Will Repeater CW Indentifiers be phased out?

[n4sva]

What what be the use of having the cw identifiers if no one can decode them anymore?

[WA3KYY]

So folks will learn CW?

[n4sva]

Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Dec. 19 2006,08:14)]So folks will learn CW?
Good point. I'll have to check Part 97 for legality, but maybe I'll start QSO-ing on the local repeater in CW. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[KB5DRJ]

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 19 2006,09:11)]What what be the use of having the cw identifiers if no one can decode them anymore?
To legally identify the station? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif Removal of the testing requirement did not erase the skill. Lots of folks know CW enough to copy a station ID. Maybe the repeater user could paste a CW chart to the back of his/her HT and use the identifier as code practice. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

David KB5DRJ http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[K7JEM]

Commercial and public safety have long used code IDers. No-one in those services know a lick of code. The IDer is there to make the thing legal, and a CWID on a repeater is much better than a voice IDer. You can talk over it, and it doesn't get in the way.

I don't know why so many people are confused about this. The FCC is not making code illegal, they are dropping the code TEST. If you want to use code on 40M, 10M, or 2M, its OK. It doesn't matter if there's not a soul out there that can copy it, that's just not its purpose.

Joe

[w3bny]

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/8892/duncezc8.gif

[N2RJ]

I think all repeater ID's should be CW ID's or digital ID's a la D-STAR.

Some voice ID's are too intrusive and say all sorts of irrelevant crap.

One around here for example, gives the time on the hour. #It also ID's quite frequently, in voice, announcing frequency and PL in addition to the callsign. #Too much information if you ask me. #Just do the ID once every 10 minutes in CW, callsign only while the repeater is in use. #That's all you really need.

Our club's repeater goes over the edge too - the CW ID is just way too long when you initially transmit.

[WA9SVD]

Seems there's a LOT on nonsense going around. Whether or not there is a Morse requirement for licensure, NOTHING, repeat NOTHING, the FCC has changed (or is about to change) makes CW any less legitimate for use on ANY Amateur frequency. (But there are bandplans that should be respected... for the benefit of all Amateurs.)

Sorry, but if you want to ID a repeater or beacon, learn the code. For the foreseeable future, and probably far beyond, CW will be a legal and viable means of communication.

(HMMM. MAYBE the FCC should institute a "proper 'phone operation" section to the testing, in lieu of the CW Element 1. Element 1a, perhaps?)

[W1SK]

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 19 2006,08:21)]Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Dec. 19 2006,08:14)]So folks will learn CW?
Good point. I'll have to check Part 97 for legality, but maybe I'll start QSO-ing on the local repeater in CW. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
I have done this many times http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif there is nothing illegal about it.


73,
Joe

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (W1SK @ Dec. 19 2006,10:54)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 19 2006,08:21)]Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Dec. 19 2006,08:14)]So folks will learn CW?
Good point. I'll have to check Part 97 for legality, but maybe I'll start QSO-ing on the local repeater in CW. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
I have done this many times http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif there is nothing illegal about it.


73,
Joe
It annoys people though.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 19 2006,08:11)]What what be the use of having the cw identifiers if no one can decode them anymore?
The CW ID's ARE at least humanly translatable, even if it takes some effort. But I have yet to meet or know anyone who can listen to a packet or PSK31 signal and ID the station.
The CW ID's are legal and legitimate. (And limited in speed so they CAN be humanly translatable.) WHY should there be a problem? Morse Code has NOT been made illegal.

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (W1SK @ Dec. 19 2006,08:54)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 19 2006,08:21)]Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Dec. 19 2006,08:14)]So folks will learn CW?
Good point. I'll have to check Part 97 for legality, but maybe I'll start QSO-ing on the local repeater in CW. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
I have done this many times http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif there is nothing illegal about it.


73,
Joe
Legality and appropriateness are two different matters. If the repeater owner doesn't object, then there's no problem using Morse Code (it would probably NOT be an actual CW transmission, though) even over a repeater. The fact that it "annoys" some people is moot; a lot of network TV is annoying, and the solution is to "change the channel." They don't HAVE to listen, any more that they have to listen to drive time "honey do's" on the repeater, which can get just as annoying.

