"Chuck Harris" wrote in message
...
W9HGO wrote:
On Aug 26, 10:59 am, Chuck Harris wrote:
W9HGO wrote:
Richard how come you don't put your call letters
in your signature?
I don't know about Richard, but I keep my call letters
off of my internet activities because the FCC database
is freely searchable, and has my station address in it.

There are some real nutcases out on the internet. Do you
really want to make it easy for one of them to come and
visit you?

-Chuck

Chuck,

That's a good point.
I am used to just using it in closed groups.
Google does expose us to a much greater audience.

Hi Harry,

What you are posting this on right now is not a closed google group!

It is usenet, one of the oldest widely used ports (119) on the internet.

Everything you post here is completely uncontrolled, unregulated and
available to anyone worldwide.

Google happens to archive everything that shows up on usenet.

Richard,

Thanks for the advice, I have already learned the code,
Used Chuck Adams code course, I hear great things about
G4FON but being a MAC and LInux user, it is unavailable to me.

I find that many of those sorts of programs work just fine under
linux using wine. And those that need DOS work just fine under
linux using dosemu with freedos. You will probably need to adjust
dosemu's pseudo processor speed for proper function.

-Chuck

Using wine!? I find that *everything* works using enough wine. Preferably a
good Australian red!

73 all

"W9HGO" wrote in message
...
On Aug 25, 4:29 pm, "Richard Knoppow"
wrote:
"Michael Black" wrote in message

mple.org...



On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Richard Knoppow wrote:

"W9HGO" wrote in message
...
GM,

I am a new ham interested in CW and would really like
to
find an
operators manual written before the topic of CW
started
to
be diluted.

I would prefer a 1st or 2nd edition.

TNX
73, Harry
W9HGO -SKCC #4647

Do you mean a Radio Amateurs Handbook? If so look at
this group, some have been advertized in the last
couple
of
weeks. The books may be helpful if you want to build CW
transmitting equipment but its very simple (one of the
virtues of CW). If you want to learn code there are a
lot
of
resources on the web.

I thought the question was clear.

The Handbook had to cover everything, so it could never
cover
it all in depth. You'd get a copy of "How to Become a
Radio Amateur"
to learn the basics, and maybe build that first regen
receiver and
single tube transmitter, and learn the code.

If you needed more help, you'd buy "Learning the
Radiotelegraph Code";
I never had a copy, I don't know how it compares with
more
recent
books about learning the Morse code from the ARRL.

You'd buy the Handbook next, to cover technical stuff in
more detail.

Then you'd buy the mobile manual if you wanted to go
mobile, or the SSB
manual if you were really interested in SSB (especially
in
the early days
when they covered theory of ssb better than in the later
ones that were
mostly construction articles), and you'd get the VHF
manual if that was
your interest.

If you were mostly interested in operating, you'd get
"Operating an Amateur Radio Station" which was sort of
an
extended version of the
"Operating a Station" chapter in the Handbook. I never
saw one in
the old days, but my impression was that it was a
relatively slim,
like the rest of the topic-specific ARRL books. The
current one
is terribly thick.

That's the one he wants, to read up on operating CW when
it was
a much bigger part of amateur radio.

The old books have the advantage that they are current
with the
era. The state of the Handbook varies, since every time
something
new is added to the hobby (and thus the Handbook),
something else
gets cut. There was a long period when SSB got short
shift, because
the initial surge of SSB was passed and there seemed to
be
an assumption
that everyone knew the basics. Likely also the rise of
commercial SSB
rigs helped. Then building changed, and a lot of people
started
building QRP ssb rigs and the ssb chapter improved.
Solid
state
and even computers came along and helped to better
implement the
phasing method, and whammo, the phasing method that had
been mostly
a footnote in the Handbook for many years suddenly
became
more detailed.

Michael VE2BVW

A good, comprehensive answer but I don't think the
original question was quite as clear as you think. Also,
the
name of the book requires some clarification: you may be
right that he wants "How to Operate an Amateur Radio
Station" but I am not sure how old a first or second
edition
would be. In any case the older ARRL handbooks cover a lot
of CW stuff like handling traffic etc. Being a long time
CW
person myself perhaps it seems simpler to me than to
someone
new. I certainly encourage anyone to wants to practice
this
art.

