Another Ouch to the tune of $10k

On February 25, the FCC issued a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (NAL) in the amount of $10,000 to Jared A. Bruegman, ex-KC0IQN, of Bolivar, Missouri. The FCC said that Bruegman “apparently and willfully violated Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by operating an unlicensed radio transmitter on the frequency 14.312 MHz in Bolivar, Missouri.” Bruegman -- who does not currently hold an Amateur Radio license -- was operating in the phone portion of the 20 meter band that is assigned to the Amateur Radio Service on a primary basis; his Amatueur Radio license expired in 2010. As a former Technician class licensee, he did not have privileges to operate in that portion of the 20 meter band when he held an Amateur Radio license.

In December 2012, the FCC’s office in Kansas City received a complaint from an Amateur Radio operator, reporting interference on 14.312 MHz. Upon investigation, agents from that office heard a male voice transmitting on the frequency 14.312 MHz. Using direction finding equipment, the agents located the source of the radio frequency transmissions to a transmitting antenna mounted on a pole next to Bruegman’s residence. The agents determined that the signals on 14.312 MHz exceeded the limits for operation under Part 15 of the Commission’s rules and therefore a license was required to transmit. The agents further discovered that Bruegman did not hold a license to operate a radio transmitter on 14.312 MHz at or near that location.
The agents determined that the source of the transmissions was coming from an unlicensed radio transmitter from a bedroom in Bruegman’s residence. “Mr Bruegman was the only person present in the bedroom and the only male in the residence during the inspection,” the NAL stated. “Mr Bruegman admitted to the agents that he owned the radio transmitter. The agents observed that the transmitter was turned on and tuned to 14.311 MHz. Mr Bruegman told the agents that he had no current Commission licenses, but that he previously held an Amateur Radio license, call sign KC0IQN. Mr Bruegman told the agents he would remove the microphone from his transmitter and only use it as a receiver.”

Section 503(b) of the Communications Act provides that “any person who willfully or repeatedly fails to comply substantially with the terms and conditions of any license, or willfully or repeatedly fails to comply with any of the provisions of the Act or of any rule, regulation, or order issued by the Commission thereunder, shall be liable for a forfeiture penalty.” In addition, Bruegman was found to be in violation of Section 301 of the Communications Act, stating that “no person shall use or operate any apparatus for the transmission of energy or communications or signals by radio within the United States, except under and in accordance with the Act and with a license granted under the provisions of the Act.”

Bruegman has until March 27, 2013 to pay the forfeiture in full, or file a written statement seeking its reduction or cancellation.

NASA restores communication with International Space Station

NASA restored communication with the International Space Station on Tuesday after connections went dark following a routine computer software update.

Before the fix, the space agency said the craft was able to communicate only every 90 minutes when it passed over ground stations in Russia.

"This is the same way they used to do it in the 1960s, with Gemini and Apollo," NASA spokesman Josh Byerly said.

The station, which is carrying two American astronauts, three Russian cosmonauts and a Canadian astronaut, did not appear to be in danger.

"It's not a panicked mood that takes over mission control," Byerly said before communications were fixed. "Anybody's who's been here has seen that."

Aboard the station, Commander Kevin Ford told mission control during a pass over a Russian ground station that the craft was "still flying straight" and that everybody was "in good shape."

The loss in communications was not considered unprecedented, though it was thought to be a cause for concern, officials said.

The station is the product of a partnership among 16 nations and carries six laboratories for space research.

Man accused of threatening amateur radio club members

SAN ANTONIO -

Northeast Bexar County resident John Watkins III is accused of making death threats to members of an amateur radio club.

Watkins was arrested on two counts of making a terroristic threat, and booked into jail Saturday. Records show he has been released after posting $4,000 bond.

According to an arrest warrant affidavit, radio club members determined someone was making threats, using racial slurs and creating “white noise,” or static, on the channels that they use for broadcasting.

A club member assigned to investigate it said he tracked the broadcasts to Watkins’ home and confronted him in January, telling him to stop, the affidavit stated.

Club members told investigators with the Bexar County Constable, Precinct 3, that Watkins made another threat over the airwaves the following day, saying he would use an AK 47 assault rifle to kill them, the affidavit stated.

Members had to have deputy constables at their meetings because they feared for their safety, the affidavit stated.

 

Link to story with video:

 http://www.ksat.com/news/Man-accused-of-threatening-amateur-radio-club-members/-/478452/18589558/-/yj8v58/-/index.html

Upcoming Radiosport Events

This Week in Radiosport

This week:

• February 15 -- NCCC Sprint Ladder
• February 16 -- Feld Hell Sprint
• February 16-17 -- ARRL International DX Contest (CW)
• February 17-18 -- Russian PSK Worldwide Contest
• February 20 -- AGCW Semi-Automatic Key Evening

Next week:

• February 22 -- NCCC Sprint Ladder
• February 22-23 -- CQ 160-Meter Contest (SSB)
• February 23-24 -- Mississippi QSO Party; North American QSO Party (RTTY); REF Contest (SSB); UBA DX Contest (CW)
• February 24 -- High Speed Club CW Contest
• February 24-25 -- North Carolina QSO Party
• February 25-27 -- CQC Winter QSO Sprint
• February 27-28 -- CWops Mini-CWT Test

All dates, unless otherwise stated, are UTC. See the ARRL Contest Branch page, the ARRL Contest Update and the WA7BNM Contest Calendar for more information. Looking for a Special Event station? Be sure to check out the ARRL Special Event Stations web page.

