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.

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.

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" :-))

"Stefan Wolfe" ) writes:
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.

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.

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" :-))


But it could never be A1, because it doesn't meet the criteria of a pure
tone into a good SSB transmitter.

I doubt however good a whistler you are, that you can guarantee it's a sine
wave and doesn't include any peripheral noise. And that microphone is bound
to pick up background noise, so you aren't sending a CW signal.

Also, the speaker and microphone, if putting a tone oscillator into
the transmitter that way, may add distortion to the tone, which then means
you don't have a CW signal.

If it looks and sounds like CW, then it is CW. But your examples
aren't about sending CW, because you'd be sending peripheral audio along
with the tone.

In other words, it's the results that matter. You can't get those
results with a microphone, and that's why it's not CW.

Michael VE2BVW

"Michael Black" wrote in message
...

If it looks and sounds like CW, then it is CW.

If the carrier of a double sideband AM signal is not keyed on and off, it is
not true CW, no matter how it sounds.

I think the problem is that you are incorrectly equating A1 "CW" to A2 "MCW"
(tone modulated continuous wave).

Actually, MCW is an oxymoron. Although you can have a wave continuously
modulated by tone, you cannot have a continuous wave if the wave is
continuously modulated. It should be WCM, not MCW :-)

You obviously know the difference. A1 CW must meet the emission requirement
of on/off keying of the carrier - only.


In other words, it's the results that matter. You can't get those
results with a microphone, and that's why it's not CW.

I agree with the latter.

Nothing is true "CW" except keyed double sideband carrier (A1A). That
doesn't mean it isn't Morse (or Farnsworth :-)). True CW is very narrowly
defined in its emission characteristic. It is only a technical point. You
can call tone modulated carrier "CW" if you wish but that does not agree
with the FCC definition in designating the US CW sub-bands.

And yes, MCW will let you listen to 1 Mhz on a cheap AM radio while a zero
beat oscillator is needed to hear A1A on a cheap AM radio (I had overlooked
that simple fact before).

"Stefan Wolfe" ) writes:
"Michael Black" wrote in message
...

If it looks and sounds like CW, then it is CW.

If the carrier of a double sideband AM signal is not keyed on and off, it is
not true CW, no matter how it sounds.

I think the problem is that you are incorrectly equating A1 "CW" to A2 "MCW"
(tone modulated continuous wave).

NO, I'm talking about resutls.

We weren't talking about double sideband, presumably with a carrier.
We were talking about an SSB transmitter.

You can't get a signal that "looks and sounds like CW" if you feed
an audio tone into a transmitter that has a carrier, and/or has two
sidebands. There will at the very least be the carrier and a signal
offset from that carrier by the frequency of the audio tone. If there
are two sidebands, there will be the carrier and then two signals (both
offset from the carrier by the frequency of the audio tone). In neither
of these cases will there be a CW signal.

But feed a pure enough sinewave into an SSB transmitter that has good
carrier balance and good unwanted sideband supression, and you have
a CW signal. It doesn't matter how it's generated, it matters whether
it "looks and sounds like CW".

If you were talking about whistling into an AM (ie dsb with carrier)
transmitter) then all you can ever get is "MCW", aka Modulated CW.

If I misread what kind of transmitter you were talking about, it was precisly
because there is absolutely no way you can get a CW signal by whistling
into an AM (DSB with carrier) transmitter. YOu were the one who said you
were a good whistler.

No, I went back and you were talking about a sideband transmitter.

The results are the results. YOu can't get a CW signal out of an AM
transmitter by injecting an audio tone into it. The output signal
will be the giveaway, and it doesn't matter what method you use.

But if you inject an tone into an SSB transmitter, the results will
be exactly the same as a CW signal, so long as the sinewave is pure
and that ssb transmitter is in good shape.

It's no longer "tone modulated" because you are only issuing a single
frequency.

An AM transmitter does not transmit a signal where the carrier goes
up and down in amplitude. It is a composite signal of three signals.
The carrier, which in effect gets to the antenna because of feedthrough.
Then the two sidebands. Feed a fixed audio tone (say 1KHz) into that
transmitter and you get three signals in the output of that transmitter, the
carrier, and the two sidebands at 1KHz above and below that carrier.
Obviously that can never be a CW signal. But it does show that the
modulating tone is translated to radio frequency. Suppress the carrier,
and the carrier is gone from the output, with the two sidebands still there,
which means two signals each offset from the frequency of the missing
carrier. Suppress the unwanted sideband from that, and you get a single
frequency, which is no different from a carrier out of a CW transmitter.

When you whistle into an SSB transmitter, it can't be CW for the simple
reason that it won't be a pure tone, and the microphone will pick up
background noise, and you will no longer have a single frequency output from
the transmitter.

ONe of your previous posts was about your interpretation of what was wanted,
but it wasn't about understanding what was being sent. The FCC or any
regulatory body doesn't care whether you key an RF oscillator on and off
to generate CW, or if you inject a tone into an SSB transmitter. They
care about the results. Hence if the tone isn't pure, or the SSB
transmitter is not suppressing the carrier or unwanted sideband enough,
then you have an amplitude modulated signal of some sort, and of course
it isn't allowed in the CW sub-band. But neither can you run an AM
transmitter in the CW sub-bands and start modulating it with anything
into the microphone input.

