When someone calls me, he/she often gives me only his/her call. DE , K or even my call is omitted. It makes me puzzled from time to time. With a filter of 400Hz on as always, their frequency could be a bit off from mine. There could be a delay in timing they start calling me. In both situation, I am not sure if I am called by him/her. When they are not loud enough, it is even more perplexing to me.
Omitting such as DE, K or my call in calling me could spare time for him/her. I could hardly believe so. If I could not be sure I was called, we should spend some long time to confirm that. Or do they believe that omitting that way is a kind of smart and modern operation? They should be disciplined to send message in most understandable way in communication of this mode.
Sometimes, I am inclined not to respond to them at all. Could I cope with such callers in that way?
Giving my call and DE, K etc when calling me is an orthodoxical method. There are reasons for that. It enables me to recognize you calling me easily. Your signal might not be so loud as you hear me. Or your rig is offsetting the grequency from me a bit.
In addition, I hope them not to end their message in transmission with BK without any identification. They do that all of sudden. I am sometimes frightened listening them in relaxation with my feet on the operaating table. In such a case, I should rush sitting back on my chair with back straight again. Apart from that my move in the shack, I should get ready for next transmission abruptly. This kind of operator always starts with the above mentioned style. To those BK senders, I would finish the QSO as soon as possible.
Sending identifications in the beginning and ending of transmission is necessary for the audience to recognize you and me and for me to get ready for my turn.
There is time enough.
Shin
ReplyDeleteI work very hard at attempting to follow proper CW procedure. When I respond to a CQ from someone, I send their call once or twice (depending on signal strength and other factors) and DE then my call twice, ending in AR. Once a QSO has begun, I end transmissions with both call signs (or more if a roundtable) and a K. QSK is very popular, however, it is not my favorite method of chatting. If I am in QSO with someone or several that prefer QSK, I will use the BK to end my transmission since they are usually limited to one or two sentences. I also use BK in a normal QSO if I have a question that I would seek an answer now, versus on the next full exchange. This is the way I was taught proper CW procedure and I assume it to be correct. Maybe not.
Don
Don,
DeleteI think you are doing the right way. I prefer normal one by one QSOs to round tables. I could never make witty response in round table.
I am sorry the ordinary way of QSO is going to be missing now. I will keep my own style whatever the others would do.
Shin
Hi Shin.... when I hear you calling CQ I just send my call cos you know me. I hope you don't mind !
ReplyDeleteHome in ten days....going 9M8 end of November for a quick holiday...all the best
Yes, John. There are some exceptional situations. I could recognize you or Don. Maybe, some other friends whose keyings are so familiar to me that their call signs come up in mind even before I hear them. Actually, I have made Don surprised a few times replying to him when I listened him sending only JA. He has been very courteous starting with my call sign when giving me a call. I could do the same way with you.
DeleteHave you been busy at the parttime teaching job? I have missed you in your holidays this time. I should let you know that I have met a renowned pianist, Lorin Hollander, WA1PGB, a couple of times and have enjoyed very nice chats with him recently. Take care. I will catch you again soon. Have a pleasant vacation.
Shin
Hi John...Shin is not kidding. I think I sent two letters, maybe, and he called me by name...Lucky guess, I think.....Either that or I am worse than I thought on the bug.
DeleteDon
Or do they believe that omitting that way is a kind of smart and modern operation?
ReplyDeleteYes i believe the operators of today to believe your sentence above Shin. It actuality proper CW procedure has disappeared a long time ago. It went out with QTH and NAME and has been replaced with HR and OP. I agree with u Shin on not knowing if the stn is calling u if they do not send JA1NUT de N6TT. Todays op is only interested in a new country, state or prefix. When we started there were manuals and elmers that taught us, today anything goes. The faster u can get thru the contact the better. Don roundtables and QSK are not popular these days. Why becuz the ops of today have not been taught. I know neither of u guys like QSK .Most Cw ops dont like roundtables or QSK style QSO's, In my opinion most ops can not do it. It is like a defense attorney who has to think on his feet. It takes a excellent cw op to do QSK style. There is no need for sending everyone's call signs each time in a QSK style QSO or roundtable. Experienced QSK ops will use Et al which means "and everyone else". Other wise it is a boring turn over to u type QSO which sadly most ops like. It is easier for them. You comment then i take notes and i comment. It takes elite operators to be able to do QSK style and in my opinion flows much better. Sadly it is a dying breed as is cw ops in ham radio. just my 2 cents worth.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSteve,
DeleteI am considering of QSK or QRQ matter. I will upload what I think of these things in this blog later.
So far, I am not happy with those styles. Either way is, I think, not better nor more excellent than the other. It is just a problem of liking.
Shin
PS:I have just uploaded an article about this problem. So far as it is aimed to yak like chatting face to face, it is not desirable to me whichever you might be concerned about, QSK,QRQ or round table.