[ne3r]

I'm not a big fan of voice identifiers, especially those with long announcements about how many linked repeaters there are, what the echolink node number is, etc. Makes monitoring the repeater in the shack kind of annoying.

[ke4pjw]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Dec. 19 2006,02:50)]I think all repeater ID's should be CW ID's or digital ID's a la D-STAR.

Some voice ID's are too intrusive and say all sorts of irrelevant crap.

One around here for example, gives the time on the hour. It also ID's quite frequently, in voice, announcing frequency and PL in addition to the callsign. Too much information if you ask me. Just do the ID once every 10 minutes in CW, callsign only while the repeater is in use. That's all you really need.

Our club's repeater goes over the edge too - the CW ID is just way too long when you initially transmit.
Ditto

[n0iu]

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 19 2006,03:11)]What what be the use of having the cw identifiers if no one can decode them anymore?
Why don't you ask the FAA?

In order to become a pilot, you need to learn how to use various navigational aids. (Duh!) One of those is the VOR (VHF Omni-directional Radio Range) system. VORs broadcast a VHF radio composite signal including the station's MORSE CODE identifier and data that allows the airborne receiving equipment to derive the magnetic bearing from the station to the aircraft.

How ironic. If you want to fly an airplane, you need to know Morse code. If you want to communicate via radio, you don't need it any more.

What's wrong with this picture??

Scott NØIU

[k6az]

Quote[/b] (W1SK @ Dec. 19 2006,10:54)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 19 2006,08:21)]Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Dec. 19 2006,08:14)]So folks will learn CW?
Good point. I'll have to check Part 97 for legality, but maybe I'll start QSO-ing on the local repeater in CW. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
I have done this many times #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif there is nothing illegal about it.


73,
Joe
True, it's called MCW, or modulated CW. We used to do it on a repeater in San Diego for code practice.

I agree with voice identifiers being annoying, especially when they go off in the middle of a QSO.

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 18 2006,09:27)]Commercial and public safety have long used code IDers. No-one in those services know a lick of code. The IDer is there to make the thing legal, and a CWID on a repeater is much better than a voice IDer. You can talk over it, and it doesn't get in the way.

I don't know why so many people are confused about this. The FCC is not making code illegal, they are dropping the code TEST. If you want to use code on 40M, 10M, or 2M, its OK. It doesn't matter if there's not a soul out there that can copy it, that's just not its purpose.

Joe
Exactly.

On that note, I MUCH prefer CW iders on repeaters and I wish most repeater owners would switch to them. While they're at it they can eliminate all of the unneccessary temp, voltage and time announcements.

Before someone informs me that the temp and voltage announcements are there to verify the status of the reapeter let me remind you that it's pretty easy to announce them only when they are out of range by some reasonable percentage.

[ac3p]

Our local trunked police/fire system id's in modulated code. So I guess the ham repeaters will continue to do so.

When's the last time anyone heard a 911 call dispatched in morse?

[k6jpd]

Quote[/b] (n0iu @ Dec. 19 2006,12:15)][quote=n4sva,Dec. 19 2006,03:11]......How ironic. If you want to fly an airplane, you need to know Morse code. If you want to communicate via radio, you don't need it any more.

i don't "think" there is any requirement for pilots to actually know code, there is a voice id'er on most of them

[n0xas]

There is no requirement to learn Morse code to become a pilot. I have not heard any beacons that ID by voice, but I'm not saying there are none. The beacons I've heard are all Morse at 5 WPM, and if you really need to you can pull out the Morse chart and decode it. I haven't had many hours of flight training, so I'm really not sure how often it's even a factor. Never occured to me to ask, since the only problem I have with the beacons is wishing they'd speed up some. It's one of the many benefits of having learned to copy Morse.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[KD6NIG]

They won't be phased out.

The CWID on a repeater is there so the FCC can identify it, nobody else. They are the ones requiring it http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

And I'm sure the FCC has a few of those pocket CW decoders around http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Sure, we can use it to ID it too, but the FCC wants it there so they can, really http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

I don't see it going away http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[K9STH]

AZ:

Sending a keyed tone over an FM repeater is NOT MCW! It is just plain old FM phone operation!

MCW involves modulating a carrier with a tone and then keying that carrier. The advantage to using MCW is that the signal may easily be received on a receiver that does not have a BFO.

