An alternative theory could be that he has a life and that upgrade
wasn't a priority.

The correct answer is, the CW wasnt the problem, the Theory was just as big a
problem. Would love to know how many time s he failed it .

On 05 Sep 2003 13:07:04 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote:

An alternative theory could be that he has a life and that upgrade
wasn't a priority.

The correct answer is, the CW wasnt the problem, the Theory was just as big a
problem. Would love to know how many time s he failed it .

Why?

On 5 Sep 2003 05:30:04 GMT, "Dick Carroll;" wrote:



"S. Hanrahan" wrote:

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:00:13 -0400, Bob Brock
wrote:

Why would you want to foil computer copy?

Because no law says you can't.

For you to do the test to
make sure that it works and then advocate it's use, you can't really
say that wasn't your intention.

What if it was? Nothing you can do about it but learn the code.

The guy is a lost cause. He doesn't even understrand that no testing ever need be done.
All it takes is a bit of understanding, which he clearlyh lacks.

You sound like a religous fanatic. Is that your intention or is it
natural? Am I now condemned to no-code hell for eternity? I'm sorry,
but if I could take your chidish commets seriously, I might actually
take a serious look at your position. However, from what I see right
now, you don't have a valid position to look at.

S. Hanrahan wrote in message . ..
On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 11:22:58 -0700, Jack Twilley
wrote:



It took me a little over 6 months to go from nothing to 20 WPM. I
passed the 20 WPM code before I took the General written exam.

When I "did" my Extra ya had to pass both the writtens and the code
test at the same sitting or wait a month and go back and do *all* of
it all over again. Dinosaur? Who ME?

w3rv

I was under the impression that Farnsworth was a type of spacing but
that the actual numbers weren't relevant -- only that the word speed
is often much less than the character speed. The test I took had a
word speed of five words per minute and a character speed of eighteen
words per minute. The practice files I'm building for my web site
have a word speed of five words per minute and a character speed of
twenty words per minute.

Stacey By the time one becomes proficient enough to copy Morse Code,
Stacey counting out the dits and dahs is moot at best.

In my limited experience, I learn more characters faster with
Farnsworth spacing, but I'm concerned that I'm building a lookup table
instead of reflexes. It's the difference between "dahdidah, hmm,
that's K, dahdah, hmm, that's M" and "dahdidah (K) dahdah (M)". I
learned eight or nine characters with Farnsworth spacing, but I can't
repeat the performance at full speed, so I fear that I'm learning
something that won't be useful if I continue to use Farnsworth
spacing.


Stick with the tried and proven Jack and just get on with the job like
tens if not hundreds of thousands of us have already done. There is no
point to reinventing the wheel.

I've sed it before I'll say it again: The W1AW code practice sessions
and getting on the air ASAP are the best methods out there for
learning the code. The 1AW sessions are reliable, they're not
repetitive and you can pace yourself without breaking a sweat
depending on your own set of learning curve variables. Yes it's
Farnsworth and 1AW Farnworth has obviously worked for decades. Now go
copy 1AW 5wpm sessions until you "get it".

I'm not sure I'd advise getting on the air with 5wpm these days but
getting on the air with 10wpm absolutely will accelerate your move up
the code learning curve. There is nothing which can simulate the
experience and stimulation one gets when snagging real CW QSOs early
in the code learning process. Nothing. Sweat, sweat, tremble, into the
deep end . . Been there, done it and it WORKS. The mix of 1AW and The
Deep End worked twice for me and I not only enjoyed all of it but also
got to 20wpm+ via logs full of actual QSOs to boot.

And CW contests are lousy code practice.



Jack.
- --

w3rv

"Brian" wrote in message
om...
It does not mandate
that the relative spacing meet any particular standard to be considered
Morse code.

So you say that Morse cannot be defined, yet the FCC demands you pass
an exam that has barred people from the medium and high frequencies.
It is whatever you want it to be.

Morse code is very clearly defined. Each letter, number, etc has a defined
combination of dots and dashes. There is no ambiguity whatsoever. For
normal conversational speeds (13wpm to 20wpm), the standard spacing allows
one to develop a natural, easy rhythm. For low speed operation (less than
13wpm), it is better to have the letter speed be at least 13 but spaces
between the letters. It's actually much easier to copy that way as you hear
the letter as a distinct sound rather than counting dashes and dots. On the
other hand, high speed ops may choose to change the ratio of the length of
dashes to dots as it may be clearer than the "standard" spacing.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Brian" =3D=3D Brian Kelly writes:

Jack In my limited experience, I learn more characters faster with
Jack Farnsworth spacing, but I'm concerned that I'm building a lookup
Jack table instead of reflexes. It's the difference between
Jack "dahdidah, hmm, that's K, dahdah, hmm, that's M" and "dahdidah
Jack (K) dahdah (M)". I learned eight or nine characters with
Jack Farnsworth spacing, but I can't repeat the performance at full
Jack speed, so I fear that I'm learning something that won't be
Jack useful if I continue to use Farnsworth spacing.

Brian Stick with the tried and proven Jack and just get on with the
Brian job like tens if not hundreds of thousands of us have already
Brian done. There is no point to reinventing the wheel.

One wonders what Mr. (or Ms.) Farnsworth would have said if someone
had told him something like that. There is point in reinventing the
wheel, if one believes they may have found something more efficient.
In this case, I'm not inventing anything -- I am facilitating the
learning of those who prefer full speed and Farnsworth spacing.

Brian I've sed it before I'll say it again: The W1AW code practice
Brian sessions and getting on the air ASAP are the best methods out
Brian there for learning the code. The 1AW sessions are reliable,
Brian they're not repetitive and you can pace yourself without
Brian breaking a sweat depending on your own set of learning curve
Brian variables. Yes it's Farnsworth and 1AW Farnworth has obviously
Brian worked for decades. Now go copy 1AW 5wpm sessions until you
Brian "get it".