New Yaesu FT-400D Leaked info

We only have and know what you see below.

Please note, it says "Dual Band Digital Transceiver" on the head.......as well as it shows a camera in the head of the microphone.

Last Man Standing to Feature Ham Radio in Upcoming Episode

Via ARRL:

In an episode to air in mid-March, the hit ABC comedy Last Man Standing -- starring Tim Allen as Mike Baxter, KA0XTT -- will prominently feature scenes with cast members using Amateur Radio. This episode will be the first episode to feature Amateur Radio since the middle of the show’s first season.

According to Last Man Standing Producer John Amodeo, NN6JA, the episode called “The Fight” will feature several of the regular cast members talking on the radios. “I can’t say much about the episode right now,” Amodeo told the ARRL, “But this episode has the most significant use of Amateur Radio in a TV comedy since Herman Munster, W6XRL4, got his ham license.” Fans of 1960s television will remember the episode of The Munsters (originally aired January 21, 1965) when Herman, on his ham radio, overheard children using walkie-talkies who were pretending to be Martians.

“In addition to the original KA0XTT station in Mike Baxter’s work office, viewers will get to see Mike’s ham shack in the basement of his home,” Amodeo explained. “A cast member will also be calling in from a portable HF radio while hiking along the Amazon.” The ARRL provided many of the awards -- including 5 Band DXCC, 5 Band Worked All States, 5 Band Worked All Continents and VUCC -- that are on Mike Baxter’s home shack wall. The episode, which was filmed February 12, will also feature Richard Karn. Fans of Allen’s former show Home Improvement will remember Karn as Al Borland.

Last Man Standing is produced by 20th Century Fox for the ABC Television Network and airs on Friday nights at 8 PM Eastern and Pacific and 7 PM Central.

 

Learning Morse Code

SO YOU WANT TO LEARN MORSE CODE

Forget Frustration: Gain Valuable Morse Skills
And Increase Your Amateur-Radio Pleasure

By David G. Finley, N1IRZ
Copyright © 1995, 2000. All Rights Reserved*

---

Note: For complete information on Morse Code training, CW operating, Morse Code history, and more, see the author's book, Morse Code: Breaking the Barrier, published by MFJ Enterprises, Inc..

---

Amateur license restructuring is here. You no longer need to pass a 13- or 20-word-per-minute (wpm) test to gain full operating privileges. Passing a 5-wpm test gets you everything. However, there are good reasons why you should do more than that. Having a level of Morse proficiency that is of real use on the air, meaning that you can copy at 12-13 wpm or more, will add immeasurably to your enjoyment of Amateur Radio.
Such rewarding HF activities as DXing, contesting and QRP operating still rely heavily on CW. Thousands of hams enjoy CW for its own appeal as a relaxing mode different from most other means of communication. And even on VHF and higher frequencies, you'll find that exciting activities such as Moonbounce and weak-signal work still require Morse skills for full participation.
The pressure to reduce the code-speed requirements came from the widespread perception that getting to 13 or 20 wpm is a nearly imsurmountable barrier. That perception is wrong. For little more investment of time than it takes to pass the 5-wpm test, you can gain real, higher-speed code proficiency that will enhance your enjoyment of the hobby.
Most of what you've been told about learning Morse Code is wrong -- dead wrong. Amateur radio operators traditionally have used the slowest, most frustrating, most painful and least effective techniques possible for gaining code proficiency.
You can gain real code proficiency. You can do it in a reasonable amount of time and with a minimum of frustration and pain. In order to do so, you must approach code training from a different perspective and use different techniques from those common among amateurs for the past half century.
It will require work (just as it does to get to 5 wpm). You will have to commit yourself to at least one 15-30 minute training session every day until you reach your goal. You may succeed in a month or in several months; individuals differ greatly. Without this committment, however, you may as well not bother.
So what's new here? By using a code training method devised by the German psychologist Ludwig Koch some 60 years ago, you will progress as quickly as you possibly can, with ample reinforcement and little frustration. By understanding this method and how it builds your code proficiency, you will know why you have to spend time practicing and you'll be able to make a reasonable prediction of how long the total effort will require.
We're going to start on your road to success by throwing some time-honored ham-radio traditions onto the trash heap where they belong. These are:

• Slow (5 wpm) code -- It ought to be illegal to teach anyone code at 5 wpm. Every minute spent toying with 5 wpm code is irrevocably wasted. In addition, as we'll see later, starting with slow code is a virtually-guaranteed path to frustration and quitting. Morse at 5 wpm and Morse at 15 or 20 wpm are completely different critters, and you don't want to waste time on the wrong one.


• Charts, mnemonics, musical cues and other "memory aids" -- These things make you think about what you're doing while trying to copy code. That is deadly to proficient copying.


• Code tapes -- In very short order, and unconsciously, you'll memorize the tape. This will lull you into false confidence in your ability. That false confidence will be quickly shattered when you hear transmitted text that you haven't memorized.


• Copying QSOs off the air -- You don't know the speed of code you find on the bands, and much code on the air is pretty badly sent. All this makes it useless for training purposes. Formal code-practice sessions, such as those on W1AW, are OK, however.

Now that you know what you're not going to do, let's start examining just how you can best gain code proficiency.

The Mechanics: Just what is code training, anyhow?

Go to the shack of a veteran CW operator, or visit the CW station at a club Field Day operation. Watch people copy and send code at 30 to 35 wpm. You'll notice they're pretty relaxed about it; they're not sweating each character as it comes out of the speaker and they're not racking their brains to "figure out" what's being sent. Code has become second nature to them.
That's the key to code proficiency. Copying code must be a thought-free process. When you hear a character, you should know, without thinking, what it is. It should be a reflex. In fact, copying above about 10 wpm can only be done by reflex. Above that speed, thought processes are too slow to succeed.
That's why slow code is a deadly trap, and why traditional amateur methods of code training are so painful and frustrating. Most hams are told to memorize all the characters, then start building their speed. When you do it this way, you build a "lookup table" in your brain, comparing each character you hear with those in the lookup table until you find a match. This process shuts down from overload at about 10 wpm. That's why people experience a "plateau" at 10 wpm, and don't see any progress for weeks or months.
Those who finally get over that "hump" and progress beyond 10 wpm do so because, through constant practice, they have begun to copy code by reflex instead of by thought. They are the lucky ones; this 10 wpm barrier is where many folks give up out of frustration.
Code training, then, should completely bypass the lookup-table phase and begin by building copying proficiency as a reflex. This was recognized in the 1930s by the German psychologist Ludwig Koch, who devised the most efficient method known for Morse training. It's his method, and how you can use it, that we're going to examine in detail.

Morse Training by the Koch Method

Koch's method is a simple, direct way of building reflexes. However, it requires either a computer and Morse software or a personal trainer. That's why it was overlooked for so many years. Now that computers are commonplace, it should become the standard Morse training method. Here's how it works:
You start out by setting up your computer (or a microprocessor-based code tutor machine) to send you Morse characters at 20 wpm and at an overall sending speed of at least 15 wpm. You then get out your paper and pencil and have the machine start sending -- but only two characters. That's right, for your first sessions, you'll only have two choices. Copy on paper for five minutes, then stop the machine and compare what you copied with what the machine sent. Count characters and calculate your percentage of correct copy.
If your score is 90 percent or better -- congratulations! You just learned your first two characters, and, importantly, you learned them at full speed. You'll never have to learn them over again. If you didn't make 90 percent, practice some more. As soon as you can copy the first two characters with 90 percent accuracy, add a third character to your practice. Your accuracy will drop as you work on assimilating the new character, but it will rise again to 90 percent or better. Then you add the fourth character, and so on.
This method does not allow you to build that lookup table in your brain. To copy at full speed, you must build the reflexes in order to achieve 90 percent accuracy. And that's what you're spending your time doing -- building reflexes. Think of it as a parallel to perfecting a tennis swing or mastering a gymnastic routine; you're practicing until you get it right. The Koch method of building code proficiency character-by-character is similar to standard methods of teaching touch typing, another skill that must be reflexive.
This is a very individual method of training -- you progress at your own best speed, and spend only the time required to gain each new character. This means that you will waste no time in reaching your goal.
How much time is required? That will depend on the individual. Koch himself, with hand-picked students, got a group to master 12 wpm code in a mere 13.5 hours. You probably won't match that, but that's much faster than any other method in the psychological literature. You can get an idea of how long it's going to take after you've mastered a few characters. Keep track of your training sessions (some software will do this for you) and calculate your hours-per-character rate (or characters-per-hour if you're really fast!). That, multiplied by the 43 characters in the amateur Morse test, will give a rough idea of how long it's going to take.
While the Koch method is the fastest method of Morse training, speed alone is not its principal advantage. Its principal advantage, and a major difference from other methods, is that it provides you with constant positive reinforcement. This begins with your realization, after mastering the first two characters, that you can copy code at 15 or 20 wpm, because you just did it. After that, each new character mastered is further proof of your progress. Contrast that to slowly trying to build speed up from 4 or 5 wpm, then hitting the plateau at 10 wpm and seeing no progress for a long time. With the Koch method, frustration is at a minimum.
Constant testing is necessary to ensure that you maximize the effectiveness of the Koch method. You must copy on paper, so you can grade yourself. Remember, if you score 90 percent accuracy or better, add another character. If you score any less than that, try again. By constantly testing yourself on continuous copying of at least five minutes, you know exactly how you're doing and exactly when you should add another character. This results in the fastest progress possible.
Naturally, with the Koch method, you'll be copying random groups of characters, rather than words, until you've mastered the entire character set. If your software allows, make these groups of random length, rather than a constant stream of five-character groups. This will ease the transition from random groups to actual words. Yes, there is a difference in the rhythm and "feel" of words and random groups. Once you've become accustomed to copying words, you should start copying sample QSOs, which are the format of the amateur tests. Pay special attention to callsigns, locations, and numerals; these are the types of things that can form questions on the test.
As you proceed toward your goal, remember that some days are just going to be better than others and some characters will take longer to assimilate than others. You know, however, that you can reach your goal because you've already mastered some characters and proven that copying at full speed is something you can do. Keep in mind that what you're doing is building reflexes, and that takes time. The amount of time you require has nothing to do with your intellegence; it's just how long it takes for characters to "sink in" and become part of your reflexes.
So there it is -- your path to real, useful Morse Code proficiency. After you've used this method, and start enjoying the wonderful world of HF radio, try a few CW QSOs. With Morse code developed as a reflex, you may just find that you really enjoy using it on the air. After all, you've gained proficiency without the frustrating ordeal that most hams have endured for decades. See you on the HF bands!
Questions? They're probably answered in Morse Code: Breaking the Barrier, the author's complete book on code training and CW operating, published by MFJ Enterprises, Inc. It's available now for $19.95 plus shipping. Call (800) 647-1800 and ask for stock number MFJ-3400.