--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA


GM,

Michael you were spot on to understand what I meant.
Thank you.

I thought my subject line would have been very clear.
Since it is exactly the title of what I am looking for.
And since I was not sure if I could locate a first edition
I left the option open for the second.

I did find a 1966 first edition. I am excited.

Richard how come you don't put your call letters
in your signature?

See you on the bands

73, Harry
W9HGO -SKCC #4647


A lot of my e-mail goes to people who wouldn't know
what it was. I should create an alternative sig. I've been
adding my call occasionally to posts here and to other ham
related places.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

WB6KBL

"W9HGO" wrote in message
...
On Aug 26, 9:46 am, "Harold E. Johnson"
wrote:
A good, comprehensive answer but I don't think the
original question was quite as clear as you think. Also,
the
name of the book requires some clarification: you may be
right that he wants "How to Operate an Amateur Radio
Station" but I am not sure how old a first or second
edition
would be. In any case the older ARRL handbooks cover a
lot
of CW stuff like handling traffic etc. Being a long time
CW
person myself perhaps it seems simpler to me than to
someone
new. I certainly encourage anyone to wants to practice
this
art.

--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA


GM,

Michael you were spot on to understand what I meant.
Thank you.

I thought my subject line would have been very clear.
Since it is exactly the title of what I am looking for.
And since I was not sure if I could locate a first edition
I left the option open for the second.

I did find a 1966 first edition. I am excited.

Richard how come you don't put your call letters
in your signature?

See you on the bands

73, Harry
W9HGO -SKCC #4647

Probably because he didn't think it important to the
subject at hand. And,
perhaps he thought that if you thought it important, you
would have looked
WB6KBL up on QRZ.com.

W4ZCB

Hi Harold,
I did not see WB6KBL any, sorry.
But now I see that there is a view profile option.
Not quite used to reading Usenet on Google.

Harold here is something you might enjoy
http://tinyurl.com/665o7u


73, Harry
W9HGO -SKCC #4647

I'm on the QRZ database. My call dates to the 1960s
when I was first licensed. I let that license lapse and just
recently got re-licensed and asked to get my old call back.
Its a clumsey call but somehow I wanted some continuity.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

"W9HGO" wrote in message
...
On Aug 26, 10:59 am, Chuck Harris
wrote:
W9HGO wrote:
Richard how come you don't put your call letters
in your signature?

I don't know about Richard, but I keep my call letters
off of my internet activities because the FCC database
is freely searchable, and has my station address in it.

There are some real nutcases out on the internet. Do you
really want to make it easy for one of them to come and
visit you?

-Chuck

Chuck,

That's a good point.
I am used to just using it in closed groups.
Google does expose us to a much greater audience.

Richard,

Thanks for the advice, I have already learned the code,
Used Chuck Adams code course, I hear great things about
G4FON but being a MAC and LInux user, it is unavailable to
me.

There s a new KOCH method Web site though that is good for
continuing accuracy training
http://lcwo.net/

I am in the processes of building a transistor qrp rig and
trying to
decide on which of the glow plug projects
looks the most promising. Then there is always the T4 I have
tucked
away. So many projects.

My main thought now is to increase my knowledge of the
operating
procedures of CW and as Michael
pointed out the newer editors of ham radio literature are
giving CW a
second class rating.

See you on the bands.


73, Harry
W9HGO -SKCC #4647

Well, I am not too happy about either current CW or
phone procedures, especially the business of signing _only_
your call when calling other stations. How the heck is the
other guy supposed to know he/she is being called?
CW procedure for conversations is pretty simple but if
you want to handle traffic the older books will be helpful.
I also suggest looking at some of the older commercial
license books for the radio-telegraph license.
BTW, I might as well ventilate on a favorate sore point
of mine. That is the use of dits at the end of
transmissions. This originated in the spark and arc days
when the letter C in wire morse (.. .) was used to indicate
a station was clear of the frequency. Maritime operators
used to split this as a kind of friendly sig. The station
_signed with_ would send the didit part and the other
station send the last dit. It was never part of "shave and a
haircut" as has been alleged on some current sites.
Sometimes the most trivial things can bother you:-)
Anyway AR SK and didit dit.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

WB6KBL

"MoiInAust" wrote in message
...

