RadioBanter

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)
-   Policy (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/)
-   -   One way to promote learning of code ... (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/113125-one-way-promote-learning-code.html)

Stefan Wolfe January 16th 07 01:33 AM

One way to promote learning of code ...
 

wrote in message
ups.com...

Show us.


I don't usually accept usenet challenges for cites since I have other things
to do but what the hey, you seem like a decent guy so I made an exception:
§97.3 Definitions.
(c) The following terms are used in this Part to indicate emission types.
Refer to §2.201 of the FCC Rules, Emission, modulation and transmission
characteristics, for information on emission type designators.


(1) CW. International Morse code telegraphy emissions having designators
with A, C, H, J or R as the first symbol; 1 as the second symbol; A or B as
the third symbol; and emissions J2A and J2B.
M = Modulation Type

N None
A AM (Amplitude Modulation), double sideband, full carrier
H AM, single sideband, full carrier
R AM, single sideband, reduced or controlled carrier
J AM, single sideband, suppressed carrier
B AM, independent sidebands
C AM, vestigial sideband (commonly analog TV)

F Angle-modulated, straight FM
G Angle-modulated, phase modulation (common; sounds like FM)

D Carrier is amplitude and angle modulated

P Pulse, no modulation
K Pulse, amplitude modulation (PAM, PSM)
L Pulse, width modulation (PWM)
M Pulse, phase or position modulation (PPM)
Q Pulse, carrier also angle-modulated during pulse
W Pulse, two or more modes used

X All cases not covered above


N = Nature of modulating signal

0 None
1 Digital, on-off or quantized, no modulation
2 Digital, with modulation
3 Single analog channel
7 Two or more digital channels
8 Two or more analog channels
9 Composite, one or more digital channel, one or more analog

X All cases not covered above


I = Information type

N None
A Aural telegraphy, for people (Morse code)
B Telegraphy for machine copy (RTTY, fast Morse)
C Analog fax
D Data, telemetry, telecommand
E Telephony, voice, sound broadcasting
F Video, television
W Combinations of the above

X All cases not covered above

Note that, in general, every permitted CW emission is AM and has a "1" in
the middle. Note that it must be in Morse (I assume you agreed with that).
J2 (SSB) is allowed (for what it's worth) but note that it must be either
keyed on/off or quantized (*digital*).
Note that in no case is any form analog modulation permitted in the FCC
definition. It may only be on/off keyed or "on/off" by digital modulation.
Tones are analog transmissions. You cannot use the RTTY "mark" tone as
FCC-defined CW.
Checkmate.



[email protected] January 16th 07 01:46 AM

One way to promote learning of code ...
 

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

As long as there is a single one out there...

Sigh...that's about the ONLY thing that justifies their mean
way of acting.


How do you justify your behavior here, Len?

How do you justify your behavior here, Dave?


Heil thinks about his rank-title-status and decides he
is "better than anybody" who can't do as "good" as
himself.

Heil is SELF-JUSTIFYING! :-)

LA


Stefan Wolfe January 16th 07 02:15 AM

One way to promote learning of code ...
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 20:00:44 -0500, "Stefan Wolfe"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 23:46:39 -0500, "Stefan Wolfe"
wrote:


wrote in message
egroups.com...
First let me say that, in amateur radio use, the term "CW", when used
to mean a mode of radio communication, is universally defined as
"Morse
Code radiotelegraphy by means of an on-off keyed carrier". The literal
"continuous wave" meaning does not apply.

Stefan Wolfe wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

The big question is whether the signals (keyed carrier vs. keyed
audio
tone) look different on a spectrum analyzer. If they don't, why
should
FCC care?

I agree that it doesn't matter to the FCC as long is the keyed audio
tone
is
coupled to the radio with EM waves such as with light
(optoisolators),
RF
or
wires (electrical connections).

However, if you couple the keyed audio carrier acoustically,
speaker-to-mike
using only sound waves, then that is J3E and only permissible in the
voice
portion of the band.

No, that's just not true - *IF* the rig and tone are clean enough.

