eHam

eHam Forums => Misc => Topic started by: VE3TRU on June 22, 2013, 07:13:08 AM



Title: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: VE3TRU on June 22, 2013, 07:13:08 AM
Even the US military got rid of it, and for a good reason.
1st thing that happens, is you strain to hear what the guy is saying. Most of the time they are using wrong terms, not to mention, that there is
no real standard (well there is, but its not working, as there are different sets of code out there)
 This is Billy Bob, Electricity, telephone buy now your thinking is he billy bob is he saying BB and why is this taking so long. Now at this point the conditions start to waver or you get a knob tuning up his radio because as he hears you talking, and you miss out on the rest.
OK how about this ..This is BLT55, great I got it and only took 2 seconds, short to the point. You may want to use phonetics if you missed it or conditions are so bad you cant hear him, but heck if the conditions are that bad and you cant hear them, turn off the radio.
just my 2 cents



Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K1CJS on June 22, 2013, 07:30:55 AM
Phonetics are a way to enhance and clarify communications.  I agree that there are all too many people who don't use standardized phoenitics, but to get rid of them....  No, it's better to use them.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: AA4PB on June 22, 2013, 07:32:25 AM
Where did you hear that the U.S. Military no longer uses a phonetic alphabet? In 1957 they adopted an international version and as far as I know still use it today. The general rule is that if you need to spell out an unfamiliar word or one with an uncommon spelling then you do it with the phonetic alphabet. The reason is that some letters sound very close to the same (D and E, for example).

One of the problems on the ham bands is that many people don't know the officially accepted phonetics and make up their own as they go along and sometimes try to be "cute".


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: TANAKASAN on June 22, 2013, 08:39:27 AM
Phonetics do help when there is heavy QRM however there are multiple standards still in use, for example an amateur in a NATO country would use ALPHA for 'A' but a ham in a former Warsaw Pact country would use ANNA. Good luck trying to get everyone singing from the same hymn sheet!

Tanakasan

P.S. Hello to Golf Eight Sugar Daddy Fox and Great Four Getting Sex Yearly if they are still around.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: NO2A on June 22, 2013, 09:09:37 AM
If people would only slow down and speak clearly using phonetics,it would help. Too many times people speak quickly when identifying like they were using a phone answering machine.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W1JKA on June 22, 2013, 09:30:38 AM
Nothing wrong with the standard phonetic alphabet,it's just when the cutesy boys make up their own like N1WGH (Number One Worlds Greatest Ham)


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K8AXW on June 22, 2013, 10:09:24 AM
TRU:  "Time to dump phonetics?"  You're joking, right? 

What I have found is that more and more people that are in mail order business are learning phonetics to ensure order accuracy!

I have encountered difficult words while ordering items within the past 3 weeks and in frustration I resorted to phonetics and the order operator copied 100%.  Each one asked if I was former military.  When I told them I was a ham both laughed and said, "OK"

The point being these people have learned the present day accepted standard phonetic list.

I have yet to encounter an order operator that didn't understand phonetics!


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K8AXW on June 22, 2013, 10:16:32 AM
JKA:  You said a mouthfull that time!  I listened to a QSO one evening and one guy (maybe he was new.... I don't know) was have a terrible time using phonetics.  He finally resorted to making up his own as he went along and it was all I could do to keep from puking! 

I would simply have turned the dial but I had to listen to see if he was going to get slammed.  He didn't...... which proves there are still courteous and understanding operators out there. 


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE4YOG on June 22, 2013, 10:28:17 AM
The fun for me begins when my brain gets stuck between different phontics. Having worked in public safety we used a different set of phonetics and at times my brain gets stuck between the ham standard and the public safety standard. Phonetics cuts down on mistakes. I can get information passed much quicker and precisely when using phonetics.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KJ6ZOL on June 22, 2013, 10:40:04 AM
In fact, I was just listening to some guy calling CQ a few days ago on 40m and I couldn't copy his call, because he was not using NATO phonetics. He was using his own cutesy version, apparently. And even worse, with the static I couldn't make out his non-phonetic call either. Well, he just missed out on a QSO. I tuned back a few minutes later and he was gone, apparently nobody responded to him. I was gonna mention it and saw your thread. Folks, use standard phonetics!


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: VE3TRU on June 22, 2013, 11:05:07 AM
Thinking back to article on what the military said.
It added confusion, leading to people making mistakes.
I don't think that, just getting everyone on the same page (the military was) is the answer either.
I do think though, it should only be used as a last resort, when you cant hear them or not used at all.
The confusion thing is an understatement, for a lot of reasons.
Maybe the article is out there in cyberspace, but I'm to lazy to try to find it.
tnx


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7KBN on June 22, 2013, 12:36:16 PM
A = Aeolian
B = Bdellium
C = Ctesiphon
...etc.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: TANAKASAN on June 22, 2013, 01:19:32 PM
D = Decelea
E = Eleusis
F = Falerii
G = Gatae
H = Hattusa

This could be fun, anyone else want to continue the list?

Tanakasan


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KD0REQ on June 22, 2013, 01:31:14 PM
if you are in local license region 4, is that IIII or IV on CW?


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: WB0KSL on June 22, 2013, 02:08:57 PM
Well, the FAA sure hasn't dropped it.  The NATO version is standard for aviation communications (and the english language is the universal language used with ATC worldwide in aviation). When I was a police officer, we used a different phonetic alphabet (adam, baker... Drove me nuts).  A quick google turned up a bunch of US Army web sites that don't seem to know that it has been abandoned.  I try to be open minded about everything, but, as a former US Army officer: 1) I just can't believe it has been dropped, and 2) if is has been abandoned, then someone has lost their mind.

 :)

73 de WB0KSL, John
 


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W1JKA on June 22, 2013, 02:24:49 PM
Re:KD0RDQ

In license region 4 it would be X space IIII then bonum amicum all in Charlie Whiskey.



Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE3WD on June 22, 2013, 02:43:13 PM
Even the US military got rid of it...

That is not a true statement. 




Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on June 23, 2013, 12:22:23 AM
The standard phonetic alphabet was designed for good signal to noise but strong accents. Many of the words are low energy words - 'sierra' for example. Longer words, as in the older 'America', 'Baltimore' 'Canada' etc  have the advantage of syllabic redundancy: the disadvantage is that people don't necessarily recognise them, but they are far better under very weak signal conditions - as you would expect from communications theory. In digital comms, we add check sums and even forward error correction (FEC), and longer phonetic words are the analogue equivalent.

However, one pre WW2 alphabet used Xanthippe  for X! OK if you happen know that Xanthippe was the wife of Socrates......


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: N6PG on June 23, 2013, 03:27:34 AM
The standard phonetic alphabet was designed for good signal to noise but strong accents. Many of the words are low energy words - 'sierra' for example. Longer words, as in the older 'America', 'Baltimore' 'Canada' etc  have the advantage of syllabic redundancy: the disadvantage is that people don't necessarily recognise them, but they are far better under very weak signal conditions - as you would expect from communications theory. In digital comms, we add check sums and even forward error correction (FEC), and longer phonetic words are the analogue equivalent.

However, one pre WW2 alphabet used Xanthippe  for X! OK if you happen know that Xanthippe was the wife of Socrates......

Spot on! The people that are 100% defending the current phonetics probably don't spend time on HF voice with a call containing soft letters. I've had a very difficult time with my suffix "Papa Golf" and many times just switch to "Potugal Germany." 

I know the phonetic alphabet, I use it at work... But... I understand when people have a reason deviate.
Scott N6PG


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: AC4RD on June 23, 2013, 05:04:57 AM
... one pre WW2 alphabet used Xanthippe  for X! OK if you happen know that Xanthippe was the wife of Socrates......

The gossip around the Parthenon was that Xanthippe had her very own "Socratic method," if you know what I mean.  [wink wink nudge nudge]


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W1JKA on June 23, 2013, 05:20:45 AM
At least please consider that the standard phonetic alphabet was developed with mostly two syllable words (we all know the few three syllable words).The main intent was is to make it relatively easy to understand the word if any one of the syllables were missed due to various conditions.Drop any one syllable from the standard alphabet and you will most likely figure out the word,now try this with the cutesy or numerous other made up words starting with the same letter and the word may be questionable.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: WB0KSL on June 23, 2013, 06:41:41 AM
G3RZP is quite correct regarding the varying accents issue.  Note that the pronunciation of the standard "NATO" phonetic alphabet, in some instances, varies considerably from what you might consider the "normal" pronunciation of the word.  The number five (5) is a perfect example.  It is to be pronounced as "fife".  Admittedly, it has been a long time since I heard that pronunciation.  There are similar, somewhat strange, examples among the letters.  Oscar and Victor come to mind.

73 de WB0KSL, John


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K1CJS on June 23, 2013, 07:23:07 AM
At least please consider that the standard phonetic alphabet was developed with mostly two syllable words (we all know the few three syllable words).The main intent was is to make it relatively easy to understand the word if any one of the syllables were missed due to various conditions.Drop any one syllable from the standard alphabet and you will most likely figure out the word,now try this with the cutesy or numerous other made up words starting with the same letter and the word may be questionable.

True enough--but that still makes the supposition that the user KNOWS the standard alphabet.  If he/she doesn't, it's still a tossup as to understanding the phonetic.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: TANAKASAN on June 23, 2013, 07:32:53 AM
To: WB0KSL

"The number five (5) is a perfect example.  It is to be pronounced as "fife"."

Interesting because I have heard from different sources that (5) is supposed to be pronounced 'fiver' and (9) is supposed to be pronounced as 'niner'. This is to eliminate any confusion with the command FIRE! *** and the German word for no.

Tanakasan

*** Certain Navies use the command 'SHOOT' which eliminates this problem.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE3WD on June 23, 2013, 08:08:31 AM
Please try to consider the fact that the currently *recommended* phonetics for use on the ham bands is just that, a "recommendation". 

It is not a law. 

It is not a regulation. 

And, yes, in DX and Worldwide Contesting, it is often the case that we use our own collectively derived teminologies that often work much better.  Keyword here is, "collectively derived". 

"Papa Sugar" instead of "Papa Sierra" etc. 

The fact is that we all speak *living languages* -- not classical Latin or Greek -- and that means that the language can, will and does get changed over time. 

That said, I'm still a proponent of all hams learning the proper phonetics, if for no other reason than the only way to be able to intelligently break a "rule" is to know the rule as it existed in the first place. 

But I don't need no steenking Band Police. 


73


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: WB0KSL on June 23, 2013, 08:58:03 AM
TANAKASAN,

You are correct as to the number nine (9), it is pronounced nine-er.  Five (5) is to be pronounced "fife".  I bet I haven't heard more than a handful of OPs pronounce it that way, though :-)
I do remember very well that a request for re-transmission of something was to be "say again", NEVER "repeat".  To an artillery battery, "repeat" meant that they were on target, go ahead and fire again, same coordinates.  Not concepts you want to be confused over :-)
I still say "say again" to this day, and my wife gets a bit embarrassed and irritated with me in public.  Aviation also uses "say again".  Probably a spill over from the military usage.

73 de WB0KSL, John
 


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7KBN on June 23, 2013, 09:04:13 AM
D = W ("Double U")

P = Pneumonia (or pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanokoniosis)

X = Xylophone (or Xanthippe, as suggested earlier)

E = Eisenhower


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: N6PG on June 23, 2013, 09:35:35 AM
To: WB0KSL

"The number five (5) is a perfect example.  It is to be pronounced as "fife"."

Interesting because I have heard from different sources that (5) is supposed to be pronounced 'fiver' and (9) is supposed to be pronounced as 'niner'. This is to eliminate any confusion with the command FIRE! *** and the German word for no.

