Re: [CQ-Contest] 10-4?

["Russell Hill" <rustyhill@earthlink.net>]

Hello folks:

> From a retired military air traffic controller-- we were taught proper radio 
phraseology-- who is also a retired military and airline pilot.  I am also a 
currently active business jet pilot, using the radio continuously at work in 
a highly structured environment.

This information is quoted verbatim from the current Aeronautical 
Information Manual, in the Pilot/Controller Glossary.

1.  ROGER--I have received all of your last transmission.
2.  WILCO--I have received your message, understand it, and will comply with 
it.
3.  OVER  --My transmission is ended; I expect a reply.
4.  OUT    --The conversation is ended and no response is expected.

One can discuss the applicability of the above in the hobby of ham radio, 
but from my experience both civilian and military, there is consistancy of 
meaning of the above terms.

#1 and #2 are never used together, also #3 and #4 are never used together.

73,
Rusty, na5tr


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Turner" <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>
To: "Bob Gates" <regates@kingwoodcable.com>
Cc: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 10-4?


> On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:29:53 -0600, Bob Gates wrote:
>
> > Actually, in commercial and military terminology, the term "Over and out" 
> > is
> > contradictory.  You use one or the other at the end of a transmission. 
> > "Over"
> > means you are asking the other station to transmit, and you will be 
> > listening.
> > "Out" means the communication is ended and you do not expect to hear 
> > anything
> > further from the other station.
>
> _________________________________________________________
>
> I disagree.  "Over" means one thing, "out" means another and they may
> or may not be combined as the situation calls for.  Especially in a
> net or roundtable, "over" means I'm turning it back to you and I will
> be listening, just as you said, but adding "out" means I'm turning it
> back to you and I am going QRT (or QSY).  I don't see a contradiction
> at all.
>
> I grant you that in a two-party QSO, as opposed to a roundtable, "over
> and out" probably should not be used.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> --
> Bill W6WRT
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest