On Mar 11, 9:09*am, Michael Black wrote:
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, notbob wrote:
Another question. *Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. *This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here.
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with? *

Well you're really confused, because this newsgroup has nothing to do with
amateur radio. *There's a whole hierarchy, rec.radio.amateur.* that's
intended for that. *They cover a wide variety of topics, and there's even
a moderated one.

This newsgroup is about listening. *"Shortwave" is in the title since it
sort of defined what the newsgroup was supposed to be about, the same way
that back forty years "SWL" meant "shortwave listening" but often the same
people also did BCB DXing and monitoring the public service bands. *It's a
description of the type of person, not the spectrum to be covered.

That confuses a lot of people, they think this is for amateur radio
because it's "shortwave". But it was never meant to be a place to discuss
amateur radio, beyond discussing monitoring the ham bands (which has
always had some followers). *The charter defines that, and the fact that
there is a whole hierarchy intended for amateur radio should also
reinforce that. *Besides. *amateur radio isn't just about shortwave,
indeed while once you couldn't really get a ham license without starting
out on the shortwave bands, now I suspect there are a good percentage,
maybe even a small majority, who have never operated on the shortwave
bands.

* * Michael

My thanks to both Mark H. and Michael for their reponses. Both
informative, and this one philosophically worthy as well.

I am currently thinking of getting an amateur license actually, even
if I never get on the air. Not sure why - I used to have one decades
ago (WB1GAL), and never got it off the ground due to inherent
limitations in manual dexterity (back then, code was de rigueur; now
it is optional for most all classes)...the theory and regs were more
or less a snap, even though I am not an electronics guy...

Maybe just for the cachet - we Californians are all about superficial
appearance and keeping up, after all ;-) SWL is still my first love
when it comes to radio.

Bruce

On Mar 11, 12:26*pm, bpnjensen wrote:
On Mar 11, 9:09*am, Michael Black wrote:



On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, notbob wrote:
Another question. *Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. *This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here..
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with? *

Well you're really confused, because this newsgroup has nothing to do with
amateur radio. *There's a whole hierarchy, rec.radio.amateur.* that's
intended for that. *They cover a wide variety of topics, and there's even
a moderated one.

This newsgroup is about listening. *"Shortwave" is in the title since it
sort of defined what the newsgroup was supposed to be about, the same way
that back forty years "SWL" meant "shortwave listening" but often the same
people also did BCB DXing and monitoring the public service bands. *It's a
description of the type of person, not the spectrum to be covered.

That confuses a lot of people, they think this is for amateur radio
because it's "shortwave". But it was never meant to be a place to discuss
amateur radio, beyond discussing monitoring the ham bands (which has
always had some followers). *The charter defines that, and the fact that
there is a whole hierarchy intended for amateur radio should also
reinforce that. *Besides. *amateur radio isn't just about shortwave,
indeed while once you couldn't really get a ham license without starting
out on the shortwave bands, now I suspect there are a good percentage,
maybe even a small majority, who have never operated on the shortwave
bands.

* * Michael

My thanks to both Mark H. and Michael for their reponses. *Both
informative, and this one philosophically worthy as well.

I am currently thinking of getting an amateur license actually, even
if I never get on the air. *Not sure why - I used to have one decades
ago (WB1GAL), and never got it off the ground due to inherent
limitations in manual dexterity (back then, code was de rigueur; now
it is optional for most all classes)...the theory and regs were more
or less a snap, even though I am not an electronics guy...

Maybe just for the cachet - we Californians are all about superficial
appearance and keeping up, after all ;-) *SWL is still my first love
when it comes to radio.

Bruce

I hope you won't give up on code. It doesn't require a lot of manual
dexterity to send code at a reasonable rate. You might not become a
speed demon sending/copying code at 50 wpm, but who cares? You can
have a ton of fun on the CW portions of the bands.

When I first got my license I had no intention of learning code. I
figured I'd stay mostly on the voice portion of the bands, but my
interests in the hobby kept expanding. Soon I was active in digital
modes like RTTY and PSK-31. Now I spend 99% of my time operating in CW
mode with a paddle and keyer, and it's about a thousand times more
addictive than any other part of the hobby I've encountered thus far.
Well worth the initial investment of time and energy to learn code.

Steve

Steve wrote:
I hope you won't give up on code. It doesn't require a lot of manual
dexterity to send code at a reasonable rate. You might not become a
speed demon sending/copying code at 50 wpm, but who cares? You can
have a ton of fun on the CW portions of the bands.

When I first got my license I had no intention of learning code. I
figured I'd stay mostly on the voice portion of the bands, but my
interests in the hobby kept expanding. Soon I was active in digital
modes like RTTY and PSK-31. Now I spend 99% of my time operating in CW
mode with a paddle and keyer, and it's about a thousand times more
addictive than any other part of the hobby I've encountered thus far.
Well worth the initial investment of time and energy to learn code.


