wrote:
I'll bet copying a message by voice from someone with the cyrillic
alphabet would end up a lot better results than copying the same
message with cw.

I would like to see Al try to copy Japanese CW.
Let's see, -.-. --.- would be "ni" "ne". Wonder
what he would do with .-.-- and --.-. ? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

jawod wrote:
My MENSA membership number is 1006281. What's yours?

What's your Social Security number?

.... 66 ... 6
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
I'll bet copying a message by voice from someone with the cyrillic
alphabet would end up a lot better results than copying the same
message with cw.

I would like to see Al try to copy Japanese CW.
Let's see, -.-. --.- would be "ni" "ne". Wonder
what he would do with .-.-- and --.-. ? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp
of course I suspect tht Al is old enough to think them Japs don't count
for much

Cecil Moore wrote:
jawod wrote:
My MENSA membership number is 1006281. What's yours?

What's your Social Security number?

... 66 ... 6
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp
you know I suspect it is from the PoV of the procoders

Cecil Moore wrote:
jawod wrote:

My MENSA membership number is 1006281. What's yours?


What's your Social Security number?


... 66 ... 6
Cecil,
Are you REALLY the spawn of Satan?
I'll kid with you no more!
(Imagine me making the sign of the cross right now.)

jawod wrote:
Are you REALLY the spawn of Satan?

How many 6's do you have in your SS#?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

"an old friend" wrote in
oups.com:


Cecil Moore wrote:
jawod wrote:
My MENSA membership number is 1006281. What's yours?

What's your Social Security number?

... 66 ... 6
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

you know I suspect it is from the PoV of the procoders

Slow Code wrote:
"an old friend" wrote in
oups.com:
more kookery

And ever so slowly we creep up on the *actual* point....

pick a freq, pick a mode, pick a language, pick a moment in time.
*Nothing* is perfect and CW or no CW, it's about circumstance, not code.
Then again, you can back it up one more and acknowledge the foolishness of
the whole CW argument.
As it stands, hams are so crazy they somehow think they are the only hope
for mankind.
I pray that farce never becomes fact!

Everything has it's place.
Ham radio is a novelty. CW is a novelty within the same. That's all....
As long as there are 40wpm ops out there that can't program a radio, it's
just a bunch of
ding-dongs arguing amongst each other, looking like a bunch of ding-dongs.
And it goes both ways.... no reason to ditch CW but this "my tapper is
faster than your tapper"
stupidity is just phallic and pathetic. Which finally brings us to the
overall problem...
As usual, the last word in any hammy hashing is the same.
Control freaks needing to feel in control, and the subject matters not.
That's why these goofy threads carry on forever.

rb

"Dave Oldridge" wrote in message
9...
"Woody" wrote in news:1o2Hg.19713$Te.3938@trnddc07:


"Dave Oldridge" wrote in message
9...
"Woody" wrote in
news:%RJGg.27319$uV.13889@trnddc08:

Did someone drop you on your head at birth? The reason 50wpm can
save lives is probably a bit complex for you to get both your
functioning neurons around, but believe me, having done CW for a
living for some decades I do know that it can save lives. And if
you're faster than the average bear at it, you can tell someone on
the scene things they need to know all that much faster.


Possibly, because try as I might, I can't really remember much about
that day.... I had pyloric stenosis, if that counts?

So apparently YOUR answer to this question is that you couldn't send
your name if your own life depended on it.

Now that's true... I'd require a CW setup of some kind in order to
send my name; or anything else for that matter.
Or as previously pointed out, hack up a headphone jack and tippy tap
the wires together. Either way, I don't see my life depending on it at
any time, so I'll just let my CW skills continue to rust.
However; your argument does make me wonder how non-hams even have a
chance at life in this world... ??


Believe me, I get it. I don't think CW ought to be mandatory and it
isn't where I live. I do think people who intend to use it should
learn how to use it properly, though. For CW to be effective, both
operators must be competent. IF they are, they can often transcend
barriers of language that only digital modes can get over. In my own
case, the fact that I could read CW and read written Spanish a bit
once enabled me to render aid to a burning fishing boat. (There were
other more routine examples of where the language barrier was crossed
by CW--many messages I copied were not in English at all, but were
readable by their end recipients).

OK.... so by your own words, CW still didn't save a life... CW mixed
with bad Spanish passed a message. So now we'll have to add a Spanish
test. Thanks a lot.

My point is, my bad Spanish might not have recognized the word "fuego" if
it was spoken fast among a lot of other words. But on CW it came across
loud and clear.

As for the language thing.... I can copy voice language and hand it
off to another native just as easy and they'll figure it out too.
No CW necessary.

Except you'll be a lot slower because you'll need phonetic spellings for
everything. Believe me, I know. I've done this. For a living for many
years.

BTW, I noticed you conveniently left out the specific year in which
said burning boat was offshore with an obsolete CW outfit, and how
your CW expertise put out a fire.... but I'm guessing we're talking
many a year ago, so again, a moot point.

Not that long ago, really. Early 1990's if I remember.

Actually,
The boat thing in general is really killing me... If these numb-nuts
are offshore and not on the correct USCG freqs and/or unaware of how
to properly tune their radios in an emergency, then it isn't CW saving
lives, it's the grace of God that somebody happened to be on their
freq at that time. But again, what boats are out there with a CW
rig???? That's crazy, bubba. :-) rb

This was on 500khz (and 484). CW was the mode of operation on those
frequencies until well into the 90's. Cheap SSB radios were plentiful.
So were some SITOR lashups. But what finally killed it was INMARSAT.

So now, instead of getting nailed by solar flares on HF, you get nailed
by them on INMARSAT and have to wait 6 to 9 months for a new launch.
Meanwhile you're limping along on SSB using a phonetic alphabet to send
traffic at a SLOWER rate.

--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

Well... no, I got the point just fine. I can't imagine being surrounded by
Spanish-speaking people needing a code interp, or being on a CW freq anyway,
while some emergency happens to be taking place. And yeah, I'm elite like
that... I have a gift for gab... just like a monkey can be trained to tap
out a code of communication, I can parrot what I hear. It [or 50wpm CW]
isn't intelligence in any way, it's just a stupid circus trick. Once
again..... this wasn't or isn't the issue anyway... No one said there were
no pros to the mode, just that the whole "save a life" thing is laughable.
This argument jumps from an issue of speed, then to the generation gap, then
to simple name-calling banter. It's quite humorous and totally stupid. Kudos
to the OP troll! LOL
rb



"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:54:37 GMT, "Woody" wrote:

"Dave Oldridge" wrote in message
. 159...
For CW to be effective, both operators
must be competent. IF they are, they can often transcend barriers of
language that only digital modes can get over. In my own case, the fact
that I could read CW and read written Spanish a bit once enabled me to
render aid to a burning fishing boat. (There were other more routine
examples of where the language barrier was crossed by CW--many messages
I
copied were not in English at all, but were readable by their end
recipients).

OK.... so by your own words, CW still didn't save a life... CW mixed with
bad Spanish passed a message. So now we'll have to add a Spanish test.
Thanks a lot.

I think you missed the point. Even if you didn't know "ola" from
"adios", you can copy Spanish in CW and hand it to the recipient, who
can read it. Try that with a mic.

As for the language thing.... I can copy voice language and hand it off to
another native just as easy and they'll figure it out too.
No CW necessary.

Really? You can write a spoken language you don't understand well
enough to be read by someone who understands it? Maybe. Maybe not.
In CW, you can.