sea in the newly opened field. They brought along with them not only their Morse code but also many of their telegraphic abbreviations and signals. One was the general call - CQ, which had been used to attract attention of all operators along a wire. It preceeded the time signal in the morning at 10 o'clock and also all notices of general importance. CQ went to sea and became a general call to all ships.
Early in 1904 the Marconi Company, realizing the desirability of some universal distress signal, filled the need by issuing the following general order: ``It has been brought to our notice that the call `CQ' (All Stations) while being satisfactory for general purposes, does not sufficiently express the urgency required in a signal of distress. Therefore, on and after the 1st of February, 1904, the call to be given by ships in distess, or in any way requiring assistance, shall be `CQD.' ''
So CQ is in fact a CW "cypher or code" that we picked up from the Marconi Company. Also we use Q signals and have taken 2 of the more than 100 numbered telegrapher's codes: 73 and 88. (134 was "who is at the key.")

 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K8MHZ on May 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I think the reason that some of us use terms like QTH or QSO, CW or CQ for that matter on 2 meter FM is that it is just part of the lexicon of ham radio. I try not to do it, as plain English is the preferred method, but I do find myself doing it when I am talking to old friends. At that time I loosen up a little bit. I find that when I do, using the ham radio lexicons, on FM or in person, is certainly not needed, but lends a bit to comradery.

I do know that some folks tend to overdo it a bit. When it gets to the point where every English word that can be replaced by a CW abbreviation is done so on an FM repeater, I think that is a bit uncouth.

I thought what Troy did was really cool, but as a ham with tenure I would only do the CQ thing on an FM repeater with tongue slightly in cheek.

I would welcome the opportunity to answer a CQ on a repeater again though.

Call me wishy washy….I love the hobby.

I am glad that some (most!) of you enjoyed the story. I surely enjoyed being an active part of it. I hope to have more good stories to share in the future...in fact I am sure of it!!

73,

Mark K8MHZ

 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K4JF on May 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Calling CQ on FM is silly given the capture effect of the mode. >

Capture effect has nothing to do with whether you use 4 syllables ("monitoring") or 3 syllables ("CQ from") on a repeater. I fail to see where it is "silly" to use the shorter.

"CQ" is actively seeking a contact ("is anyone there?" is equally valid). "Monitoring" or "listening" is just telling the world that your receiver is working.
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WA2JJH on May 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Nothing illegal about CQ on a repeater. A commen practice....no. The dudes that put up the repeater
determain a group conscience.

Some may correct you in a nice way. Some will not respond. Some will have a nice QSO with you.
Some of less enlightened will causticly lambast you
with vitrioloic attitude. Then they may elude to what type of person you are. They know nothing about you.

Jumping down another hams throat is not the spirit
of ham radio. It is a loose-loose result.

The newbie will have a negative story to tell.
The other ham may have missed the chance of benefiting
what you really all about.

A WARM WELCOME DOES NOT COST A DIME.
A HARSH WELCOME IS THE WORK OF SLIME.
SORRY FOR THE SILLY LITTLE RYME!







 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K8MHZ on May 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Jumping down another hams throat is not the spirit
of ham radio. It is a loose-loose result.>

<A WARM WELCOME DOES NOT COST A DIME.
A HARSH WELCOME IS THE WORK OF SLIME.
SORRY FOR THE SILLY LITTLE RYME!>

Thank you, a whole lot!!!

The future of ham radio depends more upon how we treat each other, as well as those on the outside, more than most people think.

Time and technology can be a conquering force. Remember, division is a prelude to conquest.

73,

Mark K8MHZ
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K4JF on May 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Nothing illegal about CQ on a repeater. A common practice....no. The dudes that put up the repeater determine a group conscience.>

Well, they determine the group "pattern", certainly not "conscience". I agree that the main point is to have some friendly conversation. All the other pales in comparison.

I do have a problem with the repeater cops who "correct" when there is nothing wrong to correct. Examples abound. I have heard that phonics are illegal (they are not - they are actually encouraged when needed for clarity), I have heard that "CQ" is illegal, I have even heard someone telling another that "Q" codes and CW are illegal on 2 meters (not!).

Suggestion: just have friendly conversations. When you find an error (and be bloody well sure it IS an error - read the regs), gently correct the fellow.... OFF the air if possible. Most hams have telephones.

 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K4JF on May 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<I think the reason that some of us use terms like QTH or QSO, CW or CQ for that matter on 2 meter FM is that it is just part of the lexicon of ham radio. I try not to do it, as plain English is the preferred method, but I do find myself doing it when I am talking to old friends. At that time I loosen up a little bit. I find that when I do, using the ham radio lexicons, on FM or in person, is certainly not needed, but lends a bit to comradery.>

Excellent points, Mark! EVERY hobby/avocation/vocation has its own lexicon. If you don't believe it, try telling a sailor that his main sheet is a "rope"!! (But be prepared for some salty language!!!) If I hear two fishermen talking, I am hopelessy lost as to what they are talking about!! :o)

But, for some reason, some hams - and we're the only group that does this - seem to think there is something wrong with using our own terminology. I see nothing wrong with saying "QSY" when I'm changing frequency, no matter what the band or mode. And QRZ is absolutely the way to ask "Who was that calling me???". It's quicker, more precise, and fully suits the occasion.

Stop thinking there is something wrong with talking like a ham when you're talking with another ham. It's a valued, honorable part of the hobby. Relax!!
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KG4LMU on May 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Obvisouly this ham hasn’t had the full experience with Michigan hams that I have. It amazes me that one good deed can get so much attention. Michigan has just as much political bull and unkindly S.M.A.R.T. people as the next state. Its almost ridiculuos to see one act get so much attention which is in my eyes no where near the truth as to how ham radio is in this state or any that matter. The clicks within clubs and community’s and political mayhem within the ham radio community in general is sending a very bad message to hams across the spectrum. Although I commend this person in trying to show some good in the ham radio community. From my perspective until the politics and rudeness of certain clicks within the community is addressed , we will continue to lose amateurs across the spectrum. Its very sad to see such great people let there personal ego’s get in the way of something that can be so much better for all involved. Its also a shame that the only time I see hams actually come together for the good of the community is when something bad happens.
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by K8MHZ on May 29, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Its also a shame that the only time I see hams actually come together for the good of the community is when something bad happens.>

You aren't looking very hard....

May 12, 13 and 14. Hams do communications for the Holland, Michigan Tulip Time Festival. I was the net control operator on Saturday from inside the Ottawa County, Michigan's Filmore Complex Emergency Operation's Center. May 21. Hams provided communications for a 5k benefit in which over 600 girls, age 7-10 ran to raise money for their cause. May 28. Amateur Radio Appreciation Day. Hams gathered in Newaygo County to pass traffic, show off ham radio and show our support for our troops. June 11. Hams will gather to do comms for a 5k run in the dunes of Silver Lake, Michigan. June 25. Hams will gather to provide comms for the 24th Annual Muskegon Chronicle Seaway Run. July 2. Hams will man Operation Care to provide coffee and refreshments at the Nunica, Michigan rest area for the entire 4th of July weekend, 24hrs a day. June 22, 23 and 24. Hams will provide security and communications for the Muskegon Air Fair. My pride and joy, especially our Child Watch effort in which we locate lost children in a crowd of people approaching 50,000 in numbers.

That is our calendar through July.

We have public service events throughout the year and also participate in county sponsored training events such as mock emergencies.

I rest my case.

73,

Mark, K8MHZ

 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WA2JJH on June 3, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Repeater cops are O.C.D-A.R. Secondary narsistic personality disorder or just mean spirited.

Yes,we must have rules that we try our best to abide
to. Nobody is the PERFECT HAM.

I am glad K8MHZ(cool call) has lanced the boil of a huge important point.

Instead of repeater cops/nazis, would not a kindred spirit approach be better?

Instead of repeater cops, how about repeater host's and guardians. They can inform the NEWBIE or out of towner as to the groups choice of policy.

I have had far too many Newbies complain about harsh
treatment on a repeater. FIRST IMPRESSIONS ARE IMPORTANT FOR THE NEWBIE.
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WA2JJH on June 3, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Repeater cops are O.C.D-A.R. Secondary narsistic personality disorder or just mean spirited.

Yes,we must have rules that we try our best to abide
to. Nobody is the PERFECT HAM.

I am glad K8MHZ(cool call) has lanced the boil of a huge important point.

Instead of repeater cops/nazis, would not a kindred spirit approach be better?

Instead of repeater cops, how about repeater host's and guardians. They can inform the NEWBIE or out of towner as to the groups choice of policy.

I have had far too many Newbies complain about harsh
treatment on a repeater. FIRST IMPRESSIONS ARE IMPORTANT FOR THE NEWBIE.
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WA2JJH on June 3, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Repeater cops are O.C.D-A.R. Secondary narsistic personality disorder or just mean spirited.

Yes,we must have rules that we try our best to abide
to. Nobody is the PERFECT HAM.

I am glad K8MHZ(cool call) has lanced the boil of a huge important point.

Instead of repeater cops/nazis, would not a kindred spirit approach be better?

Instead of repeater cops, how about repeater host's and guardians. They can inform the NEWBIE or out of towner as to the groups choice of policy.

I have had far too many Newbies complain about harsh
treatment on a repeater. FIRST IMPRESSIONS ARE IMPORTANT FOR THE NEWBIE.

 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by WA2JJH on June 3, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
sorry for multiple post. I was getting topic not found.
COMPUTER GLITCHES HAPPEN
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by AH6FC on June 9, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Great story! Though I haven't been on a repeater for 20 years, I always called "CQ." Didn't know I was breaking the "law." Hope our newbee get's on HF soon, maybe even cw and struggles through those first few QSO's that build skills and get's the heart pumping...first with fear then excitement.

Like the others, I'm happy none of the trolls and "law/protocol/bandplan" enforcers out there jumped this guy. There seem to be an increasing number of them rising to the surface of our noble hobby.

73's & Aloha,
Bill
 
RE: CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by KG6WLV on June 9, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I was listening to one of our local repeaters and heard a young man -- probably about 12 years old -- use "break" to join a conversation. He got his head bit off by one of the operators, when giving a friendly explanation would've been much better. The ONLY thing that discourages me about this hobby is the number of mean-spirited people I keep running into on the air. I also meet great people who are fun to talk to, but I'd love to see the malcontents, pseudointellectuals and foul-mouthed folks just fade away...
BTW, who edits this stuff? Anybody? Why not cut out all the irrational personal attacks? What purpose do they serve? And one more thing: How is it that people who can get a ham license frequently can't SPELL????
 
CQ CQ CQ... On a Repeater???  
by W5LJM on June 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I have a new friend, whom I had the pleasure of testing, who just can't get the ol' CB habbit out of his head. The use of "10-4", "down and out" to clear, and other CB lingo is a daily event. Although I've talked to him OFF the air and explained that this will eventually get him jumped ON the air and rudely corrected, he continues to use this lingo on 2 mtrs. and 70 cm..
My point is I suppose, that I instructed him OFF the air and not in the presence of other Amateurs. To some, public humiliation is not taken well and will cause a new ham to have second thoughts about the hobby.
I hope he figures this out before a well educated "SMART" ham rips him to pieces.
There is no right or wrong way to call for a contact, but definitely, leave the CB terminology out.
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Related News & Articles
DXCC and Remote Operation, an Opinion
E51DXX DXpedition
Revive Two Meters


Other Operating Articles
DXCC and Remote Operation, an Opinion
A Vest Pocket DX Expedition to Southern Africa
Revive Two Meters