Tanakasan

*** Certain Navies use the command 'SHOOT' which eliminates this problem.

5=fife
3=tree
There are some interesting ones...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_phonetic_alphabet

Regards,
Scott N6PG


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: AC2EU on June 23, 2013, 10:37:51 AM
Just because you read it on the internet...

There is nothing wrong with phonetics, except that many Hams don't take the half and hour to learn it.
Phonetics is often critical when ordering alpha numeric part numbers over the phone or relaying other critical information.

Now everybody who says "papa sugar", "apple baker" and the like, please go here and learn the proper words.

http://virtualskies.arc.nasa.gov/communication/2.html (http://virtualskies.arc.nasa.gov/communication/2.html)

Thanks!
73 de AC2EU (alpha charlie too echo uniform)  ;D


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W5FYI on June 23, 2013, 10:53:07 AM
Here's the radio fonetic alfabet:

A Alfa
B Bravo
C Charlie
D Delta
E Echo
F Foxtrot
G Golf
H Hotel
I India
J Juliet
K Kilo
L Lima
M Mike
N November
O Oscar
P Papa
Q Quebeck
R Romeo
S Sierra
T Tango
U Uniform
V Victor
W Whiskey
X X-Ray
Y Yankee
Z Zulu

Got it? Good!

W5FYI (Double-you Five Fox-Yolk-Ida)




Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: WB0KSL on June 23, 2013, 12:17:20 PM
Yep, "tree" for three (3).  I had forgotten that one.  That's another one that you actually hear very seldom.  Do hear "niner" a lot.  I don't say that in public as my wife managed to break me on that one :-)
 Once, over thirty years ago, we had a running QSO on I-40 with WB5UGM.  Nice guy.  His phonetics for that... "we bought five ugly green monkeys"...  I'll never forget that one.   Summer of 1975 we ran a great field day with a call of K0KS... Killer Shark...  Jaws had just finished its run in theaters!

73 de WB0KSL, John


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE3WD on June 23, 2013, 01:17:08 PM
Kilowatt Enema Three Whiskey Dick here...


 ;D


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: VE3FMC on June 23, 2013, 06:51:06 PM
Even the US military got rid of it, and for a good reason.
1st thing that happens, is you strain to hear what the guy is saying. Most of the time they are using wrong terms, not to mention, that there is
no real standard (well there is, but its not working, as there are different sets of code out there)
 This is Billy Bob, Electricity, telephone buy now your thinking is he billy bob is he saying BB and why is this taking so long. Now at this point the conditions start to waver or you get a knob tuning up his radio because as he hears you talking, and you miss out on the rest.
OK how about this ..This is BLT55, great I got it and only took 2 seconds, short to the point. You may want to use phonetics if you missed it or conditions are so bad you cant hear him, but heck if the conditions are that bad and you cant hear them, turn off the radio.
just my 2 cents



No offense towards you but apparently you have not operated 75 or 40 meter SSB much since you have been licensed. If you have then it has been during very quiet hours without 10/9 static crashes.

Trust me, phonetics are a must on those bands at times. Any band for that matter. I am an NCS on ONTARS for one hour a week and I need check ins to use phonetics when the band is noisy.

No need for them on 2 meter FM repeaters.  ;D


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7KBN on June 23, 2013, 09:08:57 PM
Here's the radio fonetic alfabet:

A Alfa
B Bravo
C Charlie
D Delta
E Echo
F Foxtrot
G Golf
H Hotel
I India
J Juliet
K Kilo
L Lima
M Mike
N November
O Oscar
P Papa
Q Quebeck
R Romeo
S Sierra
T Tango
U Uniform
V Victor
W Whiskey
X X-Ray
Y Yankee
Z Zulu

Got it? Good!

W5FYI (Double-you Five Fox-Yolk-Ida)

No, that is A phonetic alphabet.  It is not THE fonetic alfabet.   ;D


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: WB6DGN on June 23, 2013, 10:33:14 PM
Quote
No need for them on 2 meter FM repeaters
Really?  I frequently use it on the telephone; most recently with my pharmacy when ordering a prescription refill and, even in some extreme cases, face to face!

Quote
No, that is A phonetic alphabet.  It is not THE fonetic alfabet.
The correct name for the one to which you refer is the "International Phonetic Alphabet".  I first learned it in 1958 as a prerequisite to obtaining my Student Pilot License.  At the time, it was stipulated that the words were to be pronounced in "American English" (throughout the world, interestingly enough) which, somewhere along the line has changed, now depending in which part of the world the speaker is located.  So, all you hams that like to add a "European" (or Canadian) touch, in the US, Papa is NOT correct.  The correct pronunciation is Papa (no accent, either syllable).

Tom


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on June 24, 2013, 01:57:07 AM
Except that '5' can also be 'As a number, as a number, Echo'. And so on for the other numbers.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: N2MG on June 24, 2013, 04:22:54 AM
As someone who uses HF almost exclusively (OK, so it's also almost exclusively CW) it's hard to imagine anyone who would seriously think that it's "time to dump the phonetics".

In fact, even on FM repeaters I've often asked other ops (they seem to be the most clueless hams on the planet) for their calls in phonetics.  Maybe they are so used to talking to the same 2-3 guys that they've haven't used phonetics in years, maybe it's something else.

Also, using the same phonetics over and over during the same exchange with same station (say in a contest or DXing) is bull-headed.  If he keeps getting your call wrong, CHANGE THE PHONETICS.

I use (and am supposed to use) November Two Mike Golf. But that's heard as November Two Mike Alpha. (The 'K' at the end of "Mike" blends with the 'G' at the start of "Golf"). So if it's heard incorrectly I go back with Norway Two Mexico Germany.

I also agree with the previous mention in the posts - even over the telephone I've used phonetics (though I try to use "less obviously geeky" terms like Adam or Dog (still, "Foxtrot" always comes out). For "B5D7" I'll say something like "B as in Baker, the number FIVE, D as in Dog, the number SEVEN..." etc.

It's all about your audience.

Mike N2MG


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: AC2EU on June 24, 2013, 06:54:05 AM

I've used phonetics (though I try to use "less obviously geeky" terms like Adam or Dog
Mike N2MG

Are you calling US Marine radio operators geeks?  They use international phonics...  ;D


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE3WD on June 24, 2013, 07:16:03 AM
If they don't get the number on the first shot, due to noise or propagation or possibly even language differences, I usually come back with the count: 

"Five, One-Two-Three-Four-Five, Copy?" 

And I also like to use much of Contesting convention when on Phone (CW is my mode of choice, though) just because many DX contacts are very much into RadioSport and are thus very familiar with those. 

"again-again, your number is five, one-two-three-four-five..." 

That "again-again" seems to be very well known and accepted around the world. 

If the operator spends time LISTENING and thus LEARNING what the living language conventions may be, very likely that they will be better prepared to COMMUNICATE. 


73


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on June 24, 2013, 07:21:56 AM
There's always the WW1 alphabet

'A is for 'orses'
'Beef or mutton'
'C for yourself'

and so on...


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: VE5EIS on June 24, 2013, 09:07:16 AM
I routinely use phonetics, even on 2 metre.  "E" can sound like a ton of other letters, after all, and for some reason people find my callsign to be a little difficult; I'm not sure why.  (I'm thinking that should go away on CW, when I'm up to doing it, though.)

I also make a point to always use standard phonetics.  Maybe sometime in poor conditions if standard phonetics aren't working, I will try an alternative but if people are expecting to hear standard phonetics, it's a lot easier to figure out what's going on, in my opinion.

I just about died of laughter Saturday when I heard a call ending in -GOW announce himself as "Grumpy Old Woman".  Yes, I did do a QSO with him - I couldn't NOT do it - but it isn't the best practice.  :)


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K8AXW on June 24, 2013, 09:41:50 AM
If you people want a problem try understanding and or saying the first three characters of my call (K8AXW) on HF, without using phonetics!  After 57 years I still strangle on it!

Especially since I've lost a front tooth!   ::)


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: N3HFS on June 24, 2013, 10:30:23 AM
Nothing wrong with the standard phonetic alphabet,it's just when the cutesy boys make up their own like N1WGH (Number One Worlds Greatest Ham)

One should realize the difference between a mnemonic tool and a phonetic tool.  

If N1WGH wanted you to remember his call, then "Number One Worlds Greatest Ham" would probably be ideal.  But if he wanted you to copy his call through heavy QRM/QRN, then a nice, slow repetition of "November One Whiskey Golf Hotel" might be far more appropriate.

(whoo...it's hot today.  I'll be Needing Three Hot Fudge Sundaes!)


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE3WD on June 24, 2013, 11:11:06 AM
If you people want a problem try understanding and or saying the first three characters of my call (K8AXW) on HF, without using phonetics!  After 57 years I still strangle on it!

Especially since I've lost a front tooth!   ::)

Actually, you've got a fairly easy contest call, using the Int Phonetics. 

Kilo(watt) Eight, Alpha Xray Whiskey

Sounds good to me! 


73


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K0JEG on June 24, 2013, 06:21:38 PM
On most bandwidth limited channels, it is impossible to tell the difference between F and S. This is especially true on telephones, for example. If you don't believe me, test it yourself sometime. B and D are also tough to decipher.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K8AXW on June 24, 2013, 09:10:34 PM
WD:  Yes, when I use those phonetics my call works out OK....but I hate using phonetics too much because I keep hearing W2OY in my ears....."I don't wanna talk to any lids, kids or K8s and especially space cadets!"   :(


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W5LZ on June 25, 2013, 07:38:29 AM
Using phonetics is a good idea.  Using 'standard' phonetics is also a good idea.  Understanding why phonetics are used is even a better idea.  All of that requires some thinking.  Thinking is work, so there are many that don't like to work too hard.  See where I'm taking that??
 - Paul


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE3WD on June 25, 2013, 07:41:23 AM
WD:  Yes, when I use those phonetics my call works out OK....but I hate using phonetics too much because I keep hearing W2OY in my ears....."I don't wanna talk to any lids, kids or K8s and especially space cadets!"   :(

I was part of that small but weird group that would pound him with our calls contest style when he was encountered on the bands...

Turn the amp on first. 


73


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K5MF on June 25, 2013, 07:55:43 AM
Tell me again how I am suppose to pronounce the phonetic for "Q".


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K8AXW on June 25, 2013, 08:23:15 AM
Quote
Tell me again how I am suppose to pronounce the phonetic for "Q".

That's "QUEER-BECK without the "R."


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W1JKA on June 25, 2013, 08:43:39 AM
Or just visualize lots of a name brand beer freely flowing at a Gay Rights demonstration.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7KBN on June 25, 2013, 11:04:18 AM
Q = Queue (pronounced just as it's spelled)

C = Cue

M = Mnemonic

W = Weimeraner


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K5MF on June 25, 2013, 11:31:08 AM
"Q" = Quebec = "keh BECK"

Looks more like "kay-beck" to me than "qua-beck."   The "qua" sound is not very radio friendly.  Come to think of it, the whole notion that "Quebec" is a good phonetic is a bit silly.  That is not an easy word to either say or understand on the air.  I like "queen" better and apparently a lot of hams do as well.  I hear "queen" much more frequently than either "Que BECK" or certainly what appears to be the correct "Kay BECK."

Tom/AE5QB


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE3WD on June 25, 2013, 12:08:33 PM
Perhaps it would be better to spell the phonetic for this phonetic, "Kuh Beck"...

And then listen to any SSB contest for the QUEEN. 

She'll be there, all over the place.