Problems arise when the tone is not a pure sinusoid, or the
transmitter
does not have adequate carrier- or unwanted sideband-suppression. But
that's
not what is being discussed here.

Feed a Morse-Code-keyed audio tone that is a pure sinusoid into an SSB
transmitter of sufficient quality, and the result is "CW".

It doesn't matter how the tone gets into the transmitter, as long as
the process doesn't introduce other tones or artifacts.

If I were to whistle nearly pure sine waves (I am a good whistler,
perhaps
you have seen paintings of my mother :-)) in Morse code into the mike
input,
it might look like CW and sound like CW but it would really be J3E,
hence
illegal in the CW sub-bands.

No, that's not true, unless the whistle isn't a pure sine wave.

Using acoustic coupling (J3E), it becomes a slippery slope; first
computer
generated tones, then human whistling, then humming and before you
know
it,
"talking" (di dah di dah etc.. and finally, "words" :-))

Not a slippery slope at all. All that matters is what it looks like to
a spectrum analyzer. If the whistle is a pure sine wave, the output
will be a single carrier. But if it's not a pure sine wave, the result
will be spectrally different, and illegal.

From a regulations standpoint, it does not matter how the signal is
generated. What does matter is that it meets the standards of spectrum
purity.

Now you might argue that a simple "CW" transmitter using keyed Class C
stages and vacuum tubes can be much simpler, more electrically
efficient, and certainly more elegant than a newfangled
computer-SSB-transceiver-kluge-setup, yet deliver a signal of equal
quality. That's true - but it's a different issue.

I give up.

indeed you see his style of deabte evade nit pick and sidestepp avoid
anything

You keep talking about how the signal looks when it is
*received*. I keep talking about how the true A1A signal is supposed to
be
*transmitted* (your last paragraph is exactly that but you dismissed
it).
Part 97 is not concerned with how you receive, only how you transmit.

even the rules must yeld to "logic" of the ProCoders

I
agree it is true that you can fool anyone on the receiving end as long
as
you can make the signal look like A1A on a spectrum analyzer. That might
be
difficult because the sidebands generated by breaking a CW "square" wave
would be present on my A1A transmission and you would somehow have to
re-create them on your SSB pure tone transmission that is keyed in your
tightly filtered audio circuit. But re-check the definition of A1A and
you
will see that there is only one way to *transmit* it. And A1A is the
only
FCC definition of "CW". It is a moot point because tone generated data
(as
a
sinusoidal "mark" in your SSB transmission) is legal everywhere that CW
is
legal. The same is not true of the voluntary band plans. It it is
important
to know the difference, even if you think the difference makes no
difference
so to speak. And I said that whistling CW into the mike is J3E voice,
not
A1A, and the only thing that separates it from being legal on the CW
sub-bands is the way the data is coupled, not how it is received or
transmitted. You completely missed all of my points.

he is very good at missing points

OTOH it is one of the more legit styles used by th e ProCode Luddites
on here
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


Ummm....surprize, I am not/never was pro-code "test" but I think copying
code in one's head once in a while is a good mental exercise.


certainly I agree is for those with the talent
Do you ever do
anything to exercise the mind?


sure why do you ask?

I have held a rating of expert in chess I am in various types of
simulation games read etc but I choose which exercises I choose to
induge in

The physical analogue would be riding a
bicycle.


for some rding that bike is an imposible as I find morse Code

It has value and can be enjoyable for some but I agree you should
not have to pass a bicycle riding test to get an automobile drivers
license.


indeed

However, as a driver, I guess I would be slightly embarrassed if people
found out I did not know how to ride a bike ;-))


you know I can't ride bike have not been able to ride one since is day
back when Reagan was President and I was injured I in some sense still
Know how to ride but I can't do it anymore


I can't beat the victim defense. No one ever can.



[email protected] January 16th 07 02:18 AM

One way to promote learning of code ...
 

wrote:
On 15 Jan 2007 17:46:45 -0800, "
wrote:


wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

As long as there is a single one out there...

Sigh...that's about the ONLY thing that justifies their mean
way of acting.

