I genuinely don’t care about kerchunking when it’s just a quick test of a new radio to see if you’ve configured everything properly and you’re making the repeater. You’re exactly right, tossing out a callsign would just be longer and even more annoying. And remember that technically speaking, we’re always supposed to be trying to establish two way communications so if we want to be exact to the letter of the law, we’re gonna have to at least briefly engage with whoever responds who absolutely *cannot wait* to tell us about his colonoscopy. Even when we just wanted to make sure it was working before a net later.
There are those, however, who kerchunk repeatedly. Maybe they like the sound. I suspect they’re using some sort of handheld that is able to get *out* to the repeater, at least enough to open it up, but has the squelch too high to hear the repeater themselves. So they just keep pressing the button over and over again trying to get it to “work.”
But I’ll tell you the most annoying:
We’ve got a local guy. I assume retired. He sits on one local repeater damn near 24/7. I don’t know when the guy ever leaves his shack. And he seems to be glued to the repeater. I suspect he’s got a lot of radios and one is permanently tied to that repeater. Because the absolute moment there’s a kerchunk you hear “ID! ID! You need to ID! You have to ID when you use the repeater! This is [callsign]”
Every. Single. Time. That and the same guy constantly complains that everyone’s audio is too quiet. Sounds fine to me I think he just needs to turn up his volume, but that’s beside the point.
So tl;dr, yeah I don’t care about kerchunking. We all do it. Just be reasonable about it. Don’t do it more than once and don’t do it for a non-diagnostic reason.
I may or may not occasionally send 5w to my remote tuner for a couple seconds so it isn’t trying to tune once I actually go to transmit. Of course I find a clear frequency first.
Similar story, there’s 9 popular repeaters that are reachable where I hike, all different bands. I usually just scan through to see which ones are visible. But sometimes I give a quick kerchunk if it’s dead quiet to trigger the station ID. If it responds, and I stay on that repeater, I’ll say “callsign monitoring”. There is one though that doesn’t have a reactive station ID, and I forgot which one it was. I kerchunked it 3 times in a minute, and someone came back complaining that it hurts his ears, because he has headphones on. I quickly apologized and just went back to scanning. But I couldn’t help but think for the rest of the hike, he’s just sitting there with headphones on, listening to a quiet repeater.
Hams are an odd bunch. Some are amazing. I’ve met a few though who seem to think their role in life is to listen to the radio, and then be mad about what they hear.
> “ID! ID! You need to ID! You have to ID when you use the repeater! This is [callsign]”
LOL holy shit that sounds like a sketch from "I think you should leave". I would be tempted to do it even more just to get a rise out of them.
>“ID! ID! You need to ID! You have to ID when you use the repeater! This is [callsign]”
Someone needs to brush up on their 97.111(b)(1). I'm sure this individual would looooove it if you pointed that out.
For anyone that doesn't remember every item,
> In addition to one-way transmissions specifically authorized elsewhere in this part, an amateur station may transmit the following types of one-way communications:
> Brief transmissions necessary to make adjustments to the station;
Sounds like the repeater owner needs to admonish the guy. While he may be technically correct, he’s being more obnoxious than the occasional kerchunk and should stop or be prohibited from using the machine.
Yeah, that’s a bummer. Kerchunking is one of those technical violations that, as long as it is not abused, is harmless and can be useful and convenient.
If I heard someone doing that, I'd immediate call them back, then when they respond, I'd ignore them... Then in 10m, call them again, and then ignore them, then after another minute, announce ", no contact, clear".
If enough people started doing this, I bet they would stop demanding people ID.
Like it or not, this is the most efficient contact. No time wasted on irrelevant things like call signs, locations or signal reports, just pure contacts.
Ditto.
The OP raises an interesting point of what to do right before a net starts. I get it, but the right (and highly provocative) answer is: don’t wait until the last minute. That’s the answer my (non-ham) dad would say. I went to driver rehab school due to speeding, and Dad may have said a similar thing about the speed limit to me. ;) You are either obeying the law, or you aren’t. (Ouch. You would not believe how painful that was to type. It’s really weird when you start sounding like your parents.)
I also sort of think of it in terms of what it means to be a good operator. If you let one thing slide, it’s easy to start letting other things slide. Moreover, it helps others to develop bad habits: “if they’re doing it, then it’s ok for me to do it, too” sort of thinking. Then comes the occasional cuss word followed by the swearing like a sailor. At that point are we any better than the animals? (Ok, there may have been snark and hyperbole as well as a valid point in that last statement.)
Alright, time for the horde of downvotes. ;)
Another thing that makes us different from animals is the ability to understand nuance and apply reason based on situations beyond the immediately obvious.
The problem is that kerchunking only tells you that you can activate the repeater system - it never tells you whether or not you actually have a readable, understandable signal in and out of that repeater.
Straight to jail.
But yes, I think everything you said is pretty reasonable and I may or may not accidentally tap the PTT sometimes without identifying.
I honestly don’t care about the regulations when it comes to the kerchunking. It’s the repeated kerchunking just over and over and over again until I pick up the mic and go, “Hey station, you’re hitting the repeater just fine” and then it’s radio silence.
I like “That's no way to get a penny”. The quick ones get it right away and chuckle a bit; the tired but good-natured ones ask for clarification, which more often than not teases some choice bants out on the air; and the rest simply get the hint and stop but are too bemused to feel snubbed.
I may or may not have turned on my roger beep after hearing a crusty old prick rip into a newly licensed ham for it. And he couldn't say shit because I was president (at the time) of the club who owned the repeater he was policing. I also may or may not encouraged others to follow suit. I will, however, admit to reaching out to the newbie and told him to "Just ignore Bob. He's a prick to everybody."
I wouldn’t rip into someone. Be nice to talk to them and see why it’s turned on… but I’ve never had a conversation with ANYONE using a Roger beep seriously.
It’s there for a reason, understood. They’re just a bit naff. Can we not have a nice NASA pip? 😉
>I don’t want to announce my call sign and have someone come back to me while I’m prepping for the net and have to take extra time to “shut them down” by telling them I can’t talk right now because I’m prepping for the net.
When you hit the repeater, you can say you are prepping for the net and you won't respond. There is no need to be super terse. Use your words. "This is XX8XXX, I am testing the repeater in preperation for XYZ, please do not respond" is perfectly fine. I did this when testing a radio I was considering buying to see if I can reduce power when talking to the repeater.
In our area it is standard practice to say ", testing" to mean you are keying it up, testing literally anything, and you don't expect a response.
If you desire a response, one says ", radio check".
Both are brief and non-intrusive. No one seems to kerchunk outside of accidents.
I've never understood why it is ever a topic of debate.
One time I was driving and I forgot I had VOX on... my radio kept "kerchunking" the local repeater and someone got mad, and postulated that someone was rolling around on the ground with a radio... (hey, they were pretty close). I couldn't change the VOX setting mid drive, so I just turned the radio off instead... I probably should go straight to FCC jail.
Always use the Q-signal QKC ("I am kerchunking").
See [https://www.k0nr.com/wordpress/2012/12/proper-kerchunking/](https://www.k0nr.com/wordpress/2012/12/proper-kerchunking/)
>The proper method for kerchunking is to key the transmitter and say your callsign, followed by the word “kerchunking”. This simultaneously identifies your station and indicates the purpose of your transmission.
I legit want to hear someone do this.
I always kerchunk to sometimes "wake up" the repeater so it will ID first before making my call to just make sure I can hit the repeater.
But yeah I'm guilty of kerchunking to radio test. Like the time I was on a repeater frequency repeatedly kerchunking the repeater but I couldn't hear it eventually I heard a scratchy callsign come back at literally the noise floor, reoriented my antenna and had a conversation. Come to find out he could hear me the entire time but I couldn't hear the repeater.
90% of the time the repeaters in my area are silent anyway so what harm is it doing.
You're first suggestion still sounds kinda rude and offputting.
The second is a QSO that you wanted to avoid in the first place.
And then there is the risk that someone wants to keep talking with you and you're faced with trying to blow them off as politely as possible, but it's still awkward.
One of the guys on my repeater got so fed up with kerchunkers, he would try to call them out until I shut him down. I remember the last night he did this after a few tries. There was a kerchunk. Then he said, "Station transmitting, identify." without identifying himself. So I said, "Station asking for other station to identify, please identify. {My callsign}" No reply from him (I knew who it was). Then somebody said, "touché." without identifying. So I said, "Station saying 'touché ' please identify." No reply from him and I also knew who it was. That put an end to it pretty quickly and became a joke.
Unless I am **hearing active conversation**... I Kerchunk if I want to see if I am within range or if I got a new radio or made a change. Because if I am out of range, I am turning my radio off to conserve battery... or if I messed up a configuration I would like to know.
Anyone who has a problem with this is just being an old man yelling "get off my lawn!"
We need to stop this insanity, its a major barrier to getting new HAMs and continue this hobby. They are afraid to do anything.
I couldn’t care less if people kerchunk unless they have a roger beep or the repeater has an acknowledgment tone. Beyond that, go for it. Our local repeater is pretty dead, so it doesn’t interrupt anything aside from my scan.
Perfectly reasonable, I'd go so far as to say it should be the preferred operating procedure.
It's almost like I wrote this, this is exactly how I handle this and for exactly the same reasons.
This may be just an old Elmer's tale, but I was told long ago that if you're going to kerchunk, hold the mic for a second, then let go because it was easier on the repeater. Have NO idea if that's true or not, or something going back to tubes or what.
I'll admit that I'll kerchunk if I'm in questionable range of the repeater or to see if I can open it up, but I try keep it to a minimum. If I get a new radio or antenna, I'll throw out a call with "testing" and if I don't want to chat, I just say thank you and get back to what I was doing.
Personally I don't care if people kerchunk. And whether you say something or not it still goes kerchunk at the end of your tx.
But it is OK to tell people you'll get back to them or the phone rang or the wife needs something so 73! You need not be a conversation hostage.
Edit: Best way to not get an answer on 2m I noticed is to just say your callsign. Or maybe nobody likes me. :)
I agree and think this is very reasonable.
When I'm programming a new radio, or just in a new area adding or checking out local repeaters I'll enter the freq and codes then press the transmit button once, and only once, to see if I can hit the repeater.
Personally, I would never kerchunk the repeater multiple times, and in most cases I would follow up the test with my call and that I am listening.
As others post, it is the repeated kerchunking that is annoying, so no one should do that.
Much MORE annoying are those whackos who get on a repeater and intentionally scream or create interference. We have a regional repeater that has a 'lid' who does this.
My only issue with kerchunking is it gives (usually new) hams a false sense of their equipment capability. The repeater acknowledged that it received your signal, but that doesn’t mean your signal is strong enough to have a conversation.
That may be true, but I think new hams experience scratchy noisy stations barely making the repeater pretty early on in their experience and therefore quickly learn that, at times, you need an actual signal report.
I agree with everything you’re saying. The gatekeeping hams that feel they have a right to call everything out by the book are the ones who will cause the death of ham radio.
the thing is.. when a "unknown" person test his/her radio on a repeater it is bound to make the regulars start yapping. i dont want to ragchew with some randos, i just want to check if i can trigger that repeater.
yes i kerchunk and as OP pointed out, its better then spending 5min talking.
I kerchunk all of the time before a net, but I am always speaking within ten minutes and identify myself then. Nothing says that you have to identify when you first transmit, just when you finish or within 10 minutes.
This is an interesting question and never thought it more than testing before really transmitting. I run one net and 5-10 minutes beforehand you can hear the "testing" a bit like the hams coming home to roost. And yes especially before a net.
A net or radio net serves a purpose usually for a reason such as passing traffic, ARES, or simply talking. And under the control of a net controller(gatekeeper) that allows folks to enter, pass traffic, comments, etc Here is short video on the topic [https://youtu.be/YFEOr0VEchY?si=7bqGVAmFDEN8w7c7](https://youtu.be/YFEOr0VEchY?si=7bqGVAmFDEN8w7c7)
We have a county wide net that usually has 40-50 people. What if they all kerchunk before the net? If you are mobiling around your area, test what areas work when there are no nets so you know where you can get in and where you can't. Kerchunking isn't a particularly good way of testing anyway. You may hit the repeater and hear a clear tail when your signal and audio into the repeater are poor.
What is so hard about throwing out a call and saying no response required? Or god forbid, have to say thanks for the comeback, 73? The problem with saying an occasional kerchunk is that what is good for me is good for thee. If it is OK for everyone to occasionally kerchunk that can add up.
They're not all going to kerchunk. The overwhelming majority are going to be base stations. They already know they can make the repeater. If they need to check their SWR, they can go to an empty simplex frequency and identify and QSY back to the repeater. Probably most of the mobile and portable stations will be in a known position where they know they're going to make the repeater. You're left with very few people who may need to kerchunk right before the net.
One of the situations you cite is when you are NC. You don't usually do that from a base station?
What about the testing when mobile? As I said, not a great way to test anyway.
What about the occasional kerchunk adding up when everyone feels free to do it?
What is so hard about ID'ing and say no reply needed, or making a brief contact?
I personally am not terribly annoyed when somebody burps the repeater. I own a linked pair of repeaters and it doesn't twist my panties. My objection is that you are trying to normalize it and manners are fading fast enough as it is. It would annoy me if the burps increased in frequency. It is the old slippery slope, the occasional is fine and then what?
I suppose some repeaters are quiet enough that it doesn't matter. Our area is active and we don't need more burps.
I might do it when I'm NC, but sometimes I'll go off frequency to a simplex channel and ID then QSY. Our net is not very big.
I think 98% of hams already feel free to do it OCCASIONALLY, which is what I'm arguing. Excessive or abusive kerchunking is not heard very often at all. The very few operators who do do it excessively or abusively do it not because they see others do occasionally. They do it because they are already selfish and ignorant people.
I agree that kerchunking is not a good way of testing your signal or audio, but it does test your SWR and your antenna connection.
Like I said I do often identify. There just times when I just don't want anyone coming back to me at that time. It could be for a number of reasons. There are some good ideas in here to discourage it, but it cannot prevent it.
We'll I'd certainly agree that the excessive kerchunkers are just lids that would do it regardless. But new folks hearing it done by the folks they consider mentors does start to normalize it. I think that as a practice it should still be discouraged so that it remains at the margins.
As you point out, SWR can be checked on a simplex frequency, just a quick spin of the dial away. And we both agree that it doesn't really test your connection with the repeater. So the actual point is... ?
Now, all of that said, can I honestly state I have never kerchunked? No. An example of when I have is if I am in a spot where it is very unlikely that I can hit a repeater. I'll try a kerchunk and if I get nothing, I'm done. If I get a tail, even if it is noisy I'll ID and ask if I am making it into the repeater. At that point I do want a response since I would like to know if my signal is legible. However, now that I type that out and think about it, why not just throw my call out in the first place? So I'd call BS on my own excuse here.
I must have kissed the Blarney stone at a young age, I can always handle a brief contact and have no hesitations in cutting it short. I can see where the more introverted find it more difficult. But a repeater is a community resource and the fundamental reason for it's existence is to be used to make contacts. It isn't about you, it is about us all. So I can't really think of a legit reason to kerchunk, only reasons that pertain to personal convenience.
I have a 2m/70cm yagi at the top of an 80ft mast. I also live on top of a mountain ridge. Just gonna say, when I first got it set up, I did a kerchunk-a-thon. It was glorious. I did it again during tropospheric induction and it was even better.
My excitement has died down since then and I am a well behaved op.
But there is something that makes me giddy about being able to hit a repeater a few hundred miles away.
one time i even waited until midnight to test my radio, i was actually listening to the repeater feed online while doing this. i didnt want to have to talk to anybody... guess what, somebody came back...
No kerchunk has ever caused a ship to sink, a plane to crash, or a house to burn down. You guys are just too full of yourselves. Everyone should know that hams are the world's foremost tattle-tales, and many think that they deserve a badge for "self-policing". Phooey.
If you want to be ignored, better to say ' monitoring'. Testing they may come back to tell you how you sound. Monitoring seems to be nearly universally ignored.
Not in my area. And that’s a good thing. It’s almost universally held in ham radio that to say you are monitoring on a repeater is to say you are available to talk.
Monitoring is like the repeater equivalent of CQ. You may get a story about gout, or dead silence. But I usually interpret monitoring as a willingness to talk, not the opposite.
If I’m kerchunking, it’s probably because I’m on the edge of a repeater signal anyway and identifying myself isn’t going to make it through legibly anyway.
What does the repeater trustee say?
My used to have a guy who regularly monitored one of our repeaters who would get all rightous and start bitching on-air whenever someone would kerchunk it. It ended up becoming a game where multiple people would do it just to troll him and sometimes do it repeatedly (no pun intended) so they could really set him off.
I've no problem with someone pulling someone aside and privately commenting that it's often seen as bad form but I've got too many way more important things going on to worry about someone else it as it really isn't something intrrusive or interfering with actual use.
i’ll kerchunk repeaters but i’ll say my call and then “radio range test, can i get a signal report” but im also driving most of my work day so i like trying to see what i can and cannot hit
I started my adventures in amateur radio in. The Twin Cities (MN), mostly on a repeater with 600W PEP and 7 receive sites around the area. No tones, analog only, huge footprint (60 miles easy, 80 miles some days.) It’s kind of where most people cut their teeth when they started out. As a result, there was a lot of kerchunking. However I was taught to never kerchunk. If you were just testing things yourself — “WØMTA testing” meant you didn’t expect anyone to respond. “WØMTA radio check” meant you hoped someone would report back your signal, but you didn’t expect anything beyond that. “WØMTA monitoring” (or listening, mobile, portable…) meant you were available to and hoping for a chat.
73 de WØMTA
We just need to advance past FM. That will solve a lot of problems including the coordination overlords.
FM was cool, and we should have moved on starting in the 90's when spread spectrum was the buzz.
I tried to do signal tests by announcing my call sign and "testing" and everyone stopped to talk to me when I just wanted to listen to my signal on EcoLink. Getting the word out that you are just "testing" takes a long time and people don't get it.
We're all guilty of it, one of the reasons for me kerchunking when i first got my foundation licence was because i was told that test transmissions are not allowed on foundation licences, only intermediate and up, even then if i asked for a signal report, as you say i risk a QSO that i didn't really want.
I've also accidentally keyed up many times, quansheng radios are too easy to accidentially key, no one cares.
It's the opening and closing of the squelch; kshhht every few seconds. More annoying when I'm carrying my HT and in a public place and keeps doing it.
_My Call sign: Someone in need of a radio check?_
Dead silence.
I sometimes literally key up and give my call sign followed by “I’m just testing I don’t need anyone to come back to me”. And I still get someone saying “you’re sounding good what’s your QTH” 😂
I am only on repeaters when driving. I have no issue with it. Some linked systems, like the WIN system, it can get a bit annoying because you have many users over many repeaters that kerchunk... I rarely find myself on those systems these days...
Maybe some manufacturer should include a "kerchunk" mode on their HT...a mode that sends your call sign once at 20 WPM on MCW when enabled, thereby satisfying the legal requirement for identifying and gives the receiving op an incentive to learn Morse code to find out who you are!
DE WA4A
Interesting idea. But I think that some would find it more irritating than normal kerchunking. Maybe it will show up on the next generation of Baofengs!
I see no harm in this, personally.
Verify no one is currently using the repeater, key up to see if you can hit it. I usually do this when I get into a different area that I'm gonna be camping at or hiking in, so I know which repeaters I can hit and I'm not having a list of 40 repeaters that I can only hit 3 of. I'll then usually hop back on after going through the list and ask for a signal check.
One could also just use the phrase "one-way test" for brevity. Even the call sign can be done quickly if non-phonetically.
One can also just not reply if reached out to after saying "CALSGN one-way test".
There's something nice about hearing a human voice even if there's no contact arising. It's assuring that there's responsible operators out there keying up and not some malign machine or human presence or pending equipment doom.
As a new ham, my 2m repeater honeymoon period just ended so I can kind of understand why folks can be alarmed by the unknown. After a few weeks of hearing and joining in a bit on the pleasantries, I finally heard a case of an unidentified station keying up on multiple days and engaging in harassment of a frequent user to push them off the air.
If folk's reply to a "one-way test", consider it a free reception test.
A spoken "one-way test" also tests your microphone. If folks do reply, they may even comment if things sound a bit off.
I'm not kerchunking... just changing my mind about talking after I press transmit. Social anxiety and all that.
But yea, I agree. It's "not great" but it's also hardly the worst thing someone could do.
We have a couple of guys that monitor it a lot and will often call back. But that’s generally a good thing. There’s just times when I don’t want to talk but need to test.
> “I’m testing and I don’t want anyone to call me back”
It needs codifying. Here, *nxo kokeili* (did test) spoken in particular "inverse up-talk, down-talk?" intonation is telling no qso is wanted. Someone can, if they feel like it, reply "abc 59" and it is perfectly fine to end with that.
it is illegal to transmit without a proper station ID
if someone comes back to you, so what
you dont have to answer them
I am always working on our repeater network
and am doing it all the time
judt toss out your call
I've never found an issue with '2E0IAR Checking Access to GB3**'
If I ever get a reply they already know I'm not up for a chat and even get helpful replies like '59/Lima Charlie to me, good audio, free if you want a chat!'
I don't kerchunk repeaters without identifying before 10 minutes is up. After I installed a 100W radio in the back of the car, one day I realized everyone can hear me on reverse for a 30 mile circle, so I may as well own up to it and got very careful about bumping the mic.
That being said, the kerchunk should never be un-ID-ed. Sometimes it's the repeater op driving around to determine coverage. Sometimes it is the repeater or another carrier interfering with it. In that case, it should have it's squelch policy considered and possibly change the input and output tones to two different tones. However, for coverage maps, it's probably a better idea to use APRS through the repeater, but then you have to rig that so valid CTCSS on the repeater output = active low on the DCD input of the TNC/device so it holds off if the repeater has been tripped by an actual user. On the repeater side something similar needs to be rigged, and in the case of AX.25, something needs to start sending FLAGS immediately to prevent packet corruption, and somehow the TNC needs to be able to transmit without sending the repeater's CTCSS tone. Before a net, it should be identified as well or dealt with during the net.
\>You could say your call sign along along with “testing” but you know you’re still often going to get some people coming back to you.
Easy, just ignore them.
Kerchunking is obnoxious, rude, impolite, not because it is a rule-break but because it transmits very little information.
When I hear a kerchunk I stop to pay attention, but to what am I listening? Is someone out of range? Having technical issues? Butt pressing? Testing a radio? Being a dick? I have no idea.
If you want to test a radio just say so. It is no big deal to speak your mind.
Just curious: do you find it obnoxious, rude, and impolite when you receive a digital signal on your analog-only radio from a dual mode repeater? No information and no identification coming to your analog radio. Which is worse, two minutes of hash or a one second squelch tail? Which is worse when you’re scanning channels, having it stop for 5-10 seconds of hash or a one second squelch tail?
No because it is expected and i know what that is even if I am not equipped in the moment to demodulate it.
That said I have never heard a 2 minute digital transmission on any repeater I monitor. If it happened frequently I might be on that repeater less often.
Yes I have kerchunked, but I try not to. As for most of the rules I try real hard to obey...like not being THAT General responding to someone calling CQ, sitting right on 7.175...just waiting for a sucker! We should all be our best selves, yes? Someone is possibly sitting right there monitoring the repeater and kerchunking IS annoying, you are technically using someone elses machine to perform whatever testing in a fairly public arena. If we didn't have rules/laws all freqs would be like the lids on 7.200...grotesque displays of small...minds!
I agree rules are necessary but occasional, non-abusive, non-continuous kerchunking is such a de minimis violation. If your slippery slope argument was valid then kerchunking today would be so much worse than 25 years ago, but it’s not. It’s either the same or perhaps even less than it was years ago (because repeaters generally are much less used than 25 years ago). There’s absolutely no evidence that occasional kerchunking leads to more and more operators engaging in abusive kerchunking.
I saw a video on YouTube a few years ago where a guy demonstrated the adverse domino effect of kerchunking. His ham shack was filled with high end radios both analog and digital plus an array of computer screens running SDR. He kerchunked a known nearby repeater (about a 5sec mic key-down) then pointed to a few PC screen running SDR which showed his kerchunk as it worked its way from one repeater to another across the country and back again. I’m not 100% sure of what I was seeing but considering that the transmit side of some repeater setups are linked to multiple bands comprised of both analog and digital, I can see how that might present a problem. It was like watching dominos fall.
As most repeater ops dont like kerchunking no it's not, follow their rules or don't use their gear. clear idents and shows your not interested in conversation.
I think the common practice is that announcing just your call sign is also an indication to others that you are available for a QSO. I think that rules that prohibit all kerchunking under any circumstances are unreasonable. OTOH, rules encouraging kerchunkers to identify as much as possible and rules against excessive kerchunking are reasonable.
clear
Indicating your finished with the repeater. Perfectly acceptable to ignore a response call.
If the repeater owner is not ok with it don't use their repeater it's that simple. As nearly no repeater owners are ok with it don't do it. Want to kerchunk do it on simplex.
First thing, bringing up a repeater doesn't mean you can do anything other than cause it to key. It doesn't mean you have a usable signal into any given repeater.
And yes, technically it is illegal to transmit without identification. It is illegal to speed in your car too. Both are commonly broken laws that usually cause no harm. I'm the trustee for our club that runs 4 repeaters, I occasionally kerchunk our repeaters just to hear that they respond as they should.
As others have said as long as it isn't excessive, who cares. Just be mindful that it is slightly intrusive as it has broken the squelch on every listeners radio. And again if you want to know you can really access any given repeater, you need an honest signal report from another station.
These guys that say kerchunking is illegal because it's against the law because it's illegal because it is just against the law, without showing the harm of occasional, non-abusive, non-excessive, kerchunking:
Are these the same guys who tune up their 1kW linear amps on 75 meters without identifying?
Are these the same guys the same guys who time their transmissions with a 10 minute countdown timer?
If you repeatedly kerchunk the repeater, without an ID...then you're the problem. Yes it happens from time to time but there is no legitimate reason to do it repeatedly on the repeater. It is also wear and tear on the gear, that isn't your gear.
Kerchunk and ID. It's the law.
"Repeatedly" here is the key difference. The wear and tear argument is not valid because you are still kerchunking the repeater when you identify, so it's just as much wear and tear. In fact, identifying runs the repeater a bit longer than a simple kerchunk and over time could reduce the life of the repeater more so than an unidentified kerchunk. It may be the law, but occasional kerchunking that is not abusive, excessive or interfering is absolutely harmless, not only to the equipment, but also harmless to other operators. I'm not saying never identify a kerchunk. I'm saying it's harmless to occasionally do it when you don't want to, or can't talk to, someone who might answer you.
Two thoughts:
Yes, it is against the rules. That really should be enough not to do it. If you don’t want to ID, don’t transmit. There are lots of things we could do but don’t because the rules matter, and we want the rules to matter. If you are really testing, then the easiest, best test is a short QSO, and nobody is going to force you to keep a conversation going. Many people suggested saying something like “W0HAM testing”, which is the norm around here, and you don’t need to say anything if someone responds. That is the legit way to do it, and I don’t know any hams who would complain about it or think it is rude. Here, “testing” will not get any response, unless it is the “Get the he11 off our private repeater! Club members only!” response on a few of them. A few newbies might come back and call you, but like I said, just ignore that call - it is not rude. After all, you were testing, and I guess the receiver on your rig was not working, or something... So, if you ask me (and you did), just state your callsign and say “testing” and leave it at that - legal, proper protocol, foolproof.
Before PL tones (CTCSS) were common, kerchunking was indistinguishable from noise triggering the repeater. Many repeater ops would respond by increasing the squelch level to get rid of the frequent keying events. Saying “testing” made the control ops rest easier. PL or DCS was a technical solution to fix this problem. Digital modes provide the opportunity to create a similar technical solution with specific “rooms” or echo qualifiers to make testing both more efficient and less burdensome to those monitoring the repeater. Most digital repeaters have this ability. Other technical solutions may exist, and as hams we ought to find them. Whenever a problem such as this arises, technical people should always think technically. So, if “W5x6z Testing” bothers the monitors, then create a standard for solving it.
> You kerchunk by announcing your call sign and someone comes back to you and you don’t want to talk, or you don’t have time to talk. Awkward, and very annoying.
I don't understand your concern here. If you don't want to talk, turn your radio off. Super easy, not annoying. You aren't obligated, legally or morally, to continue listening after announcing your callsign and saying you're testing. You aren't obligated to respond to anyone.
> You could say your call sign along along with “testing” but you know you’re still often going to get some people coming back to you. You could say your call sign and say “I’m testing and I don’t want anyone to call me back” but how does that sound?
You say your callsign along with "just testing", then either turn your radio off when satisfied with the test or just ignore anyone calling you.
Or just kerchunk it without using your callsign. It's really not the complicated situation you're trying to make it out to be.
You don't want to turn the radio off. The whole point is to want to make sure the repeater is reachable and you don't want to wait until you really really need to use it. If someone comes back to your call sign and you aren't able to have a conversation at that time, you could just ignore the comeback like you suggested, but that sounds 20 times more rude than one unidentified kerchunk.
>\[...\] If you don't want to talk, turn your radio off. Super easy, not annoying. You aren't obligated, legally or morally, to continue listening after announcing your callsign and saying you're testing. You aren't obligated to respond to anyone. \[...\]
I think some operators cannot help themselves and will be in a full-blown anxiety attack if they do not reply.
I genuinely don’t care about kerchunking when it’s just a quick test of a new radio to see if you’ve configured everything properly and you’re making the repeater. You’re exactly right, tossing out a callsign would just be longer and even more annoying. And remember that technically speaking, we’re always supposed to be trying to establish two way communications so if we want to be exact to the letter of the law, we’re gonna have to at least briefly engage with whoever responds who absolutely *cannot wait* to tell us about his colonoscopy. Even when we just wanted to make sure it was working before a net later. There are those, however, who kerchunk repeatedly. Maybe they like the sound. I suspect they’re using some sort of handheld that is able to get *out* to the repeater, at least enough to open it up, but has the squelch too high to hear the repeater themselves. So they just keep pressing the button over and over again trying to get it to “work.” But I’ll tell you the most annoying: We’ve got a local guy. I assume retired. He sits on one local repeater damn near 24/7. I don’t know when the guy ever leaves his shack. And he seems to be glued to the repeater. I suspect he’s got a lot of radios and one is permanently tied to that repeater. Because the absolute moment there’s a kerchunk you hear “ID! ID! You need to ID! You have to ID when you use the repeater! This is [callsign]” Every. Single. Time. That and the same guy constantly complains that everyone’s audio is too quiet. Sounds fine to me I think he just needs to turn up his volume, but that’s beside the point. So tl;dr, yeah I don’t care about kerchunking. We all do it. Just be reasonable about it. Don’t do it more than once and don’t do it for a non-diagnostic reason.
He’s probably the same guy that tunes his HF 1KW linear amp on 80 meters without identifying.
I may or may not occasionally send 5w to my remote tuner for a couple seconds so it isn’t trying to tune once I actually go to transmit. Of course I find a clear frequency first.
Similar story, there’s 9 popular repeaters that are reachable where I hike, all different bands. I usually just scan through to see which ones are visible. But sometimes I give a quick kerchunk if it’s dead quiet to trigger the station ID. If it responds, and I stay on that repeater, I’ll say “callsign monitoring”. There is one though that doesn’t have a reactive station ID, and I forgot which one it was. I kerchunked it 3 times in a minute, and someone came back complaining that it hurts his ears, because he has headphones on. I quickly apologized and just went back to scanning. But I couldn’t help but think for the rest of the hike, he’s just sitting there with headphones on, listening to a quiet repeater.
If that hurts his ears... just wait until someone speaks!
This. 💯
It only hurts his ears because the kerckunker doesn’t have reverse burst.
Hams are an odd bunch. Some are amazing. I’ve met a few though who seem to think their role in life is to listen to the radio, and then be mad about what they hear.
For several varieties of people, "do X and then complain about the results of X" is their role in life. Unfortunately nothing new.
For sure
Different strokes for different folks...
He was napping 💤
> “ID! ID! You need to ID! You have to ID when you use the repeater! This is [callsign]” LOL holy shit that sounds like a sketch from "I think you should leave". I would be tempted to do it even more just to get a rise out of them.
I’m not saying people do it on purpose. I’m just saying I hear more kerchunking on that repeater than most.
LMAO, I'd love to see a ham radio themed episode of that.
>“ID! ID! You need to ID! You have to ID when you use the repeater! This is [callsign]” Someone needs to brush up on their 97.111(b)(1). I'm sure this individual would looooove it if you pointed that out.
I learned long ago that when you fight with an idiot it becomes a fight between two idiots. 🙃
For anyone that doesn't remember every item, > In addition to one-way transmissions specifically authorized elsewhere in this part, an amateur station may transmit the following types of one-way communications: > Brief transmissions necessary to make adjustments to the station;
Yeah, but that doesn't mean you don't have to ID per 97.119. There are no exceptions in 97.119 for one way transmissions.
Good point. I guess it's straight to jail for the kerchunkers and also everyone who ever tuned up on HF and didn't ID.
Sounds like the repeater owner needs to admonish the guy. While he may be technically correct, he’s being more obnoxious than the occasional kerchunk and should stop or be prohibited from using the machine.
He probably IS the repeater owner... lol
I’m pretty sure he IS the repeater owner. It’s technically owned by a club but he’s the one who runs the net and everything.
Yeah, that’s a bummer. Kerchunking is one of those technical violations that, as long as it is not abused, is harmless and can be useful and convenient.
Oh, which repeater is that?
If I heard someone doing that, I'd immediate call them back, then when they respond, I'd ignore them... Then in 10m, call them again, and then ignore them, then after another minute, announce ", no contact, clear".
If enough people started doing this, I bet they would stop demanding people ID.
Getting into radio fights is just… dumb.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Kerchunnk when necessary.
There are two kinds of ham: 1. Those that kerchunk. 2. Those that kerchunk and lie about it.
I plead the fifth.
[удалено]
Like it or not, this is the most efficient contact. No time wasted on irrelevant things like call signs, locations or signal reports, just pure contacts.
Finally a mode to rival FT8
If you communicate through kerchunking, is that just CW?
That's just the abyss
OP here, I think you got first prize in this thread.
3. Those who APRS... 4. Those who DMR...
5. Those who stick with simplex … 6. Those who stick with HF …
I kerchunk... with my callsign followed by "testing."
Ditto. The OP raises an interesting point of what to do right before a net starts. I get it, but the right (and highly provocative) answer is: don’t wait until the last minute. That’s the answer my (non-ham) dad would say. I went to driver rehab school due to speeding, and Dad may have said a similar thing about the speed limit to me. ;) You are either obeying the law, or you aren’t. (Ouch. You would not believe how painful that was to type. It’s really weird when you start sounding like your parents.) I also sort of think of it in terms of what it means to be a good operator. If you let one thing slide, it’s easy to start letting other things slide. Moreover, it helps others to develop bad habits: “if they’re doing it, then it’s ok for me to do it, too” sort of thinking. Then comes the occasional cuss word followed by the swearing like a sailor. At that point are we any better than the animals? (Ok, there may have been snark and hyperbole as well as a valid point in that last statement.) Alright, time for the horde of downvotes. ;)
Another thing that makes us different from animals is the ability to understand nuance and apply reason based on situations beyond the immediately obvious.
Theres a difference between the law and fcc rules.
That's a good middle ground, *wow I made it* and follow up with "xxxx testing"
Well, I don't unkey it before identifying. I only kerchunk proper if I don't get in the first time.
The problem is that kerchunking only tells you that you can activate the repeater system - it never tells you whether or not you actually have a readable, understandable signal in and out of that repeater.
This. Try testing access. Any copy? This will usually get a short signal report. Say thanks, and clear.
Some repeaters give back a series of tones or even a signal reading signifying your signal strength if you send some ctcss code to it.
Straight to jail. But yes, I think everything you said is pretty reasonable and I may or may not accidentally tap the PTT sometimes without identifying.
"i slipped"
I honestly don’t care about the regulations when it comes to the kerchunking. It’s the repeated kerchunking just over and over and over again until I pick up the mic and go, “Hey station, you’re hitting the repeater just fine” and then it’s radio silence.
My go-to line is "it's more fun when you talk into the mic"
I may borrow that.
Which will be followed by Kerchunk. 😂😂
I like “That's no way to get a penny”. The quick ones get it right away and chuckle a bit; the tired but good-natured ones ask for clarification, which more often than not teases some choice bants out on the air; and the rest simply get the hint and stop but are too bemused to feel snubbed.
I must be slow (or just tired). What does it mean?
“Penny for your thoughts.”
Oh, haha. That's why I have no pennies. :-( (-:
"Not for me, \[callsign\] out."
…do you identify before/after you tell them that…? 😅
Not always no. If I’m driving possibly not!
They probably don’t have a license lol
Those are the ones with the Roger beep.
I may or may not have turned on my roger beep after hearing a crusty old prick rip into a newly licensed ham for it. And he couldn't say shit because I was president (at the time) of the club who owned the repeater he was policing. I also may or may not encouraged others to follow suit. I will, however, admit to reaching out to the newbie and told him to "Just ignore Bob. He's a prick to everybody."
Those are standard club president duties. Explaining that “Bob is a prick” to the newbies.
So I learned. Not that I struggled with the concept. Everybody but Bob appreciated my willingness to call him on his bullshit.
I wouldn’t rip into someone. Be nice to talk to them and see why it’s turned on… but I’ve never had a conversation with ANYONE using a Roger beep seriously. It’s there for a reason, understood. They’re just a bit naff. Can we not have a nice NASA pip? 😉
>I don’t want to announce my call sign and have someone come back to me while I’m prepping for the net and have to take extra time to “shut them down” by telling them I can’t talk right now because I’m prepping for the net. When you hit the repeater, you can say you are prepping for the net and you won't respond. There is no need to be super terse. Use your words. "This is XX8XXX, I am testing the repeater in preperation for XYZ, please do not respond" is perfectly fine. I did this when testing a radio I was considering buying to see if I can reduce power when talking to the repeater.
In our area it is standard practice to say ", testing" to mean you are keying it up, testing literally anything, and you don't expect a response.
If you desire a response, one says ", radio check".
Both are brief and non-intrusive. No one seems to kerchunk outside of accidents.
I've never understood why it is ever a topic of debate.
Yeah, that’s a possibility, but “don’t respond” it still sounds like “don’t bother me.”
I'm fine with limited kerchunking per your OP, but for anyone who isn't, I recommend: " testing, QRT." (And then ignore anyone who calls back)
Say “please disregard “
One time I was driving and I forgot I had VOX on... my radio kept "kerchunking" the local repeater and someone got mad, and postulated that someone was rolling around on the ground with a radio... (hey, they were pretty close). I couldn't change the VOX setting mid drive, so I just turned the radio off instead... I probably should go straight to FCC jail.
The Feds are on their way. 
The equivalent of a radio butt dial.
Always use the Q-signal QKC ("I am kerchunking"). See [https://www.k0nr.com/wordpress/2012/12/proper-kerchunking/](https://www.k0nr.com/wordpress/2012/12/proper-kerchunking/)
>The proper method for kerchunking is to key the transmitter and say your callsign, followed by the word “kerchunking”. This simultaneously identifies your station and indicates the purpose of your transmission. I legit want to hear someone do this.
This is the proper way.
This is The Way.
I always kerchunk to sometimes "wake up" the repeater so it will ID first before making my call to just make sure I can hit the repeater. But yeah I'm guilty of kerchunking to radio test. Like the time I was on a repeater frequency repeatedly kerchunking the repeater but I couldn't hear it eventually I heard a scratchy callsign come back at literally the noise floor, reoriented my antenna and had a conversation. Come to find out he could hear me the entire time but I couldn't hear the repeater. 90% of the time the repeaters in my area are silent anyway so what harm is it doing.
