Why does “Ethics and Operating Procedures” suggest tuning on a dummy load?












6














The seminal work "Ethics and Operating Procedures for the Radio Amateur" suggests in subsection II.8.1 to perform tuning only on a dummy load.




Sometimes before transmitting it is necessary to tune (adjust) the transmitter (or
antenna tuner). Tuning should in the first instance be done on a dummy load. If
necessary, fine tuning can be done on a clear frequency with reduced power, after
having asked if the frequency is in use.




My understanding is that a dummy load matches the transceiver impedance so tuning is probably a) not necessary and b) without any predictive value for how the actual antenna will work with the tuning parameters.
What am I missing?










share|improve this question









New contributor




xmjx is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

























    6














    The seminal work "Ethics and Operating Procedures for the Radio Amateur" suggests in subsection II.8.1 to perform tuning only on a dummy load.




    Sometimes before transmitting it is necessary to tune (adjust) the transmitter (or
    antenna tuner). Tuning should in the first instance be done on a dummy load. If
    necessary, fine tuning can be done on a clear frequency with reduced power, after
    having asked if the frequency is in use.




    My understanding is that a dummy load matches the transceiver impedance so tuning is probably a) not necessary and b) without any predictive value for how the actual antenna will work with the tuning parameters.
    What am I missing?










    share|improve this question









    New contributor




    xmjx is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.























      6












      6








      6







      The seminal work "Ethics and Operating Procedures for the Radio Amateur" suggests in subsection II.8.1 to perform tuning only on a dummy load.




      Sometimes before transmitting it is necessary to tune (adjust) the transmitter (or
      antenna tuner). Tuning should in the first instance be done on a dummy load. If
      necessary, fine tuning can be done on a clear frequency with reduced power, after
      having asked if the frequency is in use.




      My understanding is that a dummy load matches the transceiver impedance so tuning is probably a) not necessary and b) without any predictive value for how the actual antenna will work with the tuning parameters.
      What am I missing?










      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      xmjx is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      The seminal work "Ethics and Operating Procedures for the Radio Amateur" suggests in subsection II.8.1 to perform tuning only on a dummy load.




      Sometimes before transmitting it is necessary to tune (adjust) the transmitter (or
      antenna tuner). Tuning should in the first instance be done on a dummy load. If
      necessary, fine tuning can be done on a clear frequency with reduced power, after
      having asked if the frequency is in use.




      My understanding is that a dummy load matches the transceiver impedance so tuning is probably a) not necessary and b) without any predictive value for how the actual antenna will work with the tuning parameters.
      What am I missing?







      antenna procedure equipment-operation






      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      xmjx is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      xmjx is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 13 hours ago









      Phil Frost - W8II

      27.4k147115




      27.4k147115






      New contributor




      xmjx is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked yesterday









      xmjx

      1333




      1333




      New contributor




      xmjx is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      xmjx is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      xmjx is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          9














          The text you refer to seems to be (emphasis mine):




          Sometimes before transmitting it is necessary to tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner). Tuning should in the first instance be done on a dummy load.




          This is not referring to the use of an antenna tuner, whether integral or external. Rather, it is referring to tuning the final output stage ("finals") of a vacuum-tube-based transmitter (or external power amplifier). These are also impedance-matching adjustments, but involve elements internal to the transmitter/amplifier rather than exclusively the transmitter to the antenna. (The antenna impedance is also involved, so in some cases there could be some amount of antenna matching, if not as much as a dedicated antenna tuner. Or so I understand — I'm not an expert on this part of the technology.)



          Solid-state radios operate differently and do not require these adjustments, so the recommendation you read does not apply. However, there are other uses for transmitting into a dummy load — for example, checking if your microphone is working, you're not over-modulating, or even that a computer-controlled transmission is correctly controlling your radio's frequency and PTT.






          share|improve this answer























          • That makes sense. Thank you :-)
            – xmjx
            yesterday






          • 1




            Vacuum-tube based external power amplifiers are still in wide use, which require similar tuning, so the advice isn't obsolete.
            – user71659
            yesterday






          • 1




            @user71659 Good point. I've edited to refer to separate amplifiers and not say "obsolete".
            – Kevin Reid AG6YO
            yesterday










          • The text says "tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner)". So contrary to what you wrote, it seems it is (at least sometimes) referring to the use of an antenna tuner. I think you're giving too much credit to what's really just a bit of silly advice.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            14 hours ago










          • @PhilFrost-W8II I can't think of any interpretation of the phrase "in the first instance" other than referring to the "tuning the transmitter" case as opposed to "tuning the antenna tuner". If it's not making that distinction, I don't see any other distinction for it to be making.
            – Kevin Reid AG6YO
            13 hours ago



















          2














          We use a non-radiating dummy load at first so that we minimize the chance of interfering with others.



          When our tuning adjustments are as close as they can be using that, then we can switch over to our antenna and make any needed adjustments.



