Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil
writes:
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil
writes:
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,
(William) writes:
There's somewhat the same keyboard lock-out at maximum rate
in the Model 28s and later that are 100 WPM maximums. Few
touch typists can go that fast except in bursts.
That's incorrect, Leonard. Anyone who has spent more than a year
steadily poking tape on a 28 can reasonably be expected to type at or
near the machine's maximum capability.
It's a fact, visible to anyone around a real communications center,
that p-tape is what is used for continuous throughput.
Yep, paper or mylar (for tapes used frequently). Trouble is, someone
has to input that information to the tape without errors. Someone has
to manually assign Message Reference Numbers and (for those who use
them) Message Continuity Numbers. Someone has to look up the routers
for stations infrequently addressed. There's a lot more to this
"continuous throughput" than you've indicated.
Yes...the transmitting distributors do their thing all by themselves.
One racked-up tape will start pushing through as soon as the
other reader finishes...
Sunnuvagun! :-)
Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't
address my comments at all.
Tsk. One is REQUIRED to "address your comments," your
royalness? :-)
Not at all, your Foghorn Lenhorn-ness. You can type a paragraph about
regional variations in Swahili dialect in response to someone's input on
the possibilities for the introduction of errors in RTTY messages. It's
just that doing so will make you look rather simple-minded.
Tsk. All the morsemen "know" that they do near-perfect copy
every single time at high rates. :-)
Tsk. I've not seen that written except by you. RTTY is only as perfect
as a the typist who inputs the material and then only if there are no
noise bursts to create additional errors.
Tsk, you don't "see" much... :-)
Well, I certainly don't see things which aren't there. :-) :-)
More tsk...you forget that a p-tape TTY message can be read,
scanned, checked, changed if needed by a new tape, checked
all over again...usually at a message center or central before
sent as RTTY.
No, I haven't forgotten any of those things. My experience in such
things is much more recent than your own and it is therefore fresher in
my memory. All of those things introduce a time lag.
Or done "off line" at a ham station just like a PC
e-mail message. The obvious advantage is that the outgoing
message as well as the incoming reply can be stored easily
without resorting to a paper form.
Nifty. Those things can be done with help from a PC while using morse.
Those "noise bursts" affect manual morse reception as well,
unless the sending rate is so slow that it occurs between dots.
They surely do "affect" morse reception, but you were touting the
superiority of RTTY.
Technical tsk: The noise bursts are primarily of amplitude. They
do have some wideband frequency content, but the common noise
experienced at home hobby ham stations is primarily impulse noise
with more amplitude (think AM) content that have less effect on
Frequency Shift Keying. (think FM)
Those "home hobby ham stations" use RTTY too, Leonard. I'm quite
familiar with the use of FSK. It is still effected by noise and
multipath distortion.
RTTY can be resent easily and quickly without resorting to any
paper.
So, if I've got this right, we save on paper but spend on equipment.
There's a dilemma. If my morse stuff is in memory on a keyer or PC, I
can resend it quickly and easily without resorting to any paper.
At 100 WPM continuous rates that still goes faster than
common manual morse. Special character coding can include
FEC (Forward Error Correction) or ECC (Error Correction), the latter
able to automatically correct singular bit errors and to indicate
double bit errors.
The fact is that while FEC can be of some help, it is still subject to
errors. It isn't a robust system like packet or Sitor/Amtor.
The claim by many morsemen is that "CW gets through when
nothing else will..." which is a hoary old myth dating from about
the 1930s and morsemen bragging that they were better than the
voice communicators. The only conclusion on "noise burst" circuit
problems is that most of those morsemen were "filling in the blanks"
and not doing real copy. :-)
....or so you've been told. :-)
Despite all your negative criticism against non-morse communications
methods, all the other radio services engaged in communications
have dropped morse on-off keying modes. On-off keying of a carrier
just doesn't cut it in the communications world of now.
I don't have much in the way of negative criticism for non-morse
communication methods, Leonard. Fact is, I use most of 'em. Fact is,
on/off keying cuts it quite well in the communications world of now.
That hasn't changed just because you aren't proficient in its use.
I'm not too concerned with what other radio services do. I'll continue
to enjoy the use of morse. I do hope that's all right with you.
Enjoy it all you want. I was never against any morse USE...only
against the TEST for same for radio operator licenses.
Despite the statement above, your diatribe doesn't read like someone who
supports use of morse code.
If you want to claim extraordinary or even ordinary prowess of
superhuman (or even ordinary superior human) ability, feel free to
brag up a storm complete with your usual windy rhetoric.
Did you confuse me with you there for a moment?
None of that arrogant thundering is any sort of case to retain the
old morse manual test for licensing for any newcomers.
"Arrogant thundering" = any disagreement with your views.
"Other" radio services, huh? I'm sure you're having a ball on lots of
them.
I have. :-)
Past tense?
No. Amateurs are the LAST vestige of morsemanship in radio.
You say "No" but continue with the "LAST vestige" stuff. It sounds as
if you're bothered by the use of morse by radio amateurs.
Tsk. No. Only by the excessive self-righteous self-proclaimed
superiority (as a 1930s expert radio morseman) and expecting
all others to emulate your mighty and superior accomplishments.
That's a load of manure, Leonard. That isn't the "only" at all. It is
any radio amateur who uses morse and supports continuation of morse
testing. I, for one, couldn't care less if you decide to "emulate" me
or not.
What YOU had to do long ago to get your license just does not
apply to the radio world of now.
What YOU write here isn't the case simply because YOU write it. Radio
amateurs worldwide are using morse code daily for real communications.
That you don't approve doesn't change that.
The higher morse rate testing was
an artificiality of old, a left-over from the past when the only method
of radio communications was by on-off keying.
There isn't any "higher morse rate" testing.
We're not "kiddies", Len and you aren't one of us. I'm not recreating
anything. I'm using something which is there.
Tsk. You are acting the usual arrogant bully when expecting all
to agree with your idea of what constitutes "fun" in ham radio.
You aren't even involved. It would really take an arrogant bully to
expect radio amateurs to swallow your view of how amateur radio should
be regulated. What do you know of the "fun" of amateur radio?
All those old, tired, worn-out, dead cliches about "absolutely
needing to prove manual morse capability to work HF" is just a
heap of artificial BS left over from earlier times...repeated and
repeated and repeated by the ARRL for so long that the league
lost sight (and hearing) of what it originally meant.
Well, there you have it--the opinion of one never involved in amateur
radio; one whom it would seem finds that five word per minute exam an
insurmountable obstacle to his entry into amateur radio.
If you and the other mighty morsemen want to preserve and protect
morsemanship through required manual morse testing, then you
had best petition the FCC for changing the ARS to the Archaic
Radiotelegraphy Society.
Is that a DEMAND, Leonard? It's your idea. You petition for the name
change for the service in which you have no part.
That's what the HF part of U.S. ham
radio became decades ago.
So you believe that all that goes on in HF amateur radio is the use of
morse? You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on.
That's what the testing requlations
required. A name change would make the ARS more meaningful
to what it was.
Petition your government for redress of your numerous grievances.
Don't let it worry you, Leonard. You aren't involved in the slightest.
You are to amateur radio what a chainsaw is to a symphony.
Tsk, tsk. Mike Coslo had an innovative use for a chainsaw as
a shallow trench maker for radial wires. You didn't like that. :-)
I didn't like it? I recall suggesting something easier. I could have
saved him some money if he was bent on sawing slits in his yard. A
circular saw requires only a blade change to a carbide blade. It won't
even care if it hits a rock what that blade.
I'm sure you look down your nose at all who don't agree what you
consider is vital to ham radio enjoyment...that's been demonstrated
in your on-going comments to all who have different interests in here.
Different interests? What are your "interests" in amateur radio, Len?
What do YOU consider "vital" to ham radio enjoyment?
Why should any of that concern you? You aren't in.
Don't have to be "in." :-)
You have to be in if you:
1. want to partake in those things "vital to ham radio enjoyment".
2. want to be seen as credible.
The FCC regulates U.S. civil radio.
You aren't the FCC.
The laws of the USA don't
require the FCC commissioners or staff to hold amateur radio
licenses in order to regulate U.S. amateur radio.
I'd have thought you'd have picked up on this one by now. Those people
are paid to regulate amateur radio. They are PROFESSIONALS.
Despite your mighty brass-section trumpeting about "needing to
be 'in' in order to 'direct things' in ham radio," YOU are NOT a
radio regulator.
....and have never claimed to be a regulator.
YOU are nothing but a mighty wind section
demanding all go along with your ideas, conceptions, and general
wild hairs of what 'should be done' and 'who is allowed to regulate
it.' :-)
That's be another incorrect response. I'm a participant. Participants
are more important than regulators. With no participants, there'd be
nothing to regulate.
Not an orchestra by any means, just a bad brass band, out of
step with the times yet demanding that all keep the old things.
You're an old thing and I'm not demanding to keep you.
You aren't getting in.
Are you going to STOP me?!? Oh, my. Tsk.
Why, no. You do that. Consider yourself stopped by inertia.
The FCC doesn't seem to have taken any action except to reduce the
HF morse testing speed to 5 wpm. Why do you think that is?
They seem to be overwhelmed by the olde-fahrt olde-tymer
morsemen who are blindly believing in the morse religion and
have filled the ECFS' 18 petition commentary with same. :-)
Sure, Len. When will the scales fall from their eyes? :-)
Is he here too? I'll bet he could give you some valueable insight as to
how to better use your venerable R-70.
That general purpose receiver is still working as good as it did
when I bought it and when I tested it to its factory specifications
shortly thereafter. Icom has a good product there.
I'm sure it works as well as designed. Did you read up on phase noise
yet?
Tsk. Two NCTAs in here having the same Icom receiver (both still
working) seems to be a sore point with you. Poor baby.
If you own an R-70 and are happy with it, bully for you. It is fine for
your sort of casual listening.
Go play
with your Orion, why don't you? That ready-made will bring you up
to the "state of the art!" :-)
It surely does, Leonard. Its receiver beats the specs on the $11,000
Icom IC-7800. I'm sure that my tired old Orion couldn't begin to
compete with the likes of an R-70. Now THAT'S state of the art!
You will go right ahead with your "not licensed" schtick...
Yes, I will. It happens to be true.
No, it is NOT "true."
Yes, it is an undeniable truth that you have no amateur radio license.
You don't regulate U.S. amateur radio.
That doesn't give you an amateur radio license.
All
you are is an olde-tymer snarling about all having to do as you did
before they are allowed to talk about it, discuss it, or anything
else.
"All" can't do that. You have no license but you've talked, discussed,
demeaned, insulted and belittled.
Tsk. Elementary civics teaches us that U.S. federal laws are
open for dicsussion by all citizens according to the First Amendment
of the U.S. Constitution. You seek to BAR any citizen from talking
about regulations of radio hobby licensing. You aren't any member of
any bar association, so don't try to throw your weight around where
you are weightless.
It has been pointed out on numerous occasions that no one has prevented
you from spilling your guts. But you just can't force anyone to take
your stuff seriously.
You aren't in. You have no plans to get in.
Tsk. I don't tell all in here. :-)
We can only go by what you've told us. If you do have plans to get in,
then you've lied. It doesn't matter. As the President responded to
John Kerry: "A litany of complaints is not a plan".
Neither am I required to tell YOU on YOUR demand about anything.
Excuse me? Which demand was that?
Heh heh heh. Ever the demanding arrogance of someone who likes
to push folks around.
You attempt to push others around quite frequently. It's tough being
arrogant about amateur radio when you aren't actually a licensed ham
though.
First Amendment. Refresh your memory with what it means.
It says that my right to free speech is equal to your own. It makes no
requirement for me to accept your views or to refrain from giving you
the raspberries.
