[aprssig] APRS Messages and Operating Codes (Q & Z)

[Robert Carleton]

Even the ARRL doesn't advocate operating codes on voice, mostly CW, but also digital in general.  In my own ARES group all of the voice work is plain language and I agree that it should be that way.  In my case, I'm just using the codes for "paging" prior to a voice net.  The operating codes just make for less typing on DTMF keyboards and aren't really a stakeholder facing communication.  Additionally the standardized and published codes also easily meet the FCC requirement for not using "secret" codes on the air.  That's my spin.

Best,

			--Bruce


On Apr 27, 2011, at 7:55 AM, Al Wolfe wrote:

>   Hate to rain on anyone's parade but all the ARES training today says to eliminate the use of codes and jargon in the interest of inter-agency operability. Only plain text is encouraged.
> 
>   While I don't necessarily agree with this, I do understand the logic. There is enough redundancy in the English language that if a character is mangled we can still probably figure it out anyhow. But if a shorthand term is used a mangled character may change the whole meaning.
> 
> 73,
> Al, K9SI
> 
> 
> 
> <snip>
>> Wow, I just looked at ACP-131 and am amazed that there are nearly 200 pages
>> of Qxx and Zxx codes.  Lots more than the QRZ,QRM,QSY and QTH we hear
>> often...  Such a means of encoding would certainly work well if the tables
>> are built into APRS, but otherwise I cant imagine getting a QXP signal and
>> without a book, knowing what to do with it.
>> 
>> I'm posting this on the APRSSIG to see what experience others have with the
>> ACP-131 Q and Z codes.
>> 
>> Bob, WB4APR
> <snip> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at tapr.org
> https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig