|
2m FM calling practices
Hi All,
I don't know about Stateside, but as an active 2m FM operator here in the UK I've noticed an increase in a rather annoying (to me, anyway) practice when calling CQ. I know the frequencies are different in the bandplans, but here we use 145.5 as an FM calling channel, then once contact is established, move to a working frequency. Several times recently I've heard people calling CQ and I've been all ready to return the call, but then they say that they will be listening on a totally different channel, presumably the one they used on the previous call. This is all very well, but how do they know that the frequency they've chosen is free at my end as well as theirs..? If they're anything more than a few miles away, the channel they're listening on might well be busy my end and as a result I wouldn't be able to return the call. Why does this practice seem to be on the increase..? Is it happening in the US and elsewhere as well, or is it a purely British phenomenon..? 73 Ivor G6URP |
2m FM calling practices
I don't know about Stateside, but as an active 2m FM operator here in the
UK I've noticed an increase in a rather annoying (to me, anyway) practice when calling CQ. That practise has been used for many years in the UK. On 27MHz SSB. It is an effective method on a band which is so busy that establishing a contact long enough to QSY is difficult. But you are quite right, its a poor practise for 2m FM. But then, where I am the 2m FM simplex frequency is so seldom used that when a contact is made, we don't QSY, in the hope someone else may hear us and join in :o) -- Jack VK2CJC / MM0AXL FISTS# 9666 Mid North Coast Amateur Radio Group www.mncarg.org |
2m FM calling practices
On Apr 28, 12:56 am, "Ivor Jones" wrote:
Is it happening in the US and elsewhere as well, or is it a purely British phenomenon..? Here in the colonies our equivalent simplex calling QRG is 146.52. It is largely vacant and in most cases a QSO initiated there stays there as there's hardly ever a queue to use the channel. As a related issue, K0CKB and I spend a lot of our free time traveling in an RV. When we bought the coach I had a sign-maker cut me a vinyl decal "K0HB & K0CKB 146.52". I have this decal on the rear of the coach at eye-level to a following driver, and we religiously monitor that channel. With over 16,000 miles on the odometer, the majority of it on major highways, so far we've had precisely one station call us. FM simplex isn't widely used here. In fact 2M itself is pretty vacant --- even in a fairly large metropolitan area like St Paul/Minneapolis you could shoot off a cannon on 2M and not hit anyone most of the time. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
2m FM calling practices
"KØHB" wrote in message ups.com... [snip] As a related issue, K0CKB and I spend a lot of our free time traveling in an RV. When we bought the coach I had a sign-maker cut me a vinyl decal "K0HB & K0CKB 146.52". I have this decal on the rear of the coach at eye-level to a following driver, and we religiously monitor that channel. With over 16,000 miles on the odometer, the majority of it on major highways, so far we've had precisely one station call us. I and the OM were driving along a freeway on a trip through Virginia and a vehicle passed us that had ham antennas. He stuck his arm out the window and signaled 5 2. So we assumed he meant 146.52, switched to that frequency and had a nice little chit chat. Dee, N8UZE |
2m FM calling practices
"Dee Flint" wrote in
: I and the OM were driving along a freeway on a trip through Virginia and a vehicle passed us that had ham antennas. He stuck his arm out the window and signaled 5 2. So we assumed he meant 146.52, switched to that frequency and had a nice little chit chat. In central Ohio 6.52 has some activity. Typically, QSOs started there, stay there. There are a few folks who have pre-arranged simplex freqs; but by and large 6.52 is a calling and chat freq. |
2m FM calling practices
