"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message ...
By my review, it took 3 posts to have the slamming and insults begin. And,
DICK wins the prize:

This is the part where unbiased Stebe Robevson, the RRAP Avenging
Angel, starts a new thread and nails Dick to the Cross, calls him a
liar and/or a Putz/Dick,...

I wonder how many of you realise that when you are operating Single Sideband
Suppressed Carrier you are on Amplitude Modulation ??

Dan/W4NTI

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
link.net...

"Hans K0HB" wrote in message
om...
"Bill Sohl" wrote

Yet AM is still allowed.


Yes, it certainly is. But for how long?

Good question, but it has been some 40+ years since SSB
pretty much took over as the HF mode...and there's still no
call for any ban of AM.

Riley Hollingsworth told a Richmond, Virginia hamfest last spring
(speaking of "enhanced SSB") that deliberately operating a wideband
mode in a crowded spectrum is "shortsighted and rude," may be ignoring
the "minimum bandwidth necessary" rule. Now if 4.5KHz-wide signals are
shortsighted and rude, then it logically follows that 6KHz-wide AM
signals containing the same information are even more shortsighted and
rude.

He also hinted that continued complaints "WILL (my emphasis) lead to
pressure on the FCC to revise the Amateur Service rules." Would you
expect DSB AM to survive such revision?

Not if such DSB AM was in any way a significant percentage
of use on the air. That sure doesn't seem to be the case at
all, however.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"WA8ULX" wrote in message
...
But they are being made to FCC, as shown above. What reasonable, rational
arguments can we make to counter the above logic?

73 de Jim, N2EY


Thats been my point all along. There is nothing to stop this downward
trend,
once we got started its just a matter of time.
Karl thinks hes going to jump up and scream that the Writtens have to
stay and
the FCC is going to say OK. Karl I hate to be the barrier of Bad news, but
all
your complaining and reasons you have used to stop CW testing, are about
to be
thrown back in your face as far as the written. Then maybe you will see
the
light.

If that holds true, then we are privelidged to be witness to the last gasp
of ham radio, as we knew it.

Dan/W4NTI

If that holds true, then we are privelidged to be witness to the last gasp
of ham radio, as we knew it.

Dan/W4NTI

Dan you know its going to hold true. NCI has all ready layed the groung work
for the next batch of CBplussers.
The hardest part of Dumbing Down was to get rid of the CW. Once it falls the
rest is easy.

In article ,
(Hans K0HB) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote

The ONLY way a "spark" transmitter could send anything called
communications information was by on-off keying.

Damn, Old Timer, you got it wrong again! In Boston, on Christmas Eve
of 1906, modulating a spark transmitter, Reginald Fessenden made a
holiday broadcast of a short spoken introduction, some recorded
Chistmas music, and played "Oh Holy Night" on a violin.

Obviously a "spark" transmitter was not limited to ONLY (your
emphasis) on-off keying.

Sunuvagun! Good luck on this one now.

THE FOLLOWING IS A REPEAT OF AN OPEN LETTER TO THE
CONFUSED OFFSPRING OF MOTHER BRAKOB, REPEATED
HERE FOR PUBLIC EDIFICATION -

=================================================


Dear Mother Brakob,

Your offspring is once again confused, perhaps suffering from
dittybopper dementia from spending too much time listening to
beeping or seminarian studies of official documents from Newington.

The following is a direct quote from the Special Commemorative
Issue of McGraw-Hill's "Electronics" magazine of April 17, 1980,
page 75, section titled "History before 1930." That issue is 650
pages total, was printed in celebration of 50 years of "Electronics"
magazine.

"The broadcast television that followed two decades later, would,
of course, not have been possible without proper transmitters,
receivers, modulators, demodulars, etc. --or, in other words,
without proper radio. The world had been introduced in the potential
of such a radio system as far back as 1906, when on Christmas
Eve Prof. Reginal A. Fesenden of Harvard University made the first
documented radio broadcast of speech and music. For this feat, he
used a 50-KHz Alexanderson alternator, manufactured by the
General Electric Co. Telegraph operators on ships crossing the
North Atlantic were surprised on the historic night to hear music
coming out of earphones that previously had emitted nothing but
dots and dashes. Fessenden modulated the alternator's 1-KW
output simply by putting a microphone in series with the antenna of
his experimental station at Brant Rock, Mass. It is likely, but not
certain, that the microphone was water-cooled."

Mother Brakob, please point out, highlight if necessary with a yellow
marker pen, that the transmitter was an ALTERNATOR, not the
damped-wave "spark" type your son scribbled in angry crayon.
Specifically, an ALEXANDERSON ALTERNATOR. ONE
KILOWATT output.

You may wish to give your son a primer on electricity explaining
power losses in resistive conductors. That is important considering
the microphone used by Fessenden was IN SERIES WITH THE
ANTENNA CARRYING CURRENT SUFFICIENT FOR ONE
KILOWATT RADIO FREQUENCY POWER OUTPUT.

