Len Over 21 wrote:



Go for it, big daddy dave. Ain't no cats on your hot tin roof.

I left active duty in 1956, moved to southern California in 1956, worked
IN radio-electronics in the aerospace industries out here. I'm still
working IN it but not at regular hours. Better than 40 hours a week
from then to now. Even did a severe major shift to go from illustration
to electronics engineering. Kept up a hobby in electronics at home
all that time. Even authored articles on electronics and ham radio
as a professional writer in spare time. Became senior staff
engineer at several large electronics corporations.

Howaboutthat? Does that "show enough interest?" I'd say making a
career out of an "interest" ought to prove something to anyone with
more than four brain cells. Nope. Not enough to mighty big dave.
To him (bless his 4-synapse grey matter) I'd have to regress and Learn
To Beep Morse and become an amatoor hum wid a reel lisense.


All that bragging and still can't pass the test for a ham license.

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil Miss Construance
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

The question-topic of the morse code test pertains to GETTING
INTO amateur radio below 30 MHz. Some have misconstrued the
essence of amateur radio as being a skilled radiotelegrapher.

Others have misconstrued the term "GETTING INTO" amateur radio as
meaning the several decades of interest preceeding the several years of
newsgroup posts just before the three-year-old claim of getting "an
Extra right out of the box".

Go for it, big daddy dave. Ain't no cats on your hot tin roof.

I did go for it, Len--forty years ago, within a year of my first
exposure to amateur radio.

I left active duty in 1956, moved to southern California in 1956, worked
IN radio-electronics in the aerospace industries out here.

Nope. Nothing about your obtaining an amateur radio license here.

I'm still
working IN it but not at regular hours. Better than 40 hours a week
from then to now. Even did a severe major shift to go from illustration
to electronics engineering. Kept up a hobby in electronics at home
all that time. Even authored articles on electronics and ham radio
as a professional writer in spare time. Became senior staff
engineer at several large electronics corporations.

No, nothing about your having obtained an amateur radio license here.

Howaboutthat? Does that "show enough interest?"

In obtaining an amateur radio license? Why, no, none at all.

I'd say making a
career out of an "interest" ought to prove something to anyone with
more than four brain cells. Nope. Not enough to mighty big dave.
To him (bless his 4-synapse grey matter) I'd have to regress and Learn
To Beep Morse and become an amatoor hum wid a reel lisense.

You haven't Beeped Morse nor have you Passed Any Written Exam. You've
taken no action on your declared interest.

Geez, snarly dave, those electroshock treatments do take away
some of your smarts. Was the gunnery nurse in attendance?
Did he dance well? Who lead?

Who did what? My smarts are fine, Len. I wrote about getting into
amateur radio. Your response didn't address that, did it?

Dave K8MN

Leo wrote:
On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 15:01:25 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

snippage

You forgot to add Kim's callsign!


I like Paul's callsign better! :)


Yaknow, I didn't even notice till you mentioned it!
8^)


- Mike KB3EIA -

JJ wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote:



You forgot to add Kim's callsign!


I suppose the Super Bowl half-time act with Janet Jackson and the other
moron singing with her was just the kind of low class, crass act kim
really enjoys. Maybe kim should loan Jackson her callsign.

Now that you've started it, here is a little demonstration:

Go to www.google.com . Go to the image search. Search on Janet
Jackson. Observe the pictures that pop up.

Now try to reconcile what you have just seen with CBS and MTV and the
NFL' denial of any knowledge of the ugly little stunt. (yes it was ugly
- that creepy outfit she wore looked like some 1970's lingerie from
behind the iron curtain, and what the heck was that ugly thing on her
breast? - shudder!)

They knew! And the halftime show, which used to be the way for the NFL
to get women that were not interested in football to watch the show has
now changed. My guess is that there will be plenty of men watching the
halftime show next year.

Even if they didn't know this was going to happen, the people they
hired to do the show, MTV, is pretty steeped in sleaze. Note that MTV is
owned by the same company that owns CBS. So ignorance of the act would
be admission of stupidity.

Maybe they'll have porn stars next year.


And lest we forget, Kid Rock comes out in a desecrated US Flag with a
hole cut in the middle. Pretty damn despicable! Is this what the
superbowl is about? I can only assume that the NFL approves of this kind
of disrespectful behavior, and if we watch the trash they spew, we do as
well!
- Mike KB3EIA -

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo writes:


One might almost think the fellow is just here to bust people's chops.
Thanks for the history and Clarification, Paul.


Poor baby. Feel injured, do you?

Oh heavens no! Amused? Yes. but then I feel kind of bad about that,
because I feel kind of sorry for you.

You probably see that as a sign of weakness, which reinforces my view. :^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , JJ
writes:

All that bragging and still can't pass the test for a ham license.

All that snarling and you ain't got either a name or a callsign.

Why is no one surprised? :-)

Go back under your bridge, troll.

LHA / WMD

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , JJ
writes:

All that bragging and still can't pass the test for a ham license.

All that snarling and you ain't got either a name or a callsign.

Do you have a callsign, Len?

Dave K8MN

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

One might almost think the fellow is just here to bust people's chops.
Thanks for the history and Clarification, Paul.

Poor baby. Feel injured, do you?

Oh heavens no! Amused? Yes. but then I feel kind of bad about that,
because I feel kind of sorry for you.

Awwww...that's so swweeeeet! :-)


You probably see that as a sign of weakness, which reinforces my view.


Nah. I write it off as one too many hockey puck impacts on the helmet.

That and all the sticking probably increased the ear hissing.












So...how's the pool going? Has the gunnite dried on the walls yet?

LHA / WMD

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , JJ

writes:

All that bragging and still can't pass the test for a ham license.

All that snarling and you ain't got either a name or a callsign.

Do you have a callsign, Len?

Several. :-)

I just put up a new one on Roscoe Boulevard: "Call Snarly Dave For
Your Latest Orion Firmware!"

I charged the sign rental to your SDR company (Storm Door Radio).

beep, beep.

LHA / WMD












PS: I miss Grace L. Ferguson, R.I.P.

In article , Dave Heil Miss Congeniality
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil Miss Construance
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

The question-topic of the morse code test pertains to GETTING
INTO amateur radio below 30 MHz. Some have misconstrued the
essence of amateur radio as being a skilled radiotelegrapher.

Others have misconstrued the term "GETTING INTO" amateur radio as
meaning the several decades of interest preceeding the several years of
newsgroup posts just before the three-year-old claim of getting "an
Extra right out of the box".

Go for it, big daddy dave. Ain't no cats on your hot tin roof.

I did go for it, Len--forty years ago, within a year of my first
exposure to amateur radio.

...and you are still undeveloped.


Nope. Nothing about your obtaining an amateur radio license here.

Oh? Is this a requirement to be in the electronics industry?

Strange, isn't it, not one single personnel person (that's "human
resources" profession to bus drivers) said anything about needing
any amateur radio license to work in electronics or aerospace.

Where is "here," snarly dave?

In your imagination? In your fantasy? On Fantasy Island waiting
for da blane?


No, nothing about your having obtained an amateur radio license here.

Now now, docktah no, you are getting churlish and unseemly again.

Did you download your definition of "interest in radio" from Ten-Tec,
too? Right...along with the FIRM ware, the shower, and your
undeveloped exposures.

Howaboutthat? Does that "show enough interest?"

In obtaining an amateur radio license? Why, no, none at all.

No, no, no, sweetums, you equated INTEREST IN RADIO to
GETTING A HAM LICENSE plus adding "learning morse code."

Try to keep those four neurons in line.


You haven't Beeped Morse nor have you Passed Any Written Exam. You've
taken no action on your declared interest.

I have NO interest, declared or otherwise, on "beeping morse," bleeping
dave. Never claimed otherwise.

Is that a requirement in your SS view of amateur radio?

I passed four written exams at an FCC field office in Chicago, 1956.
I passed all kinds of college exams after that, a California driver's
license written exam among others (despite a non-interest in
becoming a professional driver).

Does one have to Post Bans on "interest in radio?" Must be so at
the Church of St. Hiram.

Sorry deacon dave, I don't worship at that church.


