So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing) tnx Mike / W5JR Milton GA
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote:
So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question. Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to. I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
But its the rules! 73 Jim W7RY § 97.119 Station identification. (a) Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting channel at the end of each communication, and at least every 10 minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making the source of the transmissions from the station known to those receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified communications or signals, or transmit as the station call sign, any call sign not authorized to the station. (b) The call sign must be transmitted with an emission authorized for the transmitting channel in one of the following ways: (1) By a CW emission. When keyed by an automatic device used only for identification,the speed must not exceed 20 words per minute; On 12/15/2013 1:30 PM, Geoff wrote:
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote:
So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
Yes, Jim, for Part 97, but other Parts are higher. tnx Mike / W5JR Milton GA
On Dec 15, 2013, at 4:50 PM, Jim W7RY <w7ry@centurytel.net> wrote:
But its the rules! 73 Jim W7RY
§ 97.119 Station identification. (a) Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting channel at the end of each communication, and at least every 10 minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making the source of the transmissions from the station known to those receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified communications or signals, or transmit as the station call sign, any call sign not authorized to the station. (b) The call sign must be transmitted with an emission authorized for the transmitting channel in one of the following ways: (1) By a CW emission. When keyed by an automatic device used only for identification, the speed must not exceed 20 words per minute;
On 12/15/2013 1:30 PM, Geoff wrote:
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote: So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
It is limited by this line in the app_rpt.c file and by FCC rules morsespeed = retrieve_astcfgint(myrpt, myrpt->p.morse, "speed", 5, 20, 20); So... If the FCC rules don't apply to you (maybe you don't use a RF transmitter) then you could change the line to something like this morsespeed = retrieve_astcfgint(myrpt, myrpt->p.morse, "speed", 5, 50, 20); Then 50 wpm would be the upper limit. On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote:
So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
On 12/15/2013 5:04 PM, Chuck Henderson wrote:
It is limited by this line in the app_rpt.c file and by FCC rules
Thanks, Chuck...was wondering when someone would bring up the FCC regs for the US (acknowledging that other jurisdictions may be different) In the US, under FCC jurisdiction, in the section dealing with station ID, part 97.119 (from the FCC website): --- (a) Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting channel at the end of each communication, and at least every 10 minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making the source of the transmissions from the station known to those receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified communications or signals, or transmit as the station call sign, any call sign not authorized to the station. (b) The call sign must be transmitted with an emission authorized for the transmitting channel in one of the following ways: (1) By a CW emission. When keyed by an automatic device used only for identification, the speed must not exceed 20 words per minute; --- I suppose you could change it for a hub node...but, mistakes happen in configuration (else why would this list exist to plow the same furrow over and over...???) and SOMEHOW an RF emitter connected to that hub would (will?) end up sending CW IDs at 50 WPM. Why tempt fate? I'm sure one could parse it to mean that asterisk is not only used for identification to attempt to get around the 20 WPM speed limit. But, to be honest, I'm not interested in being the test case on a NAL cite based on parsing the rules that finely. Got better things to do with the money. 20 is plenty fast enough to keep the majority of folks out of the weeds, I think. BB WB0YLE
True for Part 97 but not other services (as you mention). Also, a non-RF implementation might use "locations" rather than FCC issued callsigns although a voice "ID" is probably more useful for such non ham implementations. tnx Mike / W5JR Milton GA
On Dec 15, 2013, at 5:36 PM, "Bryan D. Boyle" <bdboyle@bdboyle.com> wrote:
On 12/15/2013 5:04 PM, Chuck Henderson wrote: It is limited by this line in the app_rpt.c file and by FCC rules
Thanks, Chuck...was wondering when someone would bring up the FCC regs for the US (acknowledging that other jurisdictions may be different)
In the US, under FCC jurisdiction, in the section dealing with station ID, part 97.119 (from the FCC website): --- (a) Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting channel at the end of each communication, and at least every 10 minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making the source of the transmissions from the station known to those receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified communications or signals, or transmit as the station call sign, any call sign not authorized to the station.
(b) The call sign must be transmitted with an emission authorized for the transmitting channel in one of the following ways:
(1) By a CW emission. When keyed by an automatic device used only for identification, the speed must not exceed 20 words per minute; ---
I suppose you could change it for a hub node...but, mistakes happen in configuration (else why would this list exist to plow the same furrow over and over...???) and SOMEHOW an RF emitter connected to that hub would (will?) end up sending CW IDs at 50 WPM. Why tempt fate?
I'm sure one could parse it to mean that asterisk is not only used for identification to attempt to get around the 20 WPM speed limit. But, to be honest, I'm not interested in being the test case on a NAL cite based on parsing the rules that finely. Got better things to do with the money.
20 is plenty fast enough to keep the majority of folks out of the weeds, I think.
BB WB0YLE
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
Thanks Chuck. tnx Mike / W5JR Milton GA
On Dec 15, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Chuck Henderson <rpt2@chuck.midlandsnetworking.com> wrote:
It is limited by this line in the app_rpt.c file and by FCC rules
morsespeed = retrieve_astcfgint(myrpt, myrpt->p.morse, "speed", 5, 20, 20);
So... If the FCC rules don't apply to you (maybe you don't use a RF transmitter) then you could change the line to something like this
morsespeed = retrieve_astcfgint(myrpt, myrpt->p.morse, "speed", 5, 50, 20);
Then 50 wpm would be the upper limit.
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote: So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
Chuck, this worked and I've made the changes to CW speed where appropriate. Thanks for your help. tnx Mike / W5JR Milton GA
On Dec 15, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Chuck Henderson <rpt2@chuck.midlandsnetworking.com> wrote:
It is limited by this line in the app_rpt.c file and by FCC rules
morsespeed = retrieve_astcfgint(myrpt, myrpt->p.morse, "speed", 5, 20, 20);
So... If the FCC rules don't apply to you (maybe you don't use a RF transmitter) then you could change the line to something like this
morsespeed = retrieve_astcfgint(myrpt, myrpt->p.morse, "speed", 5, 50, 20);
Then 50 wpm would be the upper limit.
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote: So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
There shouldn’t be, but there is. I forget where it is, but 20 WPM is the max for legal automatic ID requirements, unless it’s changed. On Dec 15, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote:
So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
On 12/15/2013 04:41 PM, Buddy Brannan wrote:
There shouldn’t be, but there is. I forget where it is, but 20 WPM is the max for legal automatic ID requirements, unless it’s changed. On Dec 15, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> wrote:
Right. SOMEONE caught that I said "shouldn't". Doesn't mean that there isn't. I know what the law and the FCC regs says... whether or not there *should* be, it should be understood that my *opinion* is that it shouldn't.
if you believe there shouldn't be...anyone is free to write a Motion for an NPRM (in the US) to the commission asking them to change the reg, submit to public comment if there is a good reason to do so, and implement the change. Be prepared to fully describe why you feel, technically, the current reg is wrong/out of date/etc and why your change would benefit and support the 'public interest, convenience, and necessity'. Without getting into arcana, it should be remembered that the FCC doesn't grant us licenses on their own authority, but on behalf of the People (theiretically). Hint, based on experience, claiming other services have requirements that are permissive, so it should be applied to part 97, won't get a hearing. -- Bryan Sent from my iPhone 5...small keyboard, big fingers...please forgive misspellings...
On Dec 16, 2013, at 13:43, Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/15/2013 04:41 PM, Buddy Brannan wrote: There shouldn’t be, but there is. I forget where it is, but 20 WPM is the max for legal automatic ID requirements, unless it’s changed. On Dec 15, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> wrote:
Right. SOMEONE caught that I said "shouldn't". Doesn't mean that there isn't. I know what the law and the FCC regs says... whether or not there *should* be, it should be understood that my *opinion* is that it shouldn't.
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
Hey guys, lets keep it on topic. We’re about app_rpt here not FCC rules. -- Tim :wq On Dec 16, 2013, at 11:11 AM, Bryan D. Boyle <bdboyle@bdboyle.com> wrote:
if you believe there shouldn't be...anyone is free to write a Motion for an NPRM (in the US) to the commission asking them to change the reg, submit to public comment if there is a good reason to do so, and implement the change.
Be prepared to fully describe why you feel, technically, the current reg is wrong/out of date/etc and why your change would benefit and support the 'public interest, convenience, and necessity'.
Without getting into arcana, it should be remembered that the FCC doesn't grant us licenses on their own authority, but on behalf of the People (theiretically).
Hint, based on experience, claiming other services have requirements that are permissive, so it should be applied to part 97, won't get a hearing. -- Bryan Sent from my iPhone 5...small keyboard, big fingers...please forgive misspellings...
On Dec 16, 2013, at 13:43, Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/15/2013 04:41 PM, Buddy Brannan wrote: There shouldn’t be, but there is. I forget where it is, but 20 WPM is the max for legal automatic ID requirements, unless it’s changed. On Dec 15, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> wrote:
Right. SOMEONE caught that I said "shouldn't". Doesn't mean that there isn't. I know what the law and the FCC regs says... whether or not there *should* be, it should be understood that my *opinion* is that it shouldn't.
