My reading of the message is that Morse code is authorized NOT
mandated. It seems a reasonable decision for a organization often
dependent on volunteers, if they want to use it.. let'em. MARS will
continue to use MT63, ALE, PSK, and many other digital modes.
Andy K3UK
--- In
Amen, and hopefully someday soon, come into the 21st century by instituting
digital voice, as well as the other digital modes currently used.
Pax,
Jim Dear
W5LOG
NNN0RKQ
Andrew O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My
reading of the message is that Morse code is
David,
If you feel so inferior because you lack CW skills perhaps you should
make the effort and develop them.
Mocking someone for having something you do not is so very lame.
73,
Charlie
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, David Little [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Isn't this just precious. .
I have to concur with Charlie. I did not see anything negative in the
MARS reappraisal of CW. In fact, it seemed bizarre and counterproductive
to me when they decided to not only drop CW, but to prohibit its use on
MARS channels some years back!
I do agree that there are almost no new hams who
On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 15:07:17 -0400, Paul L Schmidt, K9PS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Andrew O'Brien wrote:
My reading of the message is that Morse code is authorized NOT
mandated. It seems a reasonable decision for a organization often
dependent on volunteers, if they want to use it.. let'em.
UK members of this list are already constructing pigeon lofts.
Simon Brown, HB9DRV
--
From: Jack Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I guess it's time for us all to learn how to build spark gap
transmitters, just in case.
Andrew O'Brien wrote:
My reading of the message is that Morse code is authorized NOT
mandated. It seems a reasonable decision for a organization often
dependent on volunteers, if they want to use it.. let'em. MARS will
continue to use MT63, ALE, PSK, and many other digital modes.
Andy
Very good Simon.
Years ago we had racing pigeon's.
To bad I still don't have the loft.
Have a good day.
George K1OLS
PS I thing your program is great.
UK members of this list are already constructing pigeon lofts.
Simon Brown, HB9DRV
--
Even when I have nothing against DV, people have to recognize that it is
not a QRP activity. I see quite a few signals I can never decode because
they do not exceed the threshold. FDMDV is not PSK31.
73,
Jose, CO2JA
---
Jim Dear wrote:
Amen, and hopefully someday soon, come into the 21st
Do not laugh. It could come to pass that we (mankind) will need to
reinvent spark gap.Who knows what evil lurks in the minds
Chuck AA5J
At 02:39 PM 6/1/2008, Jack Hamilton wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 15:07:17 -0400, Paul L Schmidt, K9PS
mailto:k9ps%40arrl.net[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Could be true Chuck. I guess to take it just a step further, we need
to ask Simon to start looking into writing another mode into his
great software to decode/operate the hammers to hit the trees like
the old natives in the jungle do.
Oops, somebody would have to go cut down trees and the
Go to Africa and learn the drums. They work too and are effective
over a large area.
At 03:28 PM 6/1/2008, you wrote:
Could be true Chuck. I guess to take it just a step further, we need
to ask Simon to start looking into writing another mode into his
great software to decode/operate the
Have a look at this site:
http://www.hotamateurprograms.com/downloads.htm
73 Ted G0TED
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With the non-paid version of Multipsk you only have 5 minutes to
test
the enhanced CW mode. I admit that I did not try a very
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, REAL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have started using a new program and It doesnt like me very much. I
am trying to learn code and have started using this CWget. Can anyone
help?
CW Get is not helpful for learning code.
I learned CW by doing three
Hello,
CWget can be a great aid in learning the code if you use it as a backup. Find
somebody on the air doing slow speed code or try to hook up with a patient ham
like Andy then tune in with CWget and while it is decoding you decode on paper.
That way if you miss anything CWget will help you
Hello again
I reread your post and you said the CWget program doesn't like you.
I assume you are having trouble with the program (if not forgive the post) so
try clicking with the mouse on the spikes in the spectrum. Then it will decode
the sender.