Who did what? My smarts are fine, Len.

Your four neurons are indeed fine and firing in sequence.

Dial up Ten-Tec and download some more neuron firmware.
Four isn't enough. Upgrade!

I wrote about getting into amateur radio.

Nah, you scribbled nastygrams about "getting an amateur radio license
IN ORDER TO SHOW INTEREST IN RADIO."

Your response didn't address that, did it?

Here's an official address: 445 12th St. SW, Washington, D.C., 20554

I've addressed several things to that address.

Are you still wearing address?

LHA / WMD

Len Over 21 wrote:




All that snarling and you ain't got either a name or a callsign.

Got both and the license certificate to prove it. Where is yours? Oh,
forgot, you can't pass the test.

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


Len Over 21 wrote:


In article , Mike Coslo writes:


One might almost think the fellow is just here to bust people's chops.
Thanks for the history and Clarification, Paul.

Poor baby. Feel injured, do you?

Oh heavens no! Amused? Yes. but then I feel kind of bad about that,
because I feel kind of sorry for you.


Awwww...that's so swweeeeet! :-)

Glad you approve! :-)

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Kid Rock comes out in a desecrated US Flag with a
hole cut in the middle. Pretty

[expletive deleted]

despicable!

I agree 100%.

When the halftime show started I changed the channel. Flipped back at one point
and saw "Kid", flipped back to something else. Missed JJ - no big loss.

Note that the flap over her "wardrobe malfunction" has deflected attention from
that flag desecration.

Is this what the
superbowl is about? I can only assume that the NFL approves of this kind
of disrespectful behavior, and if we watch the trash they spew, we do as
well!

I think it's evidence of a basic law of entertainment physics: "conservation of
goodstuff". IOW there's only so much good programming. Some years back,
the superbowl consisted mostly of rather unexciting games but really good shows
and commercials. Then the games got better and the shows and commercials worse.


It's not just the superbowl - most of what's on broadcast TV is JUNK. Pure and
simple. If some people in the LA area are offended - tough.

The irony of the situation is that the people who are really responsible won't
be fined, but the stations who simply carried the network feed will be.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , JJ

writes:

All that bragging and still can't pass the test for a ham license.

All that snarling and you ain't got either a name or a callsign.

Do you have a callsign, Len?

Several. :-)

Wrong answer, Pops. :-)

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil Miss Congeniality
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil Miss Construance
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

The question-topic of the morse code test pertains to GETTING
INTO amateur radio below 30 MHz. Some have misconstrued the
essence of amateur radio as being a skilled radiotelegrapher.

Others have misconstrued the term "GETTING INTO" amateur radio as
meaning the several decades of interest preceeding the several years of
newsgroup posts just before the three-year-old claim of getting "an
Extra right out of the box".

Go for it, big daddy dave. Ain't no cats on your hot tin roof.

I did go for it, Len--forty years ago, within a year of my first
exposure to amateur radio.

...and you are still undeveloped.

That's rich! You've sat on your duff for almost an equivalent period
and are still writing about "getting into amateur radio". Thanks for the
laughs, Leonard.

Nope. Nothing about your obtaining an amateur radio license here.

Oh? Is this a requirement to be in the electronics industry?

Was that under discussion? I could have sworn that amateur radio was
the topic in which you decided to submit your PROFESSIONAL credentials.

Strange, isn't it, not one single personnel person (that's "human
resources" profession to bus drivers) said anything about needing
any amateur radio license to work in electronics or aerospace.

You must want alt.jobs.wanted.aerospace.

Where is "here," snarly dave?

Right there.

Howaboutthat? Does that "show enough interest?"

In obtaining an amateur radio license? Why, no, none at all.

No, no, no, sweetums, you equated INTEREST IN RADIO to
GETTING A HAM LICENSE plus adding "learning morse code."

That is incorrect, Leona. You have your facts scrambled. I'll be happy
to quote the post if you're having trouble remembering.


You haven't Beeped Morse nor have you Passed Any Written Exam. You've
taken no action on your declared interest.

I have NO interest, declared or otherwise, on "beeping morse," bleeping
dave. Never claimed otherwise.

I understand that. There is an amateur license available which requires
no morse test. It requires a pretty straightforward written test. You
haven't tackled it.

Is that a requirement in your SS view of amateur radio?

What kind of view?

I passed four written exams at an FCC field office in Chicago, 1956.
I passed all kinds of college exams after that, a California driver's
license written exam among others (despite a non-interest in
becoming a professional driver).

Bully for you. You haven't passed an amateur license exam.

Does one have to Post Bans on "interest in radio?" Must be so at
the Church of St. Hiram.

Sorry deacon dave, I don't worship at that church.

I'm sure you don't. I see you as more of an agnostic deist, sort of
covering all bets.


I wrote about getting into amateur radio.

Nah, you scribbled nastygrams about "getting an amateur radio license
IN ORDER TO SHOW INTEREST IN RADIO."

Incorrect again, Leonid. You just can't remember anything anymore.

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil charm school dropout
from the foreign service writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil Miss Congeniality
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil Miss
Construance
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

The question-topic of the morse code test pertains to GETTING
INTO amateur radio below 30 MHz. Some have misconstrued the
essence of amateur radio as being a skilled radiotelegrapher.

Others have misconstrued the term "GETTING INTO" amateur radio as
meaning the several decades of interest preceeding the several years of
newsgroup posts just before the three-year-old claim of getting "an
Extra right out of the box".

Go for it, big daddy dave. Ain't no cats on your hot tin roof.

I did go for it, Len--forty years ago, within a year of my first
exposure to amateur radio.

...and you are still undeveloped.

That's rich! You've sat on your duff for almost an equivalent period
and are still writing about "getting into amateur radio". Thanks for the
laughs, Leonard.

Thanks for the laffs, snarly dave, but Don Rickles doesn't have
to worry about you stealing his act.

You have the moronic insult of "insult humor" down pat, but grade
ZERO on the humor part. Work on that.

Hello? Are you alive? I said "interested in radio," non-compost-
mentat-intellect.* ALL of it, not just amateur activities. I got into
a lot of the rest of the world of amateur radio, lots more than you
you ever did while engaged in the Fleecing of America as a
"foreign service" member.

* Those who've never read Frank Herbert's "Dune" novels will
not understand the pun. Those should go back to ancient Ayn
Rand.

Nope. Nothing about your obtaining an amateur radio license here.

Oh? Is this a requirement to be in the electronics industry?

Was that under discussion? I could have sworn that amateur radio was
the topic in which you decided to submit your PROFESSIONAL credentials.

Nooooo. You got it WRONG again, herr robust.

I've submitted my professional credentials to professional organizations
and got the jobs. Unlike some in here bragging of their "human
resources" fantastic grades and abilities and then going out and
becoming bus drivers. I'm still getting the professional jobs but the
work isn't as intense as before now that I don't keep regular hours.
It's fun, challenging work. You ought to try that sometime...a heckuva
lot better than spending "foreign service" time fleecing America in
some backwater African country.

Strange, isn't it, not one single personnel person (that's "human
resources" profession to bus drivers) said anything about needing
any amateur radio license to work in electronics or aerospace.

You must want alt.jobs.wanted.aerospace.

Nooooo. I can get all kinds of jobs involving electronics and even
radio. I don't care to. I've had a full career as an electronics
design engineer. My income isn't all from the U.S. Treasury as a
"foreign service key person." [did you change the locks often
while a key person?]

Where is "here," snarly dave?

Right there.

Where is "there," snarly dave? Illustrate your point. :-)

That is incorrect, Leona. You have your facts scrambled. I'll be happy
to quote the post if you're having trouble remembering.

What are you going to state as a "location" next, elsewhere? :-)

Feel free to cut and paste every single post, word for word, from
Google to illustrate whatever blunted point you think you have.

All you will do is annoy all the other readers, the regular
newsgroupies. All you will do is demonstrate that you have ZERO
originality, ZERO creativity, are nothing but a bundle of overly-
proud puffery, vindictive almost to the gunnery nurse's standards.

You really ought to TRY to get close to the subjects in this
newsgroup, not just being an exhibitionist for over-the-top raging
vindictiveness.


