"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
S. Hanrahan wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:35:58 GMT, "Bert Craig"
wrote:


"S. Hanrahan" wrote in message
. .

At 5 WPM, you don't need a computer to copy good or poor code.

I think you've just hit the nail on the head. It's really not how hard
or
easy 5-wpm is, it's the willingness (or lack thereof) to make the
initial
(i.e. "initiative") effort to learn the 43 required characters.


Exactly. I look at it this way, if a person doesn't want to learn the
code, fine, if they want to fine, just don't come up to me and bitch
and moan that 5 WPM is a hurdle or mountain too high to climb.

I'm hearing impaired in both ears, and I can copy 45-50 WPM in my head
solidly, and attained the 20 before taking my General class written,
without waivers.

Now you have my attention, Stacey! What is the nature of your hearing
loss, if I may ask? I have tinnitus and am about 60 db down compared to
normal hearing, with several 100 db plus holes in various places. One
of the weird things about my particular flavor of hearing loss is that
all incoming sounds seem to get equal treatment in my brain. Whereas it
appears that most people can filter out the good stuff from the noise, I
end up treating all sounds equally. No mental DSP here, unfortunately! 8^)

At any rate, I've had to do a lot of work to get this far. Took 6 months
of intense work to get to 5wpm, and I've been working daily on
increasing my speed for the last month or so. I don't envy much, but I
envy those who were able to pick Morse code up in a few weekends.

- Mike KB3EIA -


We all envy those who can get it in a few hours. It takes a normal person
30 hours to get to 5wpm, 60 hours to get to 10wpm, 95 hours to get to 15wpm,
and 150 hours to get to 20wpm (info from the book "Morse Code, The Essential
Language"). Some of us will need more time and a few unusually talented
people will get it in a lot less.

So don't be discouraged. Keep at it. Get on the air and make some QSOs
even though you need to go slow. If you can tolerate the frustration, try a
contest even if you have to listen to the other station repeatedly to pick
out the info and then throw in your call. You'd very likely see a
noticeable improvement in speed.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"KØHB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Bert Craig" wrote

No, it's like learning the basics of cycling before being allowed to
participate in the race.

Did your Dad & Mom make you take a test before they bought you your first
bike?

Nope, only before I actually used it. It involved training wheels, lots of
patience, and constant evaluation...even more so when I "earned the
privilege" of being allowed to ride in the street. Good analogy, Hans.
Thanks.

But actually, Morse code is a bit like learning to ride a bike.... it's
sort of "self testing"..... if you want to use it, you'll learn how.

I hope the "once you learn it, you never forget it" axiom holds true.

73, de Hans, K0HB
--
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it,
and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous
resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by
their ignorance the hard way." --Bokonon

Is this referring to the 5-wpm test? I don't think so. "Murderous
resentment?" ggg

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
et...
"KØHB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Bert Craig" wrote

No, it's like learning the basics of cycling before being allowed to
participate in the race.

Did your Dad & Mom make you take a test before they bought you your
first
bike?

Nope, only before I actually used it. It involved training wheels, lots of
patience, and constant evaluation...even more so when I "earned the
privilege" of being allowed to ride in the street. Good analogy, Hans.
Thanks.

But actually, Morse code is a bit like learning to ride a bike.... it's
sort of "self testing"..... if you want to use it, you'll learn how.

I hope the "once you learn it, you never forget it" axiom holds true.

73, de Hans, K0HB
--
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it,
and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous
resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by
their ignorance the hard way." --Bokonon

Is this referring to the 5-wpm test? I don't think so. "Murderous
resentment?" ggg

73 de Bert
WA2SI


Heh heh...unless one need it for quick contacts, you only need to remember .
.. . - - - . . .
Just joking...

Kim W5TIT

"S. Hanrahan" wrote in message
...


Exactly. I look at it this way, if a person doesn't want to learn the
code, fine, if they want to fine, just don't come up to me and bitch
and moan that 5 WPM is a hurdle or mountain too high to climb.

not to worry, it won't be a hurdle or a mountain anymore when
the FCC removes the code testing requirement.

Clint
KB5ZHT

garigue wrote:

I am not a betting man but Clint I will send you a six pack of Iron
City beer if testing doesn't turn into a 5 WPM like sham or isn't completely
eliminated in 10-15 years.


Iron City? Isn't that the worst beer known to man? I never had any
myself, but
I've heard hearsay about how awful it was.......

garigue wrote:
code, fine, if they want to fine, just don't come up to me and bitch
and moan that 5 WPM is a hurdle or mountain too high to climb.

not to worry, it won't be a hurdle or a mountain anymore when
the FCC removes the code testing requirement.

Clint
KB5ZHT



Hello there Clint .....


I agree it will all be a rather moot point but it will be the drip off the
leaf that eventually runs into the sea of a no test amateur radio license.
The future ham will just access the FCC site and type in the info and hit
print. I am not a betting man but Clint I will send you a six pack of Iron
City beer if testing doesn't turn into a 5 WPM like sham or isn't completely
eliminated in 10-15 years.

Here's another possibility, Tom. At some point in the near future, we
will *buy* our licenses from Clear Channel!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Robert Casey wrote:

garigue wrote:

I am not a betting man but Clint I will send you a six pack of Iron
City beer if testing doesn't turn into a 5 WPM like sham or isn't
completely
eliminated in 10-15 years.


Iron City? Isn't that the worst beer known to man? I never had any
myself, but
I've heard hearsay about how awful it was.......

It is awful - if you like the Peewaa swill offered up by CorBuMil.
(note that CorBuMil is the same sort of thing as YaeComWood)

- Mike KB3EIA -

Iron City? Isn't that the worst beer known to man? I never had any
myself, but
I've heard hearsay about how awful it was.......

Na Bob ...local stuff ..accquired taste ...their lite beer blows away
anything I have ever drank and don't mention that Coors Lite stuff. The
rumor here is that they dilute regular Iron lager with 100 parts of water to
make that stuff. Actually Bob a very good local beer is Stoney's but it has
to be draught and fresh. They used to make it in Smithton Pa nr here but it
is now made at the Iron City works. BTW Stoney was Shirley Jones's father.

Oh my God ....I have broken one of Len's chat room rules ...... excuse my
off topic pontification ....

73 God Bless Tom Popovic KI3R Belle Vernon Pa

[kr4af]

Originally Posted by Dan Finn

"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...
In article , "Dan Finn"
writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...

On most modern HF transceivers, the 3rd harmonic has the strongest
content of RF. The 3rd harmonic of 3.5 to 4.0 MHz is 10.5 to 12 MHz
and there aren't many "ham listening frequencies" there, are there?

For most modulated sine waves, the 3rd harmonic is usually the strongest
*harmonic* although it depends upon several factors. Generally, the odd
harmonic components add and the negative components subtract with
modulated
sine waves.

Oh my, such interesting math (which wasn't shown)...:-)

If you do not know this to be true without seeing the math worked out for
you, then you should not be discussing harmonics in a technical context.

That isn't quite the case in any real world OR the theoretical world.

Your saying so does not make your statement true. We are talking technical
issues here which are a matter of common knowledge to the RF community so
your flames are irrelevant.


First of all, in the real world, you must be presuming some absolute
zero phase shift for each harmonic to make your statement. That just
doesn't exist.

Oh God...Earth to Len....harmonics *are* phase shifted. If you reduce the
phase shift to zero, then you have eliminated the harmonics, stupid.

I can do the numbers on the series formulas for AM, FM, or PM no
problem but so few in here can follow even the beginnings of such that
I won't care to put it in public view...:-)

Having said that, most modern rigs that produce FCC quality
signals will filter such harmonics several 10's of dB rendering reception
almost impossible except in the near field.

Really?!? They work PERFECTLY ACCORDING TO SPECIFICATIONS
ALL THE TIME?!?!?!

Pretty close, most of the time, dummy.


That's not a realistic view, but feel free to indulge if you've laid
out a
big
plastic for a couple kilodollars worth of transceiver. :-)

That old standby tube output matching circuit, the "Pi-network" is only
good for about 18 db per octave attenuation above cutoff frequency.

Since 3dB is half the power, you cut the power in half 6 times. 18dB is not
bad over one octave.

Not
all modern transceivers have such "lowpass filters" since they rely on
Class B or AB linear amplifiers with rather broadband transformers
matching PA to load.

They had better filter it so that you do not have a significant signal at
12MHz when transmitting in the 75 meter band.

A typical 100 W RF transceiver has a fundamental power output of +50
dbm. If there is as much as "60 db harmonic attenuation" in it, the
harmonics can be -10 dbm into the load. That's 100 microWatts and
DOES radiate and rather beyond the Near Field...the level is a lot
higher
than most "40 db over S9" signals (depending on who assigned what
levels to a local transceiver S meter).

0.1mW? Hardly a significant signal.


I thought I needed to correct
this BS, that emanates from someone who claims to understand modern
amateur
technology theory.

Feel free to do your numbers in public, senior

That would be a rather boring and somewhar ominous excercize to do on a
newsgroup, dummy.

Call it all the "BS" you want to. When you can actually MAKE a linear
(of any class) go as low as 40 db down on total harmonic output, I'll
be
giving you a round of applause.

Hams transmitting signals of any significance on 12MHz
will not be hams for long.

Oh? Were there any recent NALs published at the FCC or ARRL sites
on such things?

Not that I know of. Not for transmitting harmonics on 12MHz using 'modern'
transceivers, as you called them.

Let us know, please, I've not seen any of those
concerning out-of-ham-band interference due to harmonic generation.

Neither have I. Most NAL's are for in band interference, referred to as QRM.

de KR4AF

LHA

why is someone using my call? that is not me , must be bootlegger