Morse Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
 

SWL's should learn CW too.
You never know when you might stumple across a station in distress sending
an SOS and you might be the only one that hears it and can get help.


SWL's normally listen to AM stations.
How would they hear a CW station?


When i was a kid in the 60's a local ship to shore cw station could be
heard just under the local AM broadcast band station my family
listened to. That's what got my interest in radio going. The same
thing happens on short wave if you detune it right...

Morris Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
 

jawod wrote in :

RHF wrote:
SC,

Morris Code
uh, it's Morse Code...after Samuel Morse who invented it

(and, of course, everyone knows Joshua T. Semaphore)


Wasn't morris the cat in the TV ads who eat with his paws?

Morse Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and-Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
 

Big Rich Soprano wrote:
When i was a kid in the 60's a local ship to shore cw station could be
heard just under the local AM broadcast band station my family
listened to. That's what got my interest in radio going. The same
thing happens on short wave if you detune it right...

In that case the AM carrier is the BFO for the CW signal.
How many SWL's are going to accidentally "detune it right"
for the purpose of hearing an SOS?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Morse Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
 

On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:01:06 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

In that case the AM carrier is the BFO for the CW signal.
How many SWL's are going to accidentally "detune it right"
for the purpose of hearing an SOS?

You can hear the change in noise as a carrier goes on and off. It's
extremely difficult to copy high speed CW like that if the signal is
strong, but a weak signal or slower CW is just as easy to copy as
noise as it is to copy as a pure tone. T1 doesn't mean uncopyable, it
just means ragged tone.

Morse Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and-Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
 

Al Klein wrote:
You can hear the change in noise as a carrier goes on and off. It's
extremely difficult to copy high speed CW like that if the signal is
strong, but a weak signal or slower CW is just as easy to copy as
noise as it is to copy as a pure tone. T1 doesn't mean uncopyable, it
just means ragged tone.

So now amateurs and SWL's should be Morse code proficient
not only using tones but using the swishing sound made when
a BFO is not present?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Morse Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
 

RHF wrote:
an old freind wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Slow Code wrote:
SWL's should learn CW too.
You never know when you might stumple across a station in distress sending
an SOS and you might be the only one that hears it and can get help.

SWL's normally listen to AM stations.
How would they hear a CW station?

- CW gets through no matter what AM FM XM TV IBOC
- no matter the mode cw gets trough even without a tranmitter
- for that vital signal SOS
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

aof - not if no one is listening ~ RHF
{ radio - it's about communicating }
no you are worng CW gets through wether you to hear or not (prehaps I
should say sarcasm on)

Morse Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
 

On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:36:03 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

So now amateurs and SWL's should be Morse code proficient
not only using tones but using the swishing sound made when
a BFO is not present?

If you can copy CW, you can copy CW. The tone it's coming in with
doesn't make much difference. I've copied signals so weak that they
were just changes in the quality of the noise and I've copied perfect
S9++T9 signals. They were all mostly R9. The R only changes if the
signal fades completely out or if there's interference that masks the
signal. Try that with PSK.

Morse Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and-Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
 

Al Klein wrote:
If you can copy CW, you can copy CW.

I can copy CW, but I cannot copy CW when the receiver
is in AM mode and there's no CW tone. I'm glad you're
that good but I am not.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Morse Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
 

In article ,
Cecil Moore wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
You can hear the change in noise as a carrier goes on and off. It's
extremely difficult to copy high speed CW like that if the signal is
strong, but a weak signal or slower CW is just as easy to copy as
noise as it is to copy as a pure tone. T1 doesn't mean uncopyable, it
just means ragged tone.

So now amateurs and SWL's should be Morse code proficient
not only using tones but using the swishing sound made when
a BFO is not present?

The swishing sound is coming from aliens. Try making the same sounds
back to them. You might get a more intelligent conversation going than
the one in this cross posted thread.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Morse Code -plus- Continuous Wave (CW) Radio Transmission -and- Semaphore Signals ? Do They Defining Amateur Radio ?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
et...
Al Klein wrote:
If you can copy CW, you can copy CW.

I can copy CW, but I cannot copy CW when the receiver
is in AM mode and there's no CW tone. I'm glad you're
that good but I am not.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

I am not good at code but I can do it. You just listen to the rhythm.

Dee, N8UZE