Now when a single tone is used to key an SSB transmitter then a pseudo CW signal is generated. This signal will be offset from the actual SSB frequency by the frequency of the tone. When used with an upper-sideband signal then the frequency will be above and when used with a lower-sideband signal then the frequency will be below the "actual" frequency. This type of CW generation is used in the Collins KWM-2 series and the Collins 32S-1 and 32S-2 transmitters (among other brands). Unfortunately, generating CW by this means often produces several signals.

MCW is permitted only on VHF and higher frequencies where phone operation is allowed. This means that MCW is NOT allowed in the 50.0 MHz to 50.1 MHz, 144.0 MHz to 144.1 MHz, and the 219 MHz to 220 MHz ranges. This is "spelled out" in 47 CFR Part 97 section 97.305 (specifically in the chart that is a part of this section).

Many amateur radio operators are not aware that a constant carrier modulated by a tone is NOT MCW. Any phone signal may definitely be modulated by a tone which is keyed to send the International Morse code anywhere that phone signals are allowed EXCEPT on the 60 meter band (where such a signal would be basically a CW signal which is not allowed). However, for an MCW signal, which consists of a modulated carrier which is keyed, those signals are restricted to VHF and above with the above mentioned exceptions.

Glen, K9STH

[K7JEM]

(5) Phone. Speech and other sound
emissions having designators with A,
C, D, F, G, H, J or R as the first symbol;
1, 2 or 3 as the second symbol; E as
the third symbol. Also speech emissions
having B as the first symbol; 7, 8
or 9 as the second symbol; E as the
third symbol. MCW for the purpose of
performing the station identification
procedure, or for providing telegraphy
practice interspersed with speech. Incidental
tones for the purpose of selective
calling or alerting or to control
the level of a demodulated signal may also be considered phone.

Funny the FCC does call it MCW as a component of phone.

Joe

[K9ALT]

I don't know about other parts of the country, but here all of the local repeaters have voice ID's...I think they all still have the CW IDer as well. In any case, I find the voice IDer's to be extremely annoing. Wish they were CW only but oh well guess we can't have everything...

Merry Christmas and a blessed New Year
Glenn
K9ALT

[K0RGR]

Quote[/b] (n0xas @ Dec. 19 2006,13:32)]There is no requirement to learn Morse code to become a pilot. I have not heard any beacons that ID by voice, but I'm not saying there are none. The beacons I've heard are all Morse at 5 WPM, and if you really need to you can pull out the Morse chart and decode it. I haven't had many hours of flight training, so I'm really not sure how often it's even a factor. Never occured to me to ask, since the only problem I have with the beacons is wishing they'd speed up some. It's one of the many benefits of having learned to copy Morse.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
As I vaguely recall, the Morse characters for each VOR are printed on the airway charts, too.

[k6az]

Quote[/b] (ac3p @ Dec. 19 2006,14:51)]Our local trunked police/fire system id's in modulated code. So I guess the ham repeaters will continue to do so.

When's the last time anyone heard a 911 call dispatched in morse?
Our sheriff uses CW as well. Only problem is that the ID is missing the first character.

http://www.k6az.com/forums/pso.mp3

[KN7T]

Our repeater has both types of ID - voice and CW. The voice ID only occurs at the top of every hour, all other ID'ing is in CW.

[KN7T]

Quote[/b] (k6az @ Dec. 19 2006,06:41)]Our sheriff uses CW as well. Only problem is that the ID is missing the first character.
They probably have the anti-kerchunk feature enabled and didn't program in an appropriate delay to the ID sequence - that's why the first character is missing???

[KS4VT]

The 28 million dollar 800 trunking system that I manage uses CW to identify itself. #The system has 4 call signs and all 4 are transmitted in order from the 10 transmit sites at the same time.

The only difference is that the only channels "required" to ID are the lowest frequencies in the 2 band allocations (General Category and NPSPAC).

Quote[/b] ]Sec. 90.647 #Station identification.