How do you justify your behavior here, Len?

How do you justify your behavior here, Dave?


Heil thinks about his rank-title-status and decides he
is "better than anybody" who can't do as "good" as
himself.

Heil is SELF-JUSTIFYING! :-)

he is a soiciopth like most of the extras

hopefully I can soon let some fresh air into that crowd

care to jion me Len?


I can hardly wait for that!


an_old_friend January 16th 07 02:22 AM

One way to promote learning of code ...
 

wrote:
wrote:
On 15 Jan 2007 17:46:45 -0800, "
wrote:


wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

As long as there is a single one out there...

Sigh...that's about the ONLY thing that justifies their mean
way of acting.

How do you justify your behavior here, Len?

How do you justify your behavior here, Dave?

Heil thinks about his rank-title-status and decides he
is "better than anybody" who can't do as "good" as
himself.

Heil is SELF-JUSTIFYING! :-)

he is a soiciopth like most of the extras

hopefully I can soon let some fresh air into that crowd

care to jion me Len?


I can hardly wait for that!

it will be chalenge but I have beaten robeson I can handle the extras
if I have to


[email protected] January 16th 07 02:26 AM

One way to promote learning of code ...
 

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From:
(Michael Black) on Sun, Jan 14 2007

Most of the ready-built "CW" or SSB HF transceivers in use
today do that sort of keying. Major reason is keeping the
PA at the same bias for all modes selected; makes for a
simpler mode selection control.


I believe you've made another of your factual errors, Leonard.

Collins used to use this method in the KWM-2A. Unfortunately, the
company used a 1375 Hz tone--too high for anything but casual CW use.

Dave K8MN


"Casual CW use???"

As Colonel Jessup would say, "Is there any other kind?"


[email protected] January 16th 07 02:27 AM

One way to promote learning of code ...
 
Stefan Wolfe wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...


Show us.


I don't usually accept usenet challenges for cites since I have other things
to do but what the hey, you seem like a decent guy so I made an exception:


Thank you

§97.3 Definitions.
(c) The following terms are used in this Part to indicate emission types.
Refer to §2.201 of the FCC Rules, Emission, modulation and transmission
characteristics, for information on emission type designators.


(1) CW. International Morse code telegraphy emissions having designators
with A, C, H, J or R as the first symbol; 1 as the second symbol; A or B as
the third symbol; and emissions J2A and J2B.
M = Modulation Type

N None
A AM (Amplitude Modulation), double sideband, full carrier
H AM, single sideband, full carrier
R AM, single sideband, reduced or controlled carrier
J AM, single sideband, suppressed carrier
B AM, independent sidebands
C AM, vestigial sideband (commonly analog TV)

F Angle-modulated, straight FM
G Angle-modulated, phase modulation (common; sounds like FM)

D Carrier is amplitude and angle modulated

P Pulse, no modulation
K Pulse, amplitude modulation (PAM, PSM)
L Pulse, width modulation (PWM)
M Pulse, phase or position modulation (PPM)
Q Pulse, carrier also angle-modulated during pulse
W Pulse, two or more modes used

X All cases not covered above


N = Nature of modulating signal

0 None
1 Digital, on-off or quantized, no modulation
2 Digital, with modulation
3 Single analog channel
7 Two or more digital channels
8 Two or more analog channels
9 Composite, one or more digital channel, one or more analog

X All cases not covered above


I = Information type

N None
A Aural telegraphy, for people (Morse code)
B Telegraphy for machine copy (RTTY, fast Morse)
C Analog fax
D Data, telemetry, telecommand
E Telephony, voice, sound broadcasting
F Video, television
W Combinations of the above

X All cases not covered above

Note that, in general, every permitted CW emission is AM and has a "1" in
the middle.


If we're talking about the non-voice parts of the AM bands, I agree.
Frequency-shift Morse is allowed elsewhere but that's a different
issue.

Note that it must be in Morse (I assume you agreed with that).


Other codes are allowed, but if they are used, the designation is
different
because they are considered data modes.