          The HF bands are full of annoying carriers because hams perform their entire tuneup procedure into their antennas.






          share|improve this answer

















          • 1




            Yes, this is what puts it in the ethics section. Don’t do your rough tuning on the air.
            – CCTO
            yesterday



















          0














          There are two ways the text could be interpreted:




          1. First tune to a dummy load. Then, switch to the antenna and tune again.

          2. First tune your transmitter for a 50 ohm load, using a dummy load. Then tune your (separate) antenna tuner to present a 50 ohm load to the transmitter.


          The first case, which is how I first understood it, doesn't make any sense unless you know the antenna is 50 ohms.



          In the case where you have a transmitter that requires tuning (common for tube equipment) and an antenna tuner, then the second sense makes sense.



          Though in either case I have a better solution: make a mark where the knobs should be set for a 50 ohm load: then you can return to this setting without any dummy load at all.



          Here's what you need to know about tuning:




          • Try to do it on a clear frequency. Avoid doing it on recognized calling frequencies.

          • Do it at low power, if possible.

          • Keep it short by writing down the approximate settings for each band beforehand.


          More generally, I think half that document is absurd, and I wouldn't take anything it says too seriously. Consider the first sentence of http://www.hamradio-operating-ethics.org/:




          Over the past decades, and not surprisingly together with the introduction and growth of the Internet, the behavior of the radio amateurs on the bands has significantly deteriorated.




          Kids these days, am I right?



          I would call it not so much a "seminal work", rather than an overbearing, 68 page tirade by a couple people upset that not everyone does everything exactly how the authors do it. Half the work has legitimate information on basic procedure, but the other half is common sense or just the author's particular operating habits presented as authoritative procedure.



          For example:




          Some subjects which are a no no in amateur radio conversations on the air are:




          • religion

          • politics

          • business (you can talk about your profession, but you cannot advertise for your business);

          • derogatory remarks directed at any group (ethnic, religious, racial, sexual etc.).

          • bathroom humor: if you wouldn't tell the joke to your ten year old child, don't tell it on the radio;

          • any subject that has no relation whatsoever with the ham radio hobby.




          People use ham radio to talk about the weather, their health problems, or to make plans to meet friends. I don't know what these things have to do with the ham radio hobby.



          Another example:




          Saying 'CQ from Victor Romeo two Oscar Portable' is not very clear. Either VR2OP calls SQ using an incorrect spelling phonetic, or VR2O/p calls CQ and omits to add the expression 'stroke' while calling CQ. This can lead to a lot of confusion.




          This is what's called a false dilemma. There's a 3rd possibility: VR2O is portable. That's how I understand it, anyway. Sometimes people even say "mobile" instead of "portable", but I don't find it confusing at all.




          Call CQ: ‘CQ from G3ZZZ, G3ZZZ calling CQ, golf three zulu zulu zulu calling
          CQ and listening’. At the end you may say ‘...calling CQ and standing by’,
          instead of ‘...and listening’. One could also say: ‘...and standing by for any call’.




          I just assume anyone calling CQ is standing by for any call. I just end with "calling CQ", but reading this document makes me feel like I must be "doing it wrong" and the ham radio procedure police are probably going to arrest me.




          If signals are not very strong and if the readability is not perfect, you can spell out your name etc. Example: 'My name is John, spelled juliett, oscar, hotel, november ...' Do NOT say '...juliett juliett, oscar oscar, hotel hotel, november november'. This is not the way you spell the name John.




          I have never once heard anyone doing this. Reminds me of four shalt thou not count...






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1




            Downvoted for sarcasm, and general tone. Sorry. This is more of a rant than an attempt to answer the question
            – Scott Earle
            20 hours ago










          • I think, "the document you cite is ridiculous" is a perfectly valid answer. Over.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            15 hours ago






          • 1




            It’s a perfectly valid comment. But it’s not an attempt at answering the question as asked.
            – Scott Earle
            15 hours ago










          • @ScottEarle it is an answer. The question asks, "What am I missing?" and in the very first sentence I answer: "You're not missing anything." Of course the next question that follows is "why would someone publish this document?", and I think the answer is because "the text is just a little too eager to provide advice which maybe isn't as authoritative as it wants to seem". The question says this text is "seminal", and I'm saying, it's not. And then I give examples of how absurd it really is.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            15 hours ago






          • 1




            Sarcastically. It’s the tone of the answer I downvoted.
            – Scott Earle
            15 hours ago











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("schematics", function () {
          StackExchange.schematics.init();
          });
          }, "cicuitlab");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "520"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });






          xmjx is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fham.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f12539%2fwhy-does-ethics-and-operating-procedures-suggest-tuning-on-a-dummy-load%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes








          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          9














          The text you refer to seems to be (emphasis mine):




          Sometimes before transmitting it is necessary to tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner). Tuning should in the first instance be done on a dummy load.




          This is not referring to the use of an antenna tuner, whether integral or external. Rather, it is referring to tuning the final output stage ("finals") of a vacuum-tube-based transmitter (or external power amplifier). These are also impedance-matching adjustments, but involve elements internal to the transmitter/amplifier rather than exclusively the transmitter to the antenna. (The antenna impedance is also involved, so in some cases there could be some amount of antenna matching, if not as much as a dedicated antenna tuner. Or so I understand — I'm not an expert on this part of the technology.)