"Chuck Harris" wrote in
message ...
W9HGO wrote:
On Aug 26, 10:59 am, Chuck Harris
wrote:
W9HGO wrote:
Richard how come you don't put your call letters
in your signature?
I don't know about Richard, but I keep my call letters
off of my internet activities because the FCC database
is freely searchable, and has my station address in it.

There are some real nutcases out on the internet. Do
you
really want to make it easy for one of them to come and
visit you?

-Chuck

Chuck,

That's a good point.
I am used to just using it in closed groups.
Google does expose us to a much greater audience.

Hi Harry,

What you are posting this on right now is not a closed
google group!

It is usenet, one of the oldest widely used ports (119)
on the internet.

Everything you post here is completely uncontrolled,
unregulated and
available to anyone worldwide.

Google happens to archive everything that shows up on
usenet.

Richard,

Thanks for the advice, I have already learned the code,
Used Chuck Adams code course, I hear great things about
G4FON but being a MAC and LInux user, it is unavailable
to me.

I find that many of those sorts of programs work just
fine under
linux using wine. And those that need DOS work just fine
under
linux using dosemu with freedos. You will probably need
to adjust
dosemu's pseudo processor speed for proper function.

-Chuck

Using wine!? I find that *everything* works using enough
wine. Preferably a good Australian red!

73 all
LOL


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

WB6KBL

A lot of my e-mail goes to people who wouldn't know
what it was. I should create an alternative sig. I've been adding my call
occasionally to posts here and to other ham related places.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

WB6KBL


Those who worry about the "Nut cases out there" very possibly have never
entered their phone numbers into Google to see what happens. Privacy is a
thing of the past.

W4ZCB

Harold E. Johnson wrote:
A lot of my e-mail goes to people who wouldn't know
what it was. I should create an alternative sig. I've been adding my call
occasionally to posts here and to other ham related places.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

WB6KBL


Those who worry about the "Nut cases out there" very possibly have never
entered their phone numbers into Google to see what happens. Privacy is a
thing of the past.

I have, it's not there.

-Chuck

"Chuck Harris" wrote in message
...
Harold E. Johnson wrote:
A lot of my e-mail goes to people who wouldn't know
what it was. I should create an alternative sig. I've been adding my
call occasionally to posts here and to other ham related places.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

WB6KBL


Those who worry about the "Nut cases out there" very possibly have never
entered their phone numbers into Google to see what happens. Privacy is a
thing of the past.

I have, it's not there.

-Chuck


Mine, which I carefully guard, certainly is -- but it's in two places where
I voluntarily put it, not thinking about the web. But, you would have to
know the number to find out who I am G

W9HGO wrote:
I am a new ham interested in CW and would really like to find an
operators manual written before the topic of CW started to be diluted.

Hi,
You might want to look up the QST article "Your Novice Accent",
which appeared in Nov 1956 QST, a reprint of which was once sent
to newly licensed hams by the ARRL. I think it was reprinted
in Dec 1990 QST.

73,
Ed Knobloch

On Aug 27, 1:52*pm, Edward Knobloch wrote:
W9HGO wrote:
I am a new ham interested in CW and would really like to find an
operators manual written before the topic of CW started to be diluted.

Hi,
You might want to look up the QST article "Your Novice Accent",
which appeared in Nov 1956 QST, a reprint of which was once sent
to newly licensed hams by the ARRL. *I think it was reprinted
in Dec 1990 QST.

73,
Ed Knobloch

Ed,

Thanks, I have a copy of that fine article. Just missed out on buying
an original autographed copy.


73, Harry
W9HGO -SKCC #4647