I've said it before, but perhaps not in this location: my current
location does not permit reception of HF signals. I have tried for
months with multiple antenna setups and have not been successful. I
have very limited VHF reception -- broadcast FM and television
stations do not come in, but I can receive on 2m and 440MHz. I
thought it was bad when I didn't have an HF rig, but it's worse to
have one and not be able to receive anything.

Brian I'm not sure I'd advise getting on the air with 5wpm these days
Brian but getting on the air with 10wpm absolutely will accelerate
Brian your move up the code learning curve. There is nothing which
Brian can simulate the experience and stimulation one gets when
Brian snagging real CW QSOs early in the code learning
Brian process. Nothing. Sweat, sweat, tremble, into the deep end
Brian . . Been there, done it and it WORKS. The mix of 1AW and The
Brian Deep End worked twice for me and I not only enjoyed all of it
Brian but also got to 20wpm+ via logs full of actual QSOs to boot.

I'm glad it worked for you. I'm going for the tried and true Koch
method of learning the characters at full speed. It might take more
time for me to learn them all, but I'll know them, and that will be
exciting. I am currently exploring another method of code generating
that spits out words from characters that I already know since I'm a
little concerned that five-letter groups might shape my learning in a
way that won't help with real code. Other than that, though, I'm
pretty happy with what I've got.

Brian And CW contests are lousy code practice.

I agree with you on this. Hopefully by next Field Day I'll be able to
participate with CW, but I am concerned that my straight-key efforts
will be wasted on the memory keyers out there. Bah.

Jack.
=2D --=20
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/WR0nGPFSfAB/ezgRAnw9AJ9Q+MjBOBHMu3/4c2UqD28AVD0/bgCgwCYK
+CsToQwt+3eBYywf9GUcu0U=3D
=3Dan8p
=2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Brian" wrote in message
om...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
igy.com...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

Actually, I believe there is an ITU-R Recommendation that specifies
the "International Morse Code" in typical ITU detail.


Operative word is recommendation, which is exactly what I said.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Yet the FCC demands that one passes an exam or be denied access.

Shouldn't they have a definition of what is being examined?

They have defined it as 5wpm. The details are left up to the NCVEC just
like the details of the writtens are left up to the NCVEC.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Bob Brock" wrote in message
...
On 5 Sep 2003 05:30:04 GMT, "Dick Carroll;" wrote:



"S. Hanrahan" wrote:

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:00:13 -0400, Bob Brock
wrote:

Why would you want to foil computer copy?

Because no law says you can't.

For you to do the test to
make sure that it works and then advocate it's use, you can't really
say that wasn't your intention.

What if it was? Nothing you can do about it but learn the code.

The guy is a lost cause. He doesn't even understrand that no testing ever
need be done.
All it takes is a bit of understanding, which he clearlyh lacks.

You sound like a religous fanatic. Is that your intention or is it
natural? Am I now condemned to no-code hell for eternity? I'm sorry,
but if I could take your chidish commets seriously, I might actually
take a serious look at your position. However, from what I see right
now, you don't have a valid position to look at.


Well, you understand Dick quite perfectly... ; )

Kim W5TIT

=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Dick" =3D=3D Dick Carroll; writes:

Jack I've said it before, but perhaps not in this location: my
Jack current location does not permit reception of HF signals. I
Jack have tried for months with multiple antenna setups and have not
Jack been successful.

Dick Where the heck are you, Jack? I've received HF from many
Dick locations, about everywhere I've ever been and tried it. Is it
Dick an radio noise environment problem or what? Unless you live in
Dick the middle of one of the BPL tryout area I can't imagine not
Dick being able to receive W1AW on one of the bands..

I'm in grid square CM88wa, between two very large hills which run for
several miles in a roughly north-south direction. My backyard is
twenty-five feet wide by nine feet deep and it is partially shared
with neighboring units. For political reasons, antennas have to be as
invisible as possible, so the highest I can get is six feet off the
ground and six feet from the house. I was able to construct a dipole
with twelve-foot legs, but I couldn't even get WWV, let alone an
amateur station. In addition, the electrical noise gives me a noise
floor of S7 -- some of which is my fault, as I've got six computers
running at any given time. Sometime this weekend I should make a
recording of what I hear on the bands so people can understand that
reception truly sucks at my house.

Dick Dick

Jack.
=2D --=20
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/WTNGGPFSfAB/ezgRAgneAJwNfhdRniL3vxgxoliupLVrlHbTGQCgvq15
8rGCa/dPlNywvoQBvQZtAlk=3D
=3D6kOg
=2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...


Brian wrote:

Bob Brock wrote in message
. ..
On 05 Sep 2003 03:44:03 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote:

Don't try to lecture me on regulatory ... that's what I do for a
living (and for a couple of major industry organizations, plus
NCI)

Carl - wk3c


Damn, I thought you were some Techno whizz, no wonder it took you
over a year
to upgrade.

An alternative theory could be that he has a life and that upgrade
wasn't a priority. Some of us do have lives you know. You do know
that don't you?

Speaking of no life. Dick is a big-time emergency communicator. Used
to drill 7/8" holes in the rooftops of Missouri's finest. Lives for
the New Madrid earthquake.

But when Hans invited him to join in a QSO using his favorite mode
that he demands everyone else be made to learn, his lame excuse for
not doing so was that he wasn't home at the time. Apparently he can't
go mobile himself.

So much for his emergency skills.

And it's true, I WASN'T at home-that time. But where were YOU when K0HB,
N2EY, W6RCA, AC6XG, W3RV and
I--Did I forget anyone?- held that nice rrap CW net on 40 meters???