---

Bibliography
Finley, D.G., "Reducing the Barrier: Effective Morse code training," Radio Fun, May 1995, pp. 14-15.
Finley, D.G., "Effective Training for High-Speed Morse: An Auditory-Learning Based Model," Morsels, Volume 2, Number 2, Fall/Winter 1996/1997, p. 3.
O'Keeffee, V., "Learning Morse," QST, August 1972, pp. 58-62.
Peak, H., "Koch's Method of Learning Code Reception," Psychololgical Bulletin, XXXIX (1942), p. 495.
Taylor, D.W., "Learning Telegraphic Code," Psychological Bulletin, XL (1943), pp. 461-487.
Taylor, D.W., "The Learning of Radiotelegraphic Code," American Journal of Psychology, LVI (1943), pp. 319-353.

A Personal Note

These ideas may sound very bold and unconventional, but I know they work, because they worked for me.
I fell in love with radio in grade school, but was kept off the air for 30 years because I found traditional code training just too frustrating. During those decades, I tried several times to learn Morse, but every time gave up in frustration and disgust -- my progress was just too slow.
In 1991, I became one of the first 500 people to enter ham radio by way of the no-code Technician license. After becoming bored with repeaters and HTs, I decided to make one last attempt to master the code. Fortunately, I stumbled on information about Koch's method, and found that it was the only thing that would work for me. In 1993, after diligent work at my computer, I took my first code test and passed the 20 wpm exam on the first try.
I became very curious about why Koch's method had worked for me when all else had failed. That sent me to libraries to read the now-aging psychological literature about Morse training. I soon realized that the Koch method achieves its speed through directness; if you want to copy reflexively at 15 or 20 wpm, then just start building those reflexes from the start. I also realized that it provides much more positive feedback than any other method, so you can keep your motivation and a "can-do" attitude throughout your training.
This was knowledge I wanted to share with others, so I began giving lectures to amateur groups on the topic. I quickly found that, after my lectures, "old-timers" would come up and tell me that my ideas on the need for reflexes were absolutely right. Many said that the Koch method sounded similar to the intense code training they had received in military schools.
Probably the only reason Koch's method didn't become standard back in 1936 when he first published it was that the average individual had no way of implementing it. The personal computer has changed that, and the time has come for the Koch method to replace all others. I hope that the speed and positive-reinforcement aspects of the Koch method can cut down the code barrier to a much less formidable size.
Prior to the FCC's restructuring of amateur licensing, the percentage of U.S. hams who had passed at least a 13-wpm code test had long since become a minority and was dropping steadily. This "code barrier" was causing an unhealthy stagnation in the amateur ranks. Many readers of Morse Code: Breaking the Barrier wrote to tell me how the Koch Method had helped them overcome many years of frustration and upgrade their licenses. It was gratifying to hear of these success stories. Now, people can use the Koch Method, not because they have to pass a test, but because they want to increase their amateur-radio pleasure.
I cannot overemphasize my dislike -- even hatred -- for 5 wpm code. As I've outlined above, it is highly counterproductive to gaining proficiency at higher speeds. In order to go from 5 to 13 wpm, you have to start over again, even though you may not realize that while you're doing it. The worst aspect is that many people pass a 5-wpm test, then never go beyond that. Why waste your time learning a skill (slow code) that has no relevance to real (13+ wpm) code proficiency and is of almost no use on the air?
Finally, as I was using the Koch method and building my code skills, I intended to forget the code as soon as I passed the test. My 30 years of frustration had built up a bitterness about CW. However, about two weeks after getting my first HF rig on the air, I looked at my straight key and decided to try a CW QSO "just so I can say I did it." Guess what? I enjoyed it. My second CW QSO was with a DX station, and I was hooked. With the encouragement of a CW Elmer, I continued to enjoy the bottom parts of the bands, and now my microphone isn't even plugged into the rig!
If the Koch method could overcome three decades of bitterness and turn me into an enthusiastic CW operator, I think it's certainly worth a try on your part. Have a go at it. Maybe I'll find you on the CW bands and we can have a ragchew.
Best of luck, and 73.
Dave Finley, N1IRZ

---

* This article is copyrighted by the author. Permission is hereby granted to transmit and distribute it by electronic means and to store it on electronic bulletin board systems, and for individuals to download and print copies for noncommercial, personal use, provided that the article is transmitted, stored and printed unaltered and in whole, including this notice. For any other use, written permission from the author must be obtained.

