"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...


Brian wrote:

Bob Brock wrote in message
. ..
On 05 Sep 2003 03:44:03 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote:

Don't try to lecture me on regulatory ... that's what I do for a
living (and for a couple of major industry organizations, plus
NCI)

Carl - wk3c


Damn, I thought you were some Techno whizz, no wonder it took you
over a year
to upgrade.

An alternative theory could be that he has a life and that upgrade
wasn't a priority. Some of us do have lives you know. You do know
that don't you?

Speaking of no life. Dick is a big-time emergency communicator. Used
to drill 7/8" holes in the rooftops of Missouri's finest. Lives for
the New Madrid earthquake.

But when Hans invited him to join in a QSO using his favorite mode
that he demands everyone else be made to learn, his lame excuse for
not doing so was that he wasn't home at the time. Apparently he can't
go mobile himself.

So much for his emergency skills.

And it's true, I WASN'T at home-that time. But where were YOU when K0HB,
N2EY, W6RCA, AC6XG, W3RV and
I--Did I forget anyone?- held that nice rrap CW net on 40 meters???


Ooooo, demmit! I missed something good here. That's what I get for picking
and choosing posts most of the time. Anyway, Brian, did you see a couple of
months ago where I posted the question to Dick about just what it would take
for the establishment of a disaster station for CW operation? As far as I
know, he never answered!!!! And, of course, it's because he knew he was
getting set up--we all know it would actually take quite a bit to be ready
to establish a disaster response CW station--and that was the set up. I was
going to ask DICK if he was ready...

Well.....


Oh, I almost forgot- you're STILL waiting for a code free license!
Right!


As for emergency gear, I have all that in a pair of metal equipment
cases, ready to grab and go, if and
when needed. I'll take along a laptop just in case the need happens to be
for a digital mode. AND my
Vibroplex Iambic paddle for CW.


PAH!!!! Grab and go. All of that?! You have got to be kidding...but wait,
there's mo


For power I have a lightweight switchmode AC supply AND an 800 watt
inverter. One does need to be
flexible doesn't one?


Oh. OK. So, uh, don't persecute me here because I am lowly slow-code
Tech+, but where you gonna get that AC and what if your car is crunched;
and/or even when it runs out of gas? And, if you've got all this "stuff"
ready to chuckle grab and go...and your vehicle is crunched, the trees are
down so much that you can't move, or any number of other quite likely
situations in a disaster, how will you choose to establish your CW station
then, Dick? Really, let's drill it.


After all, the need could be for something hightech and digital. But the
possibility always exists that those needing to communicat from a disaster
area will have only modest old
CW available.


The higher likelihood, and I think most seasoned EmCom folks will bear me
out on this one, is that there will be many low-power talkies available,
FRS, and the immediate disaster communications would be through simplex
frequencies on 2M and 70cm, along with APRS stations set up and
transmitting. Most disasters would have high hope of skilled CW ops for HW
traffic, though.


One does need to be ready, doesn't one?


Yep. And it doesn't sound like you are. The picture I get in my mind is
almost humorous if it weren't so sad. DICK, standing there with his grab
and go "stuff," wishing he'd thought to wheel mount those metal equipment
cases because they sure are going to be heavy to drag or pick up and carry,
with a tree or two down over his vehicle and the power lines dancing all
over the place around him...with his metal carrying cases right there...

Oh, the the pain, the pain...


So what's YOUR enmergency status,Slim? Do you have "permission" yet?

Dick, W0EX FISTS #3939


He probably would be up, running, established and ready to
communicate--WHILE getting the hell away from danger and to a location as
directed by the local net.

Kim W5TIT

"Jack Twilley" wrote in message
...

I agree with you on this. Hopefully by next Field Day I'll be able to
participate with CW, but I am concerned that my straight-key efforts
will be wasted on the memory keyers out there. Bah.

No, it will be just fine. I still use a straight key.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

S. Hanrahan wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:00:13 -0400, Bob Brock
wrote:


Why would you want to foil computer copy?

Because no law says you can't.

For you to do the test to
make sure that it works and then advocate it's use, you can't really
say that wasn't your intention.

What if it was? Nothing you can do about it but learn the code.

Oh, geez. Here's another Morse Elitist that apparently advocates
sending code so **** poorly that it can't be computer copied. Hoo-ah!