My rig has a 700 hz tone so when I tune the
You might also like http://pocketdigi.sourceforge.net -- download the
x86 version for a PC or the Arm version for a Windows PDA (Pocket PC).
It is the same CW decoder as in gMFSK for Linux, and fldigi (though
fldigi might be a later revision), originally based on the VE7IT engine,
and the
To decode CW, the program that I found that is the most powerful is
called CWGet. If you do a google search for CWGet, you'll find it.
There are many settings for it in RX mode which make it very good at
copying cw and it is shareware.
73--Scott
WY3X
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Andrew
MultiPSK does CW
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your
Except for a very expensive CW software reader program ($60), I have not
found a better CW reader software than Multipsk.
73,
Rick, KV9U
jhaynesatalumni wrote:
MultiPSK does CW
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW
Having tried several programs, I now use an ancient Pakratt PK-232
which I picked up on eBay for virtually nothing. The software has got
to be at least twenty years old and running on a CPU with less power
than most modern pocket calculators, but it still digs out signals
that the others miss
WinWarbler will provide more modern software support for your PK232,
Martin -- macros, logging, and an interface to the rest of the DXLab
Suite. If you're also interested in RTTY, WinWarbler will run your
PK232 and the MMTTY engine in parallel, yielding panoramic tuning
and diversity decoding.
Try MULTIPSK Version 3.13
http://f6cte.free.fr/
De LA5VNA
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Migliari Adriano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Can Somebody provide me with web site address from where i can
download a
FREE
CW (Transmit and Receive) program??
I tried MIXW and Hamscope
Are you copying in your head, or writing it down?
What I found really helped me make the switch to copying in my head
was to let a digital unit copy along with me. Normally I wouldn't
look at the screen but if I missed something important, I could look
up at it so that I could carry on an
Let me echo that if you want to copy fast and conversationally, throw
away your pencil and paper.
On most traffic nets, folks only send about 25 wpm since that is all
you can reliably copy down on paper. I've found most slow down to
whatever speed you send at since it assumed that is also what
OK John, I will look for you.
Andy K3UK
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I've started to do the same thing, and have been lurking around
3700-3715 nites getting my speed up
usually around 0300-0400Z
John
- Original Message -
--- Patrick Lindecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Martin,
8 bit or 16 bits is not the problem, only the
algorihm used or the hardware
processing makes the difference. One of the problem
is the automatic
determination of the speed. Did the old Pakrat
determines the CW speed
itself
Hello Jose, Joe and Rick,
Thanks for all information. I'm not sure that the way to decode with a
simple threshold and simple way to determine speed can give good results...
A ham told me that it compares an external decoder with a modern decoder
(no publicity), regarding the S/N level. He
The practice of referring to problems as issues began during the
early minicomputer days, when disk drives were both small and
expensive. The cumulative saving of two bytes per instance was
significant, given the rate of occurence.
Note that disk drive manufacturers continued to use problems,
I have an old PakRatt which seems to do a far better job than any
modern CW decoder I have tried - its a bit picky about its input
level but once you have that set that correctly it seems to cope with
some pretty poor morse... That is software which must be close to
twenty years old and
martinbradford2001 wrote:
I have an old PakRatt which seems to do a far better job than any
modern CW decoder I have tried - its a bit picky about its input
level but once you have that set that correctly it seems to cope with
some pretty poor morse... That is software which must be close to
it is better.
73
Patrick
- Original Message -
From: martinbradford2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:05 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: CW decoding comparison (MPSK, Mixw, Hamscope)
I have an old PakRatt which seems to do a far better
groups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Joe
IveySent: Monday, October 10, 2005 17:02To:
digitalradio@yahoogroups.comSubject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: CW
decoding comparison (MPSK, Mixw, Hamscope)
Patrick,
I have used the Pakrat software and you can have
the receive
Rick,
Only tried it a couple of times. Don't guess I gave
it a fair shake.
Joe
W4JSI
- Original Message -
From:
Rick Williams
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 5:27
PM
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: CW
decoding comparison
34 matches
Mail list logo