Ride the Wave

On the Air: Ride the Wave in the 2013 ARRL International DX CW Contest

Eric Hall, K9GY, of Lansing, Illinois, headed down to Nicaragua for the 2008 running of the ARRL International DX CW Contest. [Photo courtesy of Eric Hall, K9GY]

CW DXing and contesting take center stage the weekend of February 16-17, as the 2013 ARRL International DX CW Contest takes to the airwaves. If you've never operated the CW contest, now is the time to start. "You can work a lot of DX with 100 W and a simple dipole or vertical antenna," explained ARRL Contest Branch Manager Sean Kutzko, KX9X. "Some stations -- with some perseverance -- have worked more than 100 DXCC entities during the contest period. And who knows? You just might achieve DXCC during the contest." Read more here.

The Case for CW: By James Wades, WA8SIW

The Case for CW

For nearly two decades now, a vocal group of radio amateurs have pushed for the elimination of telegraphy
exams as a prerequisite to Amateur Radio Licensing. Many of these individuals have formed opinions about
radiotelegraphy based on little or no knowledge of its history or applications.

With the elimination of the FCC Element One telegraphy exam for all classes of Amateur Radio License, it is
hoped that individuals will now take a more dispassionate, logical look at radiotelegraphy, without concerns
regarding possible hidden agendas or other politics related to the regulatory process.

It is the purpose of this article to provide an opportunity for new radio amateurs, and others, to gain some insight into the advantages of radiotelegraphy. Ideally, the reader will walk away with a few myths dispelled and perhaps some valuable insights into the motivations of those individuals who continue to strongly support and promote radiotelegraphy despite the development of many new automated digital techniques. Most importantly, it is hoped this article will encourage new radio amateurs to learn and use “CW.”

The beginning…Morse Telegraphy

The fountainhead of all modern communications is the electromagnetic telegraph. The telegraph was a true
revolution in telecommunications. It standardized time, made safe rail transportation possible, and revolutionized industry, war, and commerce. It transformed local stock and commodities exchanges into worldwide engines of capitalism and economic progress. The telegraph supported the development of other modern infrastructure, from pipeline storage and distribution systems to modern urban fire departments.

In comparison to the telegraph, its modern successor, the Internet, is simply a refinement. It accomplishes the
same tasks more efficiently, but fundamentally, it still performs the same tasks as the telegraph. The real revolution occurred nearly 150 years earlier.

It is interesting to note that the electromagnetic telegraph saw commercial use well into the mid 1980s, at which time it remained in use in railroad, brokerage, and similar business applications. Sadly, modern historians tend to overlook the history of the telegraph, resulting in the general perception that it disappeared with the development of the telephone. Ironically, even the Bell System utilized telegraphy to coordinate the repair and maintenance of long-distance telephone tool circuits, radio and television programming distribution networks, and the like. Telegraph systems were typically less expensive to utilize, easier to maintain, and telegraph carriers could be composited to operate simultaneously on voice circuits.

There must be a reason this very basic technology survived well into the late 20th Century, and it had everything to do with efficiency!

Radiotelegraphy:

The development of wireless communications in the late 19th and early 20th century brought the application of telegraphy to radio communications. For the first two decades of the 20th Century, voice communications was difficult to accomplish. The reasons for this are somewhat technical, however, a brief explanation is in order.

Early radio transmitters produced a damped oscillation caused by discharging a high voltage spark across a
parallel resonant circuit, which was then coupled to an antenna system. The process was somewhat like ringing a bell. Each high voltage discharge across the gap would excite the L-C circuit, which would then “ring” at its resonant frequency with a decreasing amplitude (decrement) over time until again excited by the succeeding high voltage spark discharge. The “damping” effect associated with early spark transmitters made it impractical to modulate these early RF carriers.

In an attempt to overcome the deficiencies of early spark technology, continuous wave transmitters were
developed, which produced undamped oscillations. The earliest versions produced high-power, long wave signals utilizing alternator and arc technology. While this improved efficiency through better energy transfer and narrower bandwidth, such systems were also difficult to modulate due to the high power levels employed.

Only with the development of reliable, stable vacuum tube transmitters in the late ‘teens and early twenties did it become possible to efficiently transmit voice communications. Low-level circuits could be modulated at manageable levels, and the modulated signal could then be amplified to achieve the needed power output and coverage area required of the radio transmitter. This gave birth to a wide range of technological applications such as commercial radio broadcasting, police radio dispatching, long-distance radiotelephony, and so forth.