Jack Twilley wrote in message ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Dick" == Dick Carroll; writes:

Jack I've said it before, but perhaps not in this location: my
Jack current location does not permit reception of HF signals. I
Jack have tried for months with multiple antenna setups and have not
Jack been successful.

Dick Where the heck are you, Jack? I've received HF from many
Dick locations, about everywhere I've ever been and tried it. Is it
Dick an radio noise environment problem or what? Unless you live in
Dick the middle of one of the BPL tryout area I can't imagine not
Dick being able to receive W1AW on one of the bands..

I'm in grid square CM88wa, between two very large hills which run for
several miles in a roughly north-south direction. My backyard is
twenty-five feet wide by nine feet deep and it is partially shared
with neighboring units. For political reasons, antennas have to be as
invisible as possible, so the highest I can get is six feet off the
ground and six feet from the house. I was able to construct a dipole
with twelve-foot legs, but I couldn't even get WWV, let alone an
amateur station. In addition, the electrical noise gives me a noise
floor of S7 -- some of which is my fault, as I've got six computers
running at any given time. Sometime this weekend I should make a
recording of what I hear on the bands so people can understand that
reception truly sucks at my house.

Dick Dick

Jack.

Jack, you must understand something. DICK has been in every
situation, probably including your own. If DICK says he's able to
receive HF everywhere he's -tried-, he implies that you aren't trying
hard enough. In the end, it comes down to CW always getting through.
You're using CW, right?

Jack Twilley wrote in message ...


Brian Stick with the tried and proven Jack and just get on with the
Brian job like tens if not hundreds of thousands of us have already
Brian done. There is no point to reinventing the wheel.

One wonders what Mr. (or Ms.) Farnsworth would have said if someone
had told him something like that.
There is point in reinventing the
wheel, if one believes they may have found something more efficient.
In this case, I'm not inventing anything -- I am facilitating the
learning of those who prefer full speed and Farnsworth spacing.

One will get ya ten that Farnsworth was an expert on the subject
BEFORE he/she invented that wheel and took it public. I find the
concept of you, admittedly struggling to get off a notch above ground
zero in this game, "facilitating" the learning process for others just
a tad problematic.


Brian variables. Yes it's Farnsworth and 1AW Farnworth has obviously
Brian worked for decades. Now go copy 1AW 5wpm sessions until you
Brian "get it".

I've said it before, but perhaps not in this location: my current
location does not permit reception of HF signals. I have tried for
months with multiple antenna setups and have not been successful. I
have very limited VHF reception -- broadcast FM and television
stations do not come in, but I can receive on 2m and 440MHz. I
thought it was bad when I didn't have an HF rig, but it's worse to
have one and not be able to receive anything.

Local terrain isn't much an HF stopper so W1AW would be be usable
under normal condx. But per your response to Dick your overriding
problem seems to be noise. Are you on Jones St. in Martinez or in
Walnut Creek? In either case noise in those kinds of very densely
populated QTHs can be mongo. I can sympathize with all of that, I sure
have my share here. So W1AW is a non-solution. But you might try
shutting down all six computers and listen again.

Brian . . Been there, done it and it WORKS. The mix of 1AW and The
Brian Deep End worked twice for me and I not only enjoyed all of it
Brian but also got to 20wpm+ via logs full of actual QSOs to boot.

I'm glad it worked for you. I'm going for the tried and true Koch
method of learning the characters at full speed. It might take more
time for me to learn them all, but I'll know them, and that will be
exciting. I am currently exploring another method of code generating
that spits out words from characters that I already know since I'm a
little concerned that five-letter groups might shape my learning in a
way that won't help with real code.

Copying random five-letter groups is excellent code practice which is
why the military has used groups instead of straight text for CW
training purposes. Five letter groups at 20wpm is more difficult to
copy than is staright text at 20wpm, another factoid which is as old
as the hills.

Other than that, though, I'm
pretty happy with what I've got.

If it works for you it works.

Brian And CW contests are lousy code practice.

