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: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Calling a station on CW  (Read 2800 times)
N4DSP
Member

Posts: 162




Ignore
« on: January 01, 2014, 04:35:26 PM »

Encountered many times where I will call a CQ with a 3X3 call someone will drop their call one time. This is occurring more  often and is not proper operating practice. The proper way to respond to a CQ is call the station twice and then give your call twice. This is known as a 2X2 call!  This enables the operator to tune you in and adjust the amount of filtering needed for solid copy. I am speaking of general CQ calls and not contest calling.
Logged
AB9NZ
Member

Posts: 177




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: January 01, 2014, 05:31:38 PM »

You really want to hear your own call twice?
Logged
N4DSP
Member

Posts: 162




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: January 01, 2014, 05:53:31 PM »

This is not written in stone! A 1X2 is sufficient. It all depends on conditions, qrm, qrn, signal strength, etc. The point is just not drop your call once.
Thanks.


You really want to hear your own call twice?
Logged
KB4QAA
Member

Posts: 2449




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: January 01, 2014, 05:54:42 PM »

A 2x2 reply is a reasonable method.  

It gives both operators a good chance of getting the callsigns correct without being overly long.
Logged
WD8KNI
Member

Posts: 154




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: January 01, 2014, 05:55:22 PM »

why would you not be listening on your xmit frequency?   Just answer with the part of the call you heard, you will pick it up on the next go round.  Sounds like normal operating procedure for the last 30 years...  Fred
Logged
N4DSP
Member

Posts: 162




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: January 01, 2014, 06:07:17 PM »

Ask the station calling me for that answer! I hear them calling 300-450 hz away at times! Also stations running low power or using a disadvantaged antenna should use a 2X2 or 1X2 call. That has been my operating procedure as my Elmer taught me in the mid 60's and I pass it on. It  has worked very well until recently with newcomer's to the ranks.

why would you not be listening on your xmit frequency?   Just answer with the part of the call you heard, you will pick it up on the next go round.  Sounds like normal operating procedure for the last 30 years...  Fred
« Last Edit: January 01, 2014, 06:13:13 PM by N4DSP » Logged
KB4QAA
Member

Posts: 2449




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: January 01, 2014, 07:39:27 PM »

Why should you be sure that after calling CQ, a call you hear is actually for you?  Because it might NOT be for you.  What you think is a reply might be a call to someone other than you!
Logged
N4DSP
Member

Posts: 162




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: January 01, 2014, 07:43:05 PM »

Absolutely! Another reason for the person answering my CQ respond with a 1X2 or 2X2 call. Great point.

Why should you be sure that after calling CQ, a call you hear is actually for you?  Because it might NOT be for you.  What you think is a reply might be a call to someone other than you!
Logged
WB2WIK
Member

Posts: 20635




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: January 01, 2014, 07:56:10 PM »

I think the "proper" response depends on conditions and possibly even the speed at which the original CQ was sent.

I operate a lot of CW.  If someone calls CQ at 35-40 wpm I reckon they can copy that, and answer at that speed.  If they're "strong," I give them a 1x1 call and that should be very sufficient.  If they're very weak, I'll give them a 1x3 call and maybe even send slower than the original CQ, as "slow code" works better when signals are right in the noise.

Logged
WD8KNI
Member

Posts: 154




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2014, 03:01:01 AM »

"I hear them calling 300-450 Hz away" 

Glad you have been doing this for a while.  as you and I both remember back in the 60's it was very common for someone to be rockbound, call CQ and have someone answer 2 kHz  or more away.  You learned to listen with wide filters, and could usually copy any beat note from around 300-1200 Hz.  You always left your transmitter on the same frequency and turned your receiver.  Not so with todays appliance operators.

Two things have happened to todays hams... 1) they have lost the reasoning on why they should zero beat your signal before answering, and they have absolutely no understanding of filter bandwidths, other than one sounds better than others and  If they have a 500 hz filter if they hear you thats good enough... just hit the automatic keyed and 2) they don't understand their radio, they like to listen to a 1khz beat note, (even if the transmitter is set for 700 hz) so just adjust the dial to their liking, I didn't say offset their RIT like they should. 

I have taken this approach since first licensed... 

If I call CQ and am answered I will NOT change my xmit frequency unless the other station requests it. I alway open my filters to listen for return, then narrow them down as needed.  If QRN/QRM is heavy sometimes I need to engage my RIT to keep them in my bandpass. 

As you and I know most of todays appliance operators would not survive on a CW net, where they had to Zero Beat the net control.

The other thing that is going on, is heavy, heavy reliance on code copy technology. This create a hole different reason someone might not be on your frequency.   Example of sound card generated CW.. where they are using their SSB filters, and a waterfall, with AFSK turned on..   yuck..   

You also find hams today that can't even copy their own call, and rely on CW code readers so must accurately tune the signal, or they can't copy.   When I find someone returning at 10 over and asks for fills every time I very my speed, I kill the conversation quickly.. This is happening more and more as DX chasers want more countries..

As in the past I don't worry about off frequency stations unless more than one of us are talking... 

If i only get on or two letters from their call.. I simply replay with

?Z0  thanks for the call, nice signal, op Fred, missed call...  Z0?  BK

Regards.. Fred
Logged
N3QE
Member

Posts: 2356




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: January 02, 2014, 07:02:31 AM »

I think 3x3 calls and 2x2 or 3x3 replies made perfect sense in the Novice sub-bands of the 1960's where everyone was crystal-bound and had tune up and down many many kHz looking for replies.

Nobody should be surprised to have a caller come back well within a kHz today, and that is so little room to listen to, that just sending the call a single time should be enough (and, unless there are extenuating circumstances, I feel it will usually be enough.)

Someone learning CW may require more repeats, there is nothing wrong with asking for a fill. It is efficient operating practice to ask for and get fills.
Logged
M0LEP
Member

Posts: 212




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: January 02, 2014, 10:53:20 AM »

I think the "proper" response depends on conditions and possibly even the speed at which the original CQ was sent.

It certainly depends a lot on who, when, where and what... In contests, pile-ups and the like (where the operator has a limited time to to handle as many QSOs as smoothly as possible) sending a 2x2 probably won't be welcomed, and I know a number of SOTA activators who discourage chasers from sending anything more than their own call once.

Why should you be sure that after calling CQ, a call you hear is actually for you?

Once you're in a cluster-spotted pile-up, if you're at the sharp end of the spot, it's pretty obvious. If you're trying to break into a pile-up it's also pretty obvious whether you're through to the spotted op, because you'll hear your own call coming back...

73, Rick M0LEP
Logged
N1RND
Member

Posts: 69




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: January 03, 2014, 05:33:49 PM »

Welcone to CW.  The funny thing you will notice is that the more proficient an op is the less repeating of call signs.
Logged
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!