It is interesting to note that utilizing “CW” as a description for radiotelegraphy is somewhat of a misnomer dating from this early period. The term actually arose to differentiate a continuous wave radiotelegraph transmitter from its predecessor spark technology. In a sense, all modern radio and wireless devices utilize continuous wave, from 1920s radio transmitter to the latest cellular telephone or Wireless Internet device!
Why CW?

So why did radiotelegraphy, or “CW” remain in widespread use for so many years after the development of voice communications? Why is it still utilized today for some applications? Why do so many radio amateurs place so much emphasis on what often seems to the uninitiated “just another mode of communications.” The answers are many!

Efficiency:

A competent radiotelegraph operator can transfer information at a speed of perhaps 40 to 60 words per minute. The average person on the street talks at speeds ranging from 200 to 300 words minute. Yet, the radiotelegraph operator will often clear message traffic at speeds ranging from two to four times faster than a voice operator handling identical traffic. It seems paradoxical doesn’t it? The reasons for this are surprisingly straightforward.

First, voice methods encourage unnecessary language. The convenience of voice methods, and their similarity to daily, casual discussion, guarantees that a radio operator will trend toward adding unnecessary phrases, comments, and clarifications. The perception that plenty of time is available on the radio circuit due to the immediacy and convenience of voice communications encourages operators to “think aloud,” and engage in spontaneous, informal communications and problem solving.

Second, even when voice methods are managed through strict discipline and training, such as on military radio circuits, problems arise. The letter “B” sounds like “D,” which in turn sounds like “E,” and “C” and so on. Therefore, it becomes necessary to institute phonetic alphabets and similar procedural phrases to maintain accuracy. When such practices are bypassed in favor of speed, receiving operators tend to make assumptions about the meaning and nature of words, which may only have been partially perceived. For example, a public health message in reference to “pneumonic plague” is transcribed as “bubonic plague.” “Ethyl” becomes “Methyl” within a complex chemical name, and so on.

Radiotelegraph operators, on the other hand, trend toward eliminating unnecessary language. The fact that the individual operator naturally “thinks” faster than he/she can send constantly encourages the elimination of any unnecessary word, phrase of procedure. Furthermore, phonetic alphabets are unnecessary due to the fact that every sound pattern for the various Morse characters is absolutely unique. For example, complex chemical name containing “Methyl” or “Ethyl” are more likely to be transcribed accurately.

It is not uncommon to hear one operator transmitting a quantity of messages to a receiving station, only to hear a single “dit” as acknowledgement of receipt between the messages. This is an example of the trend toward limited language inherent in CW methods. In this example, both operators intuitively understand that the “dit” indicates acknowledgement.

Both a language and a system:

Radiotelegraphy is unique in the world of radio communications because, in the hands of an experienced
operator, it becomes a hybrid between a communications method and a natural language. As such, it combines the best benefits of a digital radio system with the intuitive nature of language. The skilled operator thinks in Morse, he processes the language of Morse “in his mind” in the same way he responds to voice communications, yet, when it comes time to transcribe information, he can do so with greater accuracy due to the “digital” nature of the mode. The operator can seamlessly move from a basic discussion or tactical problem solving mode to a record message traffic exchange with ease.

This is a difficult concept for the beginning radio operator or the uninitiated to understand, particularly when his experience with Morse is limited to 5 or 10 words per minute and before he has successfully made the transition to the point where he can process Morse in the same manner he does the spoken word. As in the case of learning a foreign language, it takes time and effort to develop the skills necessary to utilize Morse as a language. However, once one does, an entire new world of communications efficiency opens to him.
Technical benefits:

We have all heard the tired old explanation that a simple CW transmitter can be easily constructed from just a few parts. This is true, but few today are willing or qualified to do so. However, CW offers a variety of benefits, which make it ideal for basic emergency communications.

First, a 10 to 20 watt CW transceiver offers the same level of efficiency as a 50 to 100 watt voice (SSB) transmitter. This has everything to do with bandwidth. Whereas a CW signal occupies perhaps 200 Hertz of spectrum, voice and some data transmissions occupy up to 4000 Hertz of spectrum. So why is this important?

In a disaster situation, one can operate a CW transmitter and communicate reliably in an net situation for days utilizing little more than a couple of lantern batteries or gel cells as a source of primary power due to the low RF power output required for reliable communications. In order to accomplish the same level of reliability, a voice transmitter requires a generator and fuel for extended operation. Those that suggest this is a minimal obstacle have never tried to locate fuel in a disaster area, nor have they tried to compete with police departments, fire departments, state and federal agencies, hospitals, and other critical services for any fuel that remains available.