"John" wrote in message ... "Dee Flint" wrote in : I and the OM were driving along a freeway on a trip through Virginia and a vehicle passed us that had ham antennas. He stuck his arm out the window and signaled 5 2. So we assumed he meant 146.52, switched to that frequency and had a nice little chit chat. In central Ohio 6.52 has some activity. Typically, QSOs started there, stay there. There are a few folks who have pre-arranged simplex freqs; but by and large 6.52 is a calling and chat freq. While travelling on the road I use the 146.520 MHz (National Simplex Freq) for contacts and chats. At the base in San Diego, 146.520 MHz is used as a calling frequency, then switch to another simplex channel such as 147.555 known as triple nickles. Another commonly used simplex is 146.550. All are loaded in my mobile rig and HT's. In the USA, CQ is not used for VHF/UHF FM. Simply callsign monitoring. CQ is used for the VHF/UHF SSB mode Lamont |
2m FM calling practices
"The Shadow" wrote in message ... While travelling on the road I use the 146.520 MHz (National Simplex Freq) for contacts and chats. At the base in San Diego, 146.520 MHz is used as a calling frequency, then switch to another simplex channel such as 147.555 known as triple nickles. Another commonly used simplex is 146.550. All are loaded in my mobile rig and HT's. around here it's 145.500 - S20 is the calling freq (mobile or otherwise) HTH |
2m FM calling practices
On Apr 29, 5:16 pm, "The Shadow" wrote:
In the USA, CQ is not used for VHF/UHF FM. Simply callsign monitoring. CQ is used for the VHF/UHF SSB mode Lamont In some areas of the U.S, "CQ" is certainly used on VHF/UHF FM. If a CQ works on 160 through 10 and works on 6m, 2m and 70cm SSB or CW, pressing the PTT switch and saying, "CQ from K8MN" works fine on VHF or UHF FM. Dave K8MN |
2m FM calling practices
wrote in message
ups.com On Apr 29, 5:16 pm, "The Shadow" wrote: In the USA, CQ is not used for VHF/UHF FM. Simply callsign monitoring. CQ is used for the VHF/UHF SSB mode Lamont In some areas of the U.S, "CQ" is certainly used on VHF/UHF FM. If a CQ works on 160 through 10 and works on 6m, 2m and 70cm SSB or CW, pressing the PTT switch and saying, "CQ from K8MN" works fine on VHF or UHF FM. Dave K8MN It's most certainly used here and the 2m FM band is heavily used in many places. "S20" (or "V40" as I suppose we should call it now that 12.5 kHz channels have come into use) is the calling channel, calls are made and established there, *only then* should another channel be checked to see if it's clear *at both ends* before moving there to continue the QSO. The annoying thing about the practice of announcing that you will be listening on a frequency *other* than the established calling channel is as I said, that the person calling has no idea if the frequency they propose to use is clear where the person who answers the call is. If the person answering is mobile, it's almost certain they won't hear anyone else unless the calling station is very close by. 73 Ivor G6URP |
2m FM calling practices
"S20" (or "V40" as I suppose we should call it now that 12.5 kHz channels
have come into use) is the calling channel, Hi Ivor I left the UK just as 12.5 channels were being implemented. Are they being used? Or does everyone still use the old channels but with narrower deviation? "CQ V40" just doesn't seem to sound right to me :o) -- Jack VK2CJC / MM0AXL FISTS# 9666 Mid North Coast Amateur Radio Group www.mncarg.org |
2m FM calling practices
"Jack VK2CJC" wrote in
message "S20" (or "V40" as I suppose we should call it now that 12.5 kHz channels have come into use) is the calling channel, Hi Ivor I left the UK just as 12.5 channels were being implemented. Are they being used? Or does everyone still use the old channels but with narrower deviation? They're not used much, to be honest. Although there are a few simplex Echolink gateways that use some of them. "CQ V40" just doesn't seem to sound right to me :o) No, you're right, it doesn't, does it..?! ;-) 73 Ivor G6URP |
2m FM calling practices
|
2m FM calling practices
"Alan" wrote ...
