If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

Cecil Moore wrote:

clfe wrote:

As to the Titanic operator being a smart ass as someone alluded to in
here - maybe he was just losing his cool (very afraid) and trying
desperately to get help and felt any other signals were just going to
interfere.


It was before the Titanic hit the iceberg that the Titanic
CW operator told the Californian CW operator to get off the
air. He considered his normal Titanic CW message traffic to
have priority over any CW traffic that the Californian might
need to pass. Turns out the Californian's CW operator was
the only person in the world who could have saved the life
of the Titanic's CW operator.

Ship born radio communications were controlled by communications
companies completely separate from the ship. The radio operators were
not under the command of the ship's captain. In the case of Titanic the
Marconi Radio Company controlled the radio. Californian and Carpathia
had different company control and there was a definite rivalry between
the companies. The Titanic operator was fully justified in telling the
Californian operator to close station. This was one of the direct causes
of the formation of the international radio treaties we operate under now.

Dave WD9BDZ

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

Cecil Moore wrote:

Dave wrote:

C'mon Cecil, you've been licensed as long as I have. I Know you Know
CW. Does that mean we're virtually obsolete?


My favorite mode is CW and it's a fun mode but it is never
going to save the world.

AGREE!!!!!

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
clfe wrote:
As to the Titanic operator being a smart ass as someone alluded to in
here - maybe he was just losing his cool (very afraid) and trying
desperately to get help and felt any other signals were just going to
interfere.

It was before the Titanic hit the iceberg that the Titanic
CW operator told the Californian CW operator to get off the
air. He considered his normal Titanic CW message traffic to
have priority over any CW traffic that the Californian might
need to pass. Turns out the Californian's CW operator was
the only person in the world who could have saved the life
of the Titanic's CW operator.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

In that case then - I stand corrected, I was unaware of that.

Lou

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
 

clfe wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
It was before the Titanic hit the iceberg that the Titanic
CW operator told the Californian CW operator to get off the
air. He considered his normal Titanic CW message traffic to
have priority over any CW traffic that the Californian might
need to pass. Turns out the Californian's CW operator was
the only person in the world who could have saved the life
of the Titanic's CW operator.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

In that case then - I stand corrected, I was unaware of that.

It's totaly untrue. The Californian's radio operator ignored the
Titanic's distress signals because the Titanic was a Marconi ship and
the Californian was a Telefunken ship. The operators were not allowed to
communicate with the competing company's operators under any
circumstances under penalty of being put off the ship at first landing,
with no hope of getting home or being hired by the other company.

I recently blogged about it:

http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/2006/06/22/

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
 

Cecil Moore wrote in
om:

Dave wrote:
C'mon Cecil, you've been licensed as long as I have. I Know you Know
CW. Does that mean we're virtually obsolete?

My favorite mode is CW and it's a fun mode but it is never
going to save the world.


With an attitude like that it probably won't. Better keep a microphone
handy.

SC

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
 

Bill Turner wrote in
:

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On 12 Jul 2006 10:24:55 -0700, "an old freind"
wrote:

if i was at my home station is no they would not die

and I am as no code as they come I down right hate the mode and yet y
pc and station is quite able to work cw as needed to save a life if it
was needed

------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------

He apparently hates English too.

Bill, W6WRT


Imagine that coming toward you 20wpm. I'm begining to think it's good
he hates cw. LOL

SC

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
It's totaly untrue. The Californian's radio operator ignored the
Titanic's distress signals because the Titanic was a Marconi ship and
the Californian was a Telefunken ship.

If the History Channel got it right, the Californian's CW
operator was asleep by the time the Titanic hit the iceberg.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
 

Slow Code wrote:
With an attitude like that it probably won't. Better keep a microphone
handy.

Actually, what I keep handy is food and water.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
 

Dirk wrote:

Ham's care more about operating appliances than knowing how to save a
lives.

:-(

troll-o-meter (digital version)
0*****1*****2*****3*****4*****5*****6*****7*****8* ****9*****
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

ah ****. we have a troll!

If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
 

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 16:06:55 GMT, (Dirk) wrote:

Troll message clipped

I'll byte...

Someone can correct me if the order of my time-line is off...
Here goes what I can piece together.

Before radio, people used homing pigeons and wired communications.
This was the means of comms during WWI. If the wires failed or were
cut, the troops would send important messages out by carrier or homing
pigeons. As technology developed, the Radio was invented which
allowed CW only communications via Spark Gap. There was no voice so
ALL operators learned Morse Code.

Later, AM was invented and the voice could be heard across the radio.
This newer technology wasn't as reliable as CW, but became more
popular and more reliable as time progressed. Eventually, SSB was
invented. However, CW was maintained as the communication standard
for distress signals from ships, for two reasons. One: It could be
heard and understood even when someone wasn't tuned precisely on
frequency. Two: An invention made for ships created an automated
transmission of SOS and the ship's location coordinates. This could
not only be heard when tuned off-frequency, but also across a very
wide band of frequency.

Eventually, Satellite technology became a new standard. Now, instead
of having to calculate a ship's approximate position using LORAN
signals, a ship can know within 100 feet where it actually is. Also,
with that technology, comes a new generation of two-way
communications. Now, during a distress, the ship not only
automatically sends an SOS and it's coordinates within just a few
feet, but it is sent to monitoring rescue services who can find the
ship much more quickly than before. Now, regardless of the sun-spot
cycle, the time of day, the meteor activity, and band conditions, the
ship in distress can take only a fraction of a second to send an
emergency message in plain english ( or native language) and receive a
notice that their message has been received and is being acted on just
as quickly. Not only that, but ANYONE on the ship can read and
understand the message. They don't need to have a specially trained
CW operator to interpret it and write it down for them.

Sorry, I love to operate CW, but if it is that important to emergency
comms, maybe we need to convince OnStar to convert to CW to be more
effective. I don't think they will buy it.

I don't think the question should be "If you had to use CW to save
someone's life...?", but rather "If you had to save a life, what
reliable technology do you have ready and available to use?"

Depending on the member of my club, the answer could be any of the
following: CW on any ham band, SSB on any ham band, FM on any allowed
band, Packet radio, Satellite communication via FM or SSB, Thru the
ISS, Digital voice, APRS, Cell phone, CB channel 9 or 19, (yes, it can
be very handy in an emergency), OnStar and similar services, and
probably some other mode which does not come to mind at the moment.

Having worked communications in the aftermath of several disasters, I
have come to believe that there is no less reliable method of
communications than HF SSB. However, I have never seen conditions so
bad it couldn't be used quite effectively.

Several years ago I conducted an experiment three times during a day:
in the morning about sunrise, at lunch time, and in the evening about
6pm. I laid a 20 meter dipole on the ground and, without an antenna
tuner, I transmitted an emergency drill cq on 20, 40 and 80 meters in
SSB mode. In each exercise I found someone who could copy me clearly
within 2-4 states of me on 80 and 40 meters. Even during the
prime-time net period on 75, I got responses indicating adequate
conditions to communicate the emergency messages. I was informed by
one ham I drew him out of the woodwork as he has been listening but
not transmitting for the last four or five months. The rig I used, an
Atlas 180 drops power at high swr to 5-10 watts. The antenna was a 20
meter dipole with no balun attached directly to 75 feet of whatever
coax the cable company uses to bring CATV into the home with.

20 meters only worked during the morning and at lunch time.

People are listening and the word "emergency" will get attention!
Even appliance operators can answer that call. Could they answer you
if you sent a distress in CW?



--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW