... The use of Kilowatt as a phonetic is a pet peeve ...
Not an ITU-approved term. "K" is "kilo."
SOURCE: ARRL Handy Ops Guide's ITU Phonetics: http://web.me.com/clintbradford/Work-Sat/Shack_Aids.html
Clint, K6LCS
Neither are geographic names recommended by the ITU. However, geographic names do work considerably better under certain conditions.
Had the FCC required that the ICAO phonetics be used such would be stated in 47 CFR Part 97. However, the identification procedures for phone operation are "spelled out" in 47 CFR Part 97 Section 97.119(b)(2) which reads as follows:
(2) By a phone emission in the English language. Use of a phonetic alphabet as an aid for correct station identification is encouraged;
Please note that the regulations suggest "A PHONETIC ALPHABET", not the ICAO phonetic alphabet. There are actually several accepted phonetic alphabets in use including the APCO phonetic alphabet which is used in Public Safety communications here in the United States. That phonetic alphabet shares few phonetics with the ICAO phonetics.
Glen, K9STH
Website: http://k9sth.com
--- On Sun, 4/10/11, Clint Bradford clintbradford@mac.com wrote:
... The use of Kilowatt as a phonetic is a pet peeve ...
Not an ITU-approved term. "K" is "kilo."
SOURCE: ARRL Handy Ops Guide's ITU Phonetics: http://web.me.com/clintbradford/Work-Sat/Shack_Aids.html
I respect most everyone here's opinions, Glen. But I think we have to agree that if could at least get folks to RECOGNIZE that there are "formal" phonetics that should be used while working the satellites - and the use of them - if preferable to me announcing, for example, that I am working from "Dandy Michelle Zip Three."
(grin)
Clint, K6LCS http://www.work-sat.com
I agree that particular phonetics are appropriate for certain situations. "Funny phonetics" are best left for FM repeater operations and other certain contacts where everyone knows each other.
In the world of DXing geographical names have become the defacto standard because the ICAO phonetics just don't work in many situations. For most, but not all, satellite communications I definitely believe that the ICAO phonetics are fine and should be used. However, when one of the stations does not have English as their primary language then geographical names usually do work better.
Now coming up with alternates that are supposedly funny, or that are not readily recognizable, is a completely different matter. The purpose of having a phonetic alphabet is to get the information through in the most efficient manner and doing so involves use of words that have, at least try to have, a universal recognition.
As I said before, this topic comes up for discussion on QRZ.com on a regular basis. There are those who absolutely insist that only the ICAO phonetics are to be used even when they don't work. There are even a few who insist that using the ICAO phonetics is a matter of FCC regulation. Then there are a very few who say "anything goes". Virtually all of those who work DX and contests on a regular basis go with the geographical names. With the exception of the person who posts the original comment, virtually all of the comments are exactly the same, posted by the same individuals, that have been posted numerous times before. Sometimes I wish that the individual comments were numbered and the person could just post that number and not take up bandwidth! :>)
Again, I have no objections to the ICAO phonetics and use them the majority of the time. But, when the situation is changed (like working DX) I usually resort to geographical names because they convey the information much faster when the person on the other end does not speak English as their primary language.
Glen, K9STH
Website: http://k9sth.com
--- On Sun, 4/10/11, Clint Bradford clintbradford@mac.com wrote:
I respect most everyone here's opinions, Glen. But I think we have to agree that if could at least get folks to RECOGNIZE that there are "formal" phonetics that should be used while working the satellites - and the use of them - if preferable to me announcing, for example, that I am working from "Dandy Michelle Zip Three."
There is a "STANDARD" why not use it??? (that was a question)
My navy training just rubs me the wrong way when I hear some of the "words" being used by some.
Could be the "reason" your call went unanswered.
John, W0JAB
At 10:29 AM 4/10/2011, John Becker wrote:
There is a "STANDARD" why not use it??? (that was a question)
My navy training just rubs me the wrong way when I hear some of the "words" being used by some.
Could be the "reason" your call went unanswered.
John, W0JAB
Actually am surprised there is any debate on this topic. The whole point of using a standard phonetic alphabet is for ease in recognition under poor reception conditions. Only one word is used for one letter of the alphabet so that reduces confusion.