Drop a CW operator into a disaster area with a simple man-pack radio, a couple hunks of wire, a solar panel and a few gel-cells, and one has a reliable communications system, which can operate indefinitely. Unlike those operators employing digital modes, he will not need to worry about powering a laptop computer, PDA, and similar peripheral devices, all of which consume additional power. Furthermore, many computers and electronic devices are easily damaged by environmental factors, such as rain, vibration, and so forth. A simple CW unit can be kept nice and dry, with only a simple key exposed to the elements.
Multiplexing:

Set up a radio network with multiple stations, and one quickly discovers that occupied bandwidth is an issue for other reasons. A CW net can efficiently dispatch multiple stations off-frequency to simultaneously exchange message traffic with minimal impact on overall spectrum use. Unfortunately, voice nets find that the same technique creates real problems. Send two voice operators to simultaneously exchange messages on adjacent frequencies, and one quickly discovers that a single net operation is now consuming a minimum 10.5 KHz! Toss in a couple speech processors or inappropriately adjusted transceivers, and that figure expands yet further.

The fact is, a single CW net can send several traffic exchanges off the main net frequency and still have less
impact on adjacent users than a single voice net. 

Q-Signals

Q-Signals, procedural signs (prosigns), and the like offer little advantage on voice, yet they do wonders on CW. A net control operator may say WB8SIW QNY K8SIW d 3 SEOC. Both stations respond with a simple “dit” and they are now 3 KHz lower exchanging a message for the State Emergency Operations Center.

Q-signals, Z-signals, and similar abbreviations and prosigns convey tremendous amounts of information with
minimal time and effort. Unfortunately, they do not translate well to voice operation for the reasons mentioned above.

Language barriers:

Not only do Q-signals and prosigns translate universally via CW, a qualified CW operator can transmit and
receive messages written in many foreign languages without knowledge of the language itself. The International Morse Code is quite universal and facilitates message exchange despite barriers that would be insurmountable using voice methods.
Basic level of security.

While it is true that some computer programs can detect and decode CW, they often respond poorly to hand-keyed Morse. Additionally, Morse nets are difficult to locate unless one has some prior understanding of net times, frequencies, and procedures. A typical media outlet is not likely to comprehend “QNY D 3” or QMN QNA SEOC.” Rather, they will seek out the voice nets, which are easily understood and followed with a minimum of effort. For situations in which a degree of confidentiality is required, CW is an excellent choice.

CW offers an additional advantage. Whereas voice nets are often inundated with spontaneous, untrained
volunteers in time of emergency, CW nets often continue to operate unaffected. While the unfortunate voice
operators are contending with inexperienced individuals, poor procedures, and unnecessary language, the CW net keeps right on moving traffic, often at peak efficiency.

Analogs:

Many anti-CW operators point to the fact that the Department of Defense and maritime services no longer utilize CW. This is not entirely true. US Army Special Forces personnel are still trained in Morse, and many of the world’s militaries still utilize it, albeit to a lesser extent than in years past. In fact, the military and maritime services have not so much abandoned CW as they have abandoned the High Frequency infrastructure, which once required its use. Global satellite platforms now support much of our military and maritime communications. As such systems are immune to selective fading, geomagnetic storms, and similar propagation anomalies, there is little need for CW.

Unfortunately, Amateur Radio does not have access to a stable, geosynchronous satellite system. Instead,
Amateur Radio continues to rely on High Frequency spectrum for a much of its statewide, regional, and
international communications. Such spectrum continues to prove problematic for high-speed digital modes and voice communications due to occasional solar flares and the like.

CW does offer tremendous advantages under poor propagation conditions. This fact, combined with the
advantages noted above continues to render CW of value for both routine and emergency communications functions via Amateur Radio.
Digital Modes:

Today, radio amateurs have access to numerous digital modes, some of which occupy limited bandwidth and
offer surprising reliability. However, problems arise here as well. Whereas SSB and CW are common denominators, readily available on nearly all High Frequency transceivers, digital modes are not. Visit a random sample of 100 digital equipped operators, and one quickly discovers that no common system is universally available. Unlike an army signal battalion, which has universal standards enforced to insure interoperability and uniformity, no such standards exist within Amateur Radio. One will encounter different terminal software, different TNC command structures, and a variety of different digital capabilities.

In reality, voice and CW are the only universally available common denominators within Amateur Radio. A
qualified operator can walk up to any HF transceiver, plug in a microphone or key, and communicate instantly on a radio circuit, regardless of the age or type of HF radio transceiver.

It is interesting to note that many digital modes are also cumbersome in a net configuration. Whereas break-in CW offers instant access to a radio net for high-priority traffic, this feature is difficult to implement on a digital radio net. As stated earlier, the fact that CW combines both language skills and many features of digital communications allows a single net control station to quickly check individuals in and out of nets, provide rapid instructions, and yet clear traffic accurately. This is one reason why many emergency drills have revealed that CW nets are consistently more efficient than PSK-31, MFSK-63, and similar modes.
Is Amateur Radio needed?

Some will argue that modern cellular telephone, Internet, and satellite infrastructures are sufficiently developed to the point where High Frequency communications is no longer needed. The argument is somewhat inferential; if Amateur Radio HF resources aren’t needed, then by extension CW is not needed. As such, any imperative to learn or develop CW proficiency is moot.

The devastation of Hurricane Katrina revealed the fragility of our nation’s common carrier infrastructure.
Ultimately, satellite telephones provided significant service for many government agencies. However, satellite
telephones have some significant disadvantages, not the least of which is cost. The average call via satellite
telephone can range from 1 to 3 dollars per minute, a steep price for many non-profit relief organizations. Satellite telephones are also problematic when utilized inside buildings.

