I just wanted to let you know that I called and called and called CQ on AO-51 this morning with no takers...
Uh, no you didn't.
You simply keyed up and announced you were listening.
How about trying to use the more preferred protocol of...
Callsign phonetically. grid square, op mode
Like...
Kilo-Six-Lima-Charlie-Sierra, Delta Mike 13, handheld
Use of the word, "listening," may be taken literally - you are on the air, LISTENING.
I am assuming you were in the correct ops mode for the bird during this pass...were you?
Clint Bradford, K6LCS 909-241-7666
How about trying to use the more preferred protocol of... Callsign phonetically. grid square, op mode Like... Kilo-Six-Lima-Charlie-Sierra, Delta Mike 13, handheld
On FM, in my opinion, there is no need for phonetics except for calls with troublesome letters. Most calls can be heard easily without using up time with phonetics.
Bob
At 08:36 AM 2/26/2008, Robert Bruninga wrote:
How about trying to use the more preferred protocol of... Callsign phonetically. grid square, op mode Like... Kilo-Six-Lima-Charlie-Sierra, Delta Mike 13, handheld
On FM, in my opinion, there is no need for phonetics except for calls with troublesome letters. Most calls can be heard easily without using up time with phonetics.
I disagree, signal levels for some stations can be marginal, especially on the downlink. There are also a LOT of troublesome letters, particularly if your audio lacks high's. Is it a B, D, E, G, P, T or V? :-) Or maybe it's a _really_ muffled C?
Also, if there is fading, the longer phonetics may still get enough information through to avoid a repeat. Repeats are more costly in terms of time, when they occur. And don't forget the impact of different accents. I have enough problems with getting my details to a lot of Americans (even when using phonetics!) over a good, strong IRLP link. At least the smaller footprint of a LEO limits the variety of regional accents in many cases.
73 de VK3JED http://vkradio.com
Tony Langdon wrote:
At 08:36 AM 2/26/2008, Robert Bruninga wrote:
How about trying to use the more preferred protocol of... Callsign phonetically. grid square, op mode Like... Kilo-Six-Lima-Charlie-Sierra, Delta Mike 13, handheld
On FM, in my opinion, there is no need for phonetics except for calls with troublesome letters. Most calls can be heard easily without using up time with phonetics.
I disagree, signal levels for some stations can be marginal, especially on the downlink. There are also a LOT of troublesome letters, particularly if your audio lacks high's. Is it a B, D, E, G, P, T or V? :-) Or maybe it's a _really_ muffled C?
I mostly agree with this, there are some calls which are rather difficult to pull apart sometimes, and often just the fact that you are slowing down to say them phonetically helps.
But perhaps this is a good time to introduce a little personal rant of mine. First of all, I work satellites exclusively QRP with a TH-D7A and an arrow antenna (no preamp). This is a fun way for me to work, and I enjoy it a great deal, and quite frankly, with some ear buds I can hear the satellite very well, and always get good strong signal reports above 10 degrees or so, which is pretty much the minimum altitude I feel comfortable keying up on given that my horizons are very nearly that high anyway in most directions.
That's what makes the following particularly frustrating: someone with a LOT more power than me simply comes on and blasts over my QSO. Well, that's just the half of it. It's even worse when they ask for a repeat (often multiple times) for a callsign which I, with my completely meager equipment, can hear perfectly well. Of course, as I patiently wait to try to jump in at the end of a QSO, I hear multiple people keying up and blasting over the satellite. This happens time, after time, after time, after time, especially on the more crowded passes over the central U.S (I'm a west coaster).
Yes, I understand there can be fading and the like, but once the satellite is above even ten degrees, I pretty much always get full quieting from AO-51. I keep wondering why people with presumably much larger stations have so much more difficulty hearing the bird. I'm left with equally puzzling alternatives: that people running much more power than I simply don't have sufficient receive gain to hear the satellite, or that they simply don't care whether they interrupt existing communications and just key up over people.
Some more minor peeves: people who take a long time to thank people for the contact when the pass is very busy, people who make a half a dozen or more contacts on a busy pass, and people who apparently aren't listening closely enough to realize that the person that they are replying to has already given their callsign and grid half a dozen times in the pass. (Yes, i know, the footprint is continually changing, but c'mon... it gets a little silly).
