QRZ! Ham Radio 4/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 4.iso/digests/policy/940121.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 8.9 KB

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 94 04:30:10 PST
From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V94 #121
To: Ham-Policy


Ham-Policy Digest           Fri, 11 Mar 94       Volume 94 : Issue  121

Today's Topics:
                       Definition of CW speeds
                         Free GMRS Repeater
                        Morse Whiners (2 msgs)

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to [e-mail].

Archives of past issues of the Ham-Policy Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-policy".

We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 13:28:34 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!darwin.sura.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!murdoch!faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU![e-mail]
Subject: Definition of CW speeds
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
David R Tucker <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Laurence Gene Battin ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: I am writing a code-practice program for my Amiga computer, and
>: I wonder if anyone can give me a definitive answer to exactly
>: how many milliseconds long a dit at 18 wpm is supposed to be?
>
Then David R. Tucker wrote:
>You're right.  There is a more exact standard.
>
>The average English text word length is 50 units, which is the same as
>the work "PARIS", and that's considered the "standard" word length.
...

You've make quite a leap in going from PARIS to 50 units!  What
asumptions did you make about dash per dot ratio? And how many
dots per space?

Also some code is sent Farnsworth (sp?) where the characters are
sent at one (faster) speed while the spaces between words are spread
out.

Your final conclusions are approximately correct but you need
to account for the above spacings.

By the way to the original poster: the best to write a program that
sends code is to start with the dot length. Then make all the
other ratios a function of that dot length. (e.g. dash-dot ratio,
space length in units of dots, and character speed versus word
speed). Then adjust the ratios until you get a pleasant sounding
"fist."

73, Ned Hamilton, AB6FI.

73, Ned Hamilton, AB6FI

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 94 06:42:43 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!netcomsv!skyld![e-mail]
Subject: Free GMRS Repeater
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

  [ snip ]

  > Now that this posting is 2K bytes long, and all it does is point out
  > how to waste bandwidth, what's your next move?

  Humorless bastard.

  And a nice try with the Follow-Up-To: alt.test, misc.test line.

  Have a nice day. If that's possible for you.



 Amateur: WA6FWI@WA6FWI.#SOCA.CA.USA.NA  |  "You have a flair for adding
Internet: [e-mail]       |   a fanciful dimension to any
 US Mail: PO Box 4425 Carson, CA 90749   |   story."
   Phone: [phone]               |            Peking Noodle Co.

------------------------------

Date: 10 Mar 94 20:50:14 EET
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!nullnet!ichaos!brahman![e-mail]
Subject: Morse Whiners
To: [e-mail]

Michael P. Deignan ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Guru Gnosis Sahib ([e-mail]) wrote:
: > Of course, the
: > question in my case is moot, since FCC's system obviously doesn't apply
: > Finland and I have no idea about their code requirements.  And besides,
: > flamage here doesn't make me terribly eager to enter the world of radio...

: Why would the opinions and comments of US hams discourage you from getting
: involved in ham radio in Finland? I think that is an awfully narrow-minded
: position to take - baseing your decision to get involved in ham radio upon
: the comments of people in another country. I would think you would be
: served to listen in on some ham conversations in your own country and then
: draw a conclusion.

: Finland is a socialist country, isn't it?

I completely fail to see the link between those two paragraphs.  But anyway...
my original message was in reply to somebody saying that the tone of
no-code argument was detrimental and likely to damage the ham community,
and I agreed.  In response to your query, not all participants of r.r.a.p
are from the US, and besides can't you reach people from all over the world
on some frequencies?  And my decision to not get into ham is based far
more on a lack of time and money than fear of getting flamed, on the contrary
my political opinions are strange enough to make me relish debates with
liberals and conservatives alike.

As for your second question.  Finland was never a communist/socialist state
such as East Germany.  However, although the govn't will still deny it,
Finland was politically a puppet of the USSR for quite a long time and
its economy did become rather socialist, although the trend was reversed
in the 80's and Finland has always had plenty of private enterprise.
What's the relevance of this to ham?  I've lived outside of Finland for
most of my life, including a delightful 4.5 year period in the States,
so I doubt I've been brainwashed by Evil Commie Propaganda(tm)...

-- _
Guru Gnosis Sahib      \ E PLUBURIS / "...and the fully armed warheads are,
[e-mail] \   UNIX   / of course, merely a courtesy detail."

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 1994 08:30:17 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.ans.net!malgudi.oar.net!witch!ted![e-mail]
Subject: Morse Whiners
To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, Dan Pickersgill ([e-mail]) writes:
>[e-mail] (Michael Silva) writes:
>
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, Gary Coffman (gary@ke4zv.a
>>
>> Stuff deleted...
>>
> I don't think that's enough.  I think with every new effort you require
>> from someone there is a threshold before which they just feel stupid
>> and frustrated, and beyond which they feel confident and knowledgable
>> enough to continue.  As an example, if you tell an overweight,
>> out-of-shape person he needs to run/walk 1/4 mile to get a driver's
>> license (we're being hypothetical here), he may pop a few vitamins and
>> just go for the test, figuring anyone can run/walk 1/4 mile.  When he's
>> done and gets up off the ground he will probably swear never to run
>> another step. On the other hand, if he has to run 5 miles he'll need to
>> do some serious training, and when he's ready to take his test he'll be
>> a mean running machine who, after passing the test, is much more likely
>> to continue running for the pleasure and reward of it.
>
>NOT! However, I agree that running 5 miles is as relevant to a drivers
>license as 20 WPM morse is to ALL modes of operation, i.e. None at all.
>

Dan, are you aware that the above exchange had *nothing* to do with the
code? Read it *carefully* and you'll see I'm talking about the
technical content of the entrance-level tests.  I just knew somebody
wouldn't bother to follow the analogy....  The point is that for
somebody who just wants to talk on the radio, most of the test seems
irrelevant and they will drop it the minute they walk out of the test
room, because they never had to understand it to pass the test.  It's
just something that has to be done.  Ask a Novice or Tech some theory
from the test a month later and see if they've retained it.  I don't
blame them, they did what was required of them, which did *not* involve
understanding the material.  With a more difficult test people would
have to study hard enough that they may actually master some of the
material and put it to work after they get their ticket.  But you've
rebutted me thoroughly with a single, capitalized word. Well argued.

Mike, KK6GM

------------------------------

Date: 10 Mar 94 22:30:19 GMT
From: yale.edu!noc.near.net!news.delphi.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <Anthony_Pelliccio-050394162614@138.16.64.49>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>ale
Subject : Re: Morse Whiners

Christoper Ogren <[e-mail]> writes:

>Just because you might not like it doesn't mean you shouldn't need to
>learn it.  It's not just a hobby people, it's also an adventure.

No, the reason why one shouldn't have to learn it is that one won't NEED (as
opposed to want) to use Morse Code.

------------------------------

End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #121
******************************