          Solid-state radios operate differently and do not require these adjustments, so the recommendation you read does not apply. However, there are other uses for transmitting into a dummy load — for example, checking if your microphone is working, you're not over-modulating, or even that a computer-controlled transmission is correctly controlling your radio's frequency and PTT.






          share|improve this answer























          • That makes sense. Thank you :-)
            – xmjx
            yesterday






          • 1




            Vacuum-tube based external power amplifiers are still in wide use, which require similar tuning, so the advice isn't obsolete.
            – user71659
            yesterday






          • 1




            @user71659 Good point. I've edited to refer to separate amplifiers and not say "obsolete".
            – Kevin Reid AG6YO
            yesterday










          • The text says "tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner)". So contrary to what you wrote, it seems it is (at least sometimes) referring to the use of an antenna tuner. I think you're giving too much credit to what's really just a bit of silly advice.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            14 hours ago










          • @PhilFrost-W8II I can't think of any interpretation of the phrase "in the first instance" other than referring to the "tuning the transmitter" case as opposed to "tuning the antenna tuner". If it's not making that distinction, I don't see any other distinction for it to be making.
            – Kevin Reid AG6YO
            13 hours ago
















          9














          The text you refer to seems to be (emphasis mine):




          Sometimes before transmitting it is necessary to tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner). Tuning should in the first instance be done on a dummy load.




          This is not referring to the use of an antenna tuner, whether integral or external. Rather, it is referring to tuning the final output stage ("finals") of a vacuum-tube-based transmitter (or external power amplifier). These are also impedance-matching adjustments, but involve elements internal to the transmitter/amplifier rather than exclusively the transmitter to the antenna. (The antenna impedance is also involved, so in some cases there could be some amount of antenna matching, if not as much as a dedicated antenna tuner. Or so I understand — I'm not an expert on this part of the technology.)



          Solid-state radios operate differently and do not require these adjustments, so the recommendation you read does not apply. However, there are other uses for transmitting into a dummy load — for example, checking if your microphone is working, you're not over-modulating, or even that a computer-controlled transmission is correctly controlling your radio's frequency and PTT.






          share|improve this answer























          • That makes sense. Thank you :-)
            – xmjx
            yesterday






          • 1




            Vacuum-tube based external power amplifiers are still in wide use, which require similar tuning, so the advice isn't obsolete.
            – user71659
            yesterday






          • 1




            @user71659 Good point. I've edited to refer to separate amplifiers and not say "obsolete".
            – Kevin Reid AG6YO
            yesterday










          • The text says "tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner)". So contrary to what you wrote, it seems it is (at least sometimes) referring to the use of an antenna tuner. I think you're giving too much credit to what's really just a bit of silly advice.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            14 hours ago










          • @PhilFrost-W8II I can't think of any interpretation of the phrase "in the first instance" other than referring to the "tuning the transmitter" case as opposed to "tuning the antenna tuner". If it's not making that distinction, I don't see any other distinction for it to be making.
            – Kevin Reid AG6YO
            13 hours ago














          9












          9








          9






          The text you refer to seems to be (emphasis mine):




          Sometimes before transmitting it is necessary to tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner). Tuning should in the first instance be done on a dummy load.




          This is not referring to the use of an antenna tuner, whether integral or external. Rather, it is referring to tuning the final output stage ("finals") of a vacuum-tube-based transmitter (or external power amplifier). These are also impedance-matching adjustments, but involve elements internal to the transmitter/amplifier rather than exclusively the transmitter to the antenna. (The antenna impedance is also involved, so in some cases there could be some amount of antenna matching, if not as much as a dedicated antenna tuner. Or so I understand — I'm not an expert on this part of the technology.)



          Solid-state radios operate differently and do not require these adjustments, so the recommendation you read does not apply. However, there are other uses for transmitting into a dummy load — for example, checking if your microphone is working, you're not over-modulating, or even that a computer-controlled transmission is correctly controlling your radio's frequency and PTT.






          share|improve this answer














          The text you refer to seems to be (emphasis mine):




          Sometimes before transmitting it is necessary to tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner). Tuning should in the first instance be done on a dummy load.




          This is not referring to the use of an antenna tuner, whether integral or external. Rather, it is referring to tuning the final output stage ("finals") of a vacuum-tube-based transmitter (or external power amplifier). These are also impedance-matching adjustments, but involve elements internal to the transmitter/amplifier rather than exclusively the transmitter to the antenna. (The antenna impedance is also involved, so in some cases there could be some amount of antenna matching, if not as much as a dedicated antenna tuner. Or so I understand — I'm not an expert on this part of the technology.)