73


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KA4NMA on June 25, 2013, 10:32:35 PM
I was born with a speech problem.  I use the international phonetic standard all the time, except once.  Last Jan, I thought I was having a heart attack.  I called 911 and told them my apartment as "A".  I live 2 miles or less from the EMS. I also opened the front door and turned on a porch light.  They called back after about 10 minutes and said they could not find apartment "I".  I called out Alpha, Alpha. They arrived within a minute.  I am glad that it was a false alarm, but I did have other issues and spent 9 days in the hospital. What if it was not a false alarm? As for me, the international phonetics standard is here to stay.

Randy ka4nma


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: N9PSE on June 26, 2013, 05:00:49 AM
I'm a big fan of standard phonetics -- they're standard for a reason.  Just like Morse code, if you hear a particular sound, you think a letter.  When you use different sounds (words), I have to stop and think what letter is being referred to... which means I have to mentally spell out the word in my head to grab the right letter.  That takes time and I end up missing parts of the call.  Especially when call signs are machine-gunned out by fast talkers.

However, if you decide to use non-standard phonetics, please make them unambiguous.  For example, don't use "kilowatt."  You may mean "K", but I see "KW."  I've wasted a lot of time confusing call signs when the op is a K1ABC but keeps saying phonetics that indicate KW1ABC.

Just my 2 centibux...

 
Ninepins Niner Psychotic Sardonic Eutrophy


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W1JKA on June 26, 2013, 06:32:54 AM
As noted in some previous responses Amateur use of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) is only a drop in the bucket compared to its common daily use in all across the board non amateur radio live voice/phone communications,more to the point it is properly used.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: VE3FMC on June 26, 2013, 03:49:12 PM
Don't you just love guys that start a thread with a controversy subject and then never come back to back up their thread?  ::)



Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W1JKA on June 27, 2013, 02:42:12 AM
Re:VE3FMC

Your accurate observation is most likely due to the fact that most of theses forum contributors were Boy Scouts in their youth.As such,one of the main events of the weekend camp out was the evening fire side circle.Being that we each had merit badges in our own area of interest we could always depend on the same few guys practicing their craft.First,as you noted there were the few that were adept in originally starting the fire then sneaked off to prepare for the later evening pranks i.e short sheeting bunks,putting garter snakes into the sleeping bags etc..Remaining in the fire circle were those that specialized in throwing in big logs and fanning the flames to keep it burning bright.The rest of the boys would simply enjoy the comradeship,a few jokes and throw a small twig or two into the fire.Eventually after the evening wore on and the fire died down to a few ashes we all turned in.Of course during all this there was our troop leader(nowdays to be politically correct called a troop Administrator) I believe his name was Mr.Mike who was always lurking in the background leaving us boys to do our thing.It was his responsibility to keep an eye on things and if for some reason the fire got out control you could depend on him to quickly douse and put the fire completely out due to a well filled bladder from the leaders beer supply that was always judiciously hid some where in the troop supply trailer.What all this has to do with Phonetics I have no idea except that Taps is TANGO ALPHA PETER SIERRA.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K1CJS on June 27, 2013, 03:56:25 AM
Another thing amazing is the way that some mundane subject will garner such a group of comments!  It never ceases to amaze.

Just what is wrong with using phonetics that include well known everyday words.  True, it does not follow a standard convention, but as long as the first letter of the word is clearly understood, there is no harm whatsoever in using such words if they convey the meaning clearly.

Now that I've ignited the discussion again....  73!


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE3WD on June 27, 2013, 01:05:00 PM
Re:VE3FMC

Your accurate observation is most likely due to the fact that most of theses forum contributors were Boy Scouts in their youth.

Well, this one very recently told 'em to go to hades.  As have thousands. 

Quote
... I have no idea except that Taps is TANGO ALPHA PETER SIERRA.

Um, how about PAPA there? 

No merit badge awarded for the phonetics part of the test...


73


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W1JKA on June 27, 2013, 01:18:52 PM
Re:KE3WD

Of course you are correct concerning the letter P. I just threw PETER in to see if anybody was awake. BTW I did earn the old BSA Signaling merit badge. ;)


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G4IJE on July 01, 2013, 10:56:12 AM
It seems to me that the standard NATO/ICAO phonetic alphabet works pretty well most of the time. My only gripes are that some words have three syllables rather than two and I happen to have two of those longer words in my call ("In-dee-ah, Jew-Lee-Ett ..."), and it's hard to say "Golf Four ..." quickly without the words running together. Even though I hate using non-standard words, I sometimes have to use "George Four" instead.

In my job I often have to telephone IT support centres in India and I use phonetics all the time with great success.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on July 01, 2013, 11:10:59 AM
The time the ITU/ICAO/NATO phonetics don't work well is for very weak signals, down in the noise. Way back in the 1980's, GW4FRX found this out and commented on it in RadCom - he was (is?) a noted VHF SSB DX'er, and a number of other VHF DX'ers agreed with him.

One only needs to look at communications theory to see why - the book 'Signals, Symbols and Noise' by J. R. Pierce is a good introduction.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KH6DC on July 01, 2013, 05:39:40 PM
It's still being used in the Army, ask any SIG BN


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7RNO on July 07, 2013, 09:40:48 PM
In the late 60s in the German Navy, we learned, of course, the NATO alphabet, but also a more detailed list of names for numbers. They started with something like the Latin word for it, followed by the (almost) English. I don't remember them all, but some were

terra-three
penta-five
sette-seven
nove-niner

What cracks me up today (on 2m) is that most everybody rattles down their call without phonetic spelling but needs you to spell out yours, because they are not familiar with it. Duh!

Anyway, phonetic spelling with the international alphabet is the way to go and anyone who wants to be understood should use (learn) it and nothing else. Bravo Alpha Sierra Tango Alpha!