I understand that. There is an amateur license available which requires
no morse test. It requires a pretty straightforward written test. You
haven't tackled it.

Explain WHY that is some kind of "requirement."

This is a newsgroup with open access, no moderator, straight-
forward (except for some PCTAs bent over backwards to get back
to the 1930s). No license of any kind required here. Not even
poetic license.

You have NO concept of the discussion over the retention or
elimination of the morse code test. All you can think of is an
unyielding spit-de-corpse adherence to the very same rules you
had to follow long ago in order to get that treasured and adored
federal merit badge. Your insistance on all of present day to
Get The Morse Test or even Get A Ham License makes you a
prime believer worthy of the Waffen SS. Do not think! Follow
orders! Yap! Yap! Bark! Bark!

All that for a radio HOBBY... :-)

LHA / WMD

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil charm school dropout
from the foreign service writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil Miss Congeniality
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil Miss
Construance
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Others have misconstrued the term "GETTING INTO" amateur radio as
meaning the several decades of interest preceeding the several years of
newsgroup posts just before the three-year-old claim of getting "an
Extra right out of the box".

Go for it, big daddy dave. Ain't no cats on your hot tin roof.

I did go for it, Len--forty years ago, within a year of my first
exposure to amateur radio.

...and you are still undeveloped.

That's rich! You've sat on your duff for almost an equivalent period
and are still writing about "getting into amateur radio". Thanks for the
laughs, Leonard.

Thanks for the laffs, snarly dave, but Don Rickles doesn't have
to worry about you stealing his act.

....not as long as you're around, don Wrinkles.

You have the moronic insult of "insult humor" down pat, but grade
ZERO on the humor part. Work on that.

You wouldn't know humor if it smacked you in the forehead--Oh wait, it
DID!

Hello? Are you alive? I said "interested in radio," non-compost-
mentat-intellect.* ALL of it, not just amateur activities.

You might have written that at some time. You also wrote of your
decades-long interest in *amateur* radio.

I got into
a lot of the rest of the world of amateur radio,

Let's get this straight. You got into the rest of the world of amateur
radio? When was this?


...lots more than you
you ever did while engaged in the Fleecing of America as a
"foreign service" member.

Well, you've managed to live up to the profile yet again.

N2EY: "Besides, here's a simple, plain fact:

No matter what job, educational level, employer, or
government/military service that a radio amateur has, if said radio
amateur opposes Mr. Anderson's views, he/she will be the target of Mr.
Anderson's insults, ridicule, name-calling, factual errors, ethnic
slurs, excessive emoticons and general infantile behavior."


Nope. Nothing about your obtaining an amateur radio license here.

Oh? Is this a requirement to be in the electronics industry?

Was that under discussion? I could have sworn that amateur radio was
the topic in which you decided to submit your PROFESSIONAL credentials.

Nooooo. You got it WRONG again, herr robust.

I've submitted my professional credentials to professional organizations
and got the jobs. Unlike some in here bragging of their "human
resources" fantastic grades and abilities and then going out and
becoming bus drivers. I'm still getting the professional jobs but the
work isn't as intense as before now that I don't keep regular hours.
It's fun, challenging work. You ought to try that sometime...a heckuva
lot better than spending "foreign service" time fleecing America in
some backwater African country.

You simply can't help it.

N2EY: "Besides, here's a simple, plain fact:

No matter what job, educational level, employer, or
government/military service that a radio amateur has, if said radio
amateur opposes Mr. Anderson's views, he/she will be the target of Mr.
Anderson's insults, ridicule, name-calling, factual errors, ethnic
slurs, excessive emoticons and general infantile behavior."

Strange, isn't it, not one single personnel person (that's "human
resources" profession to bus drivers) said anything about needing
any amateur radio license to work in electronics or aerospace.

You must want alt.jobs.wanted.aerospace.

Nooooo. I can get all kinds of jobs involving electronics and even
radio. I don't care to. I've had a full career as an electronics
design engineer. My income isn't all from the U.S. Treasury as a
"foreign service key person." [did you change the locks often
while a key person?]

"Key Officers of Foreign Service Posts", Len. You took a rap on the
snout in that one, huh?


Where is "here," snarly dave?

Right there.

Where is "there," snarly dave? Illustrate your point. :-)

Right here.

That is incorrect, Leona. You have your facts scrambled. I'll be happy
to quote the post if you're having trouble remembering.

What are you going to state as a "location" next, elsewhere? :-)

Feel free to cut and paste every single post, word for word, from
Google to illustrate whatever blunted point you think you have.

Oh, it won't be a blunted point, Leonard. It'll be quite direct and to
the point.

All you will do is annoy all the other readers, the regular
newsgroupies.

I think a goodly number of them are entertained, Leonard.

All you will do is demonstrate that you have ZERO
originality, ZERO creativity, are nothing but a bundle of overly-
proud puffery, vindictive almost to the gunnery nurse's standards.

Ahh, the plaintive cry from the bottom of the Extra box.

You really ought to TRY to get close to the subjects in this
newsgroup, not just being an exhibitionist for over-the-top raging
vindictiveness.

You decide to give someone a tweak, Leonard and a tweak will likely come
your way. You tweak enough folks and lots of tweaks will come in
return.

I understand that. There is an amateur license available which requires
no morse test. It requires a pretty straightforward written test. You
haven't tackled it.

Explain WHY that is some kind of "requirement."

Okay. The FCC will not permit you to operate under Part 97 without it.

This is a newsgroup with open access, no moderator, straight-
forward (except for some PCTAs bent over backwards to get back
to the 1930s). No license of any kind required here. Not even
poetic license.

Oh, you misunderstood. No FCC license exam is required for newsgroup
access. You do have to understand though, that newsgroups are not
amateur radio.

You have NO concept of the discussion over the retention or
elimination of the morse code test.

Why, certainly I do.

All you can think of is an
unyielding spit-de-corpse adherence to the very same rules you
had to follow long ago in order to get that treasured and adored
federal merit badge.

The rules under which I received my Novice, General, Advanced and Extra
license are no longer the rules of today. Yep, I treasure and adore my
federal merit badge. You don't have one, do you?

Your insistance on all of present day to
Get The Morse Test or even Get A Ham License makes you a
prime believer worthy of the Waffen SS.

The Waffen SS? You mean that arm of the old Prussian military? You
don't have to obtain an amateur radio license though doing so would take
some of the egg off your mug after that "Extra right out of the box"
brag you issued. Obtaining even the most basic amateur radio license
might provide you with a bit of credibility in your quest to mold
amateur radio licensing to your way of thinking.

Do not think! Follow
orders! Yap! Yap! Bark! Bark!

All that for a radio HOBBY... :-)

You mean the hobby which has licensing requirements unmet by you?
Yeah, all that.

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Do you have a callsign, Len?

Several. :-)

Wrong answer, Pops. :-)

RIGHT answer, popless.

Now go back to your orion, sit down in front of it and amaze yourself.

Have an oriongasm. Enjoy.

LHA / WMD

In article , JJ
writes:

All that snarling and you ain't got either a name or a callsign.

Got both and the license certificate to prove it.

"Prove" to whom, anonymous one?

You have neither name nor callsign.

You don't even have artificial intelligence.

You aren't impressing anyone.

LHA / WMD

In article , (N2EY)
writes:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Kid Rock comes out in a desecrated US Flag with a
hole cut in the middle. Pretty

[expletive deleted]

despicable!

I agree 100%.

When the halftime show started I changed the channel. Flipped back at one
point
and saw "Kid", flipped back to something else. Missed JJ - no big loss.

Note that the flap over her "wardrobe malfunction" has deflected attention
from
that flag desecration.

Is this what the
superbowl is about? I can only assume that the NFL approves of this kind
of disrespectful behavior, and if we watch the trash they spew, we do as
well!

You must have missed the Official Oath of Allegiance to the ARRL
given by Dave Sumner at the beginning.

I think it's evidence of a basic law of entertainment physics: "conservation
of
goodstuff".

Did you want BOTH of them exposed? :-)

IOW there's only so much good programming. Some years back,
the superbowl consisted mostly of rather unexciting games but really good
shows
and commercials. Then the games got better and the shows and commercials
worse.

