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

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Calling CQ the right way?  (Read 2206 times)
WD8JWJ
Member

Posts: 14




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: December 22, 2002, 08:52:47 PM »

Why not just say your CallSign then "CQ and Listening"
Logged
N6HBJ
Member

Posts: 136


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #16 on: December 27, 2002, 04:52:21 PM »

Dennis, are you one of those guys who justs likes to argue with everyone for the sake of arguing?

Of course this isnt a WRITTEN protocol. I was simply telling you the way it is currently done by NEARLY EVERYONE. Standard practice.

If you want to be different and call CQ on a repeater (while everyone listening snickers at you), then go for it!

This is America and you have every right to make a fool out of yourself.


 
Logged
KG4RUL
Member

Posts: 2737


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #17 on: December 27, 2002, 05:07:21 PM »

When I see somone refer to a 'standard' or a 'protocol', the only reply I can make is SHOW IT TO ME!  Otherwise, it is just your opinion.  I will continue to call CQ and, GASP, actually have people come back to me!  So stay silent and snicker, you probably don't have anything useful to say anyhow.

Dennis - KG4RUL
Logged
N6HBJ
Member

Posts: 136


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #18 on: December 27, 2002, 10:34:42 PM »

So Dennis you actually have people come back to you huh?

Let me refresh your memory. The following are YOUR VERY OWN WORDS:


"RE: 2 meter repeater use  Reply  
by KG4RUL on December 13, 2002  Mail this to a friend!  
Enroute on a recent trip from Charleston, SC to Northeastern OH, a total of 1500 miles roundtrip, I made a concerted effort to use the available 2M repeaters. I programmed all repeaters within 30 miles of my route into my Yaesu FT-1500M. As the trip progressed, I would alternately listen and call on the repeaters that were within range. This resulted in a TOTAL of SIX contacts! Calls on 146.520 simplex netted a SINGLE contact.

I usually stop midpoint each way when making this trip. On the return trip, I heard a recorded announcement for a meeeting of the local club at my stopping point. I began calling for directions, on that repeater and the other local repeaters, as I approached the town. I continued calling on my HT after I checked into the hotel and up to the time of the meeting. NO ONE answered any of my calls! I was unable to attend the meeting!

Talk about indifference or lack of usage (I can't determine which was the case). How will we justify our allocation of spectrum in the future with a record like this? All in all, it is very discouraging.

Dennis - KG4RUL"

Hmmm. Would you like to withdraw your last statement? Perhaps you should drop the "CQ". You might have more luck making contacts.

Best Wishes

Your friend always-Mike





 
Logged
KG4RUL
Member

Posts: 2737


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #19 on: December 28, 2002, 07:30:48 AM »

Mike, I am truly glad that you brought this up!  On the above mentioned trip, I followed the 'standard'/'protocol' and did NOT call CQ.  The results speak for themselves.  

I called as 'listening', 'monitoring', 'is there anybody listening to this repeater', 'is there a control operator monitoring this repeater', etc.  What more could one do, short of projecting themselves through the ether to grab somone by the ears and make them listen?  

If this is the kind of response one gets when using repeaters, the amateur community will be hard pressed to preserve our precious slices of spectrum in the future.

Dennis - KG4RUL
Logged
N6HBJ
Member

Posts: 136


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #20 on: December 28, 2002, 12:09:08 PM »

Oh, so you decided to change your personal "SOP" and not call "CQ" on repeaters just for this  trip?


I'm supposed to believe that.
Logged
KB5VPS
Member

Posts: 1




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: December 28, 2002, 05:48:33 PM »

I have to go with Jim...  If I want to start a qso from the groumd up, I just say "this is W5GM mobile" or "This is W5GM. is anybody around?"
Logged
KG4RUL
Member

Posts: 2737


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #22 on: December 28, 2002, 07:58:04 PM »

Whether you believe it or not makes not one whit of difference.  The fact is, that is what I did, on that trip.  I got virtually no reponses to hundreds of calls.  Would calling CQ have made a difference?  I can't prove that it would have and conversely, you can't prove that it wouldn't.  If I choose to call CQ I will.  Fortunately, you don't appear to be in range of any repeaters that I customarily use, so your ears will not be offended.

Dennis - KG4RUL
Logged
N6HBJ
Member

Posts: 136


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #23 on: December 28, 2002, 11:26:55 PM »

Well Dennis, I'm not offended. Like I said, it doesn't matter to me.

 But it is important to know that although there is no "written procedure" against calling CQ on a repeater, it is just not usually done by the vast majority of Hams on repeaters. I've never heard it ever.

 You may choose to use it if you wish of course. But know that when someone does something different than most people, that person will stand out and often be frowned upon or looked at differently than others or thought of as a beginner etc etc. Now it is perfectly OK to be different if you wish. After all, you have a right to operate as you choose (within legal bounds of course).

 But when a newcomer or inexperienced operater asks a question regarding repeater procedures, why would you encourage him to use a procedure that is generally not used by most of us?

 This person probably doesn't want to be a pioneer like you and use uncommon procedures, but rather would like to make repeater contacts in the generally accepted manner and enjoy the hobby without standing out like a "sore thumb."

