"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
ink.net...

"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



Oh, and one more thing Alun. Why is it you don't think CW (Morse Code) is
talking ? Do you think we just sit in front of the radio and send random
characters? Or even random words?

Comunications is the 'exchange of information'. Are you actually that
ignorant Alun?

Dan/W4NTI