ad: elecraft

can someone decode this cw id for me?

Discussion in 'Working Different Modes' started by KD0KKV, Jul 13, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: L-Geochron
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-2
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-3
ad: HRDLLC-2
  1. K8MHZ

    K8MHZ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well, Jim, I think that reading comprehension should be a skill we try to master before we tackle Morse Code.

    For example, here is the very first line of the OP's thread:

    Yet, it seems you overlooked it. Here is your advice: you really think he tried using cw readers with his computer that couldn't copy CW?

    He already tried what you have suggested to no avail. I think that we should take some time to read the posts before we embarrass ourselves on an international forum by posting advice that makes it look like we only read half the question.

    Now, how do you feel?

    All I did was express what I felt should be a quality of a ham radio operator, as you did. This time you are on the other end of the stick. At least you are better suited to take it, being a 'real ham' and all.

    Scott is a new ham (like months new) and has less than 50 posts here. Let's let him get used to us a bit before we release the hounds, K?

    Oh, and just to set the record straight, I do not condone or respect the 'I had it rough so I am going to make it rough on others' attitude. I am sorry to hear that you may have been a victim of it. The best thing we can do is to break the cycle and try to make learning as easy as possible for those truly interested.


    Me too!

    That's why I started teaching!

    The ARRL video SUCKS! I teach without videos so my students can interact with me while I am teaching. In more than 5 years I have had no one fail an FCC test and some of my students are now Extras.

    My success rate is due to the fact that I try to make learning easy, not a hazing ritual. I remember my school teachers giving me such crap about the way I learned because they thought I was lazy. I taught myself how to do math in my head, yet my teachers were adamant about me writing down my work. What a bunch of BS.

    Along with the subject matter, I teach test taking. Test taking can be mastered. I was the first person in the history of our Local to get over 100 percent on our 5 year final exam, thanks to extra credit. I just took my exams for my cycle endorsement and got perfect scores on both the written and the rider's test. I NEVER fail tests and get perfect scores on about 25 percent of them, regardless of the subject.

    I also teach people how to memorize things, like formulas. Much to my own teacher's behest, I also teach people how to do math in their heads.

    I got ridiculed in school because I didn't like ball sports. I got good grades and loved to tear apart radios and stuff. It's not that I was a wuss, the fact is that I was into motorcycle racing and later on, martial arts and ended up becoming employed in the construction trades.

    To this day I HATE ball sports. If people would have just let me alone I may or may not have become interested in them, but NO WAY now. I remember being teased and thinking about what idiots my tormentors were for loving to chase balls. Most of the jocks were not good in school so I immediately associated sports with low IQs.

    If someone would have taken the time to truly Elmer me about a sport they really loved, I would bet the farm my take on ball sports would be much different.
  2. DJ1YFK

    DJ1YFK Guest

    Although I hate to reply to troll posts, I feel compelled to say that this is not a common opinion among the majority of hams, regardless of their skills in Morse code.

    Wow. Just wow. :-(

    Mark's signature line is right on spot: "We all view the world from our own perspective. We may not be able to change the world, but we can change our perspective."
  3. N2OBS

    N2OBS Ham Member QRZ Page

    What was the frequency of this strange cw id??
  4. WA4OTD

    WA4OTD Ham Member QRZ Page

    Two meter repeaters should not be able to ID in CW. Auto ID's should be only in the native mode. FM voice ID.
  5. K7KBN

    K7KBN Ham Member QRZ Page

    First, the repeater didn't identify in "CW"; it identified using Morse code by transmitting an audio tone modulating a (probably FM) carrier, resulting in a purely FM transmission. CW and Morse code are not the same.

    Second, why not identify using Morse code?
  6. K8MHZ

    K8MHZ Ham Member QRZ Page

    MCW is the mode that FM repeaters ID in when it sounds like CW.

    It is allowed by Part 97.
  7. KD0KKV

    KD0KKV Ham Member QRZ Page

    That was the strangest part to me. It was on 147.315 output 147.915 input, which is in a small group of un-coordinated pairs here. It must be some kind of a link between the 2 listed repeaters, or a control channel.
  8. WA4OTD

    WA4OTD Ham Member QRZ Page

    CW has been done away as requirement to learn and as such isn't readily recongized. Hence this post and several others in the past. Often with 2M opening there is a posting about what repeater is this I can't understand the ID. If they were all in voice would not be a problem.

    Certainly CW and Morse Code are not the same but they sound the same in a speaker.

  9. WA4OTD

    WA4OTD Ham Member QRZ Page

    Certainly allowed, I'm making a weak arguement to only make the ID in voice since majority of hams on 2M don't understand the ID in CW.

  10. W5HTW

    W5HTW Ham Member QRZ Page

    I hate to say it, OTD, but I agree with you. Many commercial and public safety repeaters still ID using Morse, probably because it is easier for them, and it goes faster than voice. In fact, all of the police repeaters I listen to ID in Morse. But the cops don't have to worry about the ID. They already know what system they are on. They don't have to learn Morse. It is only that the repeater MUST identify, and most have been doing so for decades in Morse. I doubt they see any reason to change.

    Some of the voice IDs on ham repeaters are waaaaaay too long! They give the repeater call, the tone, and who knows what else? (I don't listen much to repeaters.) And since the audio level of the ID is equal to the level of an incoming signal, it is just QRM if someone is talking. In most cases, a CW ID will not override incoming voice, but in some it does.

    Ham radio has become a no-code hobby for the most part. Nearly half of all hams are Technicians. Maybe more than half. I do not think that means we get rid of code segments in the bands, but I do think we need to rethink, perhaps, what makes a ham, and what makes ham radio what it is. Of course, with emcom, many folks have no idea what ham radio is anyway. They think it is a police auxilliary, but that is not the subject of this posting.

    I suspect that at some point in the not-distant future, CW will be confined to CW/data segments, and will no longer be permitted in phone bands. The reason it was permitted for 80 plus years is all hams knew Morse, and if someone got on 3925 khz using Morse, at a reasonable speed, folks could figure out what he was saying. Cross mode contacts were not unheard of on the lower HF bands. I made a few myself when I had only a CW rig and was talking with a friend who was on 'fone.' But I think the day of such contacts has long since passed. There is no reason for CW to continue to be permitted in the phone bands, as the majority of folks there can't understand it.

    I am not advocating this. I am simply stating that I see it in our future, and not too far in the future. We need to be realistic about what amateur radio has become, and it has become a Push To Talk hobby. A Communicator's hobby, which was what magazines like S9 and CQ pushed for back in the 1960s. A "Communicator" license, with no code test and pretty much no theory test. Just rules. We have reached that point, just about.

    So we must adapt. I would not at all object to all repeater IDs being in voice, if they don't get so darned long winded!


Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page