Ooooo, demmit! I missed something good here. That's what I get for picking
and choosing posts most of the time. Anyway, Brian, did you see a couple of
months ago where I posted the question to Dick about just what it would take
for the establishment of a disaster station for CW operation? As far as I
know, he never answered!!!! And, of course, it's because he knew he was
getting set up--we all know it would actually take quite a bit to be ready
to establish a disaster response CW station--and that was the set up. I was
going to ask DICK if he was ready...

Well.....


Oh, I almost forgot- you're STILL waiting for a code free license!
Right!


As for emergency gear, I have all that in a pair of metal equipment
cases, ready to grab and go, if and
when needed. I'll take along a laptop just in case the need happens to be
for a digital mode. AND my
Vibroplex Iambic paddle for CW.


PAH!!!! Grab and go. All of that?! You have got to be kidding...but wait,
there's mo


For power I have a lightweight switchmode AC supply AND an 800 watt
inverter. One does need to be
flexible doesn't one?


Oh. OK. So, uh, don't persecute me here because I am lowly slow-code
Tech+, but where you gonna get that AC and what if your car is crunched;
and/or even when it runs out of gas? And, if you've got all this "stuff"
ready to chuckle grab and go...and your vehicle is crunched, the trees are
down so much that you can't move, or any number of other quite likely
situations in a disaster, how will you choose to establish your CW station
then, Dick? Really, let's drill it.


After all, the need could be for something hightech and digital. But the
possibility always exists that those needing to communicat from a disaster
area will have only modest old
CW available.


The higher likelihood, and I think most seasoned EmCom folks will bear me
out on this one, is that there will be many low-power talkies available,
FRS, and the immediate disaster communications would be through simplex
frequencies on 2M and 70cm, along with APRS stations set up and
transmitting. Most disasters would have high hope of skilled CW ops for HW
traffic, though.


One does need to be ready, doesn't one?


Yep. And it doesn't sound like you are. The picture I get in my mind is
almost humorous if it weren't so sad. DICK, standing there with his grab
and go "stuff," wishing he'd thought to wheel mount those metal equipment
cases because they sure are going to be heavy to drag or pick up and carry,
with a tree or two down over his vehicle and the power lines dancing all
over the place around him...with his metal carrying cases right there...

Oh, the the pain, the pain...


So what's YOUR enmergency status,Slim? Do you have "permission" yet?

Dick, W0EX FISTS #3939


He probably would be up, running, established and ready to
communicate--WHILE getting the hell away from danger and to a location as
directed by the local net.

Kim W5TIT

"Jack Twilley" wrote in message
...

I agree with you on this. Hopefully by next Field Day I'll be able to
participate with CW, but I am concerned that my straight-key efforts
will be wasted on the memory keyers out there. Bah.

No, it will be just fine. I still use a straight key.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

S. Hanrahan wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:00:13 -0400, Bob Brock
wrote:


Why would you want to foil computer copy?

Because no law says you can't.

For you to do the test to
make sure that it works and then advocate it's use, you can't really
say that wasn't your intention.

What if it was? Nothing you can do about it but learn the code.

Oh, geez. Here's another Morse Elitist that apparently advocates
sending code so **** poorly that it can't be computer copied. Hoo-ah!

Jack Twilley wrote in message ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Dick" == Dick Carroll; writes:

Jack I've said it before, but perhaps not in this location: my
Jack current location does not permit reception of HF signals. I
Jack have tried for months with multiple antenna setups and have not
Jack been successful.

Dick Where the heck are you, Jack? I've received HF from many
Dick locations, about everywhere I've ever been and tried it. Is it
Dick an radio noise environment problem or what? Unless you live in
Dick the middle of one of the BPL tryout area I can't imagine not
Dick being able to receive W1AW on one of the bands..

I'm in grid square CM88wa, between two very large hills which run for
several miles in a roughly north-south direction. My backyard is
twenty-five feet wide by nine feet deep and it is partially shared
with neighboring units. For political reasons, antennas have to be as
invisible as possible, so the highest I can get is six feet off the
ground and six feet from the house. I was able to construct a dipole
with twelve-foot legs, but I couldn't even get WWV, let alone an
amateur station. In addition, the electrical noise gives me a noise
floor of S7 -- some of which is my fault, as I've got six computers
running at any given time. Sometime this weekend I should make a
recording of what I hear on the bands so people can understand that
reception truly sucks at my house.

Dick Dick

Jack.

Jack, you must understand something. DICK has been in every
situation, probably including your own. If DICK says he's able to
receive HF everywhere he's -tried-, he implies that you aren't trying
hard enough. In the end, it comes down to CW always getting through.
You're using CW, right?

Jack Twilley wrote in message ...


Brian Stick with the tried and proven Jack and just get on with the
Brian job like tens if not hundreds of thousands of us have already
Brian done. There is no point to reinventing the wheel.

One wonders what Mr. (or Ms.) Farnsworth would have said if someone
had told him something like that.
There is point in reinventing the
wheel, if one believes they may have found something more efficient.
In this case, I'm not inventing anything -- I am facilitating the
learning of those who prefer full speed and Farnsworth spacing.

One will get ya ten that Farnsworth was an expert on the subject
BEFORE he/she invented that wheel and took it public. I find the
concept of you, admittedly struggling to get off a notch above ground
zero in this game, "facilitating" the learning process for others just
a tad problematic.


Brian variables. Yes it's Farnsworth and 1AW Farnworth has obviously
Brian worked for decades. Now go copy 1AW 5wpm sessions until you
Brian "get it".

I've said it before, but perhaps not in this location: my current
location does not permit reception of HF signals. I have tried for
months with multiple antenna setups and have not been successful. I
have very limited VHF reception -- broadcast FM and television
stations do not come in, but I can receive on 2m and 440MHz. I
thought it was bad when I didn't have an HF rig, but it's worse to
have one and not be able to receive anything.

Local terrain isn't much an HF stopper so W1AW would be be usable
under normal condx. But per your response to Dick your overriding
problem seems to be noise. Are you on Jones St. in Martinez or in
Walnut Creek? In either case noise in those kinds of very densely
populated QTHs can be mongo. I can sympathize with all of that, I sure
have my share here. So W1AW is a non-solution. But you might try
shutting down all six computers and listen again.

Brian . . Been there, done it and it WORKS. The mix of 1AW and The
Brian Deep End worked twice for me and I not only enjoyed all of it
Brian but also got to 20wpm+ via logs full of actual QSOs to boot.

I'm glad it worked for you. I'm going for the tried and true Koch
method of learning the characters at full speed. It might take more
time for me to learn them all, but I'll know them, and that will be
exciting. I am currently exploring another method of code generating
that spits out words from characters that I already know since I'm a
little concerned that five-letter groups might shape my learning in a
way that won't help with real code.

Copying random five-letter groups is excellent code practice which is
why the military has used groups instead of straight text for CW
training purposes. Five letter groups at 20wpm is more difficult to
copy than is staright text at 20wpm, another factoid which is as old
as the hills.

Other than that, though, I'm
pretty happy with what I've got.

If it works for you it works.

Brian And CW contests are lousy code practice.

I agree with you on this. Hopefully by next Field Day I'll be able to
participate with CW,

I suggest you get on the air somewhere somehow by hook or crook and
get some real experience before you dive into FD. Per previous I have
a nasty noise problem too but I now have a nice quiet alternative
"escape QTH". I have some lines permanently installed in some big
trees in one of my daughters' back yards and pre-fabbed quick-up
dipoles for 80/40/20/15. I also have a TS-50 HF mobile xcvr with the
CW filter and an FT-847 with an Inrad 400 Hz filter both of which are
very compact lightweight portable rigs. Once I get to her place I can
be on the air in 15 minutes. Which I do when I just can't stand being
off HF any longer. I beep my buns off for hours, get my fill, do some
visiting, mooch a dinner and come home in a much better mood than I
had the day before. Sorta like FD once a month. Poke around, maybe you
have an alternative operating site too.

but I am concerned that my straight-key efforts
will be wasted on the memory keyers out there. Bah.

Using a straight key in a contest would kill me if I was running a
decent rate. The goofy relics should be outlawed at least in contests
except under unusual circumstances. Do yourself a big favor and get
yourself decent paddles like a Kent and a cheap MFJ keyer and take it
from there. The paddles would work fine with the FD momory keyers.
Beyond that real CW contesters don't use any types of mechanical keys,
they use keyboards. In the end the means used to generate the output
doesn't matter, it's the ears that *always* matter . . .

Jack.

w3rv

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com...
"Brian" wrote in message
om...
S. Hanrahan wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:00:13 -0400, Bob Brock
wrote:


Why would you want to foil computer copy?

Because no law says you can't.

For you to do the test to
make sure that it works and then advocate it's use, you can't really
say that wasn't your intention.

What if it was? Nothing you can do about it but learn the code.

Oh, geez. Here's another Morse Elitist that apparently advocates
sending code so **** poorly that it can't be computer copied. Hoo-ah!

Don't need to send it poorly.

Does anyone have a need to send it poorly (except DICK)?

More importantly, you shouldn't try to send it poorly. You should
send it to the very best of your ability.

But if you send it very poorly with the intention of thwarting machine
copy, what do you think the result will be?

Only strong code signals under good
propagation conditions can be adequatly copied by the computer anyway. I'm
only mediocre at the code myself but I routinely copy better than the
computer anytime conditions are less than ideal such as with weak signals,
poor propagation, high static, or high interference.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Brian

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com...
"Brian" wrote in message
om...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
igy.com...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

Actually, I believe there is an ITU-R Recommendation that specifies
the "International Morse Code" in typical ITU detail.


Operative word is recommendation, which is exactly what I said.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Yet the FCC demands that one passes an exam or be denied access.

Shouldn't they have a definition of what is being examined?

They have defined it as 5wpm. The details are left up to the NCVEC just
like the details of the writtens are left up to the NCVEC.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Nonsense. The FCC specified Morse at 5wpm rate. Farnsworth is a
method for learning fast Morse code, thus the characters are sent at
13-15wpm.

Amateur radio and electronics includes many methods of learning, but I
doubt the FCC would allow the answer to the resistor color code to be:
"BAD BOYS RAPE OUR YOUNG GIRLS BUT VIOLET GIVES WILLINGLY," yet it is
a commonly used learning technique.

Jack Twilley wrote in message ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Brian" == Brian Kelly writes:

[...]

Brian One will get ya ten that Farnsworth was an expert on the
Brian subject BEFORE he/she invented that wheel and took it public. I
Brian find the concept of you, admittedly struggling to get off a
Brian notch above ground zero in this game, "facilitating" the
Brian learning process for others just a tad problematic.

Out of curiosity, have you seen the page or are you still blocked on
the concept of a student assisting other students?

Jack, "students teaching students" is at the core of the FCC's
mandated Novice subbands. I hadn't been aware that Kelly was against
this concept and the implementation of it.

Brian/N0iMD

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message ...
"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...

And it's true, I WASN'T at home-that time. But where were YOU when K0HB,
N2EY, W6RCA, AC6XG, W3RV and
I--Did I forget anyone?- held that nice rrap CW net on 40 meters???


Ooooo, demmit! I missed something good here. That's what I get for picking
and choosing posts most of the time.

It was pretty pathetic, Kim. They suckered poor Cecil into meeting up
with them on 40M CW, but treated him just as badly afterward. I would
advise you not to fall for their tricks.

Anyway, Brian, did you see a couple of
months ago where I posted the question to Dick about just what it would take
for the establishment of a disaster station for CW operation? As far as I
know, he never answered!!!!

