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)
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...
···
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)
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
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…
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):
···
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
---
(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.
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 ohnosec.org
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 ohnosec.org
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 ohnosec.org
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…
Yes, Jim, for Part 97, but other Parts are higher.
tnx
Mike / W5JR
Milton GA
···
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
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…
Isnt there something in part 97 about max speed for
CW id?
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2013 15:30:28 -0600
> From: > To: > 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 mailing list
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 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: > To: > 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 mailing list
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 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: > To: > 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 mailing list
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: > To: > 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 mailing list