"Acoustic coupling" has nothing to do with what type of signal is
being sent, except so far as it affects the purity of the output signal.

You are confusing Modulated CW with using a pure tone with a good SSB
transmitter. The former will always be an MCW signal, the latter will
be a CW signal so long as things are well adjusted and pure.

Michael VE2BVW

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.

wrote in message
ups.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. 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. 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.

Stefan Wolfe wrote:
wrote in message
ups.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. You keep talking about how the signal looks when it is
*received*.

No, I don't.

I'm talking about what the signal produced by the transmitter looks
like on a spectrum analyzer

I keep talking about how the true A1A signal is supposed to be
*transmitted* (your last paragraph is exactly that but you dismissed it).

The basic point is this: FCC doesn't care *how* you generate a "CW"
signal,
as long as it meets the technical requirements.

Part 97 is not concerned with how you receive, only how you transmit.

Not "how" you transmit but "what" you transmit. The characteristics of
the transmitted signal are what matters, not the technology used to
generate it.

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.

Not about fooling anyone. It's about meeting the technical requirements
for signal quality.

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.

Show us.

Post the definition that says the way the signal is generated matters
to FCC.

And A1A is the only
FCC definition of "CW".

Show us.

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.

The way the data is coupled makes no difference. What matters are the
characteristics of the transmitted signal.

In practice, I don't think anyone could whistle into a mike so
perfectly as to produce
a "CW" signal that would be indistinguishable from one generated by
more conventional
means. But that's not the point.

You completely missed all of my points.

No, I simply pointed out your errors in interpretation of the rules.

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.

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

"Stefan Wolfe" ) writes:

I give up. 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. 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.


It has nothing to do with coupling. If you think the rules disallow
the method of a tone into an SSB transmitter, then it would most definitely
disallow whistling into the microphone.

Here. I cooked up an example that might hopefully explain all this,
but at this point I doubt it.

Take a 2MHz oscillator, and you key that (or, key a buffer stage after
that). Put it into a mixer, and the second input of the mixer is a
5MHz oscillator. Amplify it and feed it to the antenna. Now you've
got a signal with a carrier (5MHz) and two sidebands (3MHz and 7MHz), not a
good signal.

So you make the mixer balanced so the oscillators don't appear at the output.
That gets rid of the 5MHz "carrier", which leaves the two sidebands in place.
But you don't want that, so you add some filtering to get rid of the unwanted
sideband, let's make it the 3MHz signal.

Thus you now end up with a 7MHz signal.

How is this different from a 7MHz crystal oscillator being keyed and
then amplified and feeding the antenna?

How is this different from any number of SSB transmitters that also
send CW?

The rules don't allow it? But then a lot of SSB rigs break the
rules, and that really fancy CW transmitter described in QST in the
fall of 1971 would also break the rules.

Oh wait, it's legal.

But then why would a tone into an SSB transmitter be illegal
according to the rules? The tone becomes the 2MHz oscillator. It's
the same principle, just with a lower frequency being mixed with a
radio freqeuncy.

Of course you're going to get in trouble if you heterodyne two oscillators
together and don't get rid of the unwanted signals.

But, look at the output of the transmitter, and if it's designed properly
and adjusted properly, you cannot tell the difference between that
heterodyne transmitter and that simple 1 oscillator transmitter. You have
one radio signal at the output of that transmitter, and you can't tell
how it is generated.

Same with injecting a tone into an SSB transmitter. You will get one
signal at the output of that transmitter if the tone is pure enough and
carrier and unwanted sideband are properly suppressed.

You want to come up with some special case for this method, when the
other rules would take care of any problems.

If you've got more than one signal out of that transmitter, then
you've got a spur, and there are rules about that. The rules aren't
about how you can generate a spur-free signal, or allow spurs if you
followed a certain scheme, they are about not allowing spurs.

Take your simple CW transmitter. So the AC from the filament starts
modulating the oscillator tube, and suddenly you have an AM signal (ie
the keyed carrier and the two sidebands caused by the 60Hz ac signal).

Nobody is going to say "Oh, you've done that wrong, it's illegal". They
are going to say "You'd better do something about that AM signal in
the CW band".

Use an audio tone with harmonic content into the SSB transmitter
and then that signal when translated to radio frequencies will result in
multiple outputs, which is against the law. Have bad carrier suppression in
the SSB transmitter, and you'll get two outputs, again something which
is against the law. Have bad unwanted carrier suppression and you'll
have to sidebands at the output of that transmitter, yet again something
against the rules.

But do it properly, and wham, you only have one signal and nobody know,
or cares, how you generate it. Once again, it's no different than
a crystal oscillator feeding an amplifier; nobody cares how you generate
that CW signal, but they will care a lot if you've got hum on the signal
or you've got a harmonic.

In the end, you are waving your hands at your interpretation of the rules,
but can't even dig up those rules that you think mean what you say. Yet
you also can't explain the KWM-2 that used tone injection to generate
CW (surely Collins wouldn't have used the method if it wasn't allowed)
and I"m sure there were some other rigs of that same vintage that used
the same scheme. There were certainly articles in the ham magazines
about using the method to add CW to rigs that were SSB only.

You can't explain all those hams who used a frequency shifted audio
oscillator into an SSB transmitter to get FSK. Surely that would be wrong
if the FCC didn't allow the use of a tone to generate CW with an SSB
transmitter, though the principal is exactly the same.


Michael VE2BVW