Best of good luck on that one, Mother Brakob. [you are going to
need it]

LHA

================================================== =

Additionally, there are some basic technical matters which have
been totally ignored, such as the "sound" produced by attempting
to amplitude modulate a low-audio-frequency-range damped-wave
oscillation by speech or music frequencies. That might be quite
similar to attempting to amplitude modulate a doorbell buzzer and
expect intelligibility from the result.

I would suggest searching a large bookstore for a primer on
electricity and elementary radio, such as "Radio For Dummies."
That does not appear to be in the ARRL list of approved, official
documents but another publisher (possibly 73?) might have it.

Extreme amounts of good fortune on this one now!!!

LHA

In article ,
(Hans K0HB) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote

On-off keying was
adopted simply because it was the ONLY WAY POSSIBLE for
early, primitive radio to allow communications. It's just
practical applied physics. Nothing else.

Oh ****, you got it wrong again!

In Boston, on Christmas Eve of 1906, modulating a spark transmitter,
Reginald Fessenden made a holiday broadcast of a short spoken
introduction, some recorded Christmas music, and played "Oh Holy
Night" on a violin.

Obviously on-off keying was not the ONLY WAY POSSIBLE (your emphasis)
for early ("spark") radio to allow communications.

"Dear Mother Anderson, your son Leonard is failing in practical
applied physics. Perhaps he would benefit from a stint in the Army to
learn a useful trade."

Sunuvagun! Good luck on this one now.

Dear Mother Brakob,

Your offspring is once again confused, perhaps suffering from
dittybopper dementia from spending too much time listening to
beeping or seminarian studies of official documents from Newington.

The following is a direct quote from the Special Commemorative
Issue of McGraw-Hill's "Electronics" magazine of April 17, 1980,
page 75, right-hand column, section titled "History before 1930."
That issue is 650 pages total, was printed in celebration of 50 years
of "Electronics" magazine existance.

"The broadcast television that followed two decades later, would,
of course, not have been possible without proper transmitters,
receivers, modulators, demodulars, etc. --or, in other words,
without proper radio. The world had been introduced in the potential
of such a radio system as far back as 1906, when on Christmas
Eve Prof. Reginal A. Fesenden of Harvard University made the first
documented radio broadcast of speech and music. For this feat, he
used a 50-KHz Alexanderson alternator, manufactured by the
General Electric Co. Telegraph operators on ships crossing the
North Atlantic were surprised on the historic night to hear music
coming out of earphones that previously had emitted nothing but
dots and dashes. Fessenden modulated the alternator's 1-KW
output simply by putting a microphone in series with the antenna of
his experimental station at Brant Rock, Mass. It is likely, but not
certain, that the microphone was water-cooled."

Mother Brakob, please point out, highlight if necessary with a yellow
marker pen, that the transmitter was an ALTERNATOR, not the
damped-wave "spark" type your son scribbled in angry crayon.
Specifically, an ALEXANDERSON ALTERNATOR. ONE
KILOWATT output.

You may wish to give your son a primer on electricity explaining
power losses in resistive conductors. That is important considering
the microphone used by Fessenden was IN SERIES WITH THE
ANTENNA CARRYING CURRENT SUFFICIENT FOR ONE
KILOWATT RADIO FREQUENCY POWER OUTPUT.

Best of good luck on that one, Mother Brakob. [you are going to
need it]

LHA


PS: You may wish to contact ARRL psychiatric services privately
for a list of competent mental health professionals in your area who
are specialists in the dementia of dittybopper data distortion attempted
on historical facts gathered by professional publishers.

"Kim W5TIT" wrote

Hmmm, wouldn't Part 5 of Title 47 be the governing body for this? And, in
Part 5, there is the following:

PART 5--EXPERIMENTAL RADIO SERVICE (OTHER THAN BROADCAST)--Table of Contents
Subpart B--Applications and Licenses
Sec. 5.77 Change in equipment and emission characteristics.
(a) A change may be made in a licensed transmitter without specific
authorization from the Commission provided that the change does not
result in operations inconsistent with any term of the outstanding
authorization for the station involved.

Along with the above, this section goes on to define certain emission
standards, etc. I was just now trying to find the spec on emission
standards (rules?) as they apply to bandwidth. Correct me if I'm wrong--the
topic and rules of experimentation are way outta my league...no pun
intended. Would the above pertain to experimentation in the amateur bands?

Part 5 licenses are not "hobbiest" licenses, so the above does not
apply. These licenses are issued to manufacturers, inventors,
researchers, and students to experiment with new radio technologies,
new equipment designs, characteristics of radio wave propagation, or
new service concepts related to the use of the radio spectrum. Special
call signs (which look like amateur calls) are from the block K(or
W)x2Xyy. For example, KA2XYZ or WB2XYZ. The "call area" numeral is
always "2" and the letter following the 2 is always "X". My company
has 4 of these licenses related to 4 different products in
development. Rules regarding their use are very strict.

73, de Hans, K0HB

(Hans K0HB) wrote in message . com...

Reginald Fessenden made a holiday broadcast of a short spoken
introduction, some recorded Christmas music, and played "Oh Holy
Night" on a violin.

Interesting fellow, that Fessenden. Besides his work in radio, he
invented the fathometer and held over 500 patents.