Feel free to review Title 47 C.F.R. Part 97 and show us all where
ONLY already-licensed radio amateurs can talk or discuss the
amateur radio regulations. Show your work.
Is that a DEMAND?
You have no experience in amateur radio.
I have MUCH experience in RADIO.
You misread. I wrote that you have no experience in *amateur* radio.
It's true that I have no amateur
radio license.
It certainly is.
It's also true that I have a commercial radio operator
license and had several other radio licenses.
Irrelevant.
See Part 97 again and tell us all the sub-part that allows ONLY
already-licensed radio amateurs to talk about amateur radio.
You've "talked". I find you incredibly incredible.
You have no stake in amateur radio.
Tsk. There you go again DEMANDING a "stake!"
I didn't see a demand, Leonard. Do you see a demand in my six word
statement?
Be advised that von Helsing may give YOU a stake.
Wooden. [I would suggest wormwood as fitting...]
I'll take it. If he has a few more, I can use 'em during Field Day.
It doesn't seem to matter if people take pokes at you or razz you or if
they are civil to you.
Heh heh heh heh. I'm a long-time veteran of computer-modem
communications with a survivor's thick virtual skin. :-)
Virtual skin? Is that like those "message knuckles" you wrote about
some time back?
But, very very FEW PCTAs in here have been civil to me.
Gee...I wonder why that would be.
Begin
with Jim Kehler, continue through assorted types who couldn't
take it in here and left, on through a couple of now-deceased
PCTAs who weren't able to continue for obvious reasons.
Well, you seem to have it on points over those who tired of your
nonsense and left, and over those whose respiration stopped. I'm
betting that I can outlast you.
ALL of them insisted and insisted and insisted that the morse
code test "must" stay...as "tradition," as a number of invalid
reasons, but (unvoiced) was the real reason, that of making all
newcomers jump through the same hoops they had to jump
through.
You probably lose some folks as soon as you start your "jump through the
same hoops" schpiel. You aren't yet a newcomer and you'll not be able
to jump through my hoops. They no longer exist.
You continue to insult and demean.
Tsk. I return fire with fire. :-)
Naw, fess up. You more often fire and wait for the return. Say, didn't
you claim that you didn't know much about this battle stuff?
You don't like it because you imperiously demand that all the
"firing" be yours against others. Tsk.
I'm sure that it seems that way to a guy with an obvious inferiority
complex; a guy who sees demands in ordinary statements; a guy who views
the comments of those who don't agree with him as "arrogant",
"bullying", "imperious".
You deserve everything you get here, poor old piranha.
Tsk. Someone wrote that all were "civil TO me?" :-)
Who was that?
Hello? Can you understand 'hypocrisy?' :-)
Yes, I've been reading your stuff for years.
You can't possibly endure the test I had to take.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!
Did you find that funny or did the Metamucil kick in?
The test I had to take isn't being given any longer.
Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehheeehhheeee e.
You can't even take the same written test.
No need, is there? Tsk, tsk.
Need matters not. You brayed about insistence that all must do as I
have done. Fact is, it can't be done. Tsk, tsk. Poor baby.
You're an old fart, Len and you're on the periphery of amateur radio.
I did have some bean soup a couple days ago. Black bean.
Very good with a salad and a sandwich. No flatulence, though.
You underestimate yourself.
I come in here and sense a great deal of flatulence from you
olde-tymers boasting that NOBODY "could endure the kind of
test they endured."
That wasn't a boast, Leonard. Nobody wrote "endure". You made a false
statement. Now you can eat your own words with your bean soup.
Funny as hell, this newsgroup. :-)
It just seems that way if you don't know what's going on.
I suppose you'll stay there.
Maybe I will. Maybe I won't.
Did you hear that noise? That was me giving a rat's patoot.
Either way, YOU have NO CONTROL over it!
Sure I do, Len. Watch this:
Leonard Anderson, you'll stay out of amateur radio.
Now, watch it come to pass.
Dave K8MN