Yeh, I never saw his reply. I guess if you shake a guy up bad enough,
he starts blurting out all kinds of stuph, like DICK just did..

And, of course, it's because he knew he was
getting set up--we all know it would actually take quite a bit to be ready
to establish a disaster response CW station--and that was the set up. I was
going to ask DICK if he was ready...

Well.....

To hear them talk, you can make an emergency CW station out of a
Wrigley's Spearmint Gum foil wrapper and an old double edge razor
blade.

They lie.


Oh, I almost forgot- you're STILL waiting for a code free license!
Right!


If DICK could use QRZ, he might discern that I've always held a coded
license, but he chooses to remain ignorant.

"Show Me" has no meaning to him.

As for emergency gear, I have all that in a pair of metal equipment
cases, ready to grab and go, if and
when needed. I'll take along a laptop just in case the need happens to be
for a digital mode. AND my
Vibroplex Iambic paddle for CW.

PAH!!!! Grab and go. All of that?! You have got to be kidding...but wait,
there's mo

I wonder where he lifted those transit cases from?

For power I have a lightweight switchmode AC supply AND an 800 watt
inverter. One does need to be
flexible doesn't one?


Oh. OK. So, uh, don't persecute me here because I am lowly slow-code
Tech+, but where you gonna get that AC and what if your car is crunched;
and/or even when it runs out of gas? And, if you've got all this "stuff"
ready to chuckle grab and go...and your vehicle is crunched, the trees are
down so much that you can't move, or any number of other quite likely
situations in a disaster, how will you choose to establish your CW station
then, Dick? Really, let's drill it.

Yeh, where's his generator, chaing saw, and winch? Or quadrunner?

After all, the need could be for something hightech and digital. But the
possibility always exists that those needing to communicat from a disaster
area will have only modest old
CW available.

The higher likelihood, and I think most seasoned EmCom folks will bear me
out on this one, is that there will be many low-power talkies available,
FRS, and the immediate disaster communications would be through simplex
frequencies on 2M and 70cm, along with APRS stations set up and
transmitting. Most disasters would have high hope of skilled CW ops for HW
traffic, though.

On Guam, we got a little FEMA grant to set up a portable 2M repeater.
Put it in a truch or van and park it on whatever peak you needed it
at.

One does need to be ready, doesn't one?

Yep. And it doesn't sound like you are.

Now, now. DICK has done more than most have.

The picture I get in my mind is
almost humorous if it weren't so sad. DICK, standing there with his grab
and go "stuff," wishing he'd thought to wheel mount those metal equipment
cases because they sure are going to be heavy to drag or pick up and carry,
with a tree or two down over his vehicle and the power lines dancing all
over the place around him...with his metal carrying cases right there...

Oh, the the pain, the pain...

Oh, the humanity!

So what's YOUR enmergency status,Slim? Do you have "permission" yet?

Dick, W0EX FISTS #3939


He probably would be up, running, established and ready to
communicate--WHILE getting the hell away from danger and to a location as
directed by the local net.

Kim W5TIT

As a husband and father, my primary responsibility is to protect my
family.

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com...

Using a straight key in a contest would kill me if I was running a
decent rate. The goofy relics should be outlawed at least in contests
except under unusual circumstances. Do yourself a big favor and get
yourself decent paddles like a Kent and a cheap MFJ keyer and take it
from there. The paddles would work fine with the FD momory keyers.
Beyond that real CW contesters don't use any types of mechanical keys,
they use keyboards. In the end the means used to generate the output
doesn't matter, it's the ears that *always* matter . . .


Yeah if you are out to win or be a high scorer, you are correct.

For better or worse I was "brought up" in that niche. I'm one of these
animals:

http://www.gofrc.org/

However if
you just want to be a casual contester, a straight key is fine.

I just have a silly "thing" about straight keys Dee so maybe I'm going
a bit overboard here.

I fiddled with surplus J-38s long before I got serious about actually
taking the Novice test. Every radio kid did that 'Wayback. Eventually
I got to visit an experienced dx contester (which was what I wanted to
become) who used a bug (those guys ALL used bugs) and he let me futz
with his bug "offline" so to speak. Forthwith I immediately got
irrevocably hooked on bugs vs. straight keys. Net result was that the
nite WN3YIK hit the airwaves for the first time it was with a
well-greased, polished and tuned old USN Vibroplex. I've always had a
straight key or two floating around the shack, they're kinda "core ham
objects" and maybe I've had some straight key QSOs but I don't
specifically remember any of 'em.

Also if you
are doing the "hunt and pounce" instead of "camping on a frequency," it
doesn't make quite as much difference. I like to get out there in a
contest and just see what the variety is. I don't intend to make any run at
a large number of contacts. The last CW contest I was in, I was quite happy
to make 77 contacts and then go do something else.

100% on the button, all of it. It's all in what one wants out of a
contest and/or is willing to put into contesting. The simple fact of
the matter is that if it wasn't for the brigades of casual contesters
like you contests simply would not be worth getting into.


Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

w3rv

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com...

Using a straight key in a contest would kill me if I was running a
decent rate. The goofy relics should be outlawed at least in contests
except under unusual circumstances. Do yourself a big favor and get
yourself decent paddles like a Kent and a cheap MFJ keyer and take it
from there. The paddles would work fine with the FD momory keyers.
Beyond that real CW contesters don't use any types of mechanical keys,
they use keyboards. In the end the means used to generate the output
doesn't matter, it's the ears that *always* matter . . .


Yeah if you are out to win or be a high scorer, you are correct.

For better or worse I was "brought up" in that niche. I'm one of these
animals:

http://www.gofrc.org/

However if
you just want to be a casual contester, a straight key is fine.

I just have a silly "thing" about straight keys Dee so maybe I'm going
a bit overboard here.

