Posted on 02/23/2007 6:45:07 PM PST by vintage patriot
Morse code is in need of some serious SOS.
The language of dots and dashes, first used during the infancy of electronic communication in the mid-1800s, is going the way of Latin.
Beginning today, amateur or "ham" radio operators in the United States won't be tested in Morse code – also known as Continuous Wave – in order to be licensed by the federal government.
In an effort to advance the hobby, the Federal Communications Commission in December agreed to eliminate the five-words-per-minute Morse code requirement for people seeking their upper-level class licenses.
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
It's been awhile since I've been on the radio. I haven't set my gear up since moving a couple of years ago because of my work schedule and trying to keep up with playing in the band.
Lately though, I've been getting the 'urge' to get back on and do have my 2 meter set up in my dining room.
Not quite the same as my old 'shack' but it's at least a start.
73's
It's pretty simple really. The house has all cat5 phone wiring. The phones use 1 pair. The computer network uses 2 pairs, leaving a "spare" pair. The spare became the telegraph backbone.
Each station has a straight key, piezo buzzer and a 9v battery connected in series. The contacts for each key are also parallel connected to the telegraph backbone.
Operation of any key causes all of the buzzers to sounds simultaneously.
Squelch is a feature commonly found on AM and FM receivers that are receiving a full carrier. In the absence of carrier, the internal noise of the receiver is very high. That noise is rectified into a DC voltage and used to drive a switch that mutes the audio amplifier. When carrier appears, the noise is overridden and the rectified DC voltage is insufficient to activate the muting switch.
SSB has no carrier. There isn't anything to effectively drive a squelch circuit. There is still noise. That noise is rectified along with audio in the channel to drive an automatic gain control. The receiver gain runs full tilt until noise or signal creates some AGC voltage. That voltage is then used to reduce the receiver gain. The value is that you can avoid be blasted out of the room with a strong signal, yet be prepared to listen to weak signals. There is a decay time on the AGC voltage to maintain a reasonable average gain over time. In some cases, the signal conditions aren't conducive to proper AGC. The AGC will create a "pumping" effect as the gain goes up and down. In such cases it is just easier to turn the AGC adjustment or switch off and regulate the output with the audio gain.
A special case of very fast AGC is the automatic noise limiter. It functions a means of clipping or clampling noise spikes very quickly without shutting down the average AGC level necessary for comfortable listening.
If you have tube equipment, you will find that it is VERY hard to get replacement today. I designed and played with tube circuits from the time I was in elementary school. It was common to find a tube tester at the local 7-Eleven. I sold my last tube based Yaesu FT-100 in 1979. It was replaced with an Atlas 215-X. I did that to be able to efficient operate off batteries under emergency conditions. The FT-100 had a very good receiver, very clean transmitter and the ability to heat my ham shack in short order.
BTW, how do hams decide on what speed to transmit? Even if someone's capable of transmitting 60WPM it would be pointless to do so if the intended recipient of the communication couldn't decode that fast.
The two operators drop to the fastest speed that both can tolerate. The more experienced operators will slow down to communicate with a novice who is just getting started. If both operators are using fancy equipment that uses a computer to translate computer screen/keyboard to CW over the air, the operators can fly as fast as the selected communications channel will permit. If a guy with a simple key is chatting with a computer user, it is just a matter of asking the person with the computer to set the speed down.
Though I was also wondering: I know that in the early days of telegraphy, the machines used a paper tape powered by clockwork and a electromechanically-operated pencil that would make dots and dashes. I doubt that CW would be as amenable to reliable on-off detection as electrical signalling, but I was wondering whether anyone produced strip recorders for use with radio telegraphy? Such devices, if suitably designed, might help slower coders make sense of fast transmissions (especially in cases where the transmission needed to be logged, but not acted upon instantly).
There have been decent peripherals around for 15 years that perform a mix of AX25 packet, AMTOR and CW when connected between a personal computer and a radio. I was building and using the Heathkit and TAPR (Tuscon Amateur Packet Radio) devices back in 1985 to create TCP/IP networks over 2 meter VHF radios. Before I had a computer, I build an AFSK demodulator from 88 mH toroids and surplus capacitors to drive an old teletype rescued from a ham radio swap meet. That rig ran on 220 MHz VHF. I donated the teletype to the deaf community shortly after building my first Heathkit H-8 computer in 1980. It was dirt simple for me to use that platform to do CW and teletype.