73,
Arno
K7RNO


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: N3HFS on July 08, 2013, 04:32:28 AM
Just this weekend I was working 2-meter medical comms at an event, and I had to report that "Ambulance has arrived from Alpha Fire Company." 

Naturally, I was asked to spell "Alpha."  Boy, responding with the phonetic spelling that felt rather weird.  :P


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: N2MG on July 08, 2013, 05:26:19 AM
Just this weekend I was working 2-meter medical comms at an event, and I had to report that "Ambulance has arrived from Alpha Fire Company." 

Naturally, I was asked to spell "Alpha."  Boy, responding with the phonetic spelling that felt rather weird.  :P

Ha ha. Perfect example of when NOT to use the standard phonetics!


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE3WD on July 08, 2013, 05:45:52 AM
Perfect example of WHEN to use your phonetics. 

"Alpha, I spell, Alpha-Lima-Papa-Hotel-Alpha, copy?"


It isn't that hard to memorize the Int. Phonetics such that they are at the tip of the tongue when needed, one just has to resolve to practice it daily until it becomes rote. 


73


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: N3HFS on July 08, 2013, 06:44:10 AM
Ha ha. Perfect example of when NOT to use the standard phonetics!

Perfect example of WHEN to use your phonetics.  

Well, given that this was 2-meter FM and copy was generally perfect, I really should have responded with "A-L-P-H-A, Alpha."  
But instinctively, I went through the whole "Alpha-Lima-Papa..." thing which immediately brought up the concept (in my head) of the potential that this could lead to a internal self-reference redundancy error or an endless loop of phonetically spelling a phonetic.  :D


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: VE5EIS on July 08, 2013, 11:44:23 AM
It isn't that hard to memorize the Int. Phonetics such that they are at the tip of the tongue when needed, one just has to resolve to practice it daily until it becomes rote.

I've only had a callsign since April, and NATO phonetics have already become rote to me.  I use phonetics at least once a day so they stuck in the head pretty quickly.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on July 08, 2013, 01:04:08 PM
I find it interesting that none of those who advocate the use of the ITU/ICAO/NATO phonetics under all conditions have addressed the problem of poor S/N where communications theory is in favour of longer polysyllabic words.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: WB6DGN on July 17, 2013, 07:45:24 PM
Quote
"Q" = Quebec = "keh BECK"

That's why its important to know, not only the phonetics but, the RULES for their use.  As I was taught in ground school (in 1958), the words are pronounced in "AMERICAN ENGLISH" thus eliminating the confusion.  Today, I understand that pronunciation is dependent on region of the world where used, once again introducing the potential for error just to salve some group's ego.  Common Sense = 0,  Political Correctness = 1; when (if ever) is it going to end?
Tom


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K9MHZ on July 27, 2013, 09:15:02 AM
Even the US military got rid of it, and for a good reason......


Huh?  Very strange, I must not have gotten that memo.



Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on July 27, 2013, 10:59:05 AM
K9MHZ,

Neither have all the ATCO's! (Air Traffic COntrollers)


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K1CJS on July 30, 2013, 09:54:47 AM
That's why its important to know, not only the phonetics but, the RULES for their use.  As I was taught in ground school (in 1958), the words are pronounced in "AMERICAN ENGLISH" thus eliminating the confusion.  Today, I understand that pronunciation is dependent on region of the world where used, once again introducing the potential for error just to salve some group's ego.  Common Sense = 0,  Political Correctness = 1; when (if ever) is it going to end?

Yeah, but military training and communications is one thing, and ham radio is another.  With most of the hams coming on board not having such training, you're more likely to be misunderstood using the 'standard' these days.  

One good example is the letter/word you chose, 'Q'.  Some would know what/where Quebec is--but a lot more would know what Queen means!


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on July 30, 2013, 03:16:22 PM
What is used  for the US military (or US airlines) in terms of pronunciation isn't necessarily that which is useful for a non - native language English speaker in a country foreign to him.  So 'Kwebek' for some may be much less use than 'Kebek'.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K1CJS on July 30, 2013, 03:53:13 PM
To each their own.  All I can really say about it is this--I'm not getting paid to use certain phonetics, I'm not in the military, there is no law that says there is a set standard that has to be used, and more common words are more easily understood by a lot of people.

Instead of 'dumping' phonetics, how about dumping all the policing and the crazy ideas?  73!


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KC5YIV on July 30, 2013, 04:21:56 PM
Dump phonetics? Has QRM been discontinued, or am I missing some secret information that makes this idea not completely ludicrous?


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: AK7V on July 30, 2013, 05:02:58 PM
Q = Queue (pronounced just as it's spelled)

C = Cue

M = Mnemonic

W = Weimeraner

A = Are

B = Bee

E = Ewe (or Eye?)

G = Genes

I = In

J = Jeans

K = Know

N = No

S = Sea

Y = You


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7KBN on August 01, 2013, 11:37:59 AM
I still like D = W.   ;D


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: VE5EIS on August 02, 2013, 01:04:01 PM
One good example is the letter/word you chose, 'Q'.  Some would know what/where Quebec is--but a lot more would know what Queen means!

Anyone who has studied the NATO phonetic alphabet knows that "Quebec" is Q.  They may not know where Quebec is, or even that it is a place.  They don't even need to know it.

A KQ call recently called himself "King Queen" on a net I was on, and it took me several seconds for it to occur to me what he meant.  Kilo Quebec would have been far faster at communicating the meaning.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7KBN on August 02, 2013, 05:31:02 PM
Having been licensed for half a century, I recognize "Queen" just as quickly as I recognize "Quebec", no matter how it's pronounced.  Even "CUE-beck".

With experience, most of us will be able to work with many different phonetic systems.  Since there is no mandated standard which thou shalt use, it's a lot easier to go with the flow.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: N5INP on August 02, 2013, 05:34:59 PM
Here's the phonetics I use locally, the hams that hear it seem to enjoy them -

November 5 Ignorant Naive Person

 :P


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: WB6DGN on August 03, 2013, 09:34:25 PM
Quote
Some would know what/where Quebec is--but a lot more would know what Queen means!