Most modern telecommunications networks are extremely reliant on the electrical power grid. The distributed nature of networks means many nodes, control points, and RF access points are backed-up only by battery power. This is sufficient for 99 percent of power outages, which may last only hours or days. However, it is extremely insufficient for long-term outages. The fact is, any major disruption to the US electrical power grid due to natural disaster, technological disaster, or coordinated terrorist attack is likely to disrupt extensive segments of most modern networks. Yet, a HF equipped CW operator will be able to efficiently transfer basic text information indefinitely through the use of renewable energy and similar techniques.

Sadly, both the general public and the US government have been lulled into a level of complacency. Our
infrastructure is the best in the world and it is so ubiquitous and reliable, most individuals are incapable of imagining a situation, which may render large portions of it inoperative. Yet, such hazards do exist and do occur from time-to time. Non-profit and decentralized:

There remains a place in society for a non-profit, decentralized radio service that is neither dependent on
extensive infrastructure nor controlled by any particular government or business organization. Amateur Radio offers independence, survivability, and remains an unprecedented disaster communications resource.

CW in general, and CW nets in particular offer great reliability and tremendous efficiency for both casual use and emergency communications. The wise radio amateur will want to invest the time and effort necessary to become fluent in the language of radiotelegraphy. It is not only fun, but incredibly useful as well.

Author: James Wades
-30

COPYRIGHT 2006: James Wades, WA8SIW, for the Michigan Net, QMN and National Radio Emergency Net. This article may be reproduced and distributed provided credit is given to the author and the Michigan Net, QMN and National Radio Emergency Net.

Tiny Japanese satellite beams Morse code from space

An ultra-small Japanese satellite is being spotted from the ground, thanks to a set of lights that flash brightly in Morse code.
The novel cubesat, known as FITSAT-1, has been orbiting Earth since early October of last year. Though it tips the scales at less than 3 pounds, FITSAT-1's powerful light-emitting diodes (LEDs) make it a compelling target for skywatchers.

"As long as the LEDs are active, then you will be able to see it using binoculars," veteran Canadian satellite watcher Kevin Fetter told SPACE.com

An artificial star

FITSAT-1 was built at Japan’s Fukuoka Institute of Technology. The tiny spacecraft is also called Niwaka, after "Hakata Niwaka," an improvised performance of traditional Japanese comedies with masks.

The spacecraft was carried up to the International Space Station on Japan's unmanned H-2 Transfer Vehicle-3 in July 2012, then deployed from the orbiting lab in October by Japanese astronaut Aki Hoshide. [Photos: Tiny Satellites Launch from Space Station]

To cast FITSAT-1 and two other cubesats off into space, Hoshide used the Small Satellite Orbital Deployer that was attached to the Japanese Kibo module’s robotic arm.

FITSAT-1’s orbit is taking it between 51.6 degrees south latitude and 51.6 degrees north latitude. The cubesat contains a neodymium magnet that forces it to point always to magnetic north, like a compass.

Working well

A successful test of FITSAT-1's LED optical beacon took place over Japan on December 11.

"All functions of FITSAT-1 are sound and work very well," said Takushi Tanaka, leader of the project at the Fukuoka Institute of Technology.

Images of the blinking FITSAT-1 have been taken in Japan, Germany and the United States, Tanaka told SPACE.com. The tiny spacecraft has succeeded in its primary goal of investigating optical communication techniques for satellites, he said.

For Niwaka to be visible, the night sky must be dark enough that a ground observer can see the Milky Way, Tanaka has said. Also, many people are unaware that they have succeeded in photographing the fleeting, flashing light until they've magnified and closely inspected their images.

The FITSAT-1 team attempts to accommodate skywatchers who want to catch a glimpse of the little satellite.

"As observing the light is not so easy, we will flash the light on requests. If you have a plan for observing the light, please advise me [of] the time and date with your latitude and longitude," Tanaka wrote on the FITSAT-1 website. "Now we have a plan for flashing at 09:25:00 on 9th Feb. for the west coast of USA."

Amateurs of space

Tanaka is no aerospace specialist. He's a professor of computer science and engineering, with research interests that specialize in artificial intelligence, language processing, logic programming and robot soccer, in addition to cubesats.

The backgrounds of Tanaka and his team make Niwaka pretty special, the researcher said

"Most cubesats are developed by some kind of space department of a university, while FITSAT-1 is developed by amateurs of space." Tanaka said.

"Though I do not have much knowledge about space," he added, "I am a ham radio [devotee] since the age of the vacuum tube."

New HAM's

As most know, we held testing at the picnic and had 3 folks become new Tech's. This past Saturday, the 2nd of Febuary we also had a session. That gave us 3 new Techs as well.

All are listed below.

KK4OFX Rubin Sepulueda
KK4OFY Phillip Maffett
KK4OFZ Neftali Marrero
KK4OAM Bill Carson
KK4OAN Thomas Morrison
KK4OAO Bill Johnson

Make sure to say hello if you hear them.