(a) Conventional systems of communication shall be identified in accordance with existing regulations governing such matters.
(b) Trunked systems of communication, except as noted in paragraph
© of this section, shall be identified through the use of an automatic device which transmits the call sign of the base station facility at 30 minute intervals. Such station identification shall be made on the lowest frequency in the base station trunk group assigned the licensee. Should this frequency be in use at the time station identification is required, such identification may be made at the termination of the communication in progress on this frequency. Identification may be made by voice or International Morse Code. When the call sign is transmitted in International Morse Code, it must be at a rate of between 15 to 20 words
per minute and by means of tone modulation of the transmitter, the tone frequency being between 800 and 1000 hertz.

© Stations operating in either the 806-824/851-869 MHz or 896-901/935-940 MHz bands that are licensed on an exclusive basis, and normally employ digital signals for the transmission of data, text, control codes, or digitized voice may also be identified by digital transmission of the call sign. A licensee that identifies its station in this manner must provide the Commission, upon its request, information sufficient to decode the digital transmission and ascertain the call sign transmitted.

The only part of the system that does not ID is the 6 GHz digital microwave system that is Part 101 of the FCC R&R's and are exempt.

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7....213.htm (http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/09nov20051500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/octqtr/47cfr101.213.htm)

Will it be phased out....I highly doubt it.

[w4clm]

Just because someone maybe less then capable of reading the identifier in C.W. doesn't mean it will be phased out. The commercial two industry has been using CW identifiers for longer then I can remember. Even some transponders on satellites identify in CW.


_.. .
._ _ ...._ _ ._ . ._.. _ _

OH sorry maybe I had better slow that ID'er down some!

[k9kxq]

Quote[/b] (w4clm @ Dec. 19 2006,19:33)]Just because someone maybe less then capable of reading the identifier in C.W. doesn't mean it will be phased out. The commercial two industry has been using CW identifiers for longer then I can remember. Even some transponders on satellites identify in CW.


_.. #.
._ _ #...._ # _ ._ . #._.. #_ _

OH sorry maybe I had better slow that ID'er down some!
Hey, what's all them under scores and periods mean? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

kxq

[K0HWY]

Quote[/b] (w4clm @ Dec. 19 2006,19:33)]_.. #.
._ _ #...._ # _ ._ . #._.. #_ _

OH sorry maybe I had better slow that ID'er down some!
Make it part of your signature and see what happens. They love ya around here when you do that. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Hmmm... come to think of it, I think I'll add it back. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[KI4QFY]

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 19 2006,08:11)]What what be the use of having the cw identifiers if no one can decode them anymore?
Your being a smartass, and you know it.

[n0iu]

Yes, airway charts do have the dits and dahs printed next to the VOR station identifier. I guess this means that even amateur radio operators can fly airplanes now!

Scott NØIU

[KG6YTZ]

My late-to-the-thread short three-word answer: "I doubt it."

Addendum: "Only by the individual choices of repeater owners."

K7JEM said:
Quote[/b] ]I don't know why so many people are confused about this. The FCC is not making code illegal
No further comment necessary from this station. #I just thought it was worth repeating. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[KL7FZ]

I am debating what to use on the new 1.2 ghz repeater here. I think I will go with a voice ID that says "This is the KL7FZ repeater. I was going to ID in CW but that would certainly disadvantage some of you and just would not be fair. Of course there is only one 1200 mhz repeater anywhere around here but I want you to be sure you are on the right one. If you still need help in determining that you are in the right place, then get a flashlight, bend over and shine it up there to find where you put your brains!" beeep!

[K9STH]

JEM:

The actual emission used for MCW is indeed the same as for phone. That is the modulation used for the carrier such as AM, FM (i.e. +/- 5 KHz deviation), PM (i.e. +/- 5 KHz deviation), etc. What makes MCW different is the fact that the carrier is turned off and on to convey the information. When the carrier is constant and the tone is turned off and on to convey the information then that is considered to be phone operation!

As such, according to FCC regulations MCW is only allowed above 50.1 MHz (with the additional exceptions of 144.0 MHz to 144.1 MHz and 219 MHz to 220 MHz). As for modulating a continuous carrier with a tone this is allowed on frequencies below 30 MHz where phone operation is allowed except in the 60 meter band so long as the modulation index of any angle modulated signal (i.e. FM or PM) does not exceed 1.