 So why not steer him in the direction that most of us are doing? It will certainly make things easier for him. Later when he is comfortable, he can always change his mind and be different.

 

 

 
Logged
W1AI
Member

Posts: 4


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #24 on: January 01, 2003, 08:04:19 AM »

I think we should avoid childish rules that make newcomers feel uncomfortable and unwelcome.  Every ham knows that "CQ" means "calling any station".  Why would we discourage the use of that particular word?

On CB, it's considered inappropriate to say "name"; you have to say "handle".  You have to say "smokey" instead of police officer.  A bunch of childish rules.  Do we want amateur VHF/UHF operation to be like CB?

My 11-year-old niece so much enjoyed when I let her operate HF SSB that she went and got her Tech w/HF license, and she's studying for her General test now!  Now I'm introducing her to 2M, and I'm embarassed to have to explain to her that calling CQ is considered inappropriate on 2M.  She asks with the wide-eyed innocence of an 11-year-old girl, "Why?"  I cannot think of any way to explain to her why grown ups would prefer an unclear statement like "KB1JFN monitoring", when CQ is a more clear and accurate way of saying what she wants to say.

After some thought, I decided to just let her call CQ, figuring that people would be kind to her because of her extremely YL voice.

It really made me think.  Are we trying to be grown ups or CB'ers?

Sure it's standard protocol to avoid the term CQ, but we creaate the standard protocol with our usage!  If you want this to be ham radio, and not CB, let's get rid of this childish "rule"!  Next time I'm looking for a conversation on 2M, I'm going to call it what it really is -- CQ!

W1AI
Logged
N6HBJ
Member

Posts: 136


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #25 on: January 01, 2003, 01:01:56 PM »

This has nothing at all to do with being "childish".

The whole world is filled with informal customs and unwritten "rules" and procedures in every aspect of life.

It doesnt mean it is right or wrong. It just means that it is the way it is.

In life, as a newbie in any arena, there are customs and procedures that those before us use, and when we are new, we tend to adopt those same customs so that we may become accepted in that society that we are choosing to join. Its like a fraternity.

And HAM radio is a fraternity. Every type of fraternity or micro society/club/sport etc has its own slang or procedures that in a way 'seperate' themselves from the rest of the world.

"CQ" is not common practice on repeaters. I'm not sure why. Probably because repeater work is channelized and if someone IS on they will here you vs HF where you may have to call CQ several times before someone tuning the dial comes across your signal. There may not even be a reason. But things are the way they are. like it or not.
Logged
N6HBJ
Member

Posts: 136


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #26 on: January 01, 2003, 01:40:26 PM »

Regarding CB's use of heavy slang. There WAS a reason for it.

Truckers, who were very unhappy with the newly enacted 55 mph speed limit, because they were losing money, would run in "convoys" and use the CB radio to alert other truckers of law enforcement units. This would enable them to speed with a much lower likelyhood of getting caught.

The slang was a "code" adopted to disguise their identidy and their activities from law enforcement officers who also had CBs in their vehicles and might be listening. (usually in rural areas).

So you see, the use of slang such as handles, etc actually started out as a necessity for guys trying to earn a decent living and support their families-not just being 'childish' as you erroneously state.

Later, when the public caught on, it got out of control. So you see, it was the "general public" who actually ruined the CB band-not the "childish" slang talking truckers who pioneered the whole CB lingo.
Logged
N6HBJ
Member

Posts: 136


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #27 on: January 01, 2003, 01:52:51 PM »

Furthermore, to insinuate that HAM radio operators are acting like CBers because we don't use "CQ" on a repeater is absolute nonsense.

We have our own procedures, and they have theirs.

Things like QSL, QTH, HIHI, are all used frequently on phone communications, even though they are supposed to be for CW.

But so what!? It is the way it is.

Now you're gonna tell us we are acting like CBers.
Logged
VA3HIE
Member

Posts: 29




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: January 31, 2003, 01:14:17 AM »

Look at it this way... It's FM you are using a repeater... The odds are in favour your audio is intelligible (providing PL tones are correct)...
As long as you identify and you are not saying anything that may offend anyone, just SAY IT.
CQ, Hey I'm a dork or WHATEVER. If someone wants to reply, they will
Logged
N6HBJ
Member

Posts: 136


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #29 on: February 02, 2003, 02:47:14 AM »

 This is straight out of the "ARRL OPERATING MANUAL."

PAGE 3-8  ..."IT'S NOT GOOD REPEATER ETIQUETTE TO CALL CQ. EFFICIENT COMMUNICATION IS THE GOAL. YOU'RE NOT TRYING TO ATTRACT THE ATTENTION OF SOMEONE WHO IS CASUALLY TUNING HIS RECEIVER ACROSS THE BAND."

PAGE 3-7  ...TRANSMIT YOUR CALL SIGN. FOR EXAMPLE, "THIS IS NU0X MONITORING." THIS ADVISES OTHERS ON FREQUENCY THAT YOU ARE AVAILABLE TO TALK...

DO AS YOU WISH. BE DIFFERENT. BE UNIQUE. WHATEVER. JUST DON'T STEER A NEWBIE THAT WAY.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   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!