So saying that, everyone knows that KL7UW is KL7 "micro wave"! LOL In fact I chose that vanity call to bring attention to my mw activity. KL7MW had been taken. U could be construed as the greek symbol "mu"
but phonetically it is "uniform whiskey" ....I'll drink to that! ;-)
73, KL7uW, ex K8MWA (many wobbly antennas) or (micro wave amateur)
73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45 ====================================== BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com EME: 144-1.4kw, 432-100w, 1296-testing*, 3400-winter? DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubususa@hotmail.com ======================================
The problem is that the "standard" ICAO phonetics are problematic under certain circumstances. In the military world the operators are specially trained to use ICAO phonetics including the "preferred" way to pronounce the words. Unfortunately, this just doesn't exist in the amateur radio world and especially in those persons, without any formal training, who do not have English as their primary language, they have problems with the ICAO phonetics. That is why geographical names work better when working DX. For stateside use, at least in my opinion, the ICAO phonetics are definitely recommended.
Again, geographical names have become the defacto "standard" where working DX is concerned.
Glen, K9STH
Website: http://k9sth.com
--- On Sun, 4/10/11, John Becker w0jab@big-river.net wrote:
There is a "STANDARD" why not use it??? (that was a question)
My navy training just rubs me the wrong way when I hear some of the "words" being used by some.
Could be the "reason" your call went unanswered.
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 12:34:48 -0700 (PDT), Glen Zook wrote:
That is why geographical names work better when working DX. For stateside use, at least in my opinion, the ICAO phonetics are definitely recommended.
I've had this happen to me enough to be more than just coincidence. Repeating my callsign over and over to a DX station using ICAO phonetics, and the DX just.isn't.getting.it. Then I switch to "Norway United Zero Canada", it's almost always copied correctly on the next repeat. Works great when calling DX also.
Being "professional" is getting the communication across sucessfully by shifting to what works best in a given situation, rather than sticking with what doesn't work (even if it's "official") and wasting everyone's time.
73
-Jim NU0C
--
- A deep understanding of reality is exactly the same thing as laziness.
At 02:34 PM 4/10/2011, you wrote:
Again, geographical names have become the defacto "standard" where working DX is concerned.
So we are having a QSO and I tell you my QTH is Louisiana, Missouri and you then think to yourself "say what" followed be "does not compute"
Look it up at QRZ dot com.
Again there is nothing wrong with the standard
I for one will never use your "de facto" standard when there is already one that has been in use for years and years and years.
Hi!
Again there is nothing wrong with the standard
I for one will never use your "de facto" standard when there is already one that has been in use for years and years and years.
What many are saying, and I agree with in a couple of situations, is that sometimes the standard ICAO/NATO phonetic alphabet just doesn't work well for a particular letter like K. On FM, I use Kilo, but go to Kilowatt in SSB (on satellites and HF). For some Spanish-speakers, I will go with a phonetic alphabet that is used many who speak that language to complete QSOs, along with speaking in Spanish (completely legal, provided my station ID is in English at the end of the QSO).
It is nice that this discussion has centered on the choice of words for the phonetic alphabet, instead of following past discussions here on the -BB where some advocated not using any phonetics. The message in K8YSE's e-mail is a good one, reinforced when I get the occasional e-mail from a Spanish-speaking satellite ham along with a WAV or MP3 file asking me to decipher the callsign (and sometimes grid) in the recording. I know I'm not the only one that gets these sorts of requests from those hams. Lately, it all centers on the stateside hams not using phonetics, and the Spanish- speaking hams not knowing the English "A, B, C, ... " alphabet.
If you hear those hams on the passes, go ahead and try to work them. They are looking to put more stations, states/provinces, grids, etc. in their logs as anyone else. Please keep in mind that English isn't their first language, and help them with the standard phonetics so they can log you correctly.
73!
Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWK http://www.wd9ewk.net/
King Kong Five Dream On
just had to add my two cents worth as no one wanted to give me a penny for my thoughts.
73...bruce
Sent from my iPhone
Aardvark Aardvark Fife Pneumonia Knight :O)
73 Glenn
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" kk5do@amsat.org To: "amsat-bb" amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 5:33 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITU Phonetics - Kilo
King Kong Five Dream On
just had to add my two cents worth as no one wanted to give me a penny for my thoughts.