Here is a typical specification for the AEA DSP-232 offered in 1996.
DSP-232 Modes of Operation:
9600 & 1200 bps VHF Packet HF Packet
Pactor Amtor/Sitor
RTTY (ASCII and Baudot) NAVTEX
Morse
One of the most effective signal processors is a masively parrallel,self-programming,organic unit with stereo input-the human brain.The current mania for extremely narow bandwidths rob the brain of information useful in picking out one signal;remember that most people can cary on a conversation in a room despite the presence of numerous other conversations,provided no one is shouting.
Software radio using advanced Digital Signal Processing chips are being developed and used ;they have only a few parts.CHeck out the Ten-Tec black box receiver.
There has been a lot of water under the bridge in the last 50 years or so and even the circuit design portions of the exams I took were mostly out of date. Sure, you could use those principles to design and build transmitters and receivers but they would not be state of the art. "Advancing the radio art" is one of the purposes given in Part 97, and to do that these days (and even in 1978) requires skills beyond anything ever demonstrated in a Ham Radio exam.
But nonetheless, all of the purposes of Ham Radio are still valid, and we are more than appliance operators even without basic circuit design skills or Morse code proficiency. And out of necessity or desire, there will remain communities of licensees who will be able to do all of the things your old school Hams were expected to be able to do.
The hobby has become quite diverse during the time I have been in it, and opening it up to new people with different skills will only make it more so.
Times change, don't they? I remember when the novice portion of 40 was very crowded. Not any more. I am glad that there are still plenty of folks to talk to (7.0 - 7.1).
We should start a Freepers net or just have a big ragchew session about some of the articles on Free Republic... just a thought.
"I remember when the novice portion of 40 was very crowded. Not any more."
Really?
I remember the last time I was on 40 (which, sad to say was about 6 years ago), you couldn't get a word in edge wise.
What happened to clear the band? FCC? /sarc?
I found it obnoxious and frustrating. Despite - as a kid - knowing electronics well enough to build a radio from scratch, and spending plenty of time trying to learn Morse code, it just didn't connect. Failing that part of the entry ham radio test was one of my most frustrating/embarrasing moments as a teen: all my knowledge & enthusiasm, and they wouldn't let me participate just because of a stupid code I couldn't understand and wouldn't use anyway. There were better things to do than repeat making a fool of myself, and took on programming.
Too often I see support for the Morse code requirement expressed as a sort of eliteism, as in "well, it keeps THEM out of OUR frequencies." Thanks, guys.
Code wasn't required for 'Technician' Class.
And even then, to get a 'Tech Plus' license only required 5 words per minute which is not all that hard to do.
How long ago did you attempt to get into HAM?
"Too often I see support for the Morse code requirement expressed as a sort of eliteism, as in "well, it keeps THEM out of OUR frequencies."
Although there are the 'elite' types on HAM, they are generally far and few between. Almost all HAM's I know would have been more than willing to help you pass a code test without even charging for their time.
Did you attempt to ask anyone who was a HAM to help?
It was then (early 1980s).
New forms of communication - precursors to what we're using now for this thread - did not have such obnoxous barriers, and let me in.
"It was then (early 1980s)."
Yes, it was. You're correct.
But even then, it was still only 5 wpm and you had to pass the 'Novice' exam first before trying for a 'Technician' license and upgrading your code to 11 wpm wasn't required for that class of license.
Now THAT makes me feel...obsolete. :(
Guess the Army will NEVER need me again, even at a spry 51 years old.
I still remember when the FCC no longer required passing Element 9 (Broadcast Endorsement) for a broadcast radio license. I studied hard for that! A few years after I got mine, all you were required to do was clip out the coupon-sized form. Phbbbt!
Yeah. "Only."
"The eliteism was ingrained in the requirements."
How so?
The test required 'basic' knowledge of electronics and what bands you were allowed to operate on as a Novice plus the 5 wpm code requirement.
If you had the basic understanding of electronics then the only other thing you would have needed would have been the code.
I don't understand how you can say those qualifications are 'elitist'.
They are nothing more than a GOVERNMENT requirement.
Being a HAM is not something a bunch of people decided to do one day, but the government deciding that they needed a 'reserve of communication technicians' and therefore created the HAM radio service.
If that's 'elitist' then you need to take it up with the government, not group of people who decided to enter the 'hobby'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.