Glen, K9STH

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ Dec. 20 2006,11:48)]JEM:

The actual emission used for MCW is indeed the same as for phone. That is the modulation used for the carrier such as AM, FM (i.e. +/- 5 KHz deviation), PM (i.e. +/- 5 KHz deviation), etc. What makes MCW different is the fact that the carrier is turned off and on to convey the information. When the carrier is constant and the tone is turned off and on to convey the information then that is considered to be phone operation!

As such, according to FCC regulations MCW is only allowed above 50.1 MHz (with the additional exceptions of 144.0 MHz to 144.1 MHz and 219 MHz to 220 MHz). As for modulating a continuous carrier with a tone this is allowed on frequencies below 30 MHz where phone operation is allowed except in the 60 meter band so long as the modulation index of any angle modulated signal (i.e. FM or PM) does not exceed 1.

Glen, K9STH
But MCW is a part of "phone" when it is used to ID or send code practice. Therefore, MCW must be considered as not requiring the carrier to be switched on and off, else they wouldn't mention it in the definition for phone.

My repeater doesn't switch the carrier on and off in conjunction with the tone cw ID, but it is MCW. And that case of MCW is considered "phone" by the FCC, since it is just used to ID.

Joe

[w5alt]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 20 2006,15:02)]But MCW is a part of "phone" when it is used to ID or send code practice. Therefore, MCW must be considered as not requiring the carrier to be switched on and off, else they wouldn't mention it in the definition for phone.

My repeater doesn't switch the carrier on and off in conjunction with the tone cw ID, but it is MCW. And that case of MCW is considered "phone" by the FCC, since it is just used to ID. T
Actually the difference between CW and MCW is the second digit in the mode designator. For CW it is 1 and for MCW it is 2, according to FCC definitions. The difference between 1 and 2 is whether or not there is a modulating sub-carrier. he commercial regs are careful not to say "MCW," but instead say "International Morse code."

Morse code sent by audio using a non-switched carrier (as in most repeater ID's) isn't MCW, it's simply audio information. The rules permit the use of MCW is some cases, but the truth is that hardly anyone actually uses it.

73,
Walt, W5ALT

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Dec. 20 2006,13:00)]Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 20 2006,15:02)]But MCW is a part of "phone" when it is used to ID or send code practice. Therefore, MCW must be considered as not requiring the carrier to be switched on and off, else they wouldn't mention it in the definition for phone.

My repeater doesn't switch the carrier on and off in conjunction with the tone cw ID, but it is MCW. And that case of MCW is considered "phone" by the FCC, since it is just used to ID. T
Actually the difference between CW and MCW is the second digit in the mode designator. For CW it is 1 and for MCW it is 2, according to FCC definitions. The difference between 1 and 2 is whether or not there is a modulating sub-carrier. he commercial regs are careful not to say "MCW," but instead say "International Morse code."

Morse code sent by audio using a non-switched carrier (as in most repeater ID's) isn't MCW, it's simply audio information. The rules permit the use of MCW is some cases, but the truth is that hardly anyone actually uses it.

73,
Walt, W5ALT
I don't see anywhere in any FCC rule that requires the carrier to be switched on and off with the tone. The FCC designator for MCW on FM would be F2B or F2A. This would be the case if the carrier is turned on or off with the modulation or not.

Explain how a repeater could legally ID, if MCW is defined as having to turn the carrier on and off. Most repeaters don't do this.

Explain if it would be legal to take a CPO and inject it's output into an FM transmitter, then have a friend do it so you can have QSO's with each other. Would the carrier have to go on and off with the tone? Or could you just leave the TX running between dits and dahs?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Joe

[n4sva]

Quote[/b] (KI4QFY @ Dec. 19 2006,20:06)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 19 2006,08:11)]What what be the use of having the cw identifiers if no one can decode them anymore?
Your being a smartass, and you know it.
-... .. - . #-- . -. --- -.-. --- -.. . .-.

[w5alt]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 20 2006,16:42)]Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Dec. 20 2006,13:00)]Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 20 2006,15:02)]But MCW is a part of "phone" when it is used to ID or send code practice. Therefore, MCW must be considered as not requiring the carrier to be switched on and off, else they wouldn't mention it in the definition for phone.

