VK Logger Ham Radio Forum Archive

The question was asked of me.

The requirement for morse code was dropped 12 years ago.
Why then do we still bother with Q codes ?

The only reason I can think of is legacy.

Even when using voice modes, under difficult conditions, Q codes often help to convey a message more efficiently.

The only one I use for voice transmission is "QSL" and relates to the card itself and nothing more, cannot see much point in using them on fone transmissions otherwise. VK2XSO, CW may have been dropped but it's still alive and well on all the HF bands and on 50MHz too...

Jack D.Haden VK2XQ (QF-56ne) Sydney NSW

VK2XSO wrote:The question was asked of me.

The requirement for morse code was dropped 12 years ago.
Why then do we still bother with Q codes ?

The only reason I can think of is legacy.

It's embedded into our hobby so it makes sense that new operators should at least understand what Q codes are. Also, under difficult conditions or between operators that don't have a common language the Q codes are still warranted.

Unfortunately the way some operators use Q codes can get up people's noses. How often have you hear "Yeah QSL that!".

I think using Q codes on repeaters or when conditions are excellent makes no sense at all.

I presume the suggestion refers to local i.e. Australian amateurs. In the case of DX I would think it helps and is still being well used by amateurs overseas.

Its part of the AR language, no different from the shortened terms any specialist group generates for itself.
Its neither silly nor common sense to use them or not use them. Its just people using language they know works.
Its only when they are used improperly it gets right up your nose.
I wish I could use all the expletives here but... for ***'s sake... QRZ? DOES NOT MEAN CQ DX...!!
Nor does it mean CQ. I don't know how many calls I have NOT answered because of this ignorant usage of the term.

Using Q code on a repeater is just language. If you want to say it, then say it. What's it matter if someone else uses a code?
CW may no longer be "required" but it is still part of AR, and remains its heritage along with the codes and ideas it has instilled into AR language.

why are Q codes included in the Regulation exame they are procedure not law thus should be in the practical exame. Q codes are over used - you hear a conversation that has a 5/9 and they use qcodes if these two people in the conversation where talking outside Coles would they also use Qcodes

10-4 over to you Buddy Roger Roger
John

Come to think of it, I rarely use them on CW either. As Lou VK3ALB righfully says, they are not required on good clear voice communications anyway, if at all on voice? Bit like the silly CB radio "10 Code" not called for but there for the fun of it I guess.

As VK7DR says, the abuse of "QRZ" is a joke, if I want someone on fone to repeat I just say "Again please?" Instead of "QRZ DX" I just say 'VK2XQ by for any calls?" or "VK2XQ by". I don't use 'Q'' codes on the telephone or when I am talking to someone so see no real use for them on voice comms.

Not used a great deal, if at all on CW either for that matter, just as quick to send "?" on CW than QRZ, and "RR" instead of QSL and "up 10" instead of "QSY up 10" etc...

If they were suddenly dropped no one would miss the "Q Codes" at all...

Jack D. Haden VK2XQ (QF-56ne) Sydney NSW

Yeah QRA QRZ the breaker! 10-4 roger dicky duckpond

If I sign off from one station & hear a pile up of calls but cannot make out a call the short, sweet "QRZ?" is totally appropriate. It means "Who is calling me?"... and that is precisely what is being asked. If you want to use a simple "CQ" that is no different... there is more than 1 correct approach.

Lastly I wouldn't advocate using 10 codes on the amateur bands purely because it is the wrong language for that venue, but the 10 codes were developed for much the same reason as Q codes were- to aid clarity (1 from a CW origin, the other voice). I would use a 10-4 if it was appropriate, and I'm not so much a snob as to look down my nose at those who do, but a simple "roger" serves the same purpose.

Cheers


Richard
VK2AAH

Does anybody want to borrow my "roger beep" desk mic.... com on com on....


Whinging about q-codes... What next????


CW is the LAST great HAM RADIO bastion..... ssb activity is pretty ordinary.


The realm of AR has changed for the worst in my uneducated opinion.

QSL?

73, John
QTH R in the current Call Book

I did a mock advanced regs exam the other day it had 3 Q code questions in it one of the answers was QRQ never seen or heard that one before i know it know though

QRQ means send faster....that is not appropriate when CW is not a mandatory mode...

Who writes the regs exams?

VK5PO, well said John, CW will always be there for those who wish to excel at long distance contacts and chase the distance records...

Best thing that ever happened here was the Shure 444D desk mike chucking it in on the FT-1000D about four years ago now, still not repaired, having too much fun on CW to worry about SSB anymore.

The 'Q' codes have reached their use by date, just as one seldom hears the 10 codes on CB anymore, except by stirrers.

There is a fellow here in Sydney, everytime you make a noise on 110 he yells "QRZ, QRZ, QRZ?" I just drop a carrier or go "aaaahhhlo" to set him off, gives me a laugh everytime.

Jack D. Haden, VK2XQ, like John VK5PO, good in any callbook! Or should I say "QTHR" I think it is...

Well, my local airfield (Avalon) reported QNH as 1010.5mB today. I'm sure all the foreign pilots flying in for the forthcoming air show got the message just fine.

Chas
VK3PY

VK3PY wrote:Well, my local airfield (Avalon) reported QNH as 1010.5mB today. I'm sure all the foreign pilots flying in for the forthcoming air show got the message just fine.

Chas
VK3PY

as the language of aviation is by international agreement English the foreign pilots would also understand "barometric pressure adjusted to sea level is 1010.5mB"

john

Much quicker to say QNH...

VK2XQ wrote:Bit like the silly CB radio "10 Code" not called for but there for the fun of it I guess.

10 Codes were originally developed by APCO (Association of Public Safety Communications Officials, the same APCO responsible for P25 digital radio) in the late 1930's for use by police. They were subsequently adopted by the CB community many years later.

10 Codes are not inherently more evil than Q-codes, but had CB operators adopted Q-codes instead, I wonder if their use would be as heavily frowned upon on the amateur bands?

As a morse codian of over 60 years experience. I feel that it really serves no purpose to erase historical features, some of which which are still used, like the Q code in avaiation QNR "Reached the point of no return" and my favourite in the RN QLF - "Please use left foot!" One does not destroy a book when one has read it

VK6DX wrote:One does not destroy a book when one has read it

Well said.