Over and out

[Willie11b]

Wilco is absolutely correct.

And yes, I am another pedantic.

Out

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Willie11b

Wilco is absolutely correct.

And yes, I am another pedantic.

Out

Correct as in "it is a standard proword"? Yes


Correct as in "an appropriate response to the OP's question"? No

(What's is the responder saying that they are going to do?

[redsky49]

Here in the southern hinterlands I frequently hear "Come back", as in "Red Boat, This is Blue Boat, Come Back (Please respond)".


And "10-4" for affirmative.


"What's your 20?" for location.


Stupid, if you ask me. Plus the extended discussions that occur on 16, particularly between fishermen. Until the Coast Guard tells them to knock it off!

[hpeer]

Yes, I cringe.

In the Bahamas I heard “Roger, roger” ad nauseam.

[Wotname]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OBZf0QdKdE

[wiekeith]

Originally Posted by jkleins

And what would that “safety reason” be?

There are many situations where precise communications are necessary for safety reasons; negotiating crossing a TSS or congested shipping lanes, SAR, Mayday. I would agree that a percentage of communications do not have a safety element to them, but IMHO it's good do it correctly at all times so it comes naturally if and when a safest situation does arise and it is important to get it right.

If you're interested, there's a good guide to IMO Standard Marine Communications Phrases at http://www.segeln.co.at/media/pdf/smcp.pdf

The first paragraph of the Forward to this doc is:
"As navigational and safety communications from ship to shore and vice versa, ship to ship, and on board ships must be precise, simple and unambiguous, so as to avoid confusion and error, there is a need to standardize the language used. This is of particular importance in the light of the increasing number of internationally trading vessels with crews speaking many different languages since problems of communication may cause misunderstandings leading to dangers to the vessel, the people on board and the environment."

[masonc]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

I Thought that Wilco was actually proper radio usage?



what bothers me is the incessant requests for radio checks on Ch 16, or kids on the radio.Im sure parents think it's cute

I hear a lot of kids on VHF in St. Maarten, calling each other to arrange activities. They have far better radio etiquette and clarity than adults. I get a kick out of their precise use of radio protocol.

[MV Wanderlust]

Originally Posted by Pete7

Roger that. Who is Roger anyway

Roger Ramjet, if you're old enough to remember that kids' cartoon.

[Suijin]

I’m a bit puzzled at what seems to be distain for traditional protocol and terms/vocabulary, or maybe I’m just reading this thread wrong.

On VHF brevity is the soul of clear, concise communication. Standardized vocabulary contributes greatly to that. I use “over” and “over and out” and “Roger” out of ingrained habit at this point. Call me silly but if it’s good enough for the USCG it’s good enough for me.

Few things irk me more that someone jumping on 16 and meandering on and making a hash of sequenced clear communication because they don’t know how to confirm the are done talking or whatever.

And radio manufacturers should send a shock to the mic when it hears “radio check”.

[wiekeith]

Originally Posted by Suijin

I use “over” and “over and out” and “Roger” out of ingrained habit at this point. Call me silly but if it’s good enough for the USCG it’s good enough for me.

Wow, the USCG use the term "over and out"? A contradictory term invented by Hollywood.

[hpeer]

Back in the 70’s I was a AT, Aviation Electronics Technician, and part of my duties were to be Radioman on fixed wing aircraft out of Elizabeth City, NC.

Our training inculcated proper radio techniques. Some few would get informal and mildly deviate. Most did not. Things may have changed, but usually I hear good precise Comms from the USCG.

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by hpeer

Back in the 70’s I was a AT, Aviation Electronics Technician, and part of my duties were to be Radioman on fixed wing aircraft out of Elizabeth City, NC.

Our training inculcated proper radio techniques. Some few would get informal and mildly deviate. Most did not. Things may have changed, but usually I hear good precise Comms from the USCG.

OVER AND OUT is somehow offending and rude. It says translated "f××k you, you can continue talking as long as you want to (OVER), but I am not listenig anymore (OUT)."

Can't believe, USCG or any (trained) officials are saying this on the radio.

What bugs me more is that in many places the local language is used instead of English, even from the officials (like in France). And then they wonder if not getting a response.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

OVER AND OUT is somehow offending and rude. It says translated "f××k you, you can continue talking as long as you want to (OVER), but I am not listenig anymore (OUT)."

Never thought of it in exactly that way before, but very true . I'm going use that in teaching VHF Procedures in the future.

[JohnT]

Originally Posted by Suijin

On VHF brevity is the soul of clear, concise communication. Standardized vocabulary contributes greatly to that. I use “over” and “over and out” and “Roger” out of ingrained habit at this point. Call me silly but if it’s good enough for the USCG it’s good enough for me.

Wow, in all the years of communicating with USCG vessels I have never heard any of their radio officers use the term "Over and Out". They have been like parrots and used terminology as prescribed in the international radio operators handbook.

[vonotto]

Having used a radio most of my life at work and when I was in the Marines and HATING to tie up the freq I still cringe when someone says "Be advised".

You don't need to tell me to "be advised" just say what you need and I will "be advised".