Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old November 21st 05, 11:01 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
an old friend
 
Posts: n/a
Default Windy Anderson's 11/14 Reply to Comments


wrote:
From: K0HB on Nov 21, 10:09 am

cut
I WILL question that submarines NOW use ANY morse code for
either communications or Alert signalling or did in the
late 1980s. While I've had some contact with DoD on that,
I'm not permitted to say yea or nay. I will point to the
Federation of American Scientists (FAS) website where they
show a diagram with identifying nomenclature of all
equipment in a missle submarine's "radio room." None of
that has any indication of morse code capability.

Len it is my underststanding that one or more of the Navy sub systems
used or at least were desugned to able to use a non manual morse system
that would have allowed for decoding of the signal of the signals
manualy in the event that the sub suffered damage, and survived (
current comabt theory seems ot say that a hit is a kill but..) . I
heard rumors that this system was developed and used for some time very
slow haviely "fransworthed" Morse indeed a demo I heard once in an
unclisified army breifingwas slow enough and farnworthed enough I could
read it (take down the dot and dashes) for looking up on a chart. the
amry considered and rejected such system as I hear it, did look more
into a Non morse encoded OOKed CW system designed for machine use with
the abilty for a jerry rigged unit allowing manual decoding of the
coded gruops that barely (if at all) got off the ground (end of the
cold war killed it) that with the fact I have heard some signal at very
low freqs sending what could be morse and heard em till the navy shut
down the elf unit that sits within a 100 miles of my current home means
I think there was some use of NON manual Morse in Navy till quite
recently (since 9/11) My computer decoded them as seemingly random
letter groups using a Morse back ground they stopped comeing when the
Navy shut down the elf unit

  #2   Report Post  
Old November 22nd 05, 04:33 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
 
Posts: n/a
Default Windy Anderson's 11/14 Reply to Comments

From: "an old friend" on Mon, Nov 21 2005 3:01 pm


wrote:
From: K0HB on Nov 21, 10:09 am


I WILL question that submarines NOW use ANY morse code for
either communications or Alert signalling or did in the
late 1980s. While I've had some contact with DoD on that,
I'm not permitted to say yea or nay. I will point to the
Federation of American Scientists (FAS) website where they
show a diagram with identifying nomenclature of all
equipment in a missle submarine's "radio room." None of
that has any indication of morse code capability.

Len it is my underststanding that one or more of the Navy sub systems
used or at least were desugned to able to use a non manual morse system
that would have allowed for decoding of the signal of the signals


Mark, it is really irrelevant what the USN uses for Alert
messaging to submarines in this newsgroup. "We" aren't
supposed to talk about anything non-amateur...:-)

Suffice to say that those boats DO use code. It just isn't
morse code. Alert messages WERE sent on very low frequencies
using very slow data-rate DATA. The reason for very slow
data rate was signal-to-noise ratio and a very narrow
bandwidth at ELF or even VLF and to allow submarines to
pick up Alerts while still submerged. While ELF and VLF
does penetrate water, water still has attenuation of the
radio signal so the S:N ratio puts a limit at the depth
they can be to receive the Alert. There WAS automatic
decoding equipment in the boat's "radio room" for Alerts.

I used past tense because I do not know what the boats use
NOW. I'm not going to inquire, either. I've got confidence
in the USN and NSA being able to Alert Boomers and Sharks
as needed without fear of being compromised.

I no longer have any confidence that our country's leadership
can use their intelligence reports intelligently...but that
is a subject for a separate newsgroup. :-)

The information on the FAS website (a considerable amount)
is interesting. Whether it represents the "truth" or not
is a subject for the intelligence community's analysis. So
far the FAS has continued to function, stay on-line without
any closures from the government.

There IS some information about the NSA and DIA and CIA
that has been cleared for publication. I have some of those
books. Amazon has them on sale.

But, amateur radio is forbidden by the Commission regulations
from using any encipherment that obscures the meaning of a
communication. Hans has not been forthcoming on lecturing
us on the precise sub-parts on that. Since I am unlicensed
in the amateur service, several others are attempting to
forbid my mentioning anything. :-)



  #3   Report Post  
Old November 22nd 05, 05:21 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
an old friend
 
Posts: n/a
Default Windy Anderson's 11/14 Reply to Comments


wrote:
From: "an old friend" on Mon, Nov 21 2005 3:01 pm


wrote:
From: K0HB on Nov 21, 10:09 am


I WILL question that submarines NOW use ANY morse code for
either communications or Alert signalling or did in the
late 1980s. While I've had some contact with DoD on that,
I'm not permitted to say yea or nay. I will point to the
Federation of American Scientists (FAS) website where they
show a diagram with identifying nomenclature of all
equipment in a missle submarine's "radio room." None of
that has any indication of morse code capability.

Len it is my underststanding that one or more of the Navy sub systems
used or at least were desugned to able to use a non manual morse system
that would have allowed for decoding of the signal of the signals


Mark, it is really irrelevant what the USN uses for Alert
messaging to submarines in this newsgroup. "We" aren't
supposed to talk about anything non-amateur...:-)


that is the Stevie postion but i don't agree with him anything radio is
at least more ontopic than the endless discussion of everyone stevie
dislikes sex life

Suffice to say that those boats DO use code. It just isn't
morse code. Alert messages WERE sent on very low frequencies
using very slow data-rate DATA. The reason for very slow
data rate was signal-to-noise ratio and a very narrow
bandwidth at ELF or even VLF and to allow submarines to
pick up Alerts while still submerged. While ELF and VLF
does penetrate water, water still has attenuation of the
radio signal so the S:N ratio puts a limit at the depth
they can be to receive the Alert. There WAS automatic
decoding equipment in the boat's "radio room" for Alerts.

I used past tense because I do not know what the boats use
NOW. I'm not going to inquire, either. I've got confidence
in the USN and NSA being able to Alert Boomers and Sharks
as needed without fear of being compromised.


me too

I no longer have any confidence that our country's leadership
can use their intelligence reports intelligently...but that
is a subject for a separate newsgroup. :-)


definately a differently newgruops My doubts is that the intel world
can express an opinion that they will stand behind 2 days later but as
you say a different NG

The information on the FAS website (a considerable amount)
is interesting. Whether it represents the "truth" or not
is a subject for the intelligence community's analysis. So
far the FAS has continued to function, stay on-line without
any closures from the government.

There IS some information about the NSA and DIA and CIA
that has been cleared for publication. I have some of those
books. Amazon has them on sale.

But, amateur radio is forbidden by the Commission regulations
from using any encipherment that obscures the meaning of a
communication. Hans has not been forthcoming on lecturing
us on the precise sub-parts on that. Since I am unlicensed
in the amateur service, several others are attempting to
forbid my mentioning anything. :-)



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Power Industry BPL Reply Comments & Press Release Jeff Maass Antenna 38 June 29th 04 11:19 PM
Power Industry BPL Reply Comments & Press Release Jeff Maass Antenna 0 June 25th 04 11:25 PM
BPL pollution - file reply comments by August 6 Dave Shrader Antenna 4 July 30th 03 05:25 AM
BPL pollution – file reply comments by August 6 Peter Lemken Antenna 0 July 27th 03 09:47 AM
BPL interference - reply comments - YOUR ACTION REQUIRED Allodoxaphobia Antenna 2 July 10th 03 11:25 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017