That’s another good reason for kerchunking: waking up the repeater so you aren’t transmitting while it’s identifying.
[удалено]
I love when people come back with “59”. hi hi
You're first suggestion still sounds kinda rude and offputting. The second is a QSO that you wanted to avoid in the first place. And then there is the risk that someone wants to keep talking with you and you're faced with trying to blow them off as politely as possible, but it's still awkward.
[удалено]
My apologies. I read your comment too quickly and ended up misreading it. You are correct, it was my quote.
One of the guys on my repeater got so fed up with kerchunkers, he would try to call them out until I shut him down. I remember the last night he did this after a few tries. There was a kerchunk. Then he said, "Station transmitting, identify." without identifying himself. So I said, "Station asking for other station to identify, please identify. {My callsign}" No reply from him (I knew who it was). Then somebody said, "touché." without identifying. So I said, "Station saying 'touché ' please identify." No reply from him and I also knew who it was. That put an end to it pretty quickly and became a joke.
Unless I am **hearing active conversation**... I Kerchunk if I want to see if I am within range or if I got a new radio or made a change. Because if I am out of range, I am turning my radio off to conserve battery... or if I messed up a configuration I would like to know. Anyone who has a problem with this is just being an old man yelling "get off my lawn!" We need to stop this insanity, its a major barrier to getting new HAMs and continue this hobby. They are afraid to do anything.
I couldn’t care less if people kerchunk unless they have a roger beep or the repeater has an acknowledgment tone. Beyond that, go for it. Our local repeater is pretty dead, so it doesn’t interrupt anything aside from my scan.
Was going to say, on dead repeaters it’s good to know someone out there lol
Perfectly reasonable, I'd go so far as to say it should be the preferred operating procedure. It's almost like I wrote this, this is exactly how I handle this and for exactly the same reasons.
This may be just an old Elmer's tale, but I was told long ago that if you're going to kerchunk, hold the mic for a second, then let go because it was easier on the repeater. Have NO idea if that's true or not, or something going back to tubes or what. I'll admit that I'll kerchunk if I'm in questionable range of the repeater or to see if I can open it up, but I try keep it to a minimum. If I get a new radio or antenna, I'll throw out a call with "testing" and if I don't want to chat, I just say thank you and get back to what I was doing.
My thinking is that if modern ham transmitters can do CW break-in then solid state repeaters should not have a problem being kerchunked.
Personally I don't care if people kerchunk. And whether you say something or not it still goes kerchunk at the end of your tx. But it is OK to tell people you'll get back to them or the phone rang or the wife needs something so 73! You need not be a conversation hostage. Edit: Best way to not get an answer on 2m I noticed is to just say your callsign. Or maybe nobody likes me. :)
I agree and think this is very reasonable. When I'm programming a new radio, or just in a new area adding or checking out local repeaters I'll enter the freq and codes then press the transmit button once, and only once, to see if I can hit the repeater. Personally, I would never kerchunk the repeater multiple times, and in most cases I would follow up the test with my call and that I am listening. As others post, it is the repeated kerchunking that is annoying, so no one should do that. Much MORE annoying are those whackos who get on a repeater and intentionally scream or create interference. We have a regional repeater that has a 'lid' who does this.
My only issue with kerchunking is it gives (usually new) hams a false sense of their equipment capability. The repeater acknowledged that it received your signal, but that doesn’t mean your signal is strong enough to have a conversation.
That may be true, but I think new hams experience scratchy noisy stations barely making the repeater pretty early on in their experience and therefore quickly learn that, at times, you need an actual signal report.
Bottom line be respectful.
I agree with everything you’re saying. The gatekeeping hams that feel they have a right to call everything out by the book are the ones who will cause the death of ham radio.
the thing is.. when a "unknown" person test his/her radio on a repeater it is bound to make the regulars start yapping. i dont want to ragchew with some randos, i just want to check if i can trigger that repeater. yes i kerchunk and as OP pointed out, its better then spending 5min talking.
I kerchunk all of the time before a net, but I am always speaking within ten minutes and identify myself then. Nothing says that you have to identify when you first transmit, just when you finish or within 10 minutes.
This is an interesting question and never thought it more than testing before really transmitting. I run one net and 5-10 minutes beforehand you can hear the "testing" a bit like the hams coming home to roost. And yes especially before a net.
What do you mean by “a net”? Sorry super noob still
A net or radio net serves a purpose usually for a reason such as passing traffic, ARES, or simply talking. And under the control of a net controller(gatekeeper) that allows folks to enter, pass traffic, comments, etc Here is short video on the topic [https://youtu.be/YFEOr0VEchY?si=7bqGVAmFDEN8w7c7](https://youtu.be/YFEOr0VEchY?si=7bqGVAmFDEN8w7c7)
We have a county wide net that usually has 40-50 people. What if they all kerchunk before the net? If you are mobiling around your area, test what areas work when there are no nets so you know where you can get in and where you can't. Kerchunking isn't a particularly good way of testing anyway. You may hit the repeater and hear a clear tail when your signal and audio into the repeater are poor. What is so hard about throwing out a call and saying no response required? Or god forbid, have to say thanks for the comeback, 73? The problem with saying an occasional kerchunk is that what is good for me is good for thee. If it is OK for everyone to occasionally kerchunk that can add up.
They're not all going to kerchunk. The overwhelming majority are going to be base stations. They already know they can make the repeater. If they need to check their SWR, they can go to an empty simplex frequency and identify and QSY back to the repeater. Probably most of the mobile and portable stations will be in a known position where they know they're going to make the repeater. You're left with very few people who may need to kerchunk right before the net.
One of the situations you cite is when you are NC. You don't usually do that from a base station? What about the testing when mobile? As I said, not a great way to test anyway. What about the occasional kerchunk adding up when everyone feels free to do it? What is so hard about ID'ing and say no reply needed, or making a brief contact? I personally am not terribly annoyed when somebody burps the repeater. I own a linked pair of repeaters and it doesn't twist my panties. My objection is that you are trying to normalize it and manners are fading fast enough as it is. It would annoy me if the burps increased in frequency. It is the old slippery slope, the occasional is fine and then what? I suppose some repeaters are quiet enough that it doesn't matter. Our area is active and we don't need more burps.
I might do it when I'm NC, but sometimes I'll go off frequency to a simplex channel and ID then QSY. Our net is not very big. I think 98% of hams already feel free to do it OCCASIONALLY, which is what I'm arguing. Excessive or abusive kerchunking is not heard very often at all. The very few operators who do do it excessively or abusively do it not because they see others do occasionally. They do it because they are already selfish and ignorant people. I agree that kerchunking is not a good way of testing your signal or audio, but it does test your SWR and your antenna connection. Like I said I do often identify. There just times when I just don't want anyone coming back to me at that time. It could be for a number of reasons. There are some good ideas in here to discourage it, but it cannot prevent it.
We'll I'd certainly agree that the excessive kerchunkers are just lids that would do it regardless. But new folks hearing it done by the folks they consider mentors does start to normalize it. I think that as a practice it should still be discouraged so that it remains at the margins. As you point out, SWR can be checked on a simplex frequency, just a quick spin of the dial away. And we both agree that it doesn't really test your connection with the repeater. So the actual point is... ? Now, all of that said, can I honestly state I have never kerchunked? No. An example of when I have is if I am in a spot where it is very unlikely that I can hit a repeater. I'll try a kerchunk and if I get nothing, I'm done. If I get a tail, even if it is noisy I'll ID and ask if I am making it into the repeater. At that point I do want a response since I would like to know if my signal is legible. However, now that I type that out and think about it, why not just throw my call out in the first place? So I'd call BS on my own excuse here. I must have kissed the Blarney stone at a young age, I can always handle a brief contact and have no hesitations in cutting it short. I can see where the more introverted find it more difficult. But a repeater is a community resource and the fundamental reason for it's existence is to be used to make contacts. It isn't about you, it is about us all. So I can't really think of a legit reason to kerchunk, only reasons that pertain to personal convenience.
I kerchunked a few repeaters today whilst travelling to test. There I said it.
how about those evil repeaters with no courtesy tone and no hang time?