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
Usually when a moderator gets heavy-handed.... Conversations stop for a while. 73 Jim W7RY On 12/17/2013 4:43 AM, Geoff wrote:
On 12/16/2013 04:37 PM, Tim Sawyer wrote:
Hey guys, lets keep it on topic. We’re about app_rpt here not FCC rules. -- Tim :wq
He said "keep it on topic", not "Quit talking altogether" ;-)
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
On 12/17/2013 08:46 AM, Jim W7RY wrote:
Usually when a moderator gets heavy-handed.... Conversations stop for a while.
Tim's not being heavy-handed. Just guiding us back to the conversation regarding app_rpt. That being said, does anyone know if there a command to toggle all telemetry off altogether, plumb? No Allison, no courtesy tones, no tail-messages, no -nothing- (save ID) and (bonus) no hangtime? My UHF repeater is a Motorola R-100 (backyard repeater) with DCS tone access. I'm trying to get the tail as short as possible. Wait-times have been set to 0, as well as hangtime, but there's still a 'tail'... -Geoff/W5OMR
We have to forgive Tim, he may have accidently connected to the win system. JK ________________________________ From: Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> To: app_rpt-users@ohnosec.org Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Speaking of CW IDs On 12/17/2013 08:46 AM, Jim W7RY wrote:
Usually when a moderator gets heavy-handed.... Conversations stop for a while.
Tim's not being heavy-handed. Just guiding us back to the conversation regarding app_rpt. That being said, does anyone know if there a command to toggle all telemetry off altogether, plumb? No Allison, no courtesy tones, no tail-messages, no -nothing- (save ID) and (bonus) no hangtime? My UHF repeater is a Motorola R-100 (backyard repeater) with DCS tone access. I'm trying to get the tail as short as possible. Wait-times have been set to 0, as well as hangtime, but there's still a 'tail'... -Geoff/W5OMR _______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
For a while there I thought this list connected to the win system :-) -- Tim :wq On Dec 17, 2013, at 9:50 AM, Johnny Keeker <cypresstower@yahoo.com> wrote:
We have to forgive Tim, he may have accidently connected to the win system. JK
From: Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> To: app_rpt-users@ohnosec.org Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Speaking of CW IDs
On 12/17/2013 08:46 AM, Jim W7RY wrote:
Usually when a moderator gets heavy-handed.... Conversations stop for a while.
Tim's not being heavy-handed. Just guiding us back to the conversation regarding app_rpt.
That being said, does anyone know if there a command to toggle all telemetry off altogether, plumb?
No Allison, no courtesy tones, no tail-messages, no -nothing- (save ID) and (bonus) no hangtime?
My UHF repeater is a Motorola R-100 (backyard repeater) with DCS tone access. I'm trying to get the tail as short as possible. Wait-times have been set to 0, as well as hangtime, but there's still a 'tail'...
-Geoff/W5OMR
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
LOL! That's funny right there! 73 Jim W7RY On 12/17/2013 9:50 AM, Johnny Keeker wrote:
We have to forgive Tim, he may have accidently connected to the win system. JK
*From:* Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> *To:* app_rpt-users@ohnosec.org *Sent:* Tuesday, December 17, 2013 10:20 AM *Subject:* Re: [App_rpt-users] Speaking of CW IDs
On 12/17/2013 08:46 AM, Jim W7RY wrote:
Usually when a moderator gets heavy-handed.... Conversations stop for a while.
Tim's not being heavy-handed. Just guiding us back to the conversation regarding app_rpt.
That being said, does anyone know if there a command to toggle all telemetry off altogether, plumb?
No Allison, no courtesy tones, no tail-messages, no -nothing- (save ID) and (bonus) no hangtime?
My UHF repeater is a Motorola R-100 (backyard repeater) with DCS tone access. I'm trying to get the tail as short as possible. Wait-times have been set to 0, as well as hangtime, but there's still a 'tail'...
-Geoff/W5OMR
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org <mailto:App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org> http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
Sounds like good logic to me for supporting at least an increase in the Part 97 20 wpm limit. :) tnx Mike / W5JR Milton GA
On Dec 15, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Geoff <ars.w5omr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote: So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
Isnt there something in part 97 about max speed for CW id?
