Why does “Ethics and Operating Procedures” suggest tuning on a dummy load?
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
New contributor
add a comment |
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
New contributor
add a comment |
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
New contributor
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
antenna procedure equipment-operation
New contributor
New contributor
edited 13 hours ago
Phil Frost - W8II
27.4k147115
27.4k147115
New contributor
asked yesterday
xmjx
1333
1333
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
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.
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
|
show 1 more comment
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.
1
Yes, this is what puts it in the ethics section. Don’t do your rough tuning on the air.
– CCTO
yesterday
add a comment |
There are two ways the text could be interpreted:
- First tune to a dummy load. Then, switch to the antenna and tune again.
- 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...
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
|
show 4 more comments
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
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.
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
|
show 1 more comment
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.
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
|
show 1 more comment
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.
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.
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
|
show 1 more comment
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
|
show 1 more comment
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.
1
Yes, this is what puts it in the ethics section. Don’t do your rough tuning on the air.
– CCTO
yesterday
add a comment |
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.
1
Yes, this is what puts it in the ethics section. Don’t do your rough tuning on the air.
– CCTO
yesterday
add a comment |
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.
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.
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
There are two ways the text could be interpreted:
- First tune to a dummy load. Then, switch to the antenna and tune again.
- 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...
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
|
show 4 more comments
There are two ways the text could be interpreted:
- First tune to a dummy load. Then, switch to the antenna and tune again.
- 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...
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
|
show 4 more comments
There are two ways the text could be interpreted:
- First tune to a dummy load. Then, switch to the antenna and tune again.
- 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...
There are two ways the text could be interpreted:
- First tune to a dummy load. Then, switch to the antenna and tune again.
- 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...
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
|
show 4 more comments
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
|
show 4 more comments
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.
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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