Back to the original subject:
I find it hard to believe that it's hard for people to send and receive full quieting signals to AO-51, even with the most modest of equipment, at least over the great majority of passes over 10 degrees or so. Perhaps if you are asking for repeats, you should consider that your receive performance isn't the greatest, you should work on upgrading that portion of your station before clogging the satellite. The maxim "you got to hear 'em to work 'em" should be the motto of every satellite operator.
Hope to work more of you in the future.
Mark KF6KYI
Also, if there is fading, the longer phonetics may still get enough information through to avoid a repeat. Repeats are more costly in terms of time, when they occur. And don't forget the impact of different accents. I have enough problems with getting my details to a lot of Americans (even when using phonetics!) over a good, strong IRLP link. At least the smaller footprint of a LEO limits the variety of regional accents in many cases.
73 de VK3JED http://vkradio.com
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
At 10:26 AM 2/26/2008, Mark VandeWettering wrote:
I mostly agree with this, there are some calls which are rather difficult to pull apart sometimes, and often just the fact that you are slowing down to say them phonetically helps.
Very much so. :)
But perhaps this is a good time to introduce a little personal rant of mine. First of all, I work satellites exclusively QRP with a TH-D7A and an arrow antenna (no preamp). This is a fun way for me to work, and I enjoy it a great deal, and quite frankly, with some ear buds I can hear the satellite very well, and always get good strong signal reports above 10 degrees or so, which is pretty much
I normally work the birds with a similar setup, and have no difficulty receiving it. In the past, I used around 1W to access the uplink with little difficulty.
That's what makes the following particularly frustrating: someone with a LOT more power than me simply comes on and blasts over my QSO. Well, that's just the half of
That's common, and the cause (at least down here) is invariably a newbie trying to work the bird using a high gain vertical and no preamp (For the newcomers out there, this DOESN'T WORK!!! Best to try working it with a HT, seriously).
Yes, I understand there can be fading and the like, but once the satellite is above even ten degrees, I pretty much always get full quieting from AO-51. I keep wondering
I do too.
why people with presumably much larger stations have so much more difficulty hearing the bird. I'm left with equally puzzling alternatives: that people running much more power than I simply don't have sufficient receive gain to hear the satellite, or that they simply don't care whether they interrupt existing communications and just key up over people.
One of the things I hate about V/U is there is a 20 ish dB disparity in the uplink/downlink power budgets, and that is in favour of the uplink. U/V is roughly balanced. The former creates all sorts of opportunities for alligators...
of your station before clogging the satellite. The maxim "you got to hear 'em to work 'em" should be the motto of every satellite operator.
True, ESPECIALLY for satellites. If you can't hear it, fix your station! :)
73 de VK3JED http://vkradio.com
In theory, yes. But from what I've heard the longer you take to give out your call sign, the more likely it is that it will be stepped on, taken out by QSB, or both. Speaking quickly but clearly seems to work best. Once contact is made, the details on a the call sign can be verified and corrected while (most) everyone else backs off. Then the pile-up can begin again.
My $.02,
Greg KO6TH
----------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:22:54 +1100 To: bruninga@usna.edu; amsat-bb@amsat.org From: vk3jed@gmail.com Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: A0-51 "easy sat"
At 08:36 AM 2/26/2008, Robert Bruninga wrote:
How about trying to use the more preferred protocol of... Callsign phonetically. grid square, op mode Like... Kilo-Six-Lima-Charlie-Sierra, Delta Mike 13, handheld
On FM, in my opinion, there is no need for phonetics except for calls with troublesome letters. Most calls can be heard easily without using up time with phonetics.
I disagree, signal levels for some stations can be marginal, especially on the downlink. There are also a LOT of troublesome letters, particularly if your audio lacks high's. Is it a B, D, E, G, P, T or V? :-) Or maybe it's a _really_ muffled C?
Also, if there is fading, the longer phonetics may still get enough information through to avoid a repeat. Repeats are more costly in terms of time, when they occur. And don't forget the impact of different accents. I have enough problems with getting my details to a lot of Americans (even when using phonetics!) over a good, strong IRLP link. At least the smaller footprint of a LEO limits the variety of regional accents in many cases.
73 de VK3JED http://vkradio.com
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
_________________________________________________________________ Climb to the top of the charts! Play the word scramble challenge with star power. http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_jan
Thanks for your opinion, but I really disagree. I often have trouble making out call signs when people don't use phonetics. Maybe it's my tin ear or perhaps I need better ear phones, but why not just use phonetics? It does not take much longer, it helps during marginal conditions and it gets passed tricky accents. By the way, I wish hams would stick to ITC phonetics, especially when working DX.