J2 (SSB) is allowed (for what it's worth) but note that it must be either
keyed on/off or quantized (*digital*).
Note that in no case is any form analog modulation permitted in the FCC
definition. It may only be on/off keyed or "on/off" by digital modulation.


Agreed - but that on-off keying may be accomplished in any way that
results in the transmitted signal meeting the requirements.

Tones are analog transmissions. You cannot use the RTTY "mark" tone as
FCC-defined CW.


Not if there's also a space tone.

But that's not what's being discussed.

If you have an SSB transmitter of good quality (meaning good carrier
and unwanted sideband suppression), and you feed a sine wave audio tone
into the audio input,
the resulting RF output is a single carrier frequency.

If you then turn the audio tone on and off with Morse Code timing, the
result is a Morse Code keyed RF carrier that is no different than a
Morse Code keyed RF carrier generated any other way.

In the cited regulations, I see no mention of how the signal is
generated, only what the resulting RF output characteristics are.

Checkmate.


By whom? ;-)

73 de Jim, N2EY


an_old_friend January 16th 07 02:33 AM

One way to promote learning of code ...
 

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From:
(Michael Black) on Sun, Jan 14 2007

Most of the ready-built "CW" or SSB HF transceivers in use
today do that sort of keying. Major reason is keeping the
PA at the same bias for all modes selected; makes for a
simpler mode selection control.


I believe you've made another of your factual errors, Leonard.

Collins used to use this method in the KWM-2A. Unfortunately, the
company used a 1375 Hz tone--too high for anything but casual CW use.

Dave K8MN


"Casual CW use???"

As Colonel Jessup would say, "Is there any other kind?"


today certainly CW as once used seriously but harly in what 50 years


[email protected] January 16th 07 07:02 PM

One way to promote learning of code ...
 
wrote:
wrote:
On 15 Jan 2007 17:46:45 -0800, "
wrote:


wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

As long as there is a single one out there...

Sigh...that's about the ONLY thing that justifies their mean
way of acting.

How do you justify your behavior here, Len?

How do you justify your behavior here, Dave?

Heil thinks about his rank-title-status and decides he
is "better than anybody" who can't do as "good" as
himself.

Heil is SELF-JUSTIFYING! :-)

he is a soiciopth like most of the extras

hopefully I can soon let some fresh air into that crowd

care to jion me Len?


I can hardly wait for that!


Brian, I've said it before and I'll say it again: My advocacy
was for the elimination of the code test for any US amateur
radio license. Since that is almost a legal fact, I won't be
bothering the happy little in-group of middle-aged-crisis
morse mavens that the moderated group evidences
becoming. I find NO joy in keeping up the farcical fantasy
of amateur radio constantly recreating "pioneer" times in
radio a half century after the actual pioneering...or, worse
yet, their idea that having a radio hobby is somehow
"serving their country." The way that most of the
morsemen act is like the re-enacters of old battles such
as the American Civil War...AS IF they are the "generals"
who - this time - will ensure that the South won, not lost.
:-( [in their minds maybe, but not in reality]

I've found that ALL of electronics ("radio" is a subset of
that) is a fascinating subject and still find it so. By itself.
I don't need some "national organization" to tell me so or
pump up my wish-fulfillment. There's an infinity more yet
to come as the technology continues to evolve. I'll keep
on with that. Those that strive for Control, for putting up a
facade of being "better" at ancient skills, can go have their
opinion orgasms in a tight little enclave of elite "gods of
radio" full of "contests" and exhortations of "mastering"
morse (because they think they did) and all "should" be
nearly as good as they are.

...just waiting for FCC 06-178 to become legal law...




an_old_friend January 16th 07 09:49 PM

One way to promote learning of code ...
 

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
On 15 Jan 2007 17:46:45 -0800, "
wrote:



hopefully I can soon let some fresh air into that crowd

care to jion me Len?


I can hardly wait for that!


Brian, I've said it before and I'll say it again:


prehaps you miss understood whcih gruop I was inviting you to join me
in letting a bit a fresh air into I meant the extra class ONair I
certianly will not bother the "moderated" gruop if it happens



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com