Bad choice!  Much as I'd like to, I won't go there!

Tom


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K1CJS on August 04, 2013, 04:42:40 AM
Quote
Some would know what/where Quebec is--but a lot more would know what Queen means!

Bad choice!  Much as I'd like to, I won't go there!

Without going there myself, why do you think I chose that particular word?  One of the meanings is the current head of state in Great Britain--then there are the other meanings that you refer to.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K0TCH on August 04, 2013, 04:51:21 AM
I for one am proud of my call sign, I EARNED it just like all the other hams out there. So why do a few hams say their call so fast that you can't understand what was said ? Are they ashamed of there call? SLOW DOWN.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: AC4RD on August 04, 2013, 05:48:45 AM
Here's the phonetics I use locally, the hams that hear it seem to enjoy them -
November 5 Ignorant Naive Person

The first callsign held by my pal AF4YN was KF4UQX.  He would give the suffix phonetically as "Unceasingly Querying Xerxes."  :)

Speaking of phonetics police:  My call starts with AC, but other hams often hear it as KC.   I don't use the FM repeaters very often, and I'd often use phonetics when I did, so people would get the call correctly.  But there was a local guy who would often pop up and admonish me or anyone else who did it: "Don't use phonetics on FM!"  Yeah, thank you officer.  :-/


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7RNO on August 04, 2013, 07:50:07 AM
I for one am proud of my call sign, I EARNED it just like all the other hams out there. So why do a few hams say their call so fast that you can't understand what was said ? Are they ashamed of there call? SLOW DOWN.

It is because, in their small mind, they think everybody knows their call as well as they do.
It cracks me up every time a ham asks for phonetic spelling of calls and then they rattle down theirs in one blob.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KB1WSY on August 13, 2015, 08:37:44 AM
Here's an example of what happens when near-homonyms are used, without being spelled out:

(http://i100.independent.co.uk/image/28166-1to17df.jpg)

73 de Martin, KB1WSY


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KD0REQ on August 13, 2015, 10:14:56 AM
all us old phartes have some hearing issues.  so if you're asked for phonetics, hey, use 'em.  it only takes a few more minutes in CW


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: DRBEN on August 13, 2015, 11:55:17 AM
For a very detailed history of the use of so-called phonetic alphabets, see:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_phonetic_alphabet

The current version (first introduced in 1958) has been adopted by ICAO, NATO, ITU, IARU, IMO, FAA, ATIS, and ARRL.

It is clear that since the 1920's, the usefulness of such an alphabet has been recognized.

Although a very widely, internationally, accepted standard has been available for over 50 years, many amateur radio operators refuse to use it or substitute other names for some (or all letters). Many are still using the names used by the U.S. military from 1941-1956.

Many hams use "homemade" letter names that they think or better or cuter, ignoring that the objective is understanding, not cleverness.

Some hams use the letter names for the suffix but not for the prefix. Others don't use them at all or say them so fast that it is difficult to understand.

If you want to be understood, use the standardized letter names and speak them clearly and slowly. In a contact between operators who already know each other, it is relatively unimportant whether or not a callsign is given with great clarity. In other situations it may be the only way to properly identify the station.

Some operators seem to go out of their way to avoid letter names. I frequently hear DX contacts where one of the parties is having a hard time copying the other party's callsign. Sometimes, a say again request is made three or four times and each time the call is given in the ordinary manner, often rapidly and not very distinctly. If the operator had used phonetic letter names after the first say again request, he or she would not have had to repeat the callsign several more times.

FCC Part 97 rules for the amateur radio service says the following about station identification:

§97.119(b)(2)
Use of a phonetic alphabet as an aid for correct station identification is encouraged.

The logical choice of which one is obvious: the one currently in common use, i.e., the ITU/NATO/ICAO alphabet.











Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W0XX on August 13, 2015, 05:30:15 PM
DOesn't matter much to me if some nit wit wants to use goofy phonetics and end up NOT IN THE LOG because someone transcribed what the are not use to, incorrectly.  Standardized phonetics work very well on the bands especially for our DX friends that speak little English (and we speak none of theirs), at least, Alpha is Alpha to both sides and easy to understand.

I will continue to use standard phonetics, on the rare occassion I use SSB.  One reason I love CW.  Clean, more signals in less bandwidth, easy to copy callsigns at any speed, and no goofiness in trying to decipher a cryptic phonetic given from the other side.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7KBN on August 13, 2015, 10:14:31 PM
A – as in Aeolian
 B – as in Bdellium
 C – as in Czar
 D – as in Djibouti
 E – as in Eight
 F – as in Philly
 G – as in Gnat
 H – as in Heir
 I – as in One
 J – as in Jalapeño
 K – as in Knick-knack
 L – as in Fifty – or as in llama
 M – as in Mnemonic
 N – as in Nguyen
 O – as in Oedipus
 P – as in Psychosis
 Q – as in Quran
 R – as in Are
 S – as in Sea
 T – as in Tsar
 U – as in Uighur
 V – as in Five
 W – as in Write
 X – as in Xylophone
 Y – as in Yttrium
 Z – as in Zwieback


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on August 14, 2015, 12:28:31 AM
Quote
Standardized phonetics work very well on the bands especially for our DX friends that speak little English (and we speak none of theirs), at least, Alpha is Alpha to both sides and easy to understand.

Except when signals are very weak and the 'standard' phonetics have no syllabic redundancy and are low in 'speech power'. Like 'sierra'.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: DRBEN on August 14, 2015, 09:47:00 AM
Except when signals are very weak and the 'standard' phonetics have no syllabic redundancy and are low in 'speech power'. Like 'sierra'.

No system is perfect. The current phonetic alphabet works very well in MOST circumstances. Obviously there are limits.

