ad: InfoStat-1

DCW (Data CW) versus CW

Discussion in 'Straight Keys - CW Enthusiasts' started by VK5EEE, Aug 17, 2015.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
ad: Subscribe
  1. WA7DU

    WA7DU Ham Member QRZ Page

    Vail is a man to be proud of. He was the real technical force behind the development of the electric telegraph, but Morse claimed virtually all the publicity and credit. Vail's contract with Morse specified that the publicity and credit were to go to Morse. I am coming to believe that if Morse had not chosen Vail to do the "engineering" for the project, the telegraph may have ended up as some strange and weird contraption. Hiring Vail was one of Morse's best ideas--and Morse did have great ideas--he just lacked the technical savvy to bring them to fruition.
     
  2. KA0HCP

    KA0HCP XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Sigh.

    You are needlessly re-inventing the wheel. The correct, and long established terminology is: "Machine Morse".

    Ask any Cryptologist or Intercept Operator.

    Machine Morse in its hey-day saw it's biggest use among Communist Block countries as an alternative to Baudot coded RTTY.

    Morse is not digital. It is a three-state, variable length mode. Machine Morse is not prominent enough to require band assignments or protection. It is easily accommodated in the regular CW segments.
     
  3. KC9UDX

    KC9UDX Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber Life Member QRZ Page

    I wouldn't say it stretches the truth at all.
    There were to be sending machines and receiving machines not much different than someone using a keyboard on one end and a decoder on the other.
     
  4. KB0TT

    KB0TT Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Gee ..... I brought this view forward to the ZED ~ 10 years ago. ....

    I was attacked then and branded a zealot ..... I maintain what he stated
    is very much spot on .....

    Take your decoders and computers to other modes .... Just leave the CW
    subbands alone ..... I , again , will be called a despot ..... For those
    who have been on the ZED for a long time , you will remember my
    past posts on this very subject ....

    JB
     
    VK5EEE and W5BIB like this.
  5. WA7DU

    WA7DU Ham Member QRZ Page

    I've read a lot. Never read anything about decoders. Recorders, yes. Can you point me to the literature?
     
  6. N7ZAL

    N7ZAL Ham Member QRZ Page

    My authority on early telegraph is: "History, Theory, and Practice Electric Telegraph," by George B. Prescott. Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1866. It might be available online via Google books...don't know.

    Anyway, I haven't seen anything about a "decoder" but recall a printing telegraph and of course recorder..

    George Prescott is another ancestor of mine. You would have thought their brilliance would have been passed down. :)
     
  7. W8ZNX

    W8ZNX Ham Member QRZ Page

    don't care

    mind don't have much of a problem with people using code readers

    having a Lake Eire Swing solves that problem
     
    VK5EEE and W5BIB like this.
  8. W8ZNX

    W8ZNX Ham Member QRZ Page

    your right
    very early on Morse telegraph system
    used a clock work wind up paper tape / ink pen method
    but you still had to know Morse code to read the paper tape

    before that
    there were some multi wire direct readout telegraph patents
    that did not use code
    but they were so inpractical as to never be used commercially

    still in the stacks
    mac
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2015
  9. SM0AOM

    SM0AOM Ham Member QRZ Page

    What you describe is the von Sömmering electrochemical telegraph that was invented in Bavaria about 200 years ago.
    It used one wire for each character and digit and can be called the first parallel bus interface, and never made it beyond the demonstration phase.

    Morse and subsequent electrical telegraph inventors used the much more wire-efficient bit serial interface.

    73/
    Karl-Arne
    SM0AOM
     
    VK5EEE and W5BIB like this.
  10. VK5EEE

    VK5EEE Ham Member QRZ Page

    If I'm a despot for wanting my 27kHz (or 50 in USA) 20 years into the future to be free from having 50 LIDs call me in response to my CQ when NOT sent Lake Erie style, and half of them with 5 minute long QSO already mapped out and on auto send, while they make a cup of coffee and leave me to suffer the QRM and deny me a CW QSO, then so be it, I'm a despot protecting my future pleasure. And yes, the way to solve the problem is what those selfish buggers years ago (FCC types who wanted more money for government from licenses and ARRL types who wanted more money for associations) should have done: A CW test for ANYONE to be allowed to transmist in that CW-exclusive section, no matter how small it may become in future, though I personally predict a CW revival, and I don't want it to be a DCW Dunce CW one. And no one should misread me as someone who is elitist or unwelcoming to newcomers to CW on the very contrary, I'm a despot who does everything I can to assist them, mentor or Elmer them, and I'm well known for that now, though in my younger years I was sadly too impatient with people. I do want to preserve MY RIGHT to pleasure in future.
     
    W5BIB likes this.

Share This Page

ad: Amateur-1