My repeater doesn't switch the carrier on and off in conjunction with the tone cw ID, but it is MCW. And that case of MCW is considered "phone" by the FCC, since it is just used to ID. T
Actually the difference between CW and MCW is the second digit in the mode designator. For CW it is 1 and for MCW it is 2, according to FCC definitions. The difference between 1 and 2 is whether or not there is a modulating sub-carrier. he commercial regs are careful not to say "MCW," but instead say "International Morse code."

Morse code sent by audio using a non-switched carrier (as in most repeater ID's) isn't MCW, it's simply audio information. The rules permit the use of MCW is some cases, but the truth is that hardly anyone actually uses it.

73,
Walt, W5ALT
I don't see anywhere in any FCC rule that requires the carrier to be switched on and off with the tone. The FCC designator for MCW on FM would be F2B or F2A. This would be the case if the carrier is turned on or off with the modulation or not.

Explain how a repeater could legally ID, if MCW is defined as having to turn the carrier on and off. Most repeaters don't do this.

Explain if it would be legal to take a CPO and inject it's output into an FM transmitter, then have a friend do it so you can have QSO's with each other. Would the carrier have to go on and off with the tone? Or could you just leave the TX running between dits and dahs?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Joe
Joe, CW is simply 100% modulated AM. It consists of a carrier and a modulating signal, which is what forms the Morse characters required for CW. What happens if you don't modulate 100%? I guess you could switch the carrier between 20% and 80% modulation if you wanted to and still call it CW. I don't know, never thought about it! Sure would be hard to copy, though.

To get MCW, according to the FCC definition, you need a modulating sub-carrier. The carrier and the modulating signal (Morse) does the same thing it does for CW. The difference is that there is a carrier and modulation (Morse) for CW, but a carrier, a sub-carrier, and the modulation (Morse) for MCW.

To get MCW, as Glen said, you need a carrier, a modulating sub-carrier, and the modulating signal. That means you take a tone modulated signal and apply your information modulation to that. In other words you basically have a tone modulated signal and you send CW with it, typically by turning it on and off.

There is no FCC requirement that a repeater has to ID using MCW. It is simply permitted. It can ID with standard voice announcements or by sending Morse code using audio tones. Neither of those involve a sub-carrier, so they aren't MCW.

Injecting sounds from an audio oscillator into an AM or FM signal are legal, assuming it's not music of course. It's still audio, though. (It would be AFSK in the case of an SSB signal.) Until you start using a modulating sub-carrier, it's still not MCW, but there's no prohibition against sending audio Morse code on any frequency where AM or FM is permitted as far as I know.

73,
Walt, W5ALT

[N2RJ]

I've heard the MTA (NYC subway) repeaters ID in morse.

[KL7FZ]

For the hearing impaired I have decided to put a Morse ID on my machine but instead of MCW, I am going to speak it.
DUH dit dit # dit........

That ought to take care of all those that say they can't hear code!

I tried to convince a couple of VEs to do this as it would be easy to speak Morse at 5 wpm but they nixed it. Seemed like it should be allowed. Would end all those silly whiners from saying that they could not hear it. First you say TEST, TEST, TEST. Then if they say they can hear you OK then there is no excuse for not hearing the code is there?

Maybe I'll say #Dumb dit dit # dit.......

#KL7FZ

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Dec. 20 2006,14:14)]


Joe, CW is simply 100% modulated AM. It consists of a carrier and a modulating signal, which is what forms the Morse characters required for CW. What happens if you don't modulate 100%? I guess you could switch the carrier between 20% and 80% modulation if you wanted to and still call it CW. I don't know, never thought about it! Sure would be hard to copy, though.

I'm really surprised to see you post that. CW is much different than 100% modulated AM. CW is merely a carrier that is switched on and off, thats all. The "modulation" is in the switching pattern, but the carrier itself isn't modulated ala AM.

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Dec. 20 2006,14:14)]

To get MCW, according to the FCC definition, you need a modulating sub-carrier. The carrier and the modulating signal (Morse) does the same thing it does for CW. The difference is that there is a carrier and modulation (Morse) for CW, but a carrier, a sub-carrier, and the modulation (Morse) for MCW.
True. An FM radio supplies the carrier, and a 1000Hz tone is the modulated sub carrier, switched on and off with the coded message. But the main carrier doesn't have to be switched on and off to be considered F2A or F2B. By definition, F2A and F2B are MCW. There is nothing in the definition that indicates this any more than there is a definition for F3E that says the carrier has to drop between words.

