On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:35:39 -0500, Steve Nosko wrote:
The singular (implied plural) was well accepted.

100 kc

Go up 3 kc, please

It is _not_ a pluralization. It is k(ilo)c(cycles-per-)s(econd).
The scientific notation for "X per Z" is "X/Z". Ergo, "cycles per
second" (cps) is "c/s". Thousand(s) of cycles per second is "kc/s".
The crude shorthand commonly used in ham radio is (was) "kcs"(, or "mcs")
-- probably due to morse code usage influence.
The pedantic argument back in the Olde Days was that a QSL card
confirming a QSO on "7180 kc" was wrong. (Just as "73s" on the
same QSL card was {and still is} "wrong".)

"7180 kc" is seven million one hundred and eighty thousand cycles.
Period. It could be 2 cycles today, 17 tomorrow, 6 the day after,
400 next week -- and, so on until the total number of cycles are
accumulated.

It's not until the "per Unit Of Time" is specified that we have
a _frequency_ .

(But, then, I think the QSL card should've stated
"41.783 Meter Wavelength".)

Jonesy
--
Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux
Pueblo, Colorado | @ | Jonesy | OS/2 __
38.24N 104.55W | config.com | DM78rf | SK

Actually, the Hertz is is defined as a unit of frequency equal to one
cycle
per second. That would mean the KHz/s is redundant.
______

"K" means Kelvin (a unit of temperature), so "KHz" is incorrect, also. The
correct form is "kHz."

In message , Walter Maxwell
writes
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:26:55 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

Walter Maxwell wrote:
Richard, your approval of my writings is like receiving a
million-dollar jack
pot. Words cannot descibe how much your approval as an English major is
appreciated.

Y'all shudda did ah reright in Suthurn so us Texians kud unnerrstan.

Cecil, shud I huv writ my last 3 emales ta ya in Suthurn so ya kud of
unnerrstud
em sufeeciently ta reeplie?

Waalltre


Reminds me of my very first trip to the United States back in 1972. I
was working at a computer company in Massachusetts, and while I was
there I gave a training course to a group of Texans from the US
airforce.

It took us nearly a week to get in sync, what with their Texurs drahl
an' my dulcet tones from the old British Empaah, don't y' know ... :-))

They were a great bunch of guys, though. Happy days!

--
73
Ian, G3NRW

Walter,

that brings back some old memories.

In the early 1960s I was, for a while, in the control tower at RCAF Greenwood Nova
Scotia. Our ATC voice hotline linking several facitilites in the maritimes had a
constant background of CW from NAA in Cutler, Maine.

A couple of years later I was stationed in Prince Edward Island where the local
station, CJRW 1240, was about the same strength as a station in New Brunswick, CKCW
1220. In the background there always seemed to be a discernabile signal from NAA. I
always assumed that this was due to the 20 kHz difference mixing with the 24 kHz of
NAA and giving a very steady, but rather high pitched for CW, 4 kHz beat.

While in Greenwood it was also common to hear the Grennwood NDB (ZX) while in the
car; since the beacon was on the IF commonly used in automobile radios in those days
- 248 kHz? or something close.

The last one was really wierd. Some days when the weather was lousy we would hear an
intermittent and badly distorted BBC signal on a VHF FM frequency. The technicians
were convinced we were either crazy or drunk. Eventually it turned out to be a
mixing problem involving two VHF frequencies and a BBC World Service station on the
15 MHz SWBC band. It only happened in bad weather because one of the mixing
frequencies was the GCA (Ground Controlled Approach) frequency which was only really
active in bad weather.

I don't reallyl think any of the above had anything to do with radials, but they
triggered some long ago memories.

Dave

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 21:44:25 -0400, Dave Holford wrote:

Walter,

that brings back some old memories.

In the early 1960s I was, for a while, in the control tower at RCAF Greenwood Nova
Scotia. Our ATC voice hotline linking several facitilites in the maritimes had a
constant background of CW from NAA in Cutler, Maine.

Hi Dave, that was probably because of the relatively short distance between
Cutler and Greenwood with respect to the VLF of NAA, along with its very high
power ground-wave signal. Incidentally, In the pre-war days of WW2 NAA was at
Arlngton, VA.

A couple of years later I was stationed in Prince Edward Island where the local
station, CJRW 1240, was about the same strength as a station in New Brunswick, CKCW
1220. In the background there always seemed to be a discernabile signal from NAA. I
always assumed that this was due to the 20 kHz difference mixing with the 24 kHz of
NAA and giving a very steady, but rather high pitched for CW, 4 kHz beat.

That's how I'd explain it, especially if there was non-linear substance deriving
a beat between the two BC stations.

While in Greenwood it was also common to hear the Grennwood NDB (ZX) while in the
car; since the beacon was on the IF commonly used in automobile radios in those days
- 248 kHz? or something close.

The last one was really wierd. Some days when the weather was lousy we would hear an
intermittent and badly distorted BBC signal on a VHF FM frequency. The technicians
were convinced we were either crazy or drunk. Eventually it turned out to be a
mixing problem involving two VHF frequencies and a BBC World Service station on the
15 MHz SWBC band. It only happened in bad weather because one of the mixing
frequencies was the GCA (Ground Controlled Approach) frequency which was only really
active in bad weather.

I don't reallyl think any of the above had anything to do with radials, but they
triggered some long ago memories.

Dave

Very interesting, Dave, I'm pleased that that you shared those events with us.

Walt