eHam

eHam Forums => Misc => Topic started by: WA2ISE on May 26, 2014, 02:25:53 PM



Title: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: WA2ISE on May 26, 2014, 02:25:53 PM
Heard someone on the local repeater who has a bad mic on the rig, making for weak audio, when asked for the call replies "Nine Whiskey two xxxxx".  Being on 2 meters that call won't be 9W2xxx, but turned out to be NW2xxx.  Imagine the confusion on HF....   ;D


Title: RE: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: W9FIB on May 26, 2014, 04:29:28 PM
Were you a good Elmer and mention that to him, or did you just savor it to poke fun here?


Title: RE: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: WA2ISE on May 26, 2014, 04:31:40 PM
or did you just savor it to poke fun here?

Of course!    ;D   No, it was in the middle of a busy QSO....


Title: RE: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: AG6WT on May 27, 2014, 12:32:39 PM
At least he didn't also use "Won" instead of "Whiskey"... 912xxx  ???


Title: RE: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: K0JEG on May 28, 2014, 05:48:46 PM
I once worked with a dispatcher who used animals when spelling phonetically:

"Serial number 1543(iguana)(Water Buffalo)(Chimpanzee)754"

"Too many letters... IWBC?"

"No. Just IWC."

"Well, why did you say buffalo?"

Lucky for her she had many other good qualities and (ahem) attributes that let her get away with it.


Title: RE: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: N9KX on May 29, 2014, 06:51:28 PM
At least he didn't also use "Won" instead of "Whiskey"... 912xxx  ???

true, or even worse what if GN3W said call here is Gnome Nine Three Won  :D


Title: RE: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: KI5WW on May 30, 2014, 06:46:16 AM
Was she a Dr? And was her last name Dolittle?


Title: RE: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: KD8IIC on June 05, 2014, 06:19:49 AM
 Just as bad, nimrods who say Kilo Watt for K...


Title: RE: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: K5UNX on June 06, 2014, 06:48:24 AM
Was trying to work W1AW/5 last night. Some guy was using really strange phonetics while trying to get his call sign to the W1AW station. There was a lot of static and he had to repeat his weird phonetic call a lot and was yelling into the mic! After about 10 tries, he used the "normal" accepted phonetics and got it through . . . . .

And a 59 report as given both ways . . . .


Title: RE: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: N9KX on June 06, 2014, 08:18:33 AM
Was trying to work W1AW/5 last night. Some guy was using really strange phonetics while trying to get his call sign to the W1AW station. There was a lot of static and he had to repeat his weird phonetic call a lot and was yelling into the mic! After about 10 tries, he used the "normal" accepted phonetics and got it through . . . . .

And a 59 report as given both ways . . . .

that's classic!  :D  thanks for the replay


Title: RE: Poor selection of phonetics, "Nine" for "N"
Post by: K9YLI on June 07, 2014, 07:35:47 AM
IIC    I have not understood the reason  for saying   killowatt   is  wrong..
Killowatt is one word  and was used on the ham bands , long before the
'black boot army'  phonetics were made official.
I joined the army  just at the switch over and the old

'brown boot army'  phonetics of    'able baker charlie...  were phased out.