I can only confirm the thoroughly positive experiences with the QRO chasers, Armin.
However, I have a suggestion or request that goes well with the topic.
About the background:
For some time now I have been meeting up with Lars, SA4BLM, for a straight key qso at the summit. Lars often transmits with 5W and I mostly with 10W. Of course we hear each other almost equally well.
Why shouldn’t other chasers also send qrp? We activators often have less local interference than the chasers and should hear any chaser transmitting at the same power as us.
But if an activator has strong local interference, he can ask for qro in the spot.
Yes, it happens, as a chaser I have seemingly done it myself. The problem is QSB. Recently I called a familiar station and heard nothing. A short time later he came back to audibility and was actually already talking to me. On other occasions QRM or late callers blot out the activator so the chaser doesn’t hear his call. You have to bear in mind that it is not necessarily due to any fault of the chaser and be patient.
Regarding names - I keep a wallet-sized printout of my top 30 or so chasers, alphabetized by call. Not only does it help me with names but it also disambiguates calls. In the end, the pool of active chasers is not terribly large.
As an SSB only (plus FM of course) activator having been active now for 5 years I can only support all the positive statements about the SOTA qso culture. I thoroughly enjoy the pile ups and the civilised way these can be worked. In particular when I hear a s2s calling in the midst of many chaser calls I have made the experience that in general chasers respect an ongoing s2s QSO and wait till its compoleted. And recently I hear more and more often a chaser informing me about an s2s call at the end of a qso for which I’m grateful. As I’m writing my log on paper I obviously don’t see any names pop up. Some of the chaser’s names I know by heart by now, but certainly not all. So if I don’t use a name in a qso it’s simply because I don’t know it.
And again: The qso culture experienced on a SOTA summit is indeed very enjoyable.
73, Fritz HB9CYX
As another mostly FM (and occasionally SSB) activator, I use VK-port-a-log to let me know my (previous) correspondent names. I use this functionality for two reasons: to be able to say hello to my “old” friend at the other side of the QSO and to double check the call signs of the correspondents especially in bad QSO conditions.
As I am a HAMlet on SOTA (especially on SSB/HF), I am grateful to all more skilled SOTA activators and chasers being patient with me. Thank you all.
Hi Conor - I too have a printed out list of the regular chasers and often add to it - Its A4 size and also serves as a rest for my log book = I only use a paper log on the hill.
What impresses me more than that are other chasers and sometimes fellow activators who answer my calls with my name even though they have not worked me at all or very infrequently. I assume logging software can bring up names too - but I don’t use such stuff.
Oh come on, Andy - do you know all 41(?) in the official list?
The fact is - like it or not - the vast majority of amateurs don’t know or don’t use many of the Q codes for a good reason: they serve little or no value in most AR QSOs. I just reviewed the list and I reckon only about half are in common use - and some with a different meaning from that defined in traditional lists, e.g. QRT.
And the more some Q codes fall into disuse the less incentive those of us who do know them have to continue to send them, unless one’s motive is to show off rather than to communicate.
The RSGB website has a more-realistic list of Q code usage than the out-of-date traditional lists …
No. But that’s not the point. The amateur Q-code and its use is somewhat divergent from the military and commercial definitions of the code. Complaining that amateur Q codes are not the same is moot, you have to learn the Q code as it is used on ham bands. It’s the same as me complaining my Indian work colleagues are not speaking proper English. They’re not, they speak Indian English which is based on English English and is similar. But there are significant variations and differences which jar when you hear them. My colleagues are not wrong, they just speak a different language. Given I can’t speak Hindi* or any of the myriad of languages spoken in India, I can’t really correct them when they say what they hear being spoken in India. So I have to accept (often with a grimace) when I hear my language being beaten senseless that it’s not done through malice. The same applies to ham vs commercial Q codes.
Hindi* : Well I do know some suitable profanities in Hindi which I use on the scammers who call regularly from Microsoft Support or Amazon Prime Subscription Services. But they’re not suitable for use on here
The UK licence exam syllabus only lists a handful specifically (QRM, QRN, QRO, QRP, QRT, QSB, QSL, QSO, QSY and QTH), and presumably leaves the rest for licencees to discover (or not) as part of their “self-training”. Can’t say QRA had come to my attention before this thread came along, so it’s certainly not in my top 20 Q codes.
Yeah. In Morse OP has a weight of 28, NAME weighs 30, and QRA weighs 34, so OP wins on weight as well as (most likely) familiarity…
But it is the point. You said someone should learn the Q code(s) when I suspect you don’t know them all yourself. People in glasshouses shouldn’t spill milk under the bridge.
I wasn’t complaining about the deviation of Q code usage from former years but merely pointing out an obvious fact of life. I’m a realist and work with amateurs as they are nowadays.
That’s the problem. A quick search on the internet reveals numerous Q-code lists tagged as for radio amateurs. I’m looking at my paperback copy of the RSGB International Amateur Radio examination manual and it lists 14, at least one of which I’ve never heard used (QRK? everyone nowadays sends HW?) but the list is missing a few one hears regularly.
No wonder a newcomer to AR could get confused and yet another reason why we should be patient and polite with others on air.
Not just on the air, quit with the sqabbling, guys!
I remember that the predecessor of the Maidenhead locator was known as the QRA locator, which followed the format of two capital letters, two numbers, one lower case letter, and only covered western EU. Things tend to drift with the passage of time. Same with phonetics, when I first took an interest in ham radio many operators had been in the forces and used the phonetics particular to their unit or squadron, NATO codes, what NATO codes?
Context my dear boy. The OP knows the commercial / military codes and complains amateurs use them wrong. They don’t, they use them in amateur context and that is what you need to know when dealing with amateurs.
Just as on SSB you need to know how many whiskies are needed to get full poundage out of your linear. (It’s never a PA or amplifier but always a linear even when driven well into compression )
I agree with you on that point. In fact that’s why I’ve been trying to say for the last few entries.
But my original (and more important) point was to chide you for your chiding someone who you claim was misusing or not knowing QRA.
My later point was, many of the Q codes have fallen into disuse or are in decline because their precise understanding is not shared by everyone or a Q code has been replaced by a self-evident abbreviation (often with the same or fewer number of characters), e.g. my previous example QRK? vs HW?