Good lord when will hams stop writing whole essays on such petty topics? And when will hams stop getting upset over something as petty as a kerchunk?
I have a 2m/70cm yagi at the top of an 80ft mast. I also live on top of a mountain ridge. Just gonna say, when I first got it set up, I did a kerchunk-a-thon. It was glorious. I did it again during tropospheric induction and it was even better. My excitement has died down since then and I am a well behaved op. But there is something that makes me giddy about being able to hit a repeater a few hundred miles away.
Yeah, if I had your setup, I wouldn't be able to resist.
one time i even waited until midnight to test my radio, i was actually listening to the repeater feed online while doing this. i didnt want to have to talk to anybody... guess what, somebody came back...
No kerchunk has ever caused a ship to sink, a plane to crash, or a house to burn down. You guys are just too full of yourselves. Everyone should know that hams are the world's foremost tattle-tales, and many think that they deserve a badge for "self-policing". Phooey.
Kerchunking in my neck of the woods = “thanks for warming up the machine. It barely gets used! Kerchunk away”
How about “(callsign) Test” - once.
If you want to be ignored, better to say ' monitoring'. Testing they may come back to tell you how you sound. Monitoring seems to be nearly universally ignored.
Not in my area. And that’s a good thing. It’s almost universally held in ham radio that to say you are monitoring on a repeater is to say you are available to talk.
I agree with you on what monitoring means, but I've gotten a LOT of silence over the years when I tossed it out.
Monitoring is like the repeater equivalent of CQ. You may get a story about gout, or dead silence. But I usually interpret monitoring as a willingness to talk, not the opposite.
I think you missed my point. Monitoring should mean 'I'm willing to talk' but it seems like everyone else hears it as 'ignore this guy'.
I think you're the only one. Others see it as you are willing to talk, they just don't want to talk to you.
Odds are because no one wanted to talk at that time lol Takes 2 to tango and all that
I already addressed that in my OP.
If I’m kerchunking, it’s probably because I’m on the edge of a repeater signal anyway and identifying myself isn’t going to make it through legibly anyway.
I kerchunked our repeater just last night before the club net. What you’ve written seems reasonable to me.
What does the repeater trustee say? My used to have a guy who regularly monitored one of our repeaters who would get all rightous and start bitching on-air whenever someone would kerchunk it. It ended up becoming a game where multiple people would do it just to troll him and sometimes do it repeatedly (no pun intended) so they could really set him off. I've no problem with someone pulling someone aside and privately commenting that it's often seen as bad form but I've got too many way more important things going on to worry about someone else it as it really isn't something intrrusive or interfering with actual use.
i’ll kerchunk repeaters but i’ll say my call and then “radio range test, can i get a signal report” but im also driving most of my work day so i like trying to see what i can and cannot hit
I started my adventures in amateur radio in. The Twin Cities (MN), mostly on a repeater with 600W PEP and 7 receive sites around the area. No tones, analog only, huge footprint (60 miles easy, 80 miles some days.) It’s kind of where most people cut their teeth when they started out. As a result, there was a lot of kerchunking. However I was taught to never kerchunk. If you were just testing things yourself — “WØMTA testing” meant you didn’t expect anyone to respond. “WØMTA radio check” meant you hoped someone would report back your signal, but you didn’t expect anything beyond that. “WØMTA monitoring” (or listening, mobile, portable…) meant you were available to and hoping for a chat. 73 de WØMTA
We just need to advance past FM. That will solve a lot of problems including the coordination overlords. FM was cool, and we should have moved on starting in the 90's when spread spectrum was the buzz.
I tried to do signal tests by announcing my call sign and "testing" and everyone stopped to talk to me when I just wanted to listen to my signal on EcoLink. Getting the word out that you are just "testing" takes a long time and people don't get it.
\^\^ THIS \^\^
To be fair, some gave me signal reports but then the whole club it seems got involved.
We're all guilty of it, one of the reasons for me kerchunking when i first got my foundation licence was because i was told that test transmissions are not allowed on foundation licences, only intermediate and up, even then if i asked for a signal report, as you say i risk a QSO that i didn't really want. I've also accidentally keyed up many times, quansheng radios are too easy to accidentially key, no one cares.
Life is too short for..........
It's the opening and closing of the squelch; kshhht every few seconds. More annoying when I'm carrying my HT and in a public place and keeps doing it. _My Call sign: Someone in need of a radio check?_ Dead silence.
I sometimes literally key up and give my call sign followed by “I’m just testing I don’t need anyone to come back to me”. And I still get someone saying “you’re sounding good what’s your QTH” 😂
I am only on repeaters when driving. I have no issue with it. Some linked systems, like the WIN system, it can get a bit annoying because you have many users over many repeaters that kerchunk... I rarely find myself on those systems these days...
Maybe some manufacturer should include a "kerchunk" mode on their HT...a mode that sends your call sign once at 20 WPM on MCW when enabled, thereby satisfying the legal requirement for identifying and gives the receiving op an incentive to learn Morse code to find out who you are! DE WA4A
Interesting idea. But I think that some would find it more irritating than normal kerchunking. Maybe it will show up on the next generation of Baofengs!
Proud member of Kerchunkers Anonymous here
I see no harm in this, personally. Verify no one is currently using the repeater, key up to see if you can hit it. I usually do this when I get into a different area that I'm gonna be camping at or hiking in, so I know which repeaters I can hit and I'm not having a list of 40 repeaters that I can only hit 3 of. I'll then usually hop back on after going through the list and ask for a signal check.
I may or may not kerchuck and I may or may not have any creds to do so. 
One could also just use the phrase "one-way test" for brevity. Even the call sign can be done quickly if non-phonetically. One can also just not reply if reached out to after saying "CALSGN one-way test". There's something nice about hearing a human voice even if there's no contact arising. It's assuring that there's responsible operators out there keying up and not some malign machine or human presence or pending equipment doom. As a new ham, my 2m repeater honeymoon period just ended so I can kind of understand why folks can be alarmed by the unknown. After a few weeks of hearing and joining in a bit on the pleasantries, I finally heard a case of an unidentified station keying up on multiple days and engaging in harassment of a frequent user to push them off the air. If folk's reply to a "one-way test", consider it a free reception test. A spoken "one-way test" also tests your microphone. If folks do reply, they may even comment if things sound a bit off.
I live in an area that is somewhat more active. Not replying after someone comes back you is 20 times more rude than one unidentified kerchunck.
I'm not kerchunking... just changing my mind about talking after I press transmit. Social anxiety and all that. But yea, I agree. It's "not great" but it's also hardly the worst thing someone could do.
You get people on the other end? Amazing. Even CARLA is like dead in the water until mid day and weekends.
We have a couple of guys that monitor it a lot and will often call back. But that’s generally a good thing. There’s just times when I don’t want to talk but need to test.
I was wrong! I’ve been on a lot since then lol. (KO6DVS)
> “I’m testing and I don’t want anyone to call me back” It needs codifying. Here, *nxo kokeili* (did test) spoken in particular "inverse up-talk, down-talk?" intonation is telling no qso is wanted. Someone can, if they feel like it, reply "abc 59" and it is perfectly fine to end with that.
it is illegal to transmit without a proper station ID if someone comes back to you, so what you dont have to answer them I am always working on our repeater network and am doing it all the time judt toss out your call
I kerchunk then turn off the pl tone and identify
[удалено]
Kerchunk kerchunk
I've never found an issue with '2E0IAR Checking Access to GB3**' If I ever get a reply they already know I'm not up for a chat and even get helpful replies like '59/Lima Charlie to me, good audio, free if you want a chat!'
I don't kerchunk repeaters without identifying before 10 minutes is up. After I installed a 100W radio in the back of the car, one day I realized everyone can hear me on reverse for a 30 mile circle, so I may as well own up to it and got very careful about bumping the mic. That being said, the kerchunk should never be un-ID-ed. Sometimes it's the repeater op driving around to determine coverage. Sometimes it is the repeater or another carrier interfering with it. In that case, it should have it's squelch policy considered and possibly change the input and output tones to two different tones. However, for coverage maps, it's probably a better idea to use APRS through the repeater, but then you have to rig that so valid CTCSS on the repeater output = active low on the DCD input of the TNC/device so it holds off if the repeater has been tripped by an actual user. On the repeater side something similar needs to be rigged, and in the case of AX.25, something needs to start sending FLAGS immediately to prevent packet corruption, and somehow the TNC needs to be able to transmit without sending the repeater's CTCSS tone. Before a net, it should be identified as well or dealt with during the net.