          Solid-state radios operate differently and do not require these adjustments, so the recommendation you read does not apply. However, there are other uses for transmitting into a dummy load — for example, checking if your microphone is working, you're not over-modulating, or even that a computer-controlled transmission is correctly controlling your radio's frequency and PTT.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited yesterday

























          answered yesterday









          Kevin Reid AG6YO

          15.6k32965




          15.6k32965












          • That makes sense. Thank you :-)
            – xmjx
            yesterday






          • 1




            Vacuum-tube based external power amplifiers are still in wide use, which require similar tuning, so the advice isn't obsolete.
            – user71659
            yesterday






          • 1




            @user71659 Good point. I've edited to refer to separate amplifiers and not say "obsolete".
            – Kevin Reid AG6YO
            yesterday










          • The text says "tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner)". So contrary to what you wrote, it seems it is (at least sometimes) referring to the use of an antenna tuner. I think you're giving too much credit to what's really just a bit of silly advice.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            14 hours ago










          • @PhilFrost-W8II I can't think of any interpretation of the phrase "in the first instance" other than referring to the "tuning the transmitter" case as opposed to "tuning the antenna tuner". If it's not making that distinction, I don't see any other distinction for it to be making.
            – Kevin Reid AG6YO
            13 hours ago


















          • That makes sense. Thank you :-)
            – xmjx
            yesterday






          • 1




            Vacuum-tube based external power amplifiers are still in wide use, which require similar tuning, so the advice isn't obsolete.
            – user71659
            yesterday






          • 1




            @user71659 Good point. I've edited to refer to separate amplifiers and not say "obsolete".
            – Kevin Reid AG6YO
            yesterday










          • The text says "tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner)". So contrary to what you wrote, it seems it is (at least sometimes) referring to the use of an antenna tuner. I think you're giving too much credit to what's really just a bit of silly advice.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            14 hours ago










          • @PhilFrost-W8II I can't think of any interpretation of the phrase "in the first instance" other than referring to the "tuning the transmitter" case as opposed to "tuning the antenna tuner". If it's not making that distinction, I don't see any other distinction for it to be making.
            – Kevin Reid AG6YO
            13 hours ago
















          That makes sense. Thank you :-)
          – xmjx
          yesterday




          That makes sense. Thank you :-)
          – xmjx
          yesterday




          1




          1




          Vacuum-tube based external power amplifiers are still in wide use, which require similar tuning, so the advice isn't obsolete.
          – user71659
          yesterday




          Vacuum-tube based external power amplifiers are still in wide use, which require similar tuning, so the advice isn't obsolete.
          – user71659
          yesterday




          1




          1




          @user71659 Good point. I've edited to refer to separate amplifiers and not say "obsolete".
          – Kevin Reid AG6YO
          yesterday




          @user71659 Good point. I've edited to refer to separate amplifiers and not say "obsolete".
          – Kevin Reid AG6YO
          yesterday












          The text says "tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner)". So contrary to what you wrote, it seems it is (at least sometimes) referring to the use of an antenna tuner. I think you're giving too much credit to what's really just a bit of silly advice.
          – Phil Frost - W8II
          14 hours ago




          The text says "tune (adjust) the transmitter (or antenna tuner)". So contrary to what you wrote, it seems it is (at least sometimes) referring to the use of an antenna tuner. I think you're giving too much credit to what's really just a bit of silly advice.
          – Phil Frost - W8II
          14 hours ago












          @PhilFrost-W8II I can't think of any interpretation of the phrase "in the first instance" other than referring to the "tuning the transmitter" case as opposed to "tuning the antenna tuner". If it's not making that distinction, I don't see any other distinction for it to be making.
          – Kevin Reid AG6YO
          13 hours ago




          @PhilFrost-W8II I can't think of any interpretation of the phrase "in the first instance" other than referring to the "tuning the transmitter" case as opposed to "tuning the antenna tuner". If it's not making that distinction, I don't see any other distinction for it to be making.
          – Kevin Reid AG6YO
          13 hours ago











          2














          We use a non-radiating dummy load at first so that we minimize the chance of interfering with others.



          When our tuning adjustments are as close as they can be using that, then we can switch over to our antenna and make any needed adjustments.



          The HF bands are full of annoying carriers because hams perform their entire tuneup procedure into their antennas.






          share|improve this answer

















          • 1




            Yes, this is what puts it in the ethics section. Don’t do your rough tuning on the air.
            – CCTO
            yesterday
















          2














          We use a non-radiating dummy load at first so that we minimize the chance of interfering with others.



          When our tuning adjustments are as close as they can be using that, then we can switch over to our antenna and make any needed adjustments.



          The HF bands are full of annoying carriers because hams perform their entire tuneup procedure into their antennas.






          share|improve this answer

















          • 1




            Yes, this is what puts it in the ethics section. Don’t do your rough tuning on the air.
            – CCTO
            yesterday














          2












          2








          2






          We use a non-radiating dummy load at first so that we minimize the chance of interfering with others.



          When our tuning adjustments are as close as they can be using that, then we can switch over to our antenna and make any needed adjustments.



          The HF bands are full of annoying carriers because hams perform their entire tuneup procedure into their antennas.






          share|improve this answer












          We use a non-radiating dummy load at first so that we minimize the chance of interfering with others.



          When our tuning adjustments are as close as they can be using that, then we can switch over to our antenna and make any needed adjustments.



          The HF bands are full of annoying carriers because hams perform their entire tuneup procedure into their antennas.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered yesterday









          Mike Waters

          3,0152634




          3,0152634








          • 1




            Yes, this is what puts it in the ethics section. Don’t do your rough tuning on the air.
            – CCTO
            yesterday














          • 1




            Yes, this is what puts it in the ethics section. Don’t do your rough tuning on the air.
            – CCTO
            yesterday








          1




          1




          Yes, this is what puts it in the ethics section. Don’t do your rough tuning on the air.
          – CCTO
          yesterday




          Yes, this is what puts it in the ethics section. Don’t do your rough tuning on the air.
          – CCTO
          yesterday











          0














          There are two ways the text could be interpreted:




          1. First tune to a dummy load. Then, switch to the antenna and tune again.

          2. First tune your transmitter for a 50 ohm load, using a dummy load. Then tune your (separate) antenna tuner to present a 50 ohm load to the transmitter.


          The first case, which is how I first understood it, doesn't make any sense unless you know the antenna is 50 ohms.



          In the case where you have a transmitter that requires tuning (common for tube equipment) and an antenna tuner, then the second sense makes sense.



          Though in either case I have a better solution: make a mark where the knobs should be set for a 50 ohm load: then you can return to this setting without any dummy load at all.



          Here's what you need to know about tuning:




          • Try to do it on a clear frequency. Avoid doing it on recognized calling frequencies.

          • Do it at low power, if possible.

          • Keep it short by writing down the approximate settings for each band beforehand.


          More generally, I think half that document is absurd, and I wouldn't take anything it says too seriously. Consider the first sentence of http://www.hamradio-operating-ethics.org/:




          Over the past decades, and not surprisingly together with the introduction and growth of the Internet, the behavior of the radio amateurs on the bands has significantly deteriorated.




          Kids these days, am I right?



          I would call it not so much a "seminal work", rather than an overbearing, 68 page tirade by a couple people upset that not everyone does everything exactly how the authors do it. Half the work has legitimate information on basic procedure, but the other half is common sense or just the author's particular operating habits presented as authoritative procedure.



          For example:




          Some subjects which are a no no in amateur radio conversations on the air are:




          • religion

          • politics

          • business (you can talk about your profession, but you cannot advertise for your business);

          • derogatory remarks directed at any group (ethnic, religious, racial, sexual etc.).

          • bathroom humor: if you wouldn't tell the joke to your ten year old child, don't tell it on the radio;

          • any subject that has no relation whatsoever with the ham radio hobby.




          People use ham radio to talk about the weather, their health problems, or to make plans to meet friends. I don't know what these things have to do with the ham radio hobby.



          Another example:




          Saying 'CQ from Victor Romeo two Oscar Portable' is not very clear. Either VR2OP calls SQ using an incorrect spelling phonetic, or VR2O/p calls CQ and omits to add the expression 'stroke' while calling CQ. This can lead to a lot of confusion.




          This is what's called a false dilemma. There's a 3rd possibility: VR2O is portable. That's how I understand it, anyway. Sometimes people even say "mobile" instead of "portable", but I don't find it confusing at all.




          Call CQ: ‘CQ from G3ZZZ, G3ZZZ calling CQ, golf three zulu zulu zulu calling
          CQ and listening’. At the end you may say ‘...calling CQ and standing by’,
          instead of ‘...and listening’. One could also say: ‘...and standing by for any call’.




          I just assume anyone calling CQ is standing by for any call. I just end with "calling CQ", but reading this document makes me feel like I must be "doing it wrong" and the ham radio procedure police are probably going to arrest me.




          If signals are not very strong and if the readability is not perfect, you can spell out your name etc. Example: 'My name is John, spelled juliett, oscar, hotel, november ...' Do NOT say '...juliett juliett, oscar oscar, hotel hotel, november november'. This is not the way you spell the name John.




          I have never once heard anyone doing this. Reminds me of four shalt thou not count...






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1




            Downvoted for sarcasm, and general tone. Sorry. This is more of a rant than an attempt to answer the question
            – Scott Earle
            20 hours ago










          • I think, "the document you cite is ridiculous" is a perfectly valid answer. Over.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            15 hours ago






          • 1




            It’s a perfectly valid comment. But it’s not an attempt at answering the question as asked.
            – Scott Earle
            15 hours ago










          • @ScottEarle it is an answer. The question asks, "What am I missing?" and in the very first sentence I answer: "You're not missing anything." Of course the next question that follows is "why would someone publish this document?", and I think the answer is because "the text is just a little too eager to provide advice which maybe isn't as authoritative as it wants to seem". The question says this text is "seminal", and I'm saying, it's not. And then I give examples of how absurd it really is.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            15 hours ago






          • 1




            Sarcastically. It’s the tone of the answer I downvoted.
            – Scott Earle
            15 hours ago
















          0














          There are two ways the text could be interpreted:




          1. First tune to a dummy load. Then, switch to the antenna and tune again.

          2. First tune your transmitter for a 50 ohm load, using a dummy load. Then tune your (separate) antenna tuner to present a 50 ohm load to the transmitter.


