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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Correct way to repeat?  (Read 817 times)
AA4OO
Member

Posts: 97


WWW

Ignore
« on: November 06, 2017, 03:49:39 AM »

I hear some operators send a question mark  between repeated text like when sending their QTH twice but not other times.  Is there an accepted standard for indicating when you are repeating something?

Richard, AA4OO
Logged

Lower your Power and Raise your expectations
NI0C
Member

Posts: 2935




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: November 06, 2017, 05:21:41 AM »

What you heard is fairly common.  There is a Q signal (QSZ, or QSZ?) for indicating (or requesting) repeats of each word in difficult conditions: http://www.sckans.edu/~sireland/radio/q_signals.html
Logged
KD8IIC
Member

Posts: 648




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: November 06, 2017, 05:59:46 AM »

  You'll find there's lots of things about other op's sending habits to question or be critical of.
The question marks are usually there when the op makes an error in his sending or spelling or just wants to make sure you copied it right the first time.
It's not like he's sending E N instead of the traditional R for received. You're sure to hear that enough times to make you wanna pull the plug outta the wall after awhile if you're not careful, hi.
Most of the Lid behaviors mentioned in old Handbooks are common practice in this age sad to say.
Logged
K8AXW
Member

Posts: 6312




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: November 06, 2017, 10:16:09 AM »

I learned wwwaaaayyyyy back that whenever an item is repeated, to send ii ii (di-dit di-dit) and then repeat the info. This was a case of learning by listening and letting it become routine. 

If I ask for a repeat of specific information or even the last transmission, I simply ask for a repeat and the other station acknowledges the request with a R R and then simply sends the information again. When this happens in reverse I repeat the information and things like signal report, name and QTH, I'll do as described above.  One never knows under what conditions the other station is working under.  You're signal could be 599 but information is missed because the dog and cat got in a fight...... or something similar.

If this has changed I have no idea because I STILL use this procedure and never have had a complaint. 
Logged
AA4PB
Member

Posts: 14332




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: November 06, 2017, 11:02:00 AM »

In the military, IMI (**--**) was used to signify a repeat the same as "I say again" on voice.
Logged

Bob  AA4PB
Garrisonville, VA
AA4OO
Member

Posts: 97


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #5 on: November 06, 2017, 06:03:19 PM »

Very good.  'll try imi next time I repeat something and see if the other station comments.

Thanks for the responses.

Richard, AA4OO
http://hamradioqrp.com
Logged

Lower your Power and Raise your expectations
K8AXW
Member

Posts: 6312




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: November 06, 2017, 09:45:40 PM »

Unless I misunderstand your post, IMI (?) meant "What was that, please repeat."
Logged
VK5EEE
Member

Posts: 1050




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: November 07, 2017, 04:34:20 AM »

Hi AA4OO great question.

Answer depends on the service: different police forces, post offices, maritime, etc... but in general there are two main ways of repeating:

either with "?" or "ii"

Spacing the ? out to IMI as three letters was ONLY done in SOME militaries, and would be highly unusual among radio amateurs.

Some radio hams use II some use ? most don't use either, they simply repeat the word without any "I repeat" signal.

For WRITTEN communications via Morse Code, i.e. formal or telegram traffic, a signal was mandatory, because otherwise the receiving station would continue writing or typing and then have to erase the word when realizing it is the same word being repeated, hence it was mandatory to use either II or ? -- and certainly among maritime radio operators ? was favored because there was no "?" used in telegrams, and using II could still cause a fast typist to type the letter I thinking the next word starts with I.

Not all that long ago, III was a full stop (period in U.S. English) and di-dah-di-dah-di-dah was a comma, and a comma was an exclamation mark. A few hams who used to use III for a full stop may be heard using that, but extremely rare these days, Old Timers.