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2013 15:30:28 -0600 From: ars.w5omr@gmail.com To: app_rpt-users@ohnosec.org Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Speaking of CW IDs
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote:
So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
Yes. I just posted it about 2 hours ago. 20 WPM. 73 Jim W7RY On 12/15/2013 6:33 PM, Jim Duuuude wrote:
Isnt there something in part 97 about max speed for CW id?
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2013 15:30:28 -0600 From: ars.w5omr@gmail.com To: app_rpt-users@ohnosec.org Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Speaking of CW IDs
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote:
So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
20wpm applies to Part 97 only. Part 90.425(b)(2) states "The Morse code transmission rate shall be maintained between 20 and 25 words per minute." Part 95.119(d) states "The station identification must be transmitted in: (1) Voice in the English language; or (2) International Morse code telegraphy." - note no words per minute discussed. I've heard many GMRS repeaters (Part 95) rip through at 30+ wpm. So, if the change is made and recompiled, will the CW still sound OK or more like the early PROM style MSF5000, i.e, the dot/dash ratio falls apart at a faster speed? tnx Mike / W5JR Milton GA
On Dec 15, 2013, at 10:32 PM, Jim W7RY <w7ry@centurytel.net> wrote:
Yes. I just posted it about 2 hours ago.
20 WPM. 73 Jim W7RY
On 12/15/2013 6:33 PM, Jim Duuuude wrote: Isnt there something in part 97 about max speed for CW id?
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2013 15:30:28 -0600 From: ars.w5omr@gmail.com To: app_rpt-users@ohnosec.org Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Speaking of CW IDs
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote:
So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
This sounds like an area that has had little or no experimentation thus far. It will go on my "someday" list. tnx Mike / W5JR Milton GA
On Dec 15, 2013, at 11:00 PM, Mike/W5JR <w5jr.lists@att.net> wrote:
20wpm applies to Part 97 only.
Part 90.425(b)(2) states "The Morse code transmission rate shall be maintained between 20 and 25 words per minute."
Part 95.119(d) states "The station identification must be transmitted in: (1) Voice in the English language; or (2) International Morse code telegraphy." - note no words per minute discussed.
I've heard many GMRS repeaters (Part 95) rip through at 30+ wpm.
So, if the change is made and recompiled, will the CW still sound OK or more like the early PROM style MSF5000, i.e, the dot/dash ratio falls apart at a faster speed?
tnx Mike / W5JR Milton GA
On Dec 15, 2013, at 10:32 PM, Jim W7RY <w7ry@centurytel.net> wrote:
Yes. I just posted it about 2 hours ago.
20 WPM. 73 Jim W7RY
On 12/15/2013 6:33 PM, Jim Duuuude wrote: Isnt there something in part 97 about max speed for CW id?
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2013 15:30:28 -0600 From: ars.w5omr@gmail.com To: app_rpt-users@ohnosec.org Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Speaking of CW IDs
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote:
So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
20 WPM for Part 97 is correct. However, there is no mention of what level is required. Whereas, Part 90, for example, used to (and probably still does) require the level be at a minimum of 80% of full system deviation. 80% of 5 KHz (the old standard) is 4 KHz, which makes for a pretty darn loud identifier. With the newer 2.5 KHz standard, that works out to 2 KHz. Generally, amateur (in particular repeaters) tend to use way less than 80%, probably more like around 50%. N5ZUA On 12/15/2013 8:33 PM, Jim Duuuude wrote:
Isnt there something in part 97 about max speed for CW id?
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2013 15:30:28 -0600 From: ars.w5omr@gmail.com To: app_rpt-users@ohnosec.org Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Speaking of CW IDs
On 12/15/2013 03:25 PM, Mike/W5JR wrote:
So, there is a "speed=" in the morse stanza. Does it have a governor on it to limit the speed maximum to 20 wpm? My entries greater than 20 make no difference. And why would I want faster than 20 wpm you ask, my HUB nodes are only send "ID" to web transceivers, and I would like them faster. I have observed that at 20 wpm, there is a bit of jitter and faster may not be possible. (An ID I built years ago had a limit on how fast it could go before the code elements were overrun by timing)
I've been meaning to ask that same question.
Rules wise, since there's no CW requirement *at all* for 'any' license, then there shouldn't be a speed limit on how fast repeater id's should be limited to.
I like my code speed around 30~35wpm these days. I used to copy NTS traffic at 40+wpm. 20wpm is such a '~*yawn*~' bore...
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
participants (10)
-
Bryan D. Boyle -
Buddy Brannan -
Chuck Henderson -
Geoff -
Jim Duuuude -
Jim W7RY -
Johnny Keeker -
Mike/W5JR -
Steve Agee -
Tim Sawyer