          The first case, which is how I first understood it, doesn't make any sense unless you know the antenna is 50 ohms.



          In the case where you have a transmitter that requires tuning (common for tube equipment) and an antenna tuner, then the second sense makes sense.



          Though in either case I have a better solution: make a mark where the knobs should be set for a 50 ohm load: then you can return to this setting without any dummy load at all.



          Here's what you need to know about tuning:




          • Try to do it on a clear frequency. Avoid doing it on recognized calling frequencies.

          • Do it at low power, if possible.

          • Keep it short by writing down the approximate settings for each band beforehand.


          More generally, I think half that document is absurd, and I wouldn't take anything it says too seriously. Consider the first sentence of http://www.hamradio-operating-ethics.org/:




          Over the past decades, and not surprisingly together with the introduction and growth of the Internet, the behavior of the radio amateurs on the bands has significantly deteriorated.




          Kids these days, am I right?



          I would call it not so much a "seminal work", rather than an overbearing, 68 page tirade by a couple people upset that not everyone does everything exactly how the authors do it. Half the work has legitimate information on basic procedure, but the other half is common sense or just the author's particular operating habits presented as authoritative procedure.



          For example:




          Some subjects which are a no no in amateur radio conversations on the air are:




          • religion

          • politics

          • business (you can talk about your profession, but you cannot advertise for your business);

          • derogatory remarks directed at any group (ethnic, religious, racial, sexual etc.).

          • bathroom humor: if you wouldn't tell the joke to your ten year old child, don't tell it on the radio;

          • any subject that has no relation whatsoever with the ham radio hobby.




          People use ham radio to talk about the weather, their health problems, or to make plans to meet friends. I don't know what these things have to do with the ham radio hobby.



          Another example:




          Saying 'CQ from Victor Romeo two Oscar Portable' is not very clear. Either VR2OP calls SQ using an incorrect spelling phonetic, or VR2O/p calls CQ and omits to add the expression 'stroke' while calling CQ. This can lead to a lot of confusion.




          This is what's called a false dilemma. There's a 3rd possibility: VR2O is portable. That's how I understand it, anyway. Sometimes people even say "mobile" instead of "portable", but I don't find it confusing at all.




          Call CQ: ‘CQ from G3ZZZ, G3ZZZ calling CQ, golf three zulu zulu zulu calling
          CQ and listening’. At the end you may say ‘...calling CQ and standing by’,
          instead of ‘...and listening’. One could also say: ‘...and standing by for any call’.




          I just assume anyone calling CQ is standing by for any call. I just end with "calling CQ", but reading this document makes me feel like I must be "doing it wrong" and the ham radio procedure police are probably going to arrest me.




          If signals are not very strong and if the readability is not perfect, you can spell out your name etc. Example: 'My name is John, spelled juliett, oscar, hotel, november ...' Do NOT say '...juliett juliett, oscar oscar, hotel hotel, november november'. This is not the way you spell the name John.




          I have never once heard anyone doing this. Reminds me of four shalt thou not count...






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1




            Downvoted for sarcasm, and general tone. Sorry. This is more of a rant than an attempt to answer the question
            – Scott Earle
            20 hours ago










          • I think, "the document you cite is ridiculous" is a perfectly valid answer. Over.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            15 hours ago






          • 1




            It’s a perfectly valid comment. But it’s not an attempt at answering the question as asked.
            – Scott Earle
            15 hours ago










          • @ScottEarle it is an answer. The question asks, "What am I missing?" and in the very first sentence I answer: "You're not missing anything." Of course the next question that follows is "why would someone publish this document?", and I think the answer is because "the text is just a little too eager to provide advice which maybe isn't as authoritative as it wants to seem". The question says this text is "seminal", and I'm saying, it's not. And then I give examples of how absurd it really is.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            15 hours ago






          • 1




            Sarcastically. It’s the tone of the answer I downvoted.
            – Scott Earle
            15 hours ago














          0












          0








          0






          There are two ways the text could be interpreted:




          1. First tune to a dummy load. Then, switch to the antenna and tune again.

          2. First tune your transmitter for a 50 ohm load, using a dummy load. Then tune your (separate) antenna tuner to present a 50 ohm load to the transmitter.


          The first case, which is how I first understood it, doesn't make any sense unless you know the antenna is 50 ohms.



          In the case where you have a transmitter that requires tuning (common for tube equipment) and an antenna tuner, then the second sense makes sense.



          Though in either case I have a better solution: make a mark where the knobs should be set for a 50 ohm load: then you can return to this setting without any dummy load at all.



          Here's what you need to know about tuning:




          • Try to do it on a clear frequency. Avoid doing it on recognized calling frequencies.

          • Do it at low power, if possible.

