Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Alun" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in ink.net: "Alun" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in nk.net: "N2EY" wrote in message m... Perhaps someone can explain a certain operating habit I hear on Field Day - but only one 'phone: I hear most FD 'phone ops repeating the *received* exchange. That is, you'll hear: "November Two Echo Yankee from November Three Kilo Zed, roger your One Bravo Eastern Pennsylvania, OK on your 1B EPA, please copy my three alfa ...." Why do so many deem it necessary to tell me what I just told them? Heck, I know what class and section I'm in! On CW, the single letter "R" does the job, and some ops don't even bother with the R - they send their exchange as an indication that they got yours. Or they send "TU" - (thank you) which does the job of "roger" and "73" both. -- One other point: Neither FD nor SS have the signal report as part of the contact. FD is callsign, section and class, SS is serial number, class, callsign, check and section, plus date and time which you don't have to send but which are part of the required logging. 73 de Jim, N2EY Well Jim, I think it means that phone ops are lids and real hams do it with continous wave. Dan/W4NTI At last your real agenda comes out, Dan. Somehow. I'm not surprised. You want the code test kept because you consider all of us phone ops to be lids. Alun, N3KIP No, not all phone ops are lids. Just the ones that think phone is better than CW. Does that shoe fit Alun? Dan/W4NTI You are unbeleivable. 1) That ain't what you said; and 2) Even if it were it would be an indefensible position. If we define a lid as being a bad operator, you are saying that anyone who thinks that one mode is better than another is a bad operator (unless they say that your preferred mode is better). I have never heard such idiotic cr*p in my entire life. My only reason for preferring phone is that I like to use radio to talk. If you prefer to make bleeping noises instead I could't care less. If you were into SSTV, or PSK31 or what-have-you I would say that was fine too. On the whole, I would say that comparisons of bandwidth, throughput, signal-to- noise etc were only valid within one type of information, whether it is phone, or data or video, or whatever. You said, and I quote "phone ops are lids" and then, partially recanting "not all phone ops are lids. Just the ones that think phone is better than CW". Well, I am a phone op and I think that phone is not surprisingly better at carrying voice information than CW is. You know what, though, you are the lid. Alun, N3KIP And I think your a lid. Now what? Dan/W4NTI |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FCC Assigns RM Numbers To Three New Restructuring Petitions | Policy | |||
Rev.Jim the troller (was Bootlegging in 1948?) | Policy | |||
With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? | Policy | |||
Ham Radio In The Post-Code Testing Era | Policy | |||
With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? | General |