Steve, I want to present a different direction. IMHO he should study for and
take the technician exam as soon as possible. (assuming he is in the US).
Then he should get a 2m HT and get on the local repeaters.

Being on the air is a good way to meet other hams, and find an elmer
(ham lingo for a mentor). Then he can move up in class, branch out into
other things, such as learning morse code, etc.

No matter what method you choose to learn morse code, it's a lot easier and
more fun with someone to help you and communicate with.

I highly recommend Code Quick, by Dr Gerry Wheeler.

http://www.cq2k.com/

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
New word I coined 12/13/09, "Sub-Wikipedia" adj, describing knowledge or
understanding, as in he has a sub-wikipedia understanding of the situation.
i.e possessing less facts or information than can be found in the Wikipedia.

On 2010-03-11, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:

Steve, I want to present a different direction. IMHO he should study for and
take the technician exam as soon as possible. (assuming he is in the US).
Then he should get a 2m HT and get on the local repeaters.

Being on the air is a good way to meet other hams, and find an elmer
(ham lingo for a mentor). Then he can move up in class, branch out into
other things, such as learning morse code, etc.

I'm beginning to agree with you, Geoffrey. I'm pretty far out there.
I'm within twenty miles of two small towns (2-4K pop), but 100 miles
from any real metro. So far, I've only located one local club and I'm
not really sure they are hams at all (repeater assn). I'm beginning
to think getting on-line and getting an affordable HT is the way to go,
if only to connect with some radio ppl. There's got to be some hams
somewhere around here. Lot of remote farms and homes, hereabouts.

Apparently, there's one ham near me, but he may be seasonal, this
being mainly a snowbird park. If I get on-line, I'd have a much better
chance of finding an elmer. So, I'm temporarily dismissing the
romantic aspects of ham radio and ordering/joining ARRL. I will go
ahead and build the code oscillator in this general manual. I have
most of the parts and a cheapo key and have downloaded a couple computer
code programs (G4fon, Just Learn Code, etc) and will plug along while
I fast-track the traditional get-a-license approach.

Thank you to everyone who took the time to reply, even if I'm in the
wrong group. It was all good info and much appreciated.

nb

On Mar 11, 10:46*am, Steve wrote:
On Mar 11, 12:26*pm, bpnjensen wrote:





On Mar 11, 9:09*am, Michael Black wrote:

On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, notbob wrote:
Another question. *Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. *This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here.
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with? *

Well you're really confused, because this newsgroup has nothing to do with
amateur radio. *There's a whole hierarchy, rec.radio.amateur.* that's
intended for that. *They cover a wide variety of topics, and there's even
a moderated one.

This newsgroup is about listening. *"Shortwave" is in the title since it
sort of defined what the newsgroup was supposed to be about, the same way
that back forty years "SWL" meant "shortwave listening" but often the same
people also did BCB DXing and monitoring the public service bands. *It's a
description of the type of person, not the spectrum to be covered.

That confuses a lot of people, they think this is for amateur radio
because it's "shortwave". But it was never meant to be a place to discuss
amateur radio, beyond discussing monitoring the ham bands (which has
always had some followers). *The charter defines that, and the fact that
there is a whole hierarchy intended for amateur radio should also
reinforce that. *Besides. *amateur radio isn't just about shortwave,
indeed while once you couldn't really get a ham license without starting
out on the shortwave bands, now I suspect there are a good percentage,
maybe even a small majority, who have never operated on the shortwave
bands.

* * Michael

My thanks to both Mark H. and Michael for their reponses. *Both
informative, and this one philosophically worthy as well.

I am currently thinking of getting an amateur license actually, even
if I never get on the air. *Not sure why - I used to have one decades
ago (WB1GAL), and never got it off the ground due to inherent
limitations in manual dexterity (back then, code was de rigueur; now
it is optional for most all classes)...the theory and regs were more
or less a snap, even though I am not an electronics guy...

Maybe just for the cachet - we Californians are all about superficial
appearance and keeping up, after all ;-) *SWL is still my first love
when it comes to radio.

Bruce

I hope you won't give up on code. It doesn't require a lot of manual
dexterity to send code at a reasonable rate. You might not become a
speed demon sending/copying code at 50 wpm, but who cares? You can
have a ton of fun on the CW portions of the bands.

When I first got my license I had no intention of learning code. I
figured I'd stay mostly on the voice portion of the bands, but my
interests in the hobby kept expanding. Soon I was active in digital
modes like RTTY and PSK-31. Now I spend 99% of my time operating in CW
mode with a paddle and keyer, and it's about a thousand times more
addictive than any other part of the hobby I've encountered thus far.
Well worth the initial investment of time and energy to learn code.