          • Keep it short by writing down the approximate settings for each band beforehand.


          More generally, I think half that document is absurd, and I wouldn't take anything it says too seriously. Consider the first sentence of http://www.hamradio-operating-ethics.org/:




          Over the past decades, and not surprisingly together with the introduction and growth of the Internet, the behavior of the radio amateurs on the bands has significantly deteriorated.




          Kids these days, am I right?



          I would call it not so much a "seminal work", rather than an overbearing, 68 page tirade by a couple people upset that not everyone does everything exactly how the authors do it. Half the work has legitimate information on basic procedure, but the other half is common sense or just the author's particular operating habits presented as authoritative procedure.



          For example:




          Some subjects which are a no no in amateur radio conversations on the air are:




          • religion

          • politics

          • business (you can talk about your profession, but you cannot advertise for your business);

          • derogatory remarks directed at any group (ethnic, religious, racial, sexual etc.).

          • bathroom humor: if you wouldn't tell the joke to your ten year old child, don't tell it on the radio;

          • any subject that has no relation whatsoever with the ham radio hobby.




          People use ham radio to talk about the weather, their health problems, or to make plans to meet friends. I don't know what these things have to do with the ham radio hobby.



          Another example:




          Saying 'CQ from Victor Romeo two Oscar Portable' is not very clear. Either VR2OP calls SQ using an incorrect spelling phonetic, or VR2O/p calls CQ and omits to add the expression 'stroke' while calling CQ. This can lead to a lot of confusion.




          This is what's called a false dilemma. There's a 3rd possibility: VR2O is portable. That's how I understand it, anyway. Sometimes people even say "mobile" instead of "portable", but I don't find it confusing at all.




          Call CQ: ‘CQ from G3ZZZ, G3ZZZ calling CQ, golf three zulu zulu zulu calling
          CQ and listening’. At the end you may say ‘...calling CQ and standing by’,
          instead of ‘...and listening’. One could also say: ‘...and standing by for any call’.




          I just assume anyone calling CQ is standing by for any call. I just end with "calling CQ", but reading this document makes me feel like I must be "doing it wrong" and the ham radio procedure police are probably going to arrest me.




          If signals are not very strong and if the readability is not perfect, you can spell out your name etc. Example: 'My name is John, spelled juliett, oscar, hotel, november ...' Do NOT say '...juliett juliett, oscar oscar, hotel hotel, november november'. This is not the way you spell the name John.




          I have never once heard anyone doing this. Reminds me of four shalt thou not count...






          share|improve this answer














          There are two ways the text could be interpreted:




          1. First tune to a dummy load. Then, switch to the antenna and tune again.

          2. First tune your transmitter for a 50 ohm load, using a dummy load. Then tune your (separate) antenna tuner to present a 50 ohm load to the transmitter.


          The first case, which is how I first understood it, doesn't make any sense unless you know the antenna is 50 ohms.



          In the case where you have a transmitter that requires tuning (common for tube equipment) and an antenna tuner, then the second sense makes sense.



          Though in either case I have a better solution: make a mark where the knobs should be set for a 50 ohm load: then you can return to this setting without any dummy load at all.



          Here's what you need to know about tuning:




          • Try to do it on a clear frequency. Avoid doing it on recognized calling frequencies.

          • Do it at low power, if possible.

          • Keep it short by writing down the approximate settings for each band beforehand.


          More generally, I think half that document is absurd, and I wouldn't take anything it says too seriously. Consider the first sentence of http://www.hamradio-operating-ethics.org/:




          Over the past decades, and not surprisingly together with the introduction and growth of the Internet, the behavior of the radio amateurs on the bands has significantly deteriorated.




          Kids these days, am I right?



          I would call it not so much a "seminal work", rather than an overbearing, 68 page tirade by a couple people upset that not everyone does everything exactly how the authors do it. Half the work has legitimate information on basic procedure, but the other half is common sense or just the author's particular operating habits presented as authoritative procedure.



          For example:




          Some subjects which are a no no in amateur radio conversations on the air are:




          • religion

          • politics

          • business (you can talk about your profession, but you cannot advertise for your business);

          • derogatory remarks directed at any group (ethnic, religious, racial, sexual etc.).

          • bathroom humor: if you wouldn't tell the joke to your ten year old child, don't tell it on the radio;

          • any subject that has no relation whatsoever with the ham radio hobby.




          People use ham radio to talk about the weather, their health problems, or to make plans to meet friends. I don't know what these things have to do with the ham radio hobby.



          Another example:




          Saying 'CQ from Victor Romeo two Oscar Portable' is not very clear. Either VR2OP calls SQ using an incorrect spelling phonetic, or VR2O/p calls CQ and omits to add the expression 'stroke' while calling CQ. This can lead to a lot of confusion.




          This is what's called a false dilemma. There's a 3rd possibility: VR2O is portable. That's how I understand it, anyway. Sometimes people even say "mobile" instead of "portable", but I don't find it confusing at all.