73...bruce
Sent from my iPhone
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Our club at Field day WB9FDZ, was always known as Whiskey Bravo Nine Field Day Zombies. Especially at 3 am on a dead 75 meters!
Joe WB9SBD W B 9 Silent But Deadly!
The Original Rolling Ball Clock Idle Tyme Idle-Tyme.com http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 4/10/2011 5:33 PM, Bruce wrote:
King Kong Five Dream On
just had to add my two cents worth as no one wanted to give me a penny for my thoughts.
73...bruce
Sent from my iPhone
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
With inflation, probably more like 50 cents!
Glen, K9STH
Website: http://k9sth.com
--- On Sun, 4/10/11, Bruce kk5do@amsat.org wrote:
King Kong Five Dream On
just had to add my two cents worth as no one wanted to give me a penny for my thoughts.
If you want to get technical, geographic names has been a "standard" much longer than the ICAO phonetics. However, it is fine with me if you insist on using the ICAO phonetics when in a DX pileup. That just means that I am generally going to work the DX first!
As I keep saying, there is a place for ICAO phonetics and there is a place for geographic names. I do use ICAO phonetics when working stateside and generally with operators who speak English as their primary language. But, when in a pileup trying to work a DX station I definitely switch to geographical names because I work the DX MUCH sooner!
Glen, K9STH
Website: http://k9sth.com
--- On Sun, 4/10/11, John Becker w0jab@big-river.net wrote:
From: John Becker w0jab@big-river.net Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITU Phonetics - Kilo To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Date: Sunday, April 10, 2011, 4:43 PM At 02:34 PM 4/10/2011, you wrote:
Again, geographical names have become the defacto
"standard" where working DX is concerned.
So we are having a QSO and I tell you my QTH is Louisiana, Missouri and you then think to yourself "say what" followed be "does not compute"
Look it up at QRZ dot com.
Again there is nothing wrong with the standard
I for one will never use your "de facto" standard when there is already one that has been in use for years and years and years.
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
I found, some years ago when just a visitor to the US, that the format of the call was much more important than the phonetics. I took part in field day using my UK call which properly should have been W/G8IFF, Whiskey Slash Golf Eight India Foxtrot Foxtrot.
Most had problems with W/G8IFF, G8IFF/W was no better. It wasn't until I used "G8IFF Portable W8" that the requests for repeats stopped. Nobody queried the G call but most had problems with a W/ call.
On 10-Apr-11 22:57, Glen Zook wrote:
If you want to get technical, geographic names has been a "standard" much longer than the ICAO phonetics. However, it is fine with me if you insist on using the ICAO phonetics when in a DX pileup. That just means that I am generally going to work the DX first!
As I keep saying, there is a place for ICAO phonetics and there is a place for geographic names. I do use ICAO phonetics when working stateside and generally with operators who speak English as their primary language. But, when in a pileup trying to work a DX station I definitely switch to geographical names because I work the DX MUCH sooner!
Glen, K9STH
Website: http://k9sth.com
--- On Sun, 4/10/11, John Beckerw0jab@big-river.net wrote:
From: John Beckerw0jab@big-river.net Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITU Phonetics - Kilo To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Date: Sunday, April 10, 2011, 4:43 PM At 02:34 PM 4/10/2011, you wrote:
Again, geographical names have become the defacto
"standard" where working DX is concerned.
So we are having a QSO and I tell you my QTH is Louisiana, Missouri and you then think to yourself "say what" followed be "does not compute"
Look it up at QRZ dot com.
Again there is nothing wrong with the standard
I for one will never use your "de facto" standard when there is already one that has been in use for years and years and years.
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Until they start "correcting" names and Bombay becomes Mumbai and Peking becomes Beijing...
Roger WA1KAT
On 4/10/2011 6:57 PM, Glen Zook wrote:
If you want to get technical, geographic names has been a "standard" much longer than the ICAO phonetics. However, it is fine with me if you insist on using the ICAO phonetics when in a DX pileup. That just means that I am generally going to work the DX first!
As I keep saying, there is a place for ICAO phonetics and there is a place for geographic names. I do use ICAO phonetics when working stateside and generally with operators who speak English as their primary language. But, when in a pileup trying to work a DX station I definitely switch to geographical names because I work the DX MUCH sooner!
Glen, K9STH
Since MOST of us aren't civil aviators, I suggest we use the ITU Phonetic alphabet like everybody else does. It's the same for those of you that don't know that or what ICAO stands for.