Steve- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Steve - I gave up on code 30 years ago after working at it two years
and never getting beyond about 7 WPM. For me, the words 'manual
dexterity' are an oxymoron. Same with guitar, piano and typing. No
soap. My fingers might as well be made of stone. A lifelong lid.

RTTY? Not a chance.

No biggie - I'm happy :-)

Bruce

On Mar 11, 1:03*pm, Bob Dobbs wrote:
bpnjensen wrote:

RTTY? *Not a chance.

RTTY, or teletype uses a keyboard and monitor,
same as you use on this newsgroup.
You don't need to know a dot from a dash,
because it doesn't use them.
It's more of a hissing, warbling sound in a speaker,
not something the human ear could ever readily decode.

--

Operator Bob
Echo Charlie 42

Yeah, I know - but you should see me type. What you see on this page
is not what comes out of my fingers...this is the result of
painstaking review and correction, often multiple times. If I sent
RTTY, it would look like gibberish...

The **only thing** that I can type quickly and correctly is...

Bruce

On Mar 11, 1:03*pm, Bob Dobbs wrote:
bpnjensen wrote:

RTTY? *Not a chance.

RTTY, or teletype uses a keyboard and monitor,
same as you use on this newsgroup.
You don't need to know a dot from a dash,
because it doesn't use them.
It's more of a hissing, warbling sound in a speaker,
not something the human ear could ever readily decode.

--

Operator Bob
Echo Charlie 42

As an addendum - imagine yourself with large thick cold stiff gloves
on your hands. Now imagine that your hands and your mind don't
communicate properly. Then, place them a paddle or a keyboard, and try
having something sensible come out the first time.

You'd be me.

It's OK - I'm happy :-)

Bruce

On 2010-03-11, Steve wrote:

modes like RTTY and PSK-31. Now I spend 99% of my time operating in CW
mode with a paddle and keyer, and it's about a thousand times more
addictive than any other part of the hobby I've encountered thus far.
Well worth the initial investment of time and energy to learn code.

I agree and will learn code if it kills me. Speaking of which, one
motivation is that poor soul who died in OR a couple years ago.
Remember James Kim, who got lost on a back road and then stranded with
his family in deep Dec snows? Here's a guy who reviewed hi-tech
gadgets like PDAs and cell-phones for a living. Yet, for all his
know-how, he died alone and unable to call for help.

That scared the crap outta me. Though I'm no ham and have never had a
license or even a CB, I know how CW, even QRP, could have probably
saved this guy. Yet, he was clueless of even the most basic radio
technology. Frightening. I swore then, it would never happen to me
and I'm set on learning code and learning QRP radio.

I just checked out a 15 yr old ARRL Handbook and the last down rev
ARRL general study guide from the library. Outta keep my mind busy
for awhile.

nb

notbob wrote:

That scared the crap outta me. Though I'm no ham and have never had a
license or even a CB, I know how CW, even QRP, could have probably
saved this guy. Yet, he was clueless of even the most basic radio
technology. Frightening. I swore then, it would never happen to me
and I'm set on learning code and learning QRP radio.

Far better would have been a satellite based emergency locator transmitter.
Originaly designed for airplanes, they are available for hikers, etc.

As for CW, even QRP saving him, it's possible but not likely. HF location
is too coarse to find him, unless he had a GPS unit and was able to transmit
an SOS with the correct coordinates, had a big enough antenna to be heard,
and so on.

I have a 10m HT and can "work the world" (or at least access 10m
repeaters in the US and EU), but only when the band is open. It is not
likely it will be until the middle of the current sunspot cycle, which
is 4-5 years away if we are lucky.

A VHF HT is not going to be of any use, unless he happens to get lost or
snowed in to a valley with a repeater on the mountain above.

Yes, we have a repeater here in Jerusalem that had to be moved to a different
frequency because it was interfering with one on Crete, but that's
tropspheric ducting, over water, and our repeater was at 3500 feet asl.

It also depends upon finding a frequency that someone is listening on,
in a lot of places if you want road help, etc you are better off on CB.

Learn morse code if you want to, build and operate QRP if you want to,
take a radio backpacking if you want to, but IMHO you are not going to
really improve your chances if you are buried in a snow drift, or lost
while hiking out in the middle of the forest.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
New word I coined 12/13/09, "Sub-Wikipedia" adj, describing knowledge or
understanding, as in he has a sub-wikipedia understanding of the situation.
i.e possessing less facts or information than can be found in the Wikipedia.

On 2010-03-11, Michael Black wrote:

amateur radio. There's a whole hierarchy, rec.radio.amateur.* that's
intended for that. They cover a wide variety of topics, and there's even
a moderated one.

Thank you for your brief reply.

Now that you've read my post and know what I'm looking for, would you
care to recommend one of the rra groups that might be more appropriate
for my needs?

nb