          Call CQ: ‘CQ from G3ZZZ, G3ZZZ calling CQ, golf three zulu zulu zulu calling
          CQ and listening’. At the end you may say ‘...calling CQ and standing by’,
          instead of ‘...and listening’. One could also say: ‘...and standing by for any call’.




          I just assume anyone calling CQ is standing by for any call. I just end with "calling CQ", but reading this document makes me feel like I must be "doing it wrong" and the ham radio procedure police are probably going to arrest me.




          If signals are not very strong and if the readability is not perfect, you can spell out your name etc. Example: 'My name is John, spelled juliett, oscar, hotel, november ...' Do NOT say '...juliett juliett, oscar oscar, hotel hotel, november november'. This is not the way you spell the name John.




          I have never once heard anyone doing this. Reminds me of four shalt thou not count...







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 12 hours ago

























          answered yesterday









          Phil Frost - W8II

          27.4k147115




          27.4k147115








          • 1




            Downvoted for sarcasm, and general tone. Sorry. This is more of a rant than an attempt to answer the question
            – Scott Earle
            20 hours ago










          • I think, "the document you cite is ridiculous" is a perfectly valid answer. Over.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            15 hours ago






          • 1




            It’s a perfectly valid comment. But it’s not an attempt at answering the question as asked.
            – Scott Earle
            15 hours ago










          • @ScottEarle it is an answer. The question asks, "What am I missing?" and in the very first sentence I answer: "You're not missing anything." Of course the next question that follows is "why would someone publish this document?", and I think the answer is because "the text is just a little too eager to provide advice which maybe isn't as authoritative as it wants to seem". The question says this text is "seminal", and I'm saying, it's not. And then I give examples of how absurd it really is.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            15 hours ago






          • 1




            Sarcastically. It’s the tone of the answer I downvoted.
            – Scott Earle
            15 hours ago














          • 1




            Downvoted for sarcasm, and general tone. Sorry. This is more of a rant than an attempt to answer the question
            – Scott Earle
            20 hours ago










          • I think, "the document you cite is ridiculous" is a perfectly valid answer. Over.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            15 hours ago






          • 1




            It’s a perfectly valid comment. But it’s not an attempt at answering the question as asked.
            – Scott Earle
            15 hours ago










          • @ScottEarle it is an answer. The question asks, "What am I missing?" and in the very first sentence I answer: "You're not missing anything." Of course the next question that follows is "why would someone publish this document?", and I think the answer is because "the text is just a little too eager to provide advice which maybe isn't as authoritative as it wants to seem". The question says this text is "seminal", and I'm saying, it's not. And then I give examples of how absurd it really is.
            – Phil Frost - W8II
            15 hours ago






          • 1




            Sarcastically. It’s the tone of the answer I downvoted.
            – Scott Earle
            15 hours ago








          1




          1




          Downvoted for sarcasm, and general tone. Sorry. This is more of a rant than an attempt to answer the question
          – Scott Earle
          20 hours ago




          Downvoted for sarcasm, and general tone. Sorry. This is more of a rant than an attempt to answer the question
          – Scott Earle
          20 hours ago












          I think, "the document you cite is ridiculous" is a perfectly valid answer. Over.
          – Phil Frost - W8II
          15 hours ago




          I think, "the document you cite is ridiculous" is a perfectly valid answer. Over.
          – Phil Frost - W8II
          15 hours ago




          1




          1




          It’s a perfectly valid comment. But it’s not an attempt at answering the question as asked.
          – Scott Earle
          15 hours ago




          It’s a perfectly valid comment. But it’s not an attempt at answering the question as asked.
          – Scott Earle
          15 hours ago












          @ScottEarle it is an answer. The question asks, "What am I missing?" and in the very first sentence I answer: "You're not missing anything." Of course the next question that follows is "why would someone publish this document?", and I think the answer is because "the text is just a little too eager to provide advice which maybe isn't as authoritative as it wants to seem". The question says this text is "seminal", and I'm saying, it's not. And then I give examples of how absurd it really is.
          – Phil Frost - W8II
          15 hours ago




          @ScottEarle it is an answer. The question asks, "What am I missing?" and in the very first sentence I answer: "You're not missing anything." Of course the next question that follows is "why would someone publish this document?", and I think the answer is because "the text is just a little too eager to provide advice which maybe isn't as authoritative as it wants to seem". The question says this text is "seminal", and I'm saying, it's not. And then I give examples of how absurd it really is.
          – Phil Frost - W8II
          15 hours ago




          1




          1




          Sarcastically. It’s the tone of the answer I downvoted.
          – Scott Earle
          15 hours ago




          Sarcastically. It’s the tone of the answer I downvoted.
          – Scott Earle
          15 hours ago










          xmjx is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          xmjx is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













          xmjx is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          xmjx is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















          Thanks for contributing an answer to Amateur Radio Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fham.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f12539%2fwhy-does-ethics-and-operating-procedures-suggest-tuning-on-a-dummy-load%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          An IMO inspired problem

          Management

          Has there ever been an instance of an active nuclear power plant within or near a war zone?