Write the FCC and make Riley take away their amateur radio license!

Get tough!

It's not just the superbowl - most of what's on broadcast TV is JUNK. Pure and
simple. If some people in the LA area are offended - tough.

Right! Old Monty Python shows from the BBC! The only good stuff!

Forget things like the Hallmark Hall series, all [expletive deleteds].
Forget things like Live From Lincoln Center specials, all [more
expletive deleteds]. Forget things like a good American football game
going very, very close to the end, saved by a 41-yard field goal at the
last minute. That's so much [expletive deleted] nonsense.

The irony of the situation is that the people who are really responsible won't
be fined, but the stations who simply carried the network feed will be.

Ah, for the days of Big Bill Allen and angry letters to newspapers!

Write your Division Manager and complain!

Tell them not to feed the SuperBowl to the NTS!

Make all the teams and officials take morse code tests!

Remember, morse code gets through when everything else will.

LHA / WMD

Len Over 21 wrote:



You don't even have artificial intelligence.

No I don't, that is what you have only someone forgot to program it.

You aren't impressing anyone.

Of all the people in the world I couldn't care less if I impress, you're it.

Remember, morse code gets through when everything else will.

LHA / WMD

Good one Len ..... have to remember it ....

God Bless KI3R Tom Popovic Belle Vernon Pa.

On 08 Feb 2004 18:49:36 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

snip

Remember, morse code gets through when everything else will.

.....That line still makes me laugh every time I read it!

I understand that Morse is good for getting through poor conditions
better than voice. Makes sense, it is narrowband and binary (well,
tri-state if you count the spaces...) encoded. From the experimenting
(read: fooling around) that I have been doing over the past couple of
months, I have been repeatedly amazed with the ability of BPSK-31 to
get clean copy through pretty bad conditions. Even DX signals that
appear as weak vestiges on the waterfall display can be easily decoded
with near 100% accuracy, using just a PC sound card as an interface.
Frequency stability of my old Heath TX is a problem, but I'm working
on it.....

Now there's something that will get through when nothing else will.
And, it types itself out, too. (that's a real boon for the perennially
lazy - like me) :)

I believe that BPSK-31 was created within the amateur community -
there must have been similar narrowband technologies used by the
military which predated it - any idea what they were?


LHA / WMD


73, Leo

Leo wrote in message . ..

I understand that Morse is good for getting through poor conditions
better than voice.

Much better than any form of analog voice.

Makes sense, it is narrowband and binary (well,
tri-state if you count the spaces...) encoded.

Exactly.

From the experimenting
(read: fooling around) that I have been doing over the past couple of
months, I have been repeatedly amazed with the ability of BPSK-31 to
get clean copy through pretty bad conditions. Even DX signals that
appear as weak vestiges on the waterfall display can be easily decoded
with near 100% accuracy, using just a PC sound card as an interface.

The soundcard is only part of the system. The decoder is quite smart,
in that
it stores and examines the received data and does a "best fit"
decoder. You can read all about it at several websites.

But it's important to realize what constitutes "poor conditions".
Against purely amplitude noise it's quite robust. But against phase
noise of various
types it is not robust at all. All depends on the situation.

Frequency stability of my old Heath TX is a problem, but I'm working
on it.....

What rig is it?

Now there's something that will get through when nothing else will.

Not really. You will find times when the PSK-31 signal is clearly
audible in the speaker, well above the background amplitude noise, but
the decoder cannot make sense of it because the phase distortion is
too bad.

And, it types itself out, too. (that's a real boon for the perennially
lazy - like me) :)

It was meant as a replacement for conventional RTTY - as a "keyboard
to keyboard" mode. For example, the speed was chosen to be about what
*average* conversational keyboarding hams use.

btw, the code used in PSK-31 uses shorter symbols for the most common
characters and longer ones for the least common. Just like Morse code,
which is where the designers got the idea.

I believe that BPSK-31 was created within the amateur community -

Yup - G3PLX, and a number of folks who helped him by testing it out on
the air and others who have developed software packages. A local ham
of my acquaintance (one of those longtime 20 wpm 1x2 Extras with
multiple EE degrees - we share two alma maters, btw) was one of the
team who helped test it out.

PSK-31 is another great tool in the toolbox, but not a replacement for
good old Morse Code.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On 9 Feb 2004 15:25:04 -0800, (N2EY) wrote:

Leo wrote in message . ..

I understand that Morse is good for getting through poor conditions
better than voice.

Much better than any form of analog voice.

Makes sense, it is narrowband and binary (well,
tri-state if you count the spaces...) encoded.

Exactly.

From the experimenting
(read: fooling around) that I have been doing over the past couple of
months, I have been repeatedly amazed with the ability of BPSK-31 to
get clean copy through pretty bad conditions. Even DX signals that
appear as weak vestiges on the waterfall display can be easily decoded
with near 100% accuracy, using just a PC sound card as an interface.

The soundcard is only part of the system. The decoder is quite smart,
in that
it stores and examines the received data and does a "best fit"
decoder. You can read all about it at several websites.

Good point - I've compared it to RTTY from the decoding standpoint -
RTTY seems to be much more prone to losing characters or dropping out
entirely when the signal is weak or noise is high.


But it's important to realize what constitutes "poor conditions".
Against purely amplitude noise it's quite robust. But against phase
noise of various
types it is not robust at all. All depends on the situation.


Frequency stability of my old Heath TX is a problem, but I'm working
on it.....

What rig is it?

Heath SB-400. The Pride of 1964 :)

With a narrowband signal like this, it doesn't take much drift! I'm
seeing a frequency decrease of up to 15 Hz, beginning a few seconds
after keying. B+ to the VFO appears to be well regulated - maybe not
tight enough though. Might have to replace the 0A2 with a few zeners
- haven't tried that yet....


Now there's something that will get through when nothing else will.

Not really. You will find times when the PSK-31 signal is clearly
audible in the speaker, well above the background amplitude noise, but
the decoder cannot make sense of it because the phase distortion is
too bad.

Haven't experienced that yet - at least when I see that, I'll know
what is causing it!


And, it types itself out, too. (that's a real boon for the perennially
lazy - like me) :)

It was meant as a replacement for conventional RTTY - as a "keyboard
to keyboard" mode. For example, the speed was chosen to be about what
*average* conversational keyboarding hams use.

btw, the code used in PSK-31 uses shorter symbols for the most common
characters and longer ones for the least common. Just like Morse code,
which is where the designers got the idea.

Didn't know that - great idea, though!


I believe that BPSK-31 was created within the amateur community -

Yup - G3PLX, and a number of folks who helped him by testing it out on
the air and others who have developed software packages. A local ham
of my acquaintance (one of those longtime 20 wpm 1x2 Extras with
multiple EE degrees - we share two alma maters, btw) was one of the
team who helped test it out.

PSK-31 is another great tool in the toolbox, but not a replacement for
good old Morse Code.

Haven't formulated an opinion on that one yet - stay tuned!


73 de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo

Leo wrote:

On 08 Feb 2004 18:49:36 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

snip

Remember, morse code gets through when everything else will.

....That line still makes me laugh every time I read it!

Me too, especially when I think about it not getting through to Len.

Dave K8MN

"N2EY" wrote in message
m...
Leo wrote in message
. ..

I understand that Morse is good for getting through poor conditions
better than voice.

Much better than any form of analog voice.

Makes sense, it is narrowband and binary (well,
tri-state if you count the spaces...) encoded.

Exactly.

From the experimenting
(read: fooling around) that I have been doing over the past couple of
months, I have been repeatedly amazed with the ability of BPSK-31 to
get clean copy through pretty bad conditions. Even DX signals that
appear as weak vestiges on the waterfall display can be easily decoded
with near 100% accuracy, using just a PC sound card as an interface.

The soundcard is only part of the system. The decoder is quite smart,
in that
it stores and examines the received data and does a "best fit"
decoder. You can read all about it at several websites.

But it's important to realize what constitutes "poor conditions".
Against purely amplitude noise it's quite robust. But against phase
noise of various
types it is not robust at all. All depends on the situation.

Frequency stability of my old Heath TX is a problem, but I'm working
on it.....

What rig is it?

Now there's something that will get through when nothing else will.

Not really. You will find times when the PSK-31 signal is clearly
audible in the speaker, well above the background amplitude noise, but
the decoder cannot make sense of it because the phase distortion is
too bad.

And, it types itself out, too. (that's a real boon for the perennially
lazy - like me) :)

It was meant as a replacement for conventional RTTY - as a "keyboard
to keyboard" mode. For example, the speed was chosen to be about what
*average* conversational keyboarding hams use.

btw, the code used in PSK-31 uses shorter symbols for the most common
characters and longer ones for the least common. Just like Morse code,
which is where the designers got the idea.

I believe that BPSK-31 was created within the amateur community -

Yup - G3PLX, and a number of folks who helped him by testing it out on
the air and others who have developed software packages. A local ham
of my acquaintance (one of those longtime 20 wpm 1x2 Extras with
multiple EE degrees - we share two alma maters, btw) was one of the
team who helped test it out.

PSK-31 is another great tool in the toolbox, but not a replacement for
good old Morse Code.

73 de Jim, N2EY

As I tell my students EVERY mode has its advantages and disadvantages. Each
has its place in the scheme of things. If they have not tried out the modes
within their financial reach, they have shortchanged their "toolbox."

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Leo" wrote in message
...
On 9 Feb 2004 15:25:04 -0800, (N2EY) wrote:

Leo wrote in message
. ..

I understand that Morse is good for getting through poor conditions
better than voice.

Much better than any form of analog voice.

Makes sense, it is narrowband and binary (well,
tri-state if you count the spaces...) encoded.

Exactly.

From the experimenting
(read: fooling around) that I have been doing over the past couple of
months, I have been repeatedly amazed with the ability of BPSK-31 to
get clean copy through pretty bad conditions. Even DX signals that
appear as weak vestiges on the waterfall display can be easily decoded
with near 100% accuracy, using just a PC sound card as an interface.

The soundcard is only part of the system. The decoder is quite smart,
in that
it stores and examines the received data and does a "best fit"
decoder. You can read all about it at several websites.

Good point - I've compared it to RTTY from the decoding standpoint -
RTTY seems to be much more prone to losing characters or dropping out
entirely when the signal is weak or noise is high.


But it's important to realize what constitutes "poor conditions".
Against purely amplitude noise it's quite robust. But against phase
noise of various
types it is not robust at all. All depends on the situation.


Frequency stability of my old Heath TX is a problem, but I'm working
on it.....

What rig is it?

Heath SB-400. The Pride of 1964 :)

With a narrowband signal like this, it doesn't take much drift! I'm
seeing a frequency decrease of up to 15 Hz, beginning a few seconds
after keying. B+ to the VFO appears to be well regulated - maybe not
tight enough though. Might have to replace the 0A2 with a few zeners
- haven't tried that yet....


Now there's something that will get through when nothing else will.

Not really. You will find times when the PSK-31 signal is clearly
audible in the speaker, well above the background amplitude noise, but
the decoder cannot make sense of it because the phase distortion is
too bad.

Haven't experienced that yet - at least when I see that, I'll know
what is causing it!


And, it types itself out, too. (that's a real boon for the perennially
lazy - like me) :)

It was meant as a replacement for conventional RTTY - as a "keyboard
to keyboard" mode. For example, the speed was chosen to be about what
*average* conversational keyboarding hams use.

btw, the code used in PSK-31 uses shorter symbols for the most common
characters and longer ones for the least common. Just like Morse code,
which is where the designers got the idea.

Didn't know that - great idea, though!


I believe that BPSK-31 was created within the amateur community -

Yup - G3PLX, and a number of folks who helped him by testing it out on
the air and others who have developed software packages. A local ham
of my acquaintance (one of those longtime 20 wpm 1x2 Extras with
multiple EE degrees - we share two alma maters, btw) was one of the
team who helped test it out.

PSK-31 is another great tool in the toolbox, but not a replacement for
good old Morse Code.

Haven't formulated an opinion on that one yet - stay tuned!


73 de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo


Just to add to information, I heard a couple of hams talking shortly after
the major solar flares of this past fall were finally over. They had
commented on the fact that the distortion on PSK31 was so bad that they had
had to switch to Morse.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

In article 72zVb.255754$na.417263@attbi_s04, "garigue"
writes:

Remember, morse code gets through when everything else will.

LHA / WMD

Good one Len ..... have to remember it ....

Credit Brian Burke with the phrase. He had that truism right,
worthy of repeating. :-)

LHA / WMD

In article , Leo
writes:

Remember, morse code gets through when everything else will.

....That line still makes me laugh every time I read it!

It is absolutely, positively, 100% true. Brian Burke's phrase should
go into the textbooks. :-)

I understand that Morse is good for getting through poor conditions
better than voice. Makes sense, it is narrowband and binary (well,
tri-state if you count the spaces...) encoded. From the experimenting
(read: fooling around) that I have been doing over the past couple of
months, I have been repeatedly amazed with the ability of BPSK-31 to
get clean copy through pretty bad conditions. Even DX signals that
appear as weak vestiges on the waterfall display can be easily decoded
with near 100% accuracy, using just a PC sound card as an interface.
Frequency stability of my old Heath TX is a problem, but I'm working
on it.....

Now there's something that will get through when nothing else will.
And, it types itself out, too. (that's a real boon for the perennially
lazy - like me) :)

I believe that BPSK-31 was created within the amateur community -
there must have been similar narrowband technologies used by the
military which predated it - any idea what they were?

PSK31 was designed/innovated by Peter Martinez, G3PLX, in the
UK, then air-tested by several over much of Yurp. Years ago.

There's a whole heaping lot of techniques/systems used by the
militaries (of the world, actually) on sending data/teleprinter over
both wire and radio circuits. Too many to recount in here. Few of
the militaries or the governments or the commercial carriers bother
with narrowband-specific communication circuits since they have
needs to send much data quickly. The advance in Information
Theory and Coding (generic other than morse code or character
codes) have applied themselves to other things besides comm
applications: Single-error correction, double-error detection for
computer memory applications to real-time analysis of seismic
effects on building structures. Real-time Fourier Analysis has
been at the heart of that and includes mundane things like the
little audio bargraph displays on home music systems (usually
combined with "equalizer" settings of same).

The "MIT Redbook" by Peterson and Weldon is a thick text
chock full of all sorts of data coding schemes, error correction of
same, plus ways other than Forward Error Correction to send data
best without extra bits (something alluded to in Shannon's seminal
1948 paper that became familiarly known as "Shannon's Law").

The VLF Alert messages in the USN submarine fleet is not a
subject of discussion. Those are digital, encrypted, and have some
other features to work through all kinds of RF interference. The
militaries/governments/commercial carriers generally confine them-
selves to rather standard medium- to high-throughput systems for
radio circuits without going into complicated schemes. The various
"TOR" modes are very close to those. Add to that the ALE or
Automatic Link Establishment interrogation-response on auto-
measurement of signal quality and that is the broad picture of what
goes on by non-amateur communications HF to VHF. Note: Some
of the details of everyday encryption are in the grey area of talk and
I won't go into that due to prohibitions of U.S. law. If any such appear
on the Internet, it has been cleared for public viewing, not classified.

A wide example of medium- to high-rate data communications allied
to the basics of PSK31 is the common data modem used with
personal computers. It can, with a good POTS line (Plain Old Telephone
System), send 56K data rate material over a 3 KHz bandwidth. There
are, literally, millions of those modems in existance; 152 million
personal computers were sold worldwide in 2003 alone according to a
story in LA Times Business section for 9 Feb 04.

The standard data modem with PCs uses a combination of amplitude
and phase modulation of a carrier tone plus some rudimentary digital
state re-arrangments to get a rate increase far above conventional
single-mode modulations yet it does not violate Shannon's Law. Many
who can only grasp the single-mode concepts keep trying to say "it
isn't possible!" yet the possible is happening 24/7 worldwide by the
millions. The generality of such dramatic rate versus bandwidth can
be applied anywhere. PSK31 was one of those, cleverly arranged
by Martinez to fit into a bandwidth equal to a morse code spectral
space and perform just a bit better at an average throughouput of
about 30 WPM. The PSK31 system is a complex one yet quite
easy to implement with the aid of a (now) common personal
computer. The PC isn't absolutely necessary since a dedicated
terminal or radio modem can be built in a smaller package...but
still needs a keyboard, display-printer to complete the data terminal.