If you speakum sum Engrish, it wood be better.

I fiddled with surplus J-38s long before I got serious about actually
taking the Novice test. Every radio kid did that 'Wayback.

Probably a lie, but we'll indulge the grate Kelly.

Eventually
I got to visit an experienced dx contester (which was what I wanted to
become) who used a bug (those guys ALL used bugs) and he let me futz
with his bug "offline" so to speak.

Yep, all dx contesters use booogs.

Forthwith

Not to be confused with Farnsworth.

I immediately got
irrevocably hooked on bugs vs. straight keys. Net result was that the
nite WN3YIK hit the airwaves for the first time it was with a
well-greased, polished and tuned old USN Vibroplex. I've always had a
straight key or two floating around the shack,

No doubt one of those anti-gravity devises.

they're kinda "core ham
objects" and maybe I've had some straight key QSOs but I don't
specifically remember any of 'em.

Can't remember "core Ham objects," huh?

Also if you
are doing the "hunt and pounce" instead of "camping on a frequency," it
doesn't make quite as much difference. I like to get out there in a
contest and just see what the variety is. I don't intend to make any run at
a large number of contacts. The last CW contest I was in, I was quite happy
to make 77 contacts and then go do something else.

I wonder how David Heil would characterize your inability to stick
with a 7 second QSO?

100% on the button, all of it.

On what button? PTT button?

It's all in what one wants out of a
contest and/or is willing to put into contesting.

Is it?

The simple fact of
the matter is that if it wasn't for the brigades of casual contesters
like you contests simply would not be worth getting into.

Huh? Try that in Engrish sumtime and we'll relook it.

"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ...
Brian Kelly wrote:

You're a good candidate for one of the quick-up portable HF antenna
packages. Run a search on "DK9SQ", I've heard they're pretty decent.
Also check http://www.eham.net/reviews/products/75


Maybe a St Louis Vertical?

You bet. Nice compact portable package, sets up anywhere in ten
minutes, easy to tune anywhere in the HF spectrum, etc. Short
verticals will deliver the goods rumors to the contrary. Given some
decent operating smarts and patience. A local here has worked well
over 200 countries mobiling with goofy little three foot Hamsticks.

Dunno anybody who has a Ramsey keyer but both of my MFJ keyers work
fine with every Kenwood rig I've used it with including a TS-950, a
TS-440 FD clunker, my TS-940 and TS-50 and also my Yaesu FT-847 and an
ancient hybrid FT-101.

I wonder if he tried reversing the polarity of the keyer's output.

Beats me. I've had and/or used a gazillion keyer/rig combinations and
I've never had the kind of problems he's described going back to
cathode keying days. Somethin' ain't right at KC2ELS . . .

Dick

w3rv

=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Brian" =3D=3D Brian Kelly writes:

[... Dick mentioned a St. Louis Vertical ...]

Brian You bet. Nice compact portable package, sets up anywhere in ten
Brian minutes, easy to tune anywhere in the HF spectrum, etc. Short
Brian verticals will deliver the goods rumors to the contrary. Given
Brian some decent operating smarts and patience. A local here has
Brian worked well over 200 countries mobiling with goofy little three
Brian foot Hamsticks.

I'll show it to SWMBO and see what she thinks.

[... Dick wondered if I tried reversing the keyer's polarity ...]

Brian Beats me. I've had and/or used a gazillion keyer/rig
Brian combinations and I've never had the kind of problems he's
Brian described going back to cathode keying days. Somethin' ain't
Brian right at KC2ELS . . .

I corresponded with Ramsey and they weren't as helpful as I wish they
had been. Someone on Ramsey's BBS emailed me saying they had the
exact same experience and suggested a mod to fix it, but I decided I'd
rather use a straight key.

Brian w3rv

Jack.
=2D --=20
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/XMPDGPFSfAB/ezgRAg1iAKC02hM/FiF7PsmkirfDgXn6v/sr1wCfed0+
dIBgy5qKo8uDuhbw0xkqsUM=3D
=3Dc8FD
=2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

(Brian) wrote in message . com...
(Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com...

Using a straight key in a contest would kill me if I was running a
decent rate. The goofy relics should be outlawed at least in contests
except under unusual circumstances. Do yourself a big favor and get
yourself decent paddles like a Kent and a cheap MFJ keyer and take it
from there. The paddles would work fine with the FD momory keyers.
Beyond that real CW contesters don't use any types of mechanical keys,
they use keyboards. In the end the means used to generate the output
doesn't matter, it's the ears that *always* matter . . .


Yeah if you are out to win or be a high scorer, you are correct.

For better or worse I was "brought up" in that niche. I'm one of these
animals:

http://www.gofrc.org/

However if
you just want to be a casual contester, a straight key is fine.

I just have a silly "thing" about straight keys Dee so maybe I'm going
a bit overboard here.

If you speakum sum Engrish, it wood be better.

I fiddled with surplus J-38s long before I got serious about actually
taking the Novice test. Every radio kid did that 'Wayback.

Probably a lie, but we'll indulge the grate Kelly.

Eventually
I got to visit an experienced dx contester (which was what I wanted to
become) who used a bug (those guys ALL used bugs) and he let me futz
with his bug "offline" so to speak.

Yep, all dx contesters use booogs.

Forthwith

Not to be confused with Farnsworth.

I immediately got
irrevocably hooked on bugs vs. straight keys. Net result was that the
nite WN3YIK hit the airwaves for the first time it was with a
well-greased, polished and tuned old USN Vibroplex. I've always had a
straight key or two floating around the shack,

No doubt one of those anti-gravity devises.

they're kinda "core ham
objects" and maybe I've had some straight key QSOs but I don't
specifically remember any of 'em.

Can't remember "core Ham objects," huh?

