![]() |
Is a contact with a no-code ham a real QSO?
Phil Wheeler wrote: AC7PN wrote: Slow Code wrote: Or is it like talking to someone on CB? SC The answer is "yes it is a real contact" and so far as you were communicating with some one using a radio it also is "like talking to someone on CB." Dude, your arrogance is showing. I would have said ignorance ;) 73, Phil W7OX both are enteirly accurate |
Is a contact with a no-code ham a real QSO?
Phil Wheeler wrote in
: AC7PN wrote: Slow Code wrote: Or is it like talking to someone on CB? SC The answer is "yes it is a real contact" and so far as you were communicating with some one using a radio it also is "like talking to someone on CB." Dude, your arrogance is showing. I would have said ignorance ;) 73, Phil W7OX Don't tell me You want to dumb down ham radio now as well. Where have all the communicators gone? SC |
Is a contact with a no-code ham a real QSO?
"Slow Code" wrote in message ink.net... Phil Wheeler wrote in : AC7PN wrote: Slow Code wrote: Or is it like talking to someone on CB? SC The answer is "yes it is a real contact" and so far as you were communicating with some one using a radio it also is "like talking to someone on CB." Dude, your arrogance is showing. I would have said ignorance ;) 73, Phil W7OX Don't tell me You want to dumb down ham radio now as well. Where have all the communicators gone? SC Any idiot can learn code. Not everyone can understand theory enough to make it usable in day to day practice. I submit that SC is the "any idiot". |
Is a contact with a no-code ham a real QSO?
U-Know-Who wrote: "Slow Code" wrote in message ink.net... Any idiot can learn code. Not everyone can understand theory enough to make it usable in day to day practice. I submit that SC is the "any idiot". and knowing is not even vital to using it these days |
Is a contact with a no-code ham a real QSO?
Slow Code wrote:
Phil Wheeler wrote in : AC7PN wrote: Slow Code wrote: Or is it like talking to someone on CB? SC The answer is "yes it is a real contact" and so far as you were communicating with some one using a radio it also is "like talking to someone on CB." Dude, your arrogance is showing. I would have said ignorance ;) 73, Phil W7OX Don't tell me You want to dumb down ham radio now as well. Where have all the communicators gone? SC Since when was talking as in Phone SSB not "communication". Sure code is fine, but most of us learned to key "mama" long after we learned to say it ;) 73, Phil W7OX |
Is a contact with a no-code ham a real QSO?
Smokey wrote: Talking to a "no code" is like addressing someone given an honorary degree as "doctor." Hmm. OK, how about talking to a no-code with a yet-to-be-activated General? I sat for & took the Tech, passed and they mentioned I could take the General. Great. Passed that one as well. Working on Morse now. Missed the Extra, though, by a few questions. Was my first shot at any exam. Neither a Tech nor a General makes one a Ham, though. Nor Morse. That only qualifies you to be a good student of the avocation. I don't expect to be really good at ham radio until I've played around with a transceiver for a year or two, maybe. Still need to learn the lingo, learn electronics, get my feet wet, build a receiver and maybe a transmitter, blow up a few caps..you know, OJT. Plus lots of hamfests where I'll be looking for a cute hamette. When I finally DO get a rig of some kind, I sorta kinda might be Ready for going after QSOs. Even from folks who think I've got an honorary degree. Good DX & 73, Terry, KC9KEL newly minted |
Is a contact with a no-code ham a real QSO?
|
Is a contact with a no-code ham a real QSO?
|
Is a contact with a no-code ham a real QSO?
Papa Dog wrote in
: In article . net, says... Thanks for posting that chuck. I've never broken any of those on the air or on usenet. Maybe now Markie and everyone else will see why CW is important. Thanks again and Keep up the good work. 73 de Slow Code You need to read them again SC. You break them daily on usenet. You're not considerate. You're down right unfriendly to some and You're about unprogressive as they come. 73 Chris You think that's bad? Wait until HF sounds 11 meters and you can't find a decent contact anywhere. You'll see I was right. I crawled out of my hole around restructuring time. Then the ARRL and FCC screwed ham radio. I went back in my hole again. Now the FCC and it appears with the blessings of the ARRL is planning to toss CW all together. I come out of my hole to fight for the integrity of ham radio once again, but when the R&O comes out eliminating CW, I'll crawl back into my hole again. Leaving you and everyone else the problem of trying to deal with poor behavior and operating practice on the bands. The result of dumbing down licensing. Outcome based education doesn't work, what makes you think outcome based licensing will? SC |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:09 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com