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Dec. 20 2006,14:14)]
To get MCW, as Glen said, you need a carrier, a modulating sub-carrier, and the modulating signal. That means you take a tone modulated signal and apply your information modulation to that. In other words you basically have a tone modulated signal and you send CW with it, typically by turning it on and off.
True. Turning on and off the subcarrier. You can also turn on and off the carrier, if you want to, but they are both MCW.

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Dec. 20 2006,14:14)]
There is no FCC requirement that a repeater has to ID using MCW. It is simply permitted. It can ID with standard voice announcements or by sending Morse code using audio tones. Neither of those involve a sub-carrier, so they aren't MCW.
No, when the code tones are transmitted over an FM phone channel, they are MCW. These MCW transmissions are considered "phone" by the FCC definition.

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Dec. 20 2006,14:14)]
Injecting sounds from an audio oscillator into an AM or FM signal are legal, assuming it's not music of course. It's still audio, though. (It would be AFSK in the case of an SSB signal.) Until you start using a modulating sub-carrier, it's still not MCW, but there's no prohibition against sending audio Morse code on any frequency where AM or FM is permitted as far as I know.

73,
Walt, W5ALT

OK Walt, this should be easy. Explain how a normal 2M repeater with a "CWID" is legal. Cite the section of the rules that make it legal. (Hint, its in 97.119 and 97.3© )

Joe

[w5alt]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 20 2006,18:20)]Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Dec. 20 2006,14:14)]Joe, CW is simply 100% modulated AM. It consists of a carrier and a modulating signal, which is what forms the Morse characters required for CW. What happens if you don't modulate 100%? I guess you could switch the carrier between 20% and 80% modulation if you wanted to and still call it CW. I don't know, never thought about it! Sure would be hard to copy, though.
I'm really surprised to see you post that. CW is much different than 100% modulated AM. CW is merely a carrier that is switched on and off, thats all. The "modulation" is in the switching pattern, but the carrier itself isn't modulated ala AM.
Joe, turning a carrier on and off is identical to 100% AM using a pulse. Of course in practical CW there is always wave shaping to get rid of key clicks, so transmitted CW does not use rectangular pulses. You can look inside of the soundcard and SDR CW generator software if you like. The fact that CW is AM is the basis for the bandwidth that a CW signal occupies. In addition, all of the ITU designators (A, C, H, J, R) for CW refer to AM.

As far as MCW, I just noticed that there is another difference between CW and MCW. MCW includes mode designators D, F and G (which CW does not) and CW includes mode designators J2A and J2B (which MCW does not). I'd be interested in finding out how CW is sent with J2A or J2B -- i.e. with the carrier suppressed. Interesting.

For FM you're probably right that keying the tone is equivalent to MCW. For AM MCW was historically keying a modulated carrier so that the Morse could be copied either with a SSB-type detector or an AM detector. Leaving the carrier on between symbols would have made copying with a BFO or product detector almost impossible.

Quote[/b] ]OK Walt, this should be easy. Explain how a normal 2M repeater with a "CWID" is legal. Cite the section of the rules that make it legal. (Hint, its in 97.119 and 97.3© )
As far as why audio Morse is a legal means to ID, I was told long ago that it was legal because the FCC definition of "phone" includes "other sound emissions ..." as well as MCW. But to tell the truth, I never worried much about it. Obviously IDs using audio Morse have always been considered legal, no matter what the real reason is.

Interesting what I learned today. Thanks for pointing that out.

BTW, did you know that telegraphy is defined as something that is meant for recording in a graphical format? I guess that means that the FCC considers handwriting, typing and head copy to be graphical, but I would have chosen other words. Interesting.

73,
Walt, W5ALT

[K7JEM]

Yep, you can learn a lot just by reading definitions.