What is astounding, in a world of technological plenty, that there are
so many radio-backwoodsmen demanding that all revert to village
blacksmith or horse & buggy driver or other primitiveness in a hobby
activity to fulfill some mythical "requirement of knowing 'basics'" in
order to be "as good as them!" Their "knowledge" of data comms is
relegated to the memorizing-of-manufacturer's-advertisements-
descriptions for "technical familiarity"...if a description says that a
system operates at a low data rate, they cannot envision the possible
scaling to a high data rate...and vice-versa, very high data rate scaled
down to slower speed and narrower bandwidth.

The first commercial telegraph circuit opened in 1844. Queen
Victoria's coronation was about 1847 and she reigned into the 1900s
beginning while radio was first demonstrated as a communications
means in 1896. Among the PCTAs there is a terrible radio
"victorianism" both in technology and morality...the chronology and
subsequent utterances of those PCTAs is too coincident to overlook!

In this arena of PCTA radio-backwoodsmen (who can manually fell
giant redwoods in their fantasies), there can be NO talk of what
any radio service is doing other than what is blessed and codified by
the league. [see numerous utterances of the resident gunnery nurse]

"Shannon?" Who's he? He didn't have a DXCC, hasn't worked a DX
contest, isn't a dues-paying league member. Claude Elwood is "SK"
bless his joyful soul, but he did establish the relationships, the
framework on getting the highest data (of any kind, not just teleprinter)
through any given bandwidth on any communication circuit. No village
smithy anvils needed to bang out wireline morse on a solid-state
radio and pretend to be "advancing the state of the radio art." :-)

[expletive deleted]

[morse testing deleted]

[more expletives!...:-) ]

LHA / WMD

On 10 Feb 2004 04:55:13 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article , Leo
writes:

Remember, morse code gets through when everything else will.

....That line still makes me laugh every time I read it!

It is absolutely, positively, 100% true. Brian Burke's phrase should
go into the textbooks. :-)

I understand that Morse is good for getting through poor conditions
better than voice. Makes sense, it is narrowband and binary (well,
tri-state if you count the spaces...) encoded. From the experimenting
(read: fooling around) that I have been doing over the past couple of
months, I have been repeatedly amazed with the ability of BPSK-31 to
get clean copy through pretty bad conditions. Even DX signals that
appear as weak vestiges on the waterfall display can be easily decoded
with near 100% accuracy, using just a PC sound card as an interface.
Frequency stability of my old Heath TX is a problem, but I'm working
on it.....

Now there's something that will get through when nothing else will.
And, it types itself out, too. (that's a real boon for the perennially
lazy - like me) :)

I believe that BPSK-31 was created within the amateur community -
there must have been similar narrowband technologies used by the
military which predated it - any idea what they were?

PSK31 was designed/innovated by Peter Martinez, G3PLX, in the
UK, then air-tested by several over much of Yurp. Years ago.

There's a whole heaping lot of techniques/systems used by the
militaries (of the world, actually) on sending data/teleprinter over
both wire and radio circuits. Too many to recount in here. Few of
the militaries or the governments or the commercial carriers bother
with narrowband-specific communication circuits since they have
needs to send much data quickly. The advance in Information
Theory and Coding (generic other than morse code or character
codes) have applied themselves to other things besides comm
applications: Single-error correction, double-error detection for
computer memory applications to real-time analysis of seismic
effects on building structures. Real-time Fourier Analysis has
been at the heart of that and includes mundane things like the
little audio bargraph displays on home music systems (usually
combined with "equalizer" settings of same).

The "MIT Redbook" by Peterson and Weldon is a thick text
chock full of all sorts of data coding schemes, error correction of
same, plus ways other than Forward Error Correction to send data
best without extra bits (something alluded to in Shannon's seminal
1948 paper that became familiarly known as "Shannon's Law").

The VLF Alert messages in the USN submarine fleet is not a
subject of discussion. Those are digital, encrypted, and have some
other features to work through all kinds of RF interference. The
militaries/governments/commercial carriers generally confine them-
selves to rather standard medium- to high-throughput systems for
radio circuits without going into complicated schemes. The various
"TOR" modes are very close to those. Add to that the ALE or
Automatic Link Establishment interrogation-response on auto-
measurement of signal quality and that is the broad picture of what
goes on by non-amateur communications HF to VHF. Note: Some
of the details of everyday encryption are in the grey area of talk and
I won't go into that due to prohibitions of U.S. law. If any such appear
on the Internet, it has been cleared for public viewing, not classified.

A wide example of medium- to high-rate data communications allied
to the basics of PSK31 is the common data modem used with
personal computers. It can, with a good POTS line (Plain Old Telephone
System), send 56K data rate material over a 3 KHz bandwidth. There
are, literally, millions of those modems in existance; 152 million
personal computers were sold worldwide in 2003 alone according to a
story in LA Times Business section for 9 Feb 04.

The standard data modem with PCs uses a combination of amplitude
and phase modulation of a carrier tone plus some rudimentary digital
state re-arrangments to get a rate increase far above conventional
single-mode modulations yet it does not violate Shannon's Law. Many
who can only grasp the single-mode concepts keep trying to say "it
isn't possible!" yet the possible is happening 24/7 worldwide by the
millions. The generality of such dramatic rate versus bandwidth can
be applied anywhere. PSK31 was one of those, cleverly arranged
by Martinez to fit into a bandwidth equal to a morse code spectral
space and perform just a bit better at an average throughouput of
about 30 WPM. The PSK31 system is a complex one yet quite
easy to implement with the aid of a (now) common personal
computer. The PC isn't absolutely necessary since a dedicated
terminal or radio modem can be built in a smaller package...but
still needs a keyboard, display-printer to complete the data terminal.

What is astounding, in a world of technological plenty, that there are
so many radio-backwoodsmen demanding that all revert to village
blacksmith or horse & buggy driver or other primitiveness in a hobby
activity to fulfill some mythical "requirement of knowing 'basics'" in
order to be "as good as them!" Their "knowledge" of data comms is
relegated to the memorizing-of-manufacturer's-advertisements-
descriptions for "technical familiarity"...if a description says that a
system operates at a low data rate, they cannot envision the possible
scaling to a high data rate...and vice-versa, very high data rate scaled
down to slower speed and narrower bandwidth.

The first commercial telegraph circuit opened in 1844. Queen
Victoria's coronation was about 1847 and she reigned into the 1900s
beginning while radio was first demonstrated as a communications
means in 1896. Among the PCTAs there is a terrible radio
"victorianism" both in technology and morality...the chronology and
subsequent utterances of those PCTAs is too coincident to overlook!

In this arena of PCTA radio-backwoodsmen (who can manually fell
giant redwoods in their fantasies), there can be NO talk of what
any radio service is doing other than what is blessed and codified by
the league. [see numerous utterances of the resident gunnery nurse]

"Shannon?" Who's he? He didn't have a DXCC, hasn't worked a DX
contest, isn't a dues-paying league member. Claude Elwood is "SK"
bless his joyful soul, but he did establish the relationships, the
framework on getting the highest data (of any kind, not just teleprinter)
through any given bandwidth on any communication circuit. No village
smithy anvils needed to bang out wireline morse on a solid-state
radio and pretend to be "advancing the state of the radio art." :-)

[expletive deleted]

[morse testing deleted]

[more expletives!...:-) ]

LHA / WMD

Excellent answer - thanks very much!

73, Leo

Leo wrote in message . ..
On 9 Feb 2004 15:25:04 -0800, (N2EY) wrote:

Leo wrote in message . ..

I understand that Morse is good for getting through poor conditions
better than voice.

Much better than any form of analog voice.

Makes sense, it is narrowband and binary (well,
tri-state if you count the spaces...) encoded.

