"Ivor Jones" wrote in message
...
"The Shadow" wrote in message




Similar thing here. In the UK, it's generally frowned on to call CQ on a
repeater,

I have to disagree. What's wrong with calling CQ GB3xx??

but you often hear new licensees doing it. I usually just say something
like "G6URP listening GB3xx" (repeater calls all start GB3 here).

73 Ivor G6URP


G6URP listening GB3xx

CQ G6URP on GB3xx

???

what exactly is the difference Ivor???????

"Hello CQ 2. Hello CQ 2 metres. This is M0WWS listening GB3BT and 'by for
any calls" is my usual patter. Care to tell me what exactly is wrong with
this Ivor?


10-10 (till we do it again) de G1LVN
--
My Call is M0WWS. I had an accident,
and I woke up in uk.radio.amateur.
Am I mad, in a coma, or back in time?
----------------------------------------------

"LVN" wrote in message

"Ivor Jones" wrote in message
...
"The Shadow" wrote in message


[snip]

Similar thing here. In the UK, it's generally frowned
on to call CQ on a repeater,

I have to disagree. What's wrong with calling CQ GB3xx??

If that were all they did, nothing.

but you often hear new licensees doing it. I usually
just say something like "G6URP listening GB3xx"
(repeater calls all start GB3 here).

G6URP listening GB3xx

CQ G6URP on GB3xx

???

what exactly is the difference Ivor???????

In *that*, nothing. But it rarely works out like that..!

"Hello CQ 2. Hello CQ 2 metres. This is M0WWS listening
GB3BT and 'by for any calls" is my usual patter. Care to
tell me what exactly is wrong with this Ivor?

Absolutely nothing. But *nobody* around here ever calls CQ like that. They
usually go:

CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ
CQ CQ CQ CQ de G6URP G6URP G6URP
CQ CQ CQ DE G6URP G6URP located in Birmingham, central England

repeated six times over without pausing for breath..!!!

(Note *I* never do that, I just used my own call as an example, ok..?!)

73 Ivor G6URP

"Jack VK2CJC" wrote in
message

[snip]

I think this whole "anti-CQ on repeaters" movement came
from the days where repeaters were a new and strange
phenomenon. And possibly some used their 80m and 40m CQ
calling techniques. You know what I mean- "CQ CQ CQ CQ
CQ, this is ????? CQ CQ CQ etc etc blah blah". Now doing
THAT on a repeater would annoy the life out of everyone
so must be discouraged. And this has developed into an
intolerance to hearing the letters C and Q together.
After all, what's the difference between.

VK2CJC listening for any calls.
and
VK2CJC calling CQ.

If only it were so simple..! See below.

Keep it short. Keep it clear. And who cares what
terminology is used )

You've answered the question. Keep it short. Just announcing that you're
listening on a repeater takes a few seconds. Many CQ calls can take a full
30 seconds or more..! Well the ones I hear can, anyway..!

73 Ivor G6URP

RDWeaver wrote:

What ever happened to the old FCC Official Observer program? These
were licensed volunteers (hams just like you and me) who passed some
screening exam, and then cruised the bands looking for problems. As I
recall they had no 'police' power but could issue you a 'friendly
reminder', backed up by "chapter and verse" if you were afoul of the
rules. This reminder didn't go on any record, but was intended to
take a load off the FCC monitoring stations. I suppose that 'frequent
offenders' were referred upstairs, but I never heard of it.

Although it's referred to as the "Amateur Auxillary of the FCC", the OO
program is primarily an ARRL field appointment, and it's still alive and
well. See http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/org/am_aux.html and
http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/org/oo.html

I received my share of OO citations back in the 60's. They helped me
understand the wonders of harmonics of the 80-meter novice band and how
well they propagated.

I think that the OO contingent has also been used to help document
recent malicious interference situations, but they're hams like you and
me, not FCC employees. An analogy is Skywarn . . . spotters are trained
and treated differently than the general public, but they're not
official NWS employees.

"RDWeaver" wrote in message
oups.com...
On May 11, 7:01 pm, John wrote:


Around my area, pretty much everything goes... (what's legal anyway).


As long as it's legal, that ought to be the test.

What ever happened to the old FCC Official Observer program? These
were licensed volunteers (hams just like you and me) who passed some
screening exam, and then cruised the bands looking for problems. As I
recall they had no 'police' power but could issue you a 'friendly
reminder', backed up by "chapter and verse" if you were afoul of the
rules. This reminder didn't go on any record, but was intended to
take a load off the FCC monitoring stations. I suppose that 'frequent
offenders' were referred upstairs, but I never heard of it.

73, RDW


My appointment as an Official Observer in the FCC Field Operations
Bureau Amateur Auxiliary was in March 1989. At that time to become an
Official Observer you must have held a Technician class or higher license
for at least 5 years and pass a rigorous test of FCC part 97 rules
questions. After being appointed the ARRL provided me with a free copy of
"The FCC Rule Book".
If an OO notice didn't get the desired result the next step was a "Heavy
Duty" notice from a FCC monitoring station. That would usually get the job
done.
73, Ace - WH2T


..

RDWeaver wrote in news:1178912315.244869.311630
@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:

On May 11, 7:01 pm, John wrote:


Around my area, pretty much everything goes... (what's legal anyway).


As long as it's legal, that ought to be the test.

What ever happened to the old FCC Official Observer program?

I know there is at least one OO in my area. From what I understand, the
program is still in place.

"Ivor Jones" wrote in
:


You've answered the question. Keep it short. Just announcing that
you're listening on a repeater takes a few seconds. Many CQ calls can
take a full 30 seconds or more..! Well the ones I hear can, anyway..!


I do suppose a lot of it has to do with what is common practice in each
area. Some repeater crowds are more formal, whereas some are less formal,
and will allow more "variety". CQ is rarely heard on repeaters or simplex
for that matter (on UHF and VHF); but when it does occur, no one has any
issues.

See URL:
http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/org/am_aux.html

Lamont

"John" wrote in message
...
RDWeaver wrote in news:1178912315.244869.311630
@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:

On May 11, 7:01 pm, John wrote:


Around my area, pretty much everything goes... (what's legal anyway).


As long as it's legal, that ought to be the test.

What ever happened to the old FCC Official Observer program?

I know there is at least one OO in my area. From what I understand, the
program is still in place.

On Sun, 13 May 2007 14:15:05 EDT, John
wrote:

What ever happened to the old FCC Official Observer program?

I know there is at least one OO in my area. From what I understand, the
program is still in place.

The program is organized and run by the ARRL.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

Once again -- see URL:
http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/org/oo.html

Lamont

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 May 2007 14:15:05 EDT, John
wrote:

What ever happened to the old FCC Official Observer program?

I know there is at least one OO in my area. From what I understand, the
program is still in place.

The program is organized and run by the ARRL.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net