If MCW is defined (one definition) as F2B, and if MCW is defined as a component of phone, legal for ID, then you have the legal means for a repeater to ID. "Other sounds" are not listed as a means of ID, but CW and phone are (when using phone). Our repeaters do not use CW to ID, the emission doesn't fit the definition of CW. Therefore, phone is the only legal means of ID on a voice repeater (unless you mod your repeater to do true CW). Since the definition of phone includes MCW, when it is used for ID purposes, and since F2B fits the definition of MCW, we must be using MCW, or it wouldn't be technically legal.

Joe

[w5alt]

I'm intrigued by the J2A and J2B definitions for CW. I wondered many years ago what would happen if you suppressed the carrier on a CW signal, since it is a mathematical possibility. Of course back then I had no way to really try that and wrote it off as impractical since you'd have no real way to figure out where the carrier should go when tuning it in with a BFO.

These days with DSP it should be fairly easy to code up and see. One of these days I may just do that. Talk about narrow band signals! The bandwidth of CW is totally due to the rise and decay time of the carrier and the presence of 2 sidebands. Get rid of the carrier and 1 sideband and the signal really would have almost no theoretical bandwidth.

Is anyone already doing that? I'm curious.

73,
Walt, W5ALT

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] (K9ALT @ Dec. 19 2006,14:34)]I don't know about other parts of the country, but here all of the local repeaters have voice ID's...I think they all still have the CW IDer as well. In any case, I find the voice IDer's to be extremely annoing. Wish they were CW only but oh well guess we can't have everything...

Merry Christmas and a blessed New Year
Glenn
K9ALT
actually I like the voice ID's, a repeater around here has a woman that tells you hi and goes on about the repeater, then the time, the day and the date! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

The ID goes on for like 10 seconds, heh.

[KI4QFY]

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 20 2006,14:13)]Quote[/b] (KI4QFY @ Dec. 19 2006,20:06)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 19 2006,08:11)]What what be the use of having the cw identifiers if no one can decode them anymore?
Your being a smartass, and you know it.
-... .. - . -- . -. --- -.-. --- -.. . .-.
-.-- --- ..- / -- .- -.- . / -. --- / ... . -. ... .

[WA9ZZZ]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 20 2006,19:13)]Yep, you can learn a lot just by reading definitions.

[...] Since the definition of phone includes MCW, when it is used for ID purposes, and since F2B fits the definition of MCW, we must be using MCW, or it wouldn't be technically legal.
That was a little convoluted, but I think you ended up with the right idea.

This discussion of MCW has come up before. As you say, part 97 includes F2B (actually, F2A is relevant to code that you listen to) in its definition of MCW. If you turned the carrier off and on with the tone that was FM modulating the carrier you would have combined amplitude and frequency modulation of the main carrier which is designated by "D". Part 97 includes D2A in the definition of MCW, so you could do that if you want to. It probably wouldn't sound too good.

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (WA9ZZZ @ Dec. 20 2006,20:40)]Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 20 2006,19:13)]Yep, you can learn a lot just by reading definitions.

[...] Since the definition of phone includes MCW, when it is used for ID purposes, and since F2B fits the definition of MCW, we must be using MCW, or it wouldn't be technically legal.
That was a little convoluted, but I think you ended up with the right idea.

This discussion of MCW has come up before. As you say, part 97 includes F2B (actually, F2A is relevant to code that you listen to) in its definition of MCW. If you turned the carrier off and on with the tone that was FM modulating the carrier you would have combined amplitude and frequency modulation of the main carrier which is designated by "D". Part 97 includes D2A in the definition of MCW, so you could do that if you want to. It probably wouldn't sound too good.
A "little' convoluted??

Man, I worked on that for 30 minutes trying to make it as convoluted as I could.

Yeah, I think F2B would be more like RTTY. F2A would be the proper designator for CW sent for humans. They're both covered under MCW. I suppose if a machine was TXing and RXing the code, it could be considered F2B.

Joe

[PE1RDW]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Dec. 21 2006,06:10)]Yeah, I think F2B would be more like RTTY. F2A would be the proper designator for CW sent for humans. They're both covered under MCW. I suppose if a machine was TXing and RXing the code, it could be considered F2B.
F2B is only used for telegraphy modes that can't be decoded by a human.
This includes highspeed morse (>100wpm) slow speed morse (30sec dot lenght) fdcw (mark and space have the same length but are shifted in frequentie) but also rtty psk31 etc. as long as it is transmitted as a subcarier on fm.