Ken, N6KTH
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Robert Bruninga Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 1:36 PM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: A0-51 "easy sat"
How about trying to use the more preferred protocol of... Callsign phonetically. grid square, op mode Like... Kilo-Six-Lima-Charlie-Sierra, Delta Mike 13, handheld
On FM, in my opinion, there is no need for phonetics except for calls with troublesome letters. Most calls can be heard easily without using up time with phonetics.
Bob
_______________________________________________ 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
Clint Bradford clintbrad4d@earthlink.net wrote:
> Use of the word, "listening," may be taken literally - you > are on the air, LISTENING.
Taken literally? Awwww...come on Clint. If I were just a listener on the bird, why in the heck would I need to announce it on the air. That just makes no sense whatsoever.
LISTENING = Announcing that I'm here for anyone else who may also be on the bird and would like to make a contact with me.
73, Gary -K8KFJ- AMSAT #32574 Sat VUCC #125
I just wanted to let you know that I called and called and called CQ on AO-51 this morning with no takers...
Uh, no you didn't.
You simply keyed up and announced you were listening.
How about trying to use the more preferred protocol of...
Callsign phonetically. grid square, op mode
Like...
Kilo-Six-Lima-Charlie-Sierra, Delta Mike 13, handheld
Use of the word, "listening," may be taken literally - you are on the air, LISTENING.
I am assuming you were in the correct ops mode for the bird during this pass...were you?
Clint Bradford, K6LCS 909-241-7666
_______________________________________________ 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 agree with Cliff. Tha same is true with terrestial repeaters. If you expect a reply then the accepted term is "CQ" not "listening".
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
G8IFF/KC8NHF wrote: | I agree with Cliff. Tha same is true with terrestial repeaters. | If you expect a reply then the accepted term is "CQ" not "listening".
I have yet to hear a "CQ" on a repeater here in the US. The normal practice here is to announce you're "listening", "monitoring", or just give out your call sign.
I've also heard plenty of people reply to this. :)
- -- Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA bbj <at> innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/
At 10:13 PM 2/26/2008, Ben Jackson wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
G8IFF/KC8NHF wrote: | I agree with Cliff. Tha same is true with terrestial repeaters. | If you expect a reply then the accepted term is "CQ" not "listening".
I have yet to hear a "CQ" on a repeater here in the US. The normal practice here is to announce you're "listening", "monitoring", or just give out your call sign.
Actually, I have seen calling CQ on repeaters suggested in guides on "How to be a LID" :D. Over here, it is also customary to announce that you're listening. I personally don't like the callsign only approach (fortunately, it's rare here - only time I can recall hearing it is US stations via IRLP or Echolink), it's too abrupt and vague, callsign and status (listening, testing, etc) is the preferred approach here. That allows for tests as well. :)
As the FM birds are essentially repeaters in the sky, most satellite operators here use the same convention as for terrestrial repeaters. Most of the long CQs on FM sats I've heard have been from newcomers who haven't yet sorted out their receive setups (so they invariably trash any QSO in progress :( ).
I've also heard plenty of people reply to this. :)
All the time, that's how repeater QSOs start, unless someone calls someone specifically. :)
73 de VK3JED http://vkradio.com
Yes, how do you think I got the recording? I monitor my own downlink, like Im supposed to. My downlink is what is passed to the recorder.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Clint Bradford" clintbrad4d@earthlink.net To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 3:34 PM Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: A0-51 "easy sat"
I just wanted to let you know that I called and called and called CQ on AO-51 this morning with no takers...
Uh, no you didn't.
You simply keyed up and announced you were listening.
How about trying to use the more preferred protocol of...
Callsign phonetically. grid square, op mode
Like...
Kilo-Six-Lima-Charlie-Sierra, Delta Mike 13, handheld
Use of the word, "listening," may be taken literally - you are on the air, LISTENING.
I am assuming you were in the correct ops mode for the bird during this pass...were you?
Clint Bradford, K6LCS 909-241-7666
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 (10)
-
Ben Jackson -
Charles Reiche -
Clint Bradford -
G8IFF/KC8NHF -
Garie Halstead K8KFJ -
Greg D. -
Ken Owen -
Mark VandeWettering -
Robert Bruninga -
Tony Langdon