Readability

1--Unreadable.
2--Barely readable, occasional words distinguishable.
3--Readable with considerable difficulty.
4--Readable with practically no difficulty.
5--Perfectly readable.

R1 Don't waste your time; find someone else to contact; phonetics not helpful here.
R2 Phonetics may help, but the going will be rough no matter how you try to identify your station.

R3 and
R4 A common phonetic alphabet can be very useful when a callsign is difficult to copy or a particular word is not being
     correctly copied.

R5 Even here, there a times, because of language differences or accents, when a phonetic callsign or spelling of a
     hard to understand word will save the day.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on August 14, 2015, 10:00:58 AM
The  problem tends to be worse when working very weak signal SSB on VHF/UHF: adding syllabic redundancy with longer words then helps. Like adding FEC to digital signals.

Which was the advantage of the pre WW2 Amsterdam-Baltimore-Casablanca  international alphabet.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: W0XX on August 14, 2015, 11:13:27 AM
Quote
Standardized phonetics work very well on the bands especially for our DX friends that speak little English (and we speak none of theirs), at least, Alpha is Alpha to both sides and easy to understand.

Except when signals are very weak and the 'standard' phonetics have no syllabic redundancy and are low in 'speech power'. Like 'sierra'.

That is when CW rules..and why most folks use it in DXing..if signals are that weak, many wouldn't bother on SSB trying to dig something out that is nearly ESP


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: WA2ISE on August 14, 2015, 01:31:57 PM
Some really bad phonetic selections:  ;D (modified from an above post)

 C – as in Czar    ;D
 
 F – as in Philly   ;D
 G – as in Gnat   ;D
 H – as in Heir    ;D   or "herb"

 J – as in Jalapeño    Sounds like "H"    ;D  Or "Jose"...
 K – as in Knife   ;D  I changed this one

 M – as in Mnemonic
 N – as in Nguyen

 P – as in Psychosis    ;D  ;D
 Q – as in Qatar    ;D
 
 S – as in Sea
 T – as in Tsar   ;D
 U – as in Uighur


 X – as in Xylophone   ;D

 Z – as in Zwieback     ;D


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on August 14, 2015, 02:46:10 PM
Naw - you cannot beat 'Xanthippe' for X!

For which, you need to know ancient Greek history, who Xanthippe was and how her name was correctly pronounced.....

Not, I submit, the best choice, even though there is the necessary syllabic redundancy!

Quote
That is when CW rules..and why most folks use it in DXing..if signals are that weak, many would bother on SSB trying to dig something out that is nearly ESP

That is where the enormous difference appears to exist - maybe not so much now - between the US and Europe. Most EU DXers seem to believe  that a key is something to open the door with -  although  now with JT65  and so on, the idea of actually having to strain to read a signal has gone - why put effort into operating when the computer can do it better?

But in the older days, when the going got rough on VHF/UHF, US hams would easily drop back into using CW - I saw this happening when operating in a June VHF QSO party from Maine in the early part of this century. In Europe, there MIGHT be a few who could read CW.......with difficulty.

I sometimes think that amateur radio is going down a road where the computers talk to each other and don't actually need the humans.......


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7KBN on August 14, 2015, 07:28:19 PM
Xanthippe - a blond hippie?  And if she gained weight, a blond hippo (keeping the Greek root)...

The reason Socrates spent so much time reasoning and arguing with Plato?


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: G3RZP on August 15, 2015, 12:01:46 AM
Exactly, Pat!


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K7KBN on August 15, 2015, 02:06:53 PM
I missed the obvious straight line I gave myself -- wondering if those Greek roots might not have been naturally blond -- but I didn't want to split hairs.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K6CPO on August 17, 2015, 12:46:37 PM
I give you new phonetics, drawn from the periodic table of elements:

Actinium
Bohrium
Curium
Dubnium
Erbium
Fermium
Gadolinium
Holminium
Iridium

Krypton
Lutetium
Magnesium
Neptunium
Osmium
Promethium

Ruthenium
Strontium
Terbinium
Unuseptium
Vanadiam
Yttrium
Zirconium

There are no elements that start with the letters "J" or "Q" so feel free to make up your own.


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE0EFX on August 17, 2015, 01:18:03 PM
I give you new phonetics, drawn from the periodic table of elements:

Actinium
Bohrium
Curium
Dubnium
Erbium
Fermium
Gadolinium
Holminium
Iridium

Krypton
Lutetium
Magnesium
Neptunium
Osmium
Promethium

Ruthenium
Strontium
Terbinium
Unuseptium
Vanadiam
Yttrium
Zirconium

There are no elements that start with the letters "J" or "Q" so feel free to make up your own.

I think you overlooked Xenon..


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: KE0EFX on August 17, 2015, 01:21:50 PM
Of course I would notice a missing "X".

73,
Krypton Erbium 0 Erbium Fermium Xenon


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K1ZJH on August 17, 2015, 02:55:38 PM
Fun to discuss, but:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_phonetic_alphabet

the phonetic alphabet was chosen for a reason...  with my call I often switch... Zulu to Zanzibar,  Juliet to Japan, when someone is having trouble with standard phonetics. No nonsense--phonetics have evolved and changed over the years. The NATO standard works bests, but sometimes using similar phonetic systems makes a difference.

Pete


Title: RE: Time to dump the phonetics
Post by: K6CPO on August 17, 2015, 03:41:30 PM
I give you new phonetics, drawn from the periodic table of elements:

Actinium
Bohrium
Curium
Dubnium
Erbium
Fermium
Gadolinium
Holminium
Iridium

Krypton
Lutetium
Magnesium
Neptunium
Osmium
Promethium

Ruthenium
Strontium
Terbinium
Unuseptium
Vanadiam
Yttrium
Zirconium

There are no elements that start with the letters "J" or "Q" so feel free to make up your own.

I think you overlooked Xenon..


Yep, I did.  (Transcription error...)