Also if you
are doing the "hunt and pounce" instead of "camping on a frequency," it
doesn't make quite as much difference. I like to get out there in a
contest and just see what the variety is. I don't intend to make any run at
a large number of contacts. The last CW contest I was in, I was quite happy
to make 77 contacts and then go do something else.

I wonder how David Heil would characterize your inability to stick
with a 7 second QSO?

100% on the button, all of it.

On what button? PTT button?

It's all in what one wants out of a
contest and/or is willing to put into contesting.

Is it?

The simple fact of
the matter is that if it wasn't for the brigades of casual contesters
like you contests simply would not be worth getting into.

Huh? Try that in Engrish sumtime and we'll relook it.

You overdosed on yer get-stupid pills again din ya?

"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ...
Brian Kelly wrote:

(Brian) wrote in message


The simple fact of
the matter is that if it wasn't for the brigades of casual contesters
like you contests simply would not be worth getting into.

Huh? Try that in Engrish sumtime and we'll relook it.

You overdosed on yer get-stupid pills again din ya?

Doncha think the guys in the white coats took him away? He was really getting on some sort of psycho high.

He's completely whacked, I told him not to smoke the stuff they sprayed.

W1AW also sends Morse Code practice on VHF, if you live close enough.
But I don't think 8-land is close enough.

If not, Jim can tell you how to build an Elecraft K1 out of junk box
parts, or something like that.

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message ...
Yeah, that might be true if you have HF capability........

I've sed it before I'll say it again: The W1AW code practice sessions
and getting on the air ASAP are the best methods out there for
learning the code. The 1AW sessions are reliable, they're not
repetitive and you can pace yourself without breaking a sweat
depending on your own set of learning curve variables. Yes it's
Farnsworth and 1AW Farnworth has obviously worked for decades. Now go
copy 1AW 5wpm sessions until you "get it".


w3rv

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

Heck yes. In fact it went something like this:

First, ya had to have a General or Advanced for at least two years
before they'd even let ya try the Extra.

Then ya had to pass the receive test with at least 100 correct
consecutive legible characters. No going back and fixing things after
the code stopped, either, after the last dit it was PENCILS DOWN or ya
flunked right there.

If ya passed the receive, they let ya try sending with their straight
key or *your* speed key. You sent until the examiner was satisfied.

Only then did they let you try the written. Mess up at any point -
even one character or question - and it was "go home and study some
more and don't come back for at least 30 days". No CSCE, no partial
credit, nada, do it all first try at one sitting or it doesn't count
at all.

Dinosaur? Who ME?

Naw.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Jim:

Ah, yes, the good old days. Challenging licensing requirements and
uncompromising testing procedures. Of course, all that is waaaaay too
PoliticKally IncorrecKt today, since someone with a particular ethnic
origin, skin color, religion, "gender," or a hangnail might not be able
to pass the first time or two. This certainly won't do in these
enlightened times. After all, it might "exclude" someone who is, in
reality, a nascent technical genius who just needs the ability to talk
on the HF phone bands in order to find the inspiration to create the
next fabulous new invention which will revolutionize electronic
communication for the rest of all time!

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article , ospam
(Larry Roll K3LT) writes:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

Heck yes. In fact it went something like this:

First, ya had to have a General or Advanced for at least two years
before they'd even let ya try the Extra.

Then ya had to pass the receive test with at least 100 correct
consecutive legible characters. No going back and fixing things after
the code stopped, either, after the last dit it was PENCILS DOWN or ya
flunked right there.

If ya passed the receive, they let ya try sending with their straight
key or *your* speed key. You sent until the examiner was satisfied.

Only then did they let you try the written. Mess up at any point -
even one character or question - and it was "go home and study some
more and don't come back for at least 30 days". No CSCE, no partial
credit, nada, do it all first try at one sitting or it doesn't count
at all.

Dinosaur? Who ME?

Naw.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Jim:

Ah, yes, the good old days.

With all due respect, Larry - were you there?

Did you have to take a sending test?

Did you have to pass all of the elements to upgrade at the same time?

Did you have to wait 2 years to even try the Extra?

Challenging licensing requirements and
uncompromising testing procedures.

They've been "compromising" forever. Back before WW2 the exam was all blue book
essays. Before 1960 there was diagram drawing. The tests I took in 1967-70 were
"dumbed down" compared to those because my tests were all multiple choice.

Of course, all that is waaaaay too
PoliticKally IncorrecKt today, since someone with a particular ethnic
origin, skin color, religion, "gender," or a hangnail might not be able
to pass the first time or two. This certainly won't do in these
enlightened times.

None of that had anything to do with the license test changes.

Incentive Licensing came about in LBJ's time

Dick Bash did his stuff (and got away with it) when Nixon and Ford were in
office

The change to the VE system happened under Reagan

We got medical waivers because a "king" wanted a favor from George Bush 1.

We also got a nocodeham license because of GB 1.

Etc.

After all, it might "exclude" someone who is, in
reality, a nascent technical genius who just needs the ability to talk
on the HF phone bands in order to find the inspiration to create the
next fabulous new invention which will revolutionize electronic
communication for the rest of all time!

Or something like that.

Don't hold yer breath waiting for it, tho.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ,
(Brian) writes:


Larry, instead of complaining all of the time about others, why don't
you relate to us how you've revolutionized radio communications?

BTW, how's your WAS coming?

Saw in QST where a ham had 48 states in 1957, then completed WAS with
Hawaii and Nevada in 2003. No doubt another revolutionizing operator.

Brian:

I *have* worked all 50 states; however, I've never received a QSL card from
North Dakota. BTW, I worked all 50 mainly from the mobile HF station I
had in my '78 Plymouth Horizon while stationed at Andrews AFB, MD. And,
in case you're wondering, it was mainly CW, with some SSB contacts.
BTW2: It was done between Sept. 1981 and Feb. 1983, so it took me a
whole 18 months. Sorry to disappoint you.