Juliet Echo Foxtrot Foxtrot -- Kilo Echo Seven Alpha Charlie Yankee
----- Original Message ----- From: "Glen Zook" gzook@yahoo.com
The problem is that the "standard" ICAO phonetics are problematic under certain circumstances. In the military world the operators are specially trained to use ICAO phonetics including the "preferred" way to pronounce the words. Unfortunately, this just doesn't exist in the amateur radio world and especially in those persons, without any formal training, who do not have English as their primary language, they have problems with the ICAO phonetics. That is why geographical names work better when working DX. For stateside use, at least in my opinion, the ICAO phonetics are definitely recommended.
Again, geographical names have become the defacto "standard" where working DX is concerned.
Glen, K9STH
Website: http://k9sth.com
--- On Sun, 4/10/11, John Becker w0jab@big-river.net wrote:
There is a "STANDARD" why not use it??? (that was a question)
My navy training just rubs me the wrong way when I hear some of the "words" being used by some.
Could be the "reason" your call went unanswered. _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
I don't get confused, I just get so I don't care.
Joe WB9SBD
The Original Rolling Ball Clock Idle Tyme Idle-Tyme.com http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 4/10/2011 12:26 PM, Clint Bradford wrote:
... "Whiskey" confuses me ...
It's usually rum in my pina coladas that confuses me ...
Clint _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
"Whiskey" confuses me ;-))
Chuck, Kilo Mike Niner Uniform ----- Original Message ----- From: "Clint Bradford" clintbradford@mac.com To: "AMSAT BB" amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 12:19 Subject: [amsat-bb] ITU Phonetics - Kilo
... The use of Kilowatt as a phonetic is a pet peeve ...
Not an ITU-approved term. "K" is "kilo."
SOURCE: ARRL Handy Ops Guide's ITU Phonetics: http://web.me.com/clintbradford/Work-Sat/Shack_Aids.html
Clint, K6LCS
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Some of us have our ears ready for the "standard" phonetics when some comes out with "mississippi whiskey runner" for MWR I got to stop and think "what did he just say"
John, W0JAB
Really? I thought the phonetic for K was "knot". :-)
Bob K0NR
On 4/10/2011 10:19 AM, Clint Bradford wrote:
... The use of Kilowatt as a phonetic is a pet peeve ...
Not an ITU-approved term. "K" is "kilo."
SOURCE: ARRL Handy Ops Guide's ITU Phonetics: http://web.me.com/clintbradford/Work-Sat/Shack_Aids.html
Clint, K6LCS
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Nope that is Jethro Bodine phonetics and knot stands for zero!! ;-)
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Bob K0NR - email list Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 2:18 PM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: ITU Phonetics - Kilo
Really? I thought the phonetic for K was "knot". :-)
Bob K0NR
On 4/10/2011 10:19 AM, Clint Bradford wrote:
... The use of Kilowatt as a phonetic is a pet peeve ...
Not an ITU-approved term. "K" is "kilo."
SOURCE: ARRL Handy Ops Guide's ITU Phonetics:
http://web.me.com/clintbradford/Work-Sat/Shack_Aids.html
Clint, K6LCS
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
My call starts Kilo Kilo Zero --- It never gets logged correctly, it always gets logged as Kilo Zero. Kilowatt Kilowatt Zero gets logged right almost every-time. I have come to accept it.
Sierra works about 60 % -- Sugar works around 95 % I have learned to use what works.
73, Joe kk0sd
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Clint Bradford Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 11:20 AM To: AMSAT BB Subject: [amsat-bb] ITU Phonetics - Kilo
... The use of Kilowatt as a phonetic is a pet peeve ...
Not an ITU-approved term. "K" is "kilo."
SOURCE: ARRL Handy Ops Guide's ITU Phonetics: http://web.me.com/clintbradford/Work-Sat/Shack_Aids.html
Clint, K6LCS
_______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
participants (16)
-
Bob K0NR - email list -
Bruce -
Clint Bradford -
Edward R. Cole -
Gary "Joe" Mayfield -
Glen Zook -
Glenn AA5PK -
Jeff Moore -
Jim Shorney -
Joe -
John Becker -
KM9U -
Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF -
Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK) -
Roger Kolakowski -
Ron Settle