Some interesting dates in his early radio work:

1900 - successfully transmits voice radio signal 1 mile

1903 - successfully transmits voice radio signal 50 miles

1906 - (November) Successfully achieves 2 way transatlantic voice
radio communication between Scotland and Massachusetts. (This was less
than 5 years after Marconi's claimed one-way reception of the letter
"S", and over a greater distance.)

1906 - (December 24 & 31) Christmas Eve broadcast of both recorded and
live music and voice from Massachusetts. Signals heard all over North
Atlantic and coastal areas. Inland as far as New York State. Broadcast
*repeated* New Year's Eve.

Spark and alternator transmitters were used, with power up to 1 kW and
frequencies as high as 100 kHz. At least one replica spark transmitter
based on Fessenden's methods has been built by Canadian amateurs
(Fessenden was Canadian), and successful voice signal operation
demonstrated with a dummy load.

Lots more info available from a number of websites. The Hammond Museum
of Radio has lots of great stuff on him.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Dick Carroll wrote in message ...
N2EY wrote:

In article k.net, "Bill
Sohl" writes:


We'll just have to
agree to disagree on that because I ain't gonna waste any more
time arguing hypotheticals when those arguments aren't
even being made to the FCC.


But they are being made to FCC, as shown above. What reasonable, rational
arguments can we make to counter the above logic?


Jim, you're talking to a post.

I don't think so at all, Dick. K2UNK is one of the most interesting
folks to discuss things with here.

Bill and I are simply having a discussion. We disagree with each other
but there is mutual respect and civility on both sides. He's not
convinced by my arguments and I'm not convinced by his reassurances,
but I'm quite sure he read what I had to say and considered it
carefully.

Frankly, I hope Bill is right and I'm wrong on this, and that we don't
ever have to contend with folks wanting to drastically reduce written
testing.

NCI thinks they've got what they want
now and their heads are firmly buried in the sand to any issue beyond
killing off the code test.

That's the whole purpose of that organization - and we're promised
that it will simply cease to function in the USA if/when there's no
more code test.

When Bill or Carl or Ed or Jon write something here, I take it to be
their own personal view, not that of NCI (in the case of Bill or Carl)
or ARRL (in the case of Ed or Jon) *unless* they specifically state
"NCI policy is..."

Nothing will dull their premature euphoria.

The fat lady ain't sung yet.

So now we'll see if the adage "be careful what you ask for" will apply.

Who knows? My concern, however, is still the same:

What reasonable, rational arguments can we make to counter the above
logic (against more-than-the-barest-minimum-written-tests)?

Because I still think that sooner, rather than later, that issue will
come up. And we better be ready for it.

Everyone should read that KL7CC paper on the AL7FS website. Note what
it says about the writtens. Heck, the author is one of the top guys at
NCVEC, helping make their policy, and he says in public that he
couldn't pass the current *written* exam for the Extra without some
serious book study!

--

Who of us here was a ham before November 22, 1968? Let's see - there's
N2EY, W0EX, K2UNK, W3RV, K0HB, W4NTI, AA2QA. Apologies to anyone I
missed.

Back then, all it took for full privs was 13 wpm code and a ~50
question written test. Has 35 years of incentive licensing made hams
"more technical"? If not, why do we need all those written tests?

What say, folks?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Well, we are both in agreement on that Len.... it doesn't take
long to see what the PCTA crowd is *really* about and after;
just read some of thier posted reasons for keeping the test
around (if you can stand to put up with the intermixed vular
insults and name calling)... one that is just recently being
tabled in here is "if we don't force eveybody to do it, then
they won't want to"... that's a self defeating argument right
there; who would want to drink casteroil that doesn't want to,
and what's more, would forcing it down thier throad make
them become *warmer* to the idea??? And one recently
spouted, before thinking closely to what he was saying I
believe, that they want to "shape the ham community to
what *they* (read: PCTA crowd) WANT it to be.

*ahem*...

Clint
KB5ZHT
whipping the code test debate with EASE.....


"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...
In article , "Clint" rattlehead at
computron dot net writes:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical
backwater.

Justify requireing a knowledge or profeciency test on using an old
fashioned
buggy whip before giving out an modern day automobile driver's license.

Clint, it seems to be wasted effort to lay out the technical reasons
for morse code mode communications disappearing on the world
radio scene.

The very first demonstrations of radio as a communications medium
was 107 years ago. In Russia and in Italy. Both demonstrators used
morse code mode with on-off keying. What was used 107 years ago
is NOT "state of the art" today.

USE of morse code mode is optional in the US radio amateur service.

Elimination of the morse code TEST for any amateur radio license is
not defacto elimination of its use, nor banning its use.

Retention of the morse code TEST only has validity as an EMOTIONAL
supplement to those already licensed in the amateur radio service who
are sufficiently proficient to use the mode.

Mike Coslo imagines himself as a sort of "devil's advocate" but is, by
all public evidence, little more than a PCTA who attempts to
masquerade his trolling and baiting by some odd self-defined role as
"arbiter" or "moderator."

This newsgroup is unmoderated.

LHA