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article , (N2EY)
writes:


With all due respect, Larry - were you there?

Jim:

Obviously not. Point?

Did you have to take a sending test?

No, but I could have easily passed one.

Did you have to pass all of the elements to upgrade at the same time?

No. You got me there.

Did you have to wait 2 years to even try the Extra?

No. Ditto.

Challenging licensing requirements and
uncompromising testing procedures.

They've been "compromising" forever. Back before WW2 the exam was all blue
book
essays. Before 1960 there was diagram drawing. The tests I took in 1967-70
were
"dumbed down" compared to those because my tests were all multiple choice.

Yeah, I know, and that's my point. However, the level of "dumbing-down"
that has occurred just in the last few years is way out of porportion to that
which took place from the beginning of FCC testing and the time you and I
became licensed.

Of course, all that is waaaaay too
PoliticKally IncorrecKt today, since someone with a particular ethnic
origin, skin color, religion, "gender," or a hangnail might not be able
to pass the first time or two. This certainly won't do in these
enlightened times.

None of that had anything to do with the license test changes.

Oh, really? Prove it.

Incentive Licensing came about in LBJ's time

Dick Bash did his stuff (and got away with it) when Nixon and Ford were in
office

The change to the VE system happened under Reagan

We got medical waivers because a "king" wanted a favor from George Bush 1.

We also got a nocodeham license because of GB 1.

Etc.

Damn those Republicans! OBTW -- who was President when the
"Restructuring" took place?

After all, it might "exclude" someone who is, in
reality, a nascent technical genius who just needs the ability to talk
on the HF phone bands in order to find the inspiration to create the
next fabulous new invention which will revolutionize electronic
communication for the rest of all time!

Or something like that.

Don't hold yer breath waiting for it, tho.

Trust me, I'm not.

73 de Larry, K3LT

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...


Brian Kelly wrote:

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message
...
Yeah, that might be true if you have HF capability........

Can't argue with that. But as Jim points out it doesn't take much of a
radio and antenna to at least listen on HF. What's the show-stopper in
your case?


Desire, obviously

Yes, as in regards to listening to HF voice..... Sounds just like listening
to CB. No, it is environmental conditions. Killer RFI that would make BPL
look like nothing.




--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...

"Brian" wrote in message
om...
W1AW also sends Morse Code practice on VHF, if you live close enough.
But I don't think 8-land is close enough.

Definitely, maybe the supposed field organizations can get together to
rebroadcast the transmissions?? Sounds like an actual good idea.


If not, Jim can tell you how to build an Elecraft K1 out of junk box
parts, or something like that.

Nice idea, but it will be deaf, as that is the problem until I move, which
won't be happening for another 2 years. Will have to suffer till then.


--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...


"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message
...
Yeah, that might be true if you have HF capability........

I've sed it before I'll say it again: The W1AW code practice sessions
and getting on the air ASAP are the best methods out there for
learning the code. The 1AW sessions are reliable, they're not
repetitive and you can pace yourself without breaking a sweat
depending on your own set of learning curve variables. Yes it's
Farnsworth and 1AW Farnworth has obviously worked for decades. Now go
copy 1AW 5wpm sessions until you "get it".


w3rv

In article , ospam
(Larry Roll K3LT) writes:

In article ,
(N2EY)
writes:

With all due respect, Larry - were you there?

Jim:

Obviously not. Point?

That the same complaints you have about today's tests can be made by some of
those who came before you.

Did you have to take a sending test?

No, but I could have easily passed one.

"could have" and "did" are not the same thing.

Did you have to pass all of the elements to upgrade at the same time?

No. You got me there.

Did you have to wait 2 years to even try the Extra?

No. Ditto.

See?

Challenging licensing requirements and
uncompromising testing procedures.

They've been "compromising" forever. Back before WW2 the exam was all blue
book essays. Before 1960 there was diagram drawing. The tests I took in
1967-70 were "dumbed down" compared to those because my tests were all
multiple choice.

Yeah, I know, and that's my point. However, the level of "dumbing-down"
that has occurred just in the last few years is way out of porportion to that
which took place from the beginning of FCC testing and the time you and I
became licensed.

Those who had to do essays and draw diagrams might disagree.

Of course, all that is waaaaay too
PoliticKally IncorrecKt today, since someone with a particular ethnic
origin, skin color, religion, "gender," or a hangnail might not be able
to pass the first time or two. This certainly won't do in these
enlightened times.

None of that had anything to do with the license test changes.

Oh, really? Prove it.

Just look at the records and the old regs. Nothing in there about ethnicity,
skin color, religion or gender. I dunno about hangnails.

Incentive Licensing came about in LBJ's time

Dick Bash did his stuff (and got away with it) when Nixon and Ford were in
office

The change to the VE system happened under Reagan

We got medical waivers because a "king" wanted a favor from George Bush 1.

We also got a nocodeham license because of GB 1.

Etc.

Damn those Republicans! OBTW -- who was President when the
"Restructuring" took place?

That would be Slick Willy Clinton.

After all, it might "exclude" someone who is, in
reality, a nascent technical genius who just needs the ability to talk
on the HF phone bands in order to find the inspiration to create the
next fabulous new invention which will revolutionize electronic
communication for the rest of all time!

Or something like that.

Don't hold yer breath waiting for it, tho.

Trust me, I'm not.

Me neither.

So, have you commented on each of the 7 petitions now before FCC?

73 de Jim, N2EY

N2EY wrote:

Only then did they let you try the written. Mess up at any point -
even one character or question - and it was "go home and study some
more and don't come back for at least 30 days". No CSCE, no partial
credit, nada, do it all first try at one sitting or it doesn't count
at all.


hold on s second Jim! You're saying one missed question meant flunking
the test?

- Mike KB3EIA -