It seems that "monitoring" has fallen out of favor, at least with folks I know. If you want to talk to someone, you might say something like: "Anyone around? callsign" or even actually call CQ. "Monitoring" tells me you are listening, but does not imply that you are actively soliciting a contact, just that your radio is on. "Monitoring..." seems to be the most prevalent method that I am hearing on the popular repeaters here in the PDX area. KE7GKP |
2m FM calling practices
"Alan" wrote in message ... In article . com writes: On Apr 29, 5:16 pm, "The Shadow" wrote: In the USA, CQ is not used for VHF/UHF FM. Simply callsign monitoring. CQ is used for the VHF/UHF SSB mode Lamont In some areas of the U.S, "CQ" is certainly used on VHF/UHF FM. If a CQ works on 160 through 10 and works on 6m, 2m and 70cm SSB or CW, pressing the PTT switch and saying, "CQ from K8MN" works fine on VHF or UHF FM. Dave K8MN It seems that "monitoring" has fallen out of favor, at least with folks I know. If you want to talk to someone, you might say something like: "Anyone around? callsign" or even actually call CQ. "Monitoring" tells me you are listening, but does not imply that you are actively soliciting a contact, just that your radio is on. Alan wa6azp I refer you to the ARRL Page at URL: http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/pdf/repeater1.pdf It sez" "Making your first transmission on a repeater is as simple as signing your call. If the repeater is quiet, just say "N1GZO" or "N1GZO listening" -- to attract someone's attention." Further it states " "Don't call CQ to initiate a conversation on a repeater. It takes longer to complete a CQ than to transmit your call sign. (In some areas, a solitary "CQ" is permissible.) Efficient communication is the goal. You are not on HF, trying to attract the attention of someone who is casually tuning across the band. In the FM mode, stations are either monitoring their favorite frequency or not." At one time "monitoring " was for control operators, but now a days in So Calif, you will here "Listening" or "Monitoring" Calling CQ on a repeater will get you 10 guys replying "We don't use CQ on repeaters" and a big argument about it. Travelling across country, the same protocol is generally used IMHO. Lamont |
2m FM calling practices
On May 11, 1:41 pm, "The Shadow" wrote:
Calling CQ on a repeater will get you 10 guys replying "We don't use CQ on repeaters" and a big argument about it. These 'radio cops' exist on all bands, not just repeaters. I once wrote a parody/satire humor piece about them, too funny to be posted here, but you can view a copy at http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-cont.../msg00393.html 73, de Hans, K0HB |
2m FM calling practices
KØHB wrote in
oups.com: On May 11, 1:41 pm, "The Shadow" wrote: Calling CQ on a repeater will get you 10 guys replying "We don't use CQ on repeaters" and a big argument about it. These 'radio cops' exist on all bands, not just repeaters. I once wrote a parody/satire humor piece about them, too funny to be posted here, but you can view a copy at http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-cont.../msg00393.html Around my area, pretty much everything goes... (what's legal anyway). The repeater users are all pretty laid back folks with a lot of tolerance. All the "repeater cops" pretty much left 2 meters some time ago. |
2m FM calling practices
On May 11, 3:40 pm, KØHB wrote:
but you can view a copy at http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/2005-1 2/msg00393.html Cute! 73, RDW |
2m FM calling practices
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 |
2m FM calling practices
"The Shadow" wrote in message
[snip] I refer you to the ARRL Page at URL: http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/pdf/repeater1.pdf It sez" "Making your first transmission on a repeater is as simple as signing your call. If the repeater is quiet, just say "N1GZO" or "N1GZO listening" -- to attract someone's attention." Further it states " "Don't call CQ to initiate a conversation on a repeater. It takes longer to complete a CQ than to transmit your call sign. (In some areas, a solitary "CQ" is permissible.) Efficient communication is the goal. You are not on HF, trying to attract the attention of someone who is casually tuning across the band. In the FM mode, stations are either monitoring their favorite frequency or not." At one time "monitoring " was for control operators, but now a days in So Calif, you will here "Listening" or "Monitoring" Calling CQ on a repeater will get you 10 guys replying "We don't use CQ on repeaters" and a big argument about it. Travelling across country, the same protocol is generally used IMHO. Similar thing here. In the UK, it's generally frowned on to call CQ on a repeater, 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 |
2m FM calling practices
Similar thing here. In the UK, it's generally frowned on to call CQ on a
repeater, but you often hear new licensees doing it. I usually just say something like "G6URP listening GB3xx" I do the same. 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. Keep it short. Keep it clear. And who cares what terminology is used :o) |
2m FM calling practices
"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? ---------------------------------------------- |
2m FM calling practices
"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 |
2m FM calling practices
"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 :o) 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 |
OO
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. |
2m FM calling practices
"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 .. |
2m FM calling practices
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. |
2m FM calling practices
"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. |
Official Observers Program
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. |
2m FM calling practices
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 |
2m FM calling practices
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 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com