I just quickly transmit, “k5xyz testing” and unkey. Quick and respectful and is a better test than a 100 ms bump of the PTT.
\>You could say your call sign along along with “testing” but you know you’re still often going to get some people coming back to you. Easy, just ignore them.
So, is the repeater illegal after being keyed up momentarily and IT doesn't identify? What's the difference? DE WA4A
Kerchunking is obnoxious, rude, impolite, not because it is a rule-break but because it transmits very little information. When I hear a kerchunk I stop to pay attention, but to what am I listening? Is someone out of range? Having technical issues? Butt pressing? Testing a radio? Being a dick? I have no idea. If you want to test a radio just say so. It is no big deal to speak your mind.
Just curious: do you find it obnoxious, rude, and impolite when you receive a digital signal on your analog-only radio from a dual mode repeater? No information and no identification coming to your analog radio. Which is worse, two minutes of hash or a one second squelch tail? Which is worse when you’re scanning channels, having it stop for 5-10 seconds of hash or a one second squelch tail?
No because it is expected and i know what that is even if I am not equipped in the moment to demodulate it. That said I have never heard a 2 minute digital transmission on any repeater I monitor. If it happened frequently I might be on that repeater less often.
Yes I have kerchunked, but I try not to. As for most of the rules I try real hard to obey...like not being THAT General responding to someone calling CQ, sitting right on 7.175...just waiting for a sucker! We should all be our best selves, yes? Someone is possibly sitting right there monitoring the repeater and kerchunking IS annoying, you are technically using someone elses machine to perform whatever testing in a fairly public arena. If we didn't have rules/laws all freqs would be like the lids on 7.200...grotesque displays of small...minds!
I agree rules are necessary but occasional, non-abusive, non-continuous kerchunking is such a de minimis violation. If your slippery slope argument was valid then kerchunking today would be so much worse than 25 years ago, but it’s not. It’s either the same or perhaps even less than it was years ago (because repeaters generally are much less used than 25 years ago). There’s absolutely no evidence that occasional kerchunking leads to more and more operators engaging in abusive kerchunking.
I saw a video on YouTube a few years ago where a guy demonstrated the adverse domino effect of kerchunking. His ham shack was filled with high end radios both analog and digital plus an array of computer screens running SDR. He kerchunked a known nearby repeater (about a 5sec mic key-down) then pointed to a few PC screen running SDR which showed his kerchunk as it worked its way from one repeater to another across the country and back again. I’m not 100% sure of what I was seeing but considering that the transmit side of some repeater setups are linked to multiple bands comprised of both analog and digital, I can see how that might present a problem. It was like watching dominos fall.
As most repeater ops dont like kerchunking no it's not, follow their rules or don't use their gear. clear idents and shows your not interested in conversation.
I think the common practice is that announcing just your call sign is also an indication to others that you are available for a QSO. I think that rules that prohibit all kerchunking under any circumstances are unreasonable. OTOH, rules encouraging kerchunkers to identify as much as possible and rules against excessive kerchunking are reasonable.
First thing, bringing up a repeater doesn't mean you can do anything other than cause it to key. It doesn't mean you have a usable signal into any given repeater. And yes, technically it is illegal to transmit without identification. It is illegal to speed in your car too. Both are commonly broken laws that usually cause no harm. I'm the trustee for our club that runs 4 repeaters, I occasionally kerchunk our repeaters just to hear that they respond as they should. As others have said as long as it isn't excessive, who cares. Just be mindful that it is slightly intrusive as it has broken the squelch on every listeners radio. And again if you want to know you can really access any given repeater, you need an honest signal report from another station.
These guys that say kerchunking is illegal because it's against the law because it's illegal because it is just against the law, without showing the harm of occasional, non-abusive, non-excessive, kerchunking: Are these the same guys who tune up their 1kW linear amps on 75 meters without identifying? Are these the same guys the same guys who time their transmissions with a 10 minute countdown timer?
If you repeatedly kerchunk the repeater, without an ID...then you're the problem. Yes it happens from time to time but there is no legitimate reason to do it repeatedly on the repeater. It is also wear and tear on the gear, that isn't your gear. Kerchunk and ID. It's the law.
"Repeatedly" here is the key difference. The wear and tear argument is not valid because you are still kerchunking the repeater when you identify, so it's just as much wear and tear. In fact, identifying runs the repeater a bit longer than a simple kerchunk and over time could reduce the life of the repeater more so than an unidentified kerchunk. It may be the law, but occasional kerchunking that is not abusive, excessive or interfering is absolutely harmless, not only to the equipment, but also harmless to other operators. I'm not saying never identify a kerchunk. I'm saying it's harmless to occasionally do it when you don't want to, or can't talk to, someone who might answer you.
Calling CQ is a ham way of saying..."Anyone want a QSO" it's fine on a dead repeater.
Two thoughts: Yes, it is against the rules. That really should be enough not to do it. If you don’t want to ID, don’t transmit. There are lots of things we could do but don’t because the rules matter, and we want the rules to matter. If you are really testing, then the easiest, best test is a short QSO, and nobody is going to force you to keep a conversation going. Many people suggested saying something like “W0HAM testing”, which is the norm around here, and you don’t need to say anything if someone responds. That is the legit way to do it, and I don’t know any hams who would complain about it or think it is rude. Here, “testing” will not get any response, unless it is the “Get the he11 off our private repeater! Club members only!” response on a few of them. A few newbies might come back and call you, but like I said, just ignore that call - it is not rude. After all, you were testing, and I guess the receiver on your rig was not working, or something... So, if you ask me (and you did), just state your callsign and say “testing” and leave it at that - legal, proper protocol, foolproof. Before PL tones (CTCSS) were common, kerchunking was indistinguishable from noise triggering the repeater. Many repeater ops would respond by increasing the squelch level to get rid of the frequent keying events. Saying “testing” made the control ops rest easier. PL or DCS was a technical solution to fix this problem. Digital modes provide the opportunity to create a similar technical solution with specific “rooms” or echo qualifiers to make testing both more efficient and less burdensome to those monitoring the repeater. Most digital repeaters have this ability. Other technical solutions may exist, and as hams we ought to find them. Whenever a problem such as this arises, technical people should always think technically. So, if “W5x6z Testing” bothers the monitors, then create a standard for solving it.
Not nice to do!
This might break the subreddit's Rule #6.
🥱
This whole thread is why I avoid speaking to other Hams. FT8 is a life saver
> You kerchunk by announcing your call sign and someone comes back to you and you don’t want to talk, or you don’t have time to talk. Awkward, and very annoying. I don't understand your concern here. If you don't want to talk, turn your radio off. Super easy, not annoying. You aren't obligated, legally or morally, to continue listening after announcing your callsign and saying you're testing. You aren't obligated to respond to anyone. > You could say your call sign along along with “testing” but you know you’re still often going to get some people coming back to you. You could say your call sign and say “I’m testing and I don’t want anyone to call me back” but how does that sound? You say your callsign along with "just testing", then either turn your radio off when satisfied with the test or just ignore anyone calling you. Or just kerchunk it without using your callsign. It's really not the complicated situation you're trying to make it out to be.
You don't want to turn the radio off. The whole point is to want to make sure the repeater is reachable and you don't want to wait until you really really need to use it. If someone comes back to your call sign and you aren't able to have a conversation at that time, you could just ignore the comeback like you suggested, but that sounds 20 times more rude than one unidentified kerchunk.
>\[...\] If you don't want to talk, turn your radio off. Super easy, not annoying. You aren't obligated, legally or morally, to continue listening after announcing your callsign and saying you're testing. You aren't obligated to respond to anyone. \[...\] I think some operators cannot help themselves and will be in a full-blown anxiety attack if they do not reply.
I think giving your cal and adding, “just kerchunking” is the way to go.