I believe that Australian land line telegraphists used RR for I repeat, but among hams that would definitely mean "Roger, Roger!"
Logged

Long Live Real Human CW and wishing you many happy CW QSO - 77 - CW Forever

Support CW and join CW clubs. QTT: FIST#1124, HSC#1437, UFT#728, RCWC#982, SKCC#15007, CWOPS#1714, 30CW#1,
KQ4MM
Member

Posts: 19




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: November 07, 2017, 05:47:09 AM »

EEE Thanks for weighing in, as a wet behind the ears new CW op at about 10WPM I have learned many good operating tips from your informative posts. Been a amateur radio op for about 28 years, but just re-discovering my love for CW a few months ago.

AA4OO

I was have not ( in about 150 CW QSO's so far) heard anyone send ? between repeats, thats not a good sample I'm sure, but my experience to date. I was taught and self learned to send repeats of QTH and name when signal is less than 599 and always on numbers like club numbers, age and such. Is that right, couldn't say, but its how I do it. I do focus very hard on sending properly spaced code and always use a straight key, if you hear me doing something improper procedurally please let me know and I will adjust, same for my keying.

Brian - KQ4MM

P.S. If you  have not read EEE's story about being a RO on a ship as a young boy you need to, its a awesome story and he had a experience of a life time.
Logged
AA4OO
Member

Posts: 97


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #9 on: November 07, 2017, 06:04:58 AM »

I'm hearing the question mark (or IMI) sent between repeated QTH more often over the past few months.  I was working a station last week that repeated each of his station elements and put the ? between each repeat.

The CW community seems relatively small... In the little over 1600 CW qsos I've made in the past couple years since re-learning the code.  there were just over 900 unique callsigns.  With that small a pool of CW operators we are bound to start copying each other's habits, some good, some bad.

Richard, AA4OO
Logged

Lower your Power and Raise your expectations
OZ8AGB
Member

Posts: 334




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: November 07, 2017, 06:12:35 AM »

With that small a pool of CW operators we are bound to start copying each other's habits, some good, some bad.

EN EN
Logged
VK5EEE
Member

Posts: 1050




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: November 07, 2017, 06:14:51 AM »

Dear OM Brian,

Thanks for your kind comments. Very welcome back to CW! 10 WPM is fine, I enjoy that on a straight key, so if you ever hear me send QRS and happy to oblige!

For sure in ham radio, sending name and QTH is good to repeat, also the RST and certainly no need for a "ii" or "?" between repeats, the standard in ham radio has always been similar to RST 579 57N 57N NAME IS LOU LOU LOU QTH ADELAIDE ADELAIDE simply repeat...

Yes OM those were the best 5 weeks of my life, without a doubt. I was very fortunate. I was a shy boy back then, but it is lucky I could not resist going to the radio room window, and chiming up with "Sydney Radio!" when hearing the familiar Morse. A dream come true!

Richard, true what you say. In the old days, that is, until the 90's, it was standard to learn CW procedure and "rubber stamp" QSO format, as well as the real RST code, and many Q codes. Now very little is published, and the main book promoted by IARU contains very strange advice.

It is very peculiar how it's co-author has turned well known CW pro signs and amateur radio procedures on their head, and even sent the most weird CQ I have ever heard: "CQ DX DX = LP ON4UN ON4UN DX DX = LP" (where = is dah-di-di-di-dah). Again this year, the Icelandic Amateur Radio Society in its meetings raised this issue, the only national society, it seems, to take this attack against CW by ON4UN serious.

The CQ DX DX = LP ON4UN ON4UN DX DX = LP was clearly programmed into his keyer, but it just makes no sense. Long Path to where? And why end a CQ simply with LP? And why insert two = into a CQ? I know I am unconventional and you may hear me doing some odd things when I'm bored, such as calling CQ in Russian, but why would the author of this Ethics book deliberately set out to confuse new CW Operators?!
Logged

Long Live Real Human CW and wishing you many happy CW QSO - 77 - CW Forever

Support CW and join CW clubs. QTT: FIST#1124, HSC#1437, UFT#728, RCWC#982, SKCC#15007, CWOPS#1714, 30CW#1,
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!