Exactly.

From the experimenting
(read: fooling around) that I have been doing over the past couple of
months, I have been repeatedly amazed with the ability of BPSK-31 to
get clean copy through pretty bad conditions. Even DX signals that
appear as weak vestiges on the waterfall display can be easily decoded
with near 100% accuracy, using just a PC sound card as an interface.

The soundcard is only part of the system. The decoder is quite smart,
in that
it stores and examines the received data and does a "best fit"
decoder. You can read all about it at several websites.

Good point - I've compared it to RTTY from the decoding standpoint -
RTTY seems to be much more prone to losing characters or dropping out
entirely when the signal is weak or noise is high.

Part of that is the modulation method used and part is the encoding.
There's a good explanation of the varicode philosophy and the PSK31
modulation method on a number of websites.

btw, PSK31 in BPSK mode works at around 45-50 wpm. The speed depends
on the exact text sent because the length of each character varies,
but the average character is 6 to 7 bits long.

But it's important to realize what constitutes "poor conditions".
Against purely amplitude noise it's quite robust. But against phase
noise of various
types it is not robust at all. All depends on the situation.

Frequency stability of my old Heath TX is a problem, but I'm working
on it.....

What rig is it?

Heath SB-400. The Pride of 1964 :)

Amazing how well a 40 year old box full of glowbottles is still
useful, huh?
15 Hz stability from a one-tube Hartley is pretty decent.

With a narrowband signal like this, it doesn't take much drift! I'm
seeing a frequency decrease of up to 15 Hz, beginning a few seconds
after keying. B+ to the VFO appears to be well regulated - maybe not
tight enough though. Might have to replace the 0A2 with a few zeners
- haven't tried that yet....

First try replacing the 0A2 regulator and 6AU6A oscillator tubes -
different
ones may have slightly different characteristics.

But the real problem may be that the heater voltage is changing when
transmitting, rather than the B+. Another possibility is that heat
from the
6146s and power supply may be causing a bit of drift, because PSK31 is
a very
high duty cycle mode and a lot of heat gets dissipated on transmit.

One cure to consider is to build an external VFO, either LC or
synthetic, to do the job. The SB-400 LMO tunes 5.0 to 5.5 MHz, and it
tunes "backwards" (5.5 MHz on the VFO is the low end of the band
selected). Such a VFO could be mounted
externally to eliminate any changes to the rig itself.

I copied the heterodyne scheme of the Heath SB-series for the
Southgate Type 6 transceivers, btw. Found some Heath filters at the
1978 Rochester hamfest and
built a rig around them. Now it's on "standby" duty since the Type 7
entered service about 10 years ago.

Now there's something that will get through when nothing else will.

Not really. You will find times when the PSK-31 signal is clearly
audible in the speaker, well above the background amplitude noise, but
the decoder cannot make sense of it because the phase distortion is
too bad.

Haven't experienced that yet - at least when I see that, I'll know
what is causing it!

Exactly.

And, it types itself out, too. (that's a real boon for the perennially
lazy - like me) :)

It was meant as a replacement for conventional RTTY - as a "keyboard
to keyboard" mode. For example, the speed was chosen to be about what
*average* conversational keyboarding hams use.

btw, the code used in PSK-31 uses shorter symbols for the most common
characters and longer ones for the least common. Just like Morse code,
which is where the designers got the idea.

Didn't know that - great idea, though!

Yup. Even the use of 00 for a character space was derived from Morse.

I believe that BPSK-31 was created within the amateur community -

Yup - G3PLX, and a number of folks who helped him by testing it out on
the air and others who have developed software packages. A local ham
of my acquaintance (one of those longtime 20 wpm 1x2 Extras with
multiple EE degrees - we share two alma maters, btw) was one of the
team who helped test it out.

PSK-31 is another great tool in the toolbox, but not a replacement for
good old Morse Code.

Haven't formulated an opinion on that one yet - stay tuned!

Consider that it takes a lot more hardware to implement PSK31, and
that
the requirements of that hardware are much more stringent than what is
required to implement Morse code.

Consider also that Morse code, as used by hams, is an aural mode, but
doesn't
require talking. Thus it can be used in a number of situations where
other
modes can't. For example, it's not safe to drive and work PSK-31, but
mobile
Morse operation is safely enjoyed by many hams. Using voice is often
out of
the question when it is of prime importance not to disturb other
family members.

And when cost, size, weight and battery power considerations are
paramount, Morse code equipment is the natural choice. Check out the
new KX1 at

http://www.elecraft.com

for an example of what can be done with modern Morse code radio
equipment.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On 10 Feb 2004 10:14:34 -0800, (N2EY) wrote:

snip

Heath SB-400. The Pride of 1964 :)

Oh yeah - and my basement!


Amazing how well a 40 year old box full of glowbottles is still
useful, huh?
15 Hz stability from a one-tube Hartley is pretty decent.

With a narrowband signal like this, it doesn't take much drift! I'm
seeing a frequency decrease of up to 15 Hz, beginning a few seconds
after keying. B+ to the VFO appears to be well regulated - maybe not
tight enough though. Might have to replace the 0A2 with a few zeners
- haven't tried that yet....

First try replacing the 0A2 regulator and 6AU6A oscillator tubes -
different
ones may have slightly different characteristics.

That was one of the things I tried when I rbuilt the TX back in the
summer - ended up with an 0A2WA regulator and a 6136 in the LMO. That
brought it much closer...that and some conductive silver grease in the
bearings of the LMO tuning cap (I didn't even know they made that
stuff till I dug into the Web and discovered that TRW used it when
they built the LMOs for Heath, and it dries out over time.....)


But the real problem may be that the heater voltage is changing when
transmitting, rather than the B+. Another possibility is that heat
from the
6146s and power supply may be causing a bit of drift, because PSK31 is
a very
high duty cycle mode and a lot of heat gets dissipated on transmit.

That is very possible - it's also possible that the drift is in one of
the other oscillator sections other than the LMO. Haven't had time to
tear it apart and see yet....one of these days!


snip

Thanks for the info!

73 de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

Remember, morse code gets through when everything else will.

Moreover, it gets through when almost nothing else will! This makes it a
mode which all radio amateurs wishing to possess total communications
capability simply cannot ignore. It is well worth the time and effort it takes
to learn.


LHA / WMD

Good one Len ..... have to remember it ....

Credit Brian Burke with the phrase. He had that truism right,
worthy of repeating. :-)

Brian was right, Lennie, but he left out the last part I just added! Sorry,
still no cigar for you and Brian!

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article , Leo
writes:

On 10 Feb 2004 10:14:34 -0800, (N2EY) wrote:

snip

Heath SB-400. The Pride of 1964 :)

Oh yeah - and my basement!


Amazing how well a 40 year old box full of glowbottles is still
useful, huh?
15 Hz stability from a one-tube Hartley is pretty decent.

With a narrowband signal like this, it doesn't take much drift! I'm
seeing a frequency decrease of up to 15 Hz, beginning a few seconds
after keying. B+ to the VFO appears to be well regulated - maybe not
tight enough though. Might have to replace the 0A2 with a few zeners
- haven't tried that yet....

First try replacing the 0A2 regulator and 6AU6A oscillator tubes -
different
ones may have slightly different characteristics.

That was one of the things I tried when I rbuilt the TX back in the
summer - ended up with an 0A2WA regulator and a 6136 in the LMO. That
brought it much closer...that and some conductive silver grease in the
bearings of the LMO tuning cap (I didn't even know they made that
stuff till I dug into the Web and discovered that TRW used it when
they built the LMOs for Heath, and it dries out over time.....)

Lotta subtleties in old gear. Not as "primitive" as some folks try to tell
us...

But the real problem may be that the heater voltage is changing when
transmitting, rather than the B+. Another possibility is that heat
from the
6146s and power supply may be causing a bit of drift, because PSK31 is
a very
high duty cycle mode and a lot of heat gets dissipated on transmit.

That is very possible - it's also possible that the drift is in one of
the other oscillator sections other than the LMO. Haven't had time to
tear it apart and see yet....one of these days!

Two xtal and one tunable oscillator in that heterodyne scheme.

Upwards drift in the het osc will make the operating freq go higher
Upwards drift in the LMO will make the operating freq go lower
Upwards drift in the BFO will make the operating freq go lower

So there's a bit of compensation *if* the oscillators all drift the same way.

Thanks for the info!

You're welcome.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Leo
writes:

On 17 Jan 2004 00:57:34 GMT, (N2EY) wrote:

In article , Leo

writes:

For some reason, this discussion keeps going off on a tangent from the
core "issue" that began our discourse.

There are several issues, not just one.

OK - I'm listening.


Perhaps I haven't stated it
clearly enough, or during the discussion the original issue has become
clouded.

Let's see what you've got, then.

Let's go.


I have responded to your comments below, but I fear that we will
continue forever if we are not discussing exactly the same issue.

I understand that, due to your standards, you find Kim's callsign
inappropriate.

That's correct. It's also an issue to some people.

OK - fair enough. And it shouldn't be.

But it is! And that's one of my points.

Your personal standards are
your own - no one else's.

They are shared in this case by some other people, so your
statement of "no one else's" isn't true.

Let's clear that one off - agreed?

Once you agree that they are shared by some but not all others, yes.

No issue there - that is entirely your right.

Some people say it isn't. Not you, but some others.

Others may, but who cares - it's none of their business.

Whether or not it's someone's business is an issue, too.

I also
understand that you do not wish to use it in any of your posts.

Also correct. And also an issue to some people, who say that my deletion of
Kim's call is "wrong".

Let's focus on that one, and agree that deleting her call from your
post is necessary for you to due to your standards. I have no issue
there at all. If you don't want to use it, OK. Let's clear this one
off too - agreed?

OK, fine. You have no problem with my not using her callsign.

Again, no issue there - I respect that.

For clarity, I'll restate it in clear and concise wording:

Kim feels that eliminating just her callsign from your post was
unfair, as it singled her out. I agree.

And I disagree. Kim singled herself out by choosing that callsign. As you
are aware.

Yes she did - and quite intentionally, too, as she has stated.

BINGO!

That wasn't, however, what I was saying in my statement above. Simply
that Kim feels that you singled her out too, by omitting just her call
from the list.

Understood.

Forget the inappropriatenesss of the call for a moment

Why? It is that inappropriateness which was the cause of the whole thing.

....do you see where she might get that feeling?

Sure.

Do you see where others might get the same or similar feelings?

Would finding a compromise
whereby neither your standards nor Kim's feelings - such as removing
all of the callsigns and listing only names for all participants -
have not been a fairer way to handle this situation for all concerned?

No, it wouldn't.

Honestly, I dont agree with you on this point.

That's OK. You can post her callsign, my callsign, or nobody's callsign in
*your* posts. Just don't try to get me to post them or not post them in *my*
posts....

It would have been an
easy compromise to make,

Easy - and not in acordance with my standards.

and woulld potentially have offended no one.

Incorrect. It would have offended me.

More on this further down in the post!

That's the only issue that I am discussing, Jim.

No, it isn't, but we'll get to that later. Right now, let's discuss that
issue.

It seems to me that what you're saying is that I should either include
everyone's callsign, or no one's.

Now since I don't wish to include Kim's callsign, that leaves only the
option of including no one's callsign, in order to accomodate Kim's feelings.

Agreed - in order to treat everyone equally, that would be the only
other option available given the situation.

But it would *not* treat everyone equally. Those with appropriate callsigns
would
not get to see them posted. Everyone would suffer for one person's choice.

But what about everyone else's feelings, including mine? I want my call
listed.

I would feel disrespected to be listed by name rather than callsign or name
and callsign on an amateur radio newsgroup.

Yes, and I believe that Kim feels exactly the same way, Jim. For the
same reason as you, I suppose - she is also a ham. (She does not feel
that her call is in any way wrong, remember.)

I use the word "inappropriate". "Wrong" implies a moral judgement.

Maybe Dee, Dave, Carl, Dwight, Jim, Jim, Steve, et. al also want *their*
callsigns listed, and would feel disrespected if I listed by name only.

Don't the feelings of everyone else count?

Of course they do - but are you sure that these people world be that
upset by this?

I know I would be - that's one.

(except Dave, of course - he appears, from his recent
correspondence, to be annoyed that Kim is still breathing... :) )

I don't see any indication that Dave, K8MN wants Kim to die. I do see an
indication that Dave would like Kim to choose a more appropriate callsign.

So if we assume K8MN agrees with me, that's two.

Perhaps others would feel disrespected too.

So you're saying that Kim's feelings are more important than Jim's (N2EY) and
Dave's (K8MN) feelings. And maybe more.

In fact, if it had been my post, I would have revised it to names only
immediately after Kim's original complaint.

But it wasn't your post. It was my post.

By your logic, I should change my screen name and email address and how I sign
posts, because they are derived from my callsign, too.

And seen what comments
came back next. If I had several legitimate complaints (without the
agendas that we have seen in several recent posts {not yours, Jim!)
which obviously relate to Kim personally rather than just her
call...), then yes there would be no other alternative than to put the
calls back - but I would have written and offered Kim the option of
going by name only or dropping out before I went ahead.

So I should potentially disrespect a bunch of other hams with appropriate
callsigns to please Kim? And if some of them complain, I get to put their
callsigns back but not Kim's?

Why not just do what I did and avoid the potential of disrespecting hams with
appropriate callsigns?

At least I'd
be able to tell Kim that I tried to fix it for her, but it didn't work
out with the rest of the group.

That would be passing the buck.

Maybe it's just me, but I would try first to resolve her complaint if
possible, out of respect for her as a fellow amateur.

I respect her as a fellow amateur. But I also respect other amateurs
with appropriate callsigns.

I prefer
compromise whenever possible - not compromising my standards, but
finding a way to achieve a balance.

What about when your standards cannot be compromised?

Note also, Kim said that if I wouldn't use her callsign, she didn't want to
be on the list..

True, but that was after the had become frustrated with trying to
solve this issue.

She was not willing to do anything to solve the issue other than complain and
protest.

Your rights and
standards are not at question here.

Yes, they are. I've been told that "it's not my place" to determine whether
a callsign is appropriate or not. I've been told that my actions are "wrong".

Also, the word "prejudice" has been used...

As you are aware.

I did state that it is in fact no one individual's place to determine
what is or is not appropriate for the ARS - that role belongs to the
regulators, and to the will of the majority of us, I suppose.

It was that it was not *my* (N2EY's) place to decide.

Each of us is however completely in charge of determining what is
appropriate for us as an individual, however. No question there.

And I say it's appropriate for me to post the calls and words of hams with
appropriate callsigns and to edit out the calls and words of those who
use inappropriate ones.

Jim, my intent was not to criticize your standards

Well, you did. I could even say you disrespected me in the way you did it.

- simply to point
out that perhaps a more amicable solution to this issue was possible
without compromising anyone's standards - finding a common ground for
all.

I do not agree that your proposed solution wasn't a compromise to my standards.

That's it - that's my point.

And here's one more issue to think about:

Every community, including the ARS, has its standards. Consider
residential neighborhoods as an analogy.

Some community standards are concretely and legally stated, like
zoning ordinances and building codes. Others are part of the
general community culture, such as keeping one's property in
reasonable repair and not mowing your lawn at 3 AM. A lot
of the latter come under the heading of "being a good neighbor".

If someone wants to be accepted and respected in a community,
it is necessary to act (more or less) in accordance with reasonable
community standards. That doesn't mean everyone must be exactly
alike and never do anything different than the neighbors, but it
*does* mean that community standards need to be considered.

The fact that not all community standards are codified into law doesn't
mean they aren't important. For example, painting one's house in odd
colors and patterns may be legal in some communities, but it's not the
mark of being a "good neighbor".

What Kim wants to do is to reject the ARS' "community standards"
in her choice of callsign, yet still receive the same respect and
acceptance from other hams as those who choose appropriate callsigns.
Just like the person who paints their house purple and orange in a dazzle
pattern, then wonders why the neighbors put up fences and shrubs to
conceal the view.

73 de Jim, N2EY


73 de Jim, N2EY