I agree with you on this. Hopefully by next Field Day I'll be able to
participate with CW,

I suggest you get on the air somewhere somehow by hook or crook and
get some real experience before you dive into FD. Per previous I have
a nasty noise problem too but I now have a nice quiet alternative
"escape QTH". I have some lines permanently installed in some big
trees in one of my daughters' back yards and pre-fabbed quick-up
dipoles for 80/40/20/15. I also have a TS-50 HF mobile xcvr with the
CW filter and an FT-847 with an Inrad 400 Hz filter both of which are
very compact lightweight portable rigs. Once I get to her place I can
be on the air in 15 minutes. Which I do when I just can't stand being
off HF any longer. I beep my buns off for hours, get my fill, do some
visiting, mooch a dinner and come home in a much better mood than I
had the day before. Sorta like FD once a month. Poke around, maybe you
have an alternative operating site too.

but I am concerned that my straight-key efforts
will be wasted on the memory keyers out there. Bah.

Using a straight key in a contest would kill me if I was running a
decent rate. The goofy relics should be outlawed at least in contests
except under unusual circumstances. Do yourself a big favor and get
yourself decent paddles like a Kent and a cheap MFJ keyer and take it
from there. The paddles would work fine with the FD momory keyers.
Beyond that real CW contesters don't use any types of mechanical keys,
they use keyboards. In the end the means used to generate the output
doesn't matter, it's the ears that *always* matter . . .

Jack.

w3rv

(Brian) wrote in message

Jack, you must understand something. DICK has been in every
situation, probably including your own. If DICK says he's able to
receive HF everywhere he's -tried-, he implies that you aren't trying
hard enough. In the end, it comes down to CW always getting through.
You're using CW, right?

Just once try reading the thread before you pounce on the "reply to"
button you dim bulb, he's using 80M moonbounce spread spectrum.

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com...
"Brian" wrote in message
om...
S. Hanrahan wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:00:13 -0400, Bob Brock
wrote:


Why would you want to foil computer copy?

Because no law says you can't.

For you to do the test to
make sure that it works and then advocate it's use, you can't really
say that wasn't your intention.

What if it was? Nothing you can do about it but learn the code.

Oh, geez. Here's another Morse Elitist that apparently advocates
sending code so **** poorly that it can't be computer copied. Hoo-ah!

Don't need to send it poorly.

Does anyone have a need to send it poorly (except DICK)?

More importantly, you shouldn't try to send it poorly. You should
send it to the very best of your ability.

But if you send it very poorly with the intention of thwarting machine
copy, what do you think the result will be?

Only strong code signals under good
propagation conditions can be adequatly copied by the computer anyway. I'm
only mediocre at the code myself but I routinely copy better than the
computer anytime conditions are less than ideal such as with weak signals,
poor propagation, high static, or high interference.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Brian

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message om...
(Brian) wrote in message

Jack, you must understand something. DICK has been in every
situation, probably including your own. If DICK says he's able to
receive HF everywhere he's -tried-, he implies that you aren't trying
hard enough. In the end, it comes down to CW always getting through.
You're using CW, right?

Just once try reading the thread before you pounce on the "reply to"
button you dim bulb, he's using 80M moonbounce spread spectrum.

No doubt. Were you on the other side of the circuit?

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com...
"Brian" wrote in message
om...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
igy.com...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

Actually, I believe there is an ITU-R Recommendation that specifies
the "International Morse Code" in typical ITU detail.


Operative word is recommendation, which is exactly what I said.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Yet the FCC demands that one passes an exam or be denied access.

Shouldn't they have a definition of what is being examined?

They have defined it as 5wpm. The details are left up to the NCVEC just
like the details of the writtens are left up to the NCVEC.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Nonsense. The FCC specified Morse at 5wpm rate. Farnsworth is a
method for learning fast Morse code, thus the characters are sent at
13-15wpm.

Amateur radio and electronics includes many methods of learning, but I
doubt the FCC would allow the answer to the resistor color code to be:
"BAD BOYS RAPE OUR YOUNG GIRLS BUT VIOLET GIVES WILLINGLY," yet it is
a commonly used learning technique.

Jack Twilley wrote in message ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Brian" == Brian Kelly writes:

[...]

Brian One will get ya ten that Farnsworth was an expert on the
Brian subject BEFORE he/she invented that wheel and took it public. I
Brian find the concept of you, admittedly struggling to get off a
Brian notch above ground zero in this game, "facilitating" the
Brian learning process for others just a tad problematic.

Out of curiosity, have you seen the page or are you still blocked on
the concept of a student assisting other students?

Jack, "students teaching students" is at the core of the FCC's
mandated Novice subbands. I hadn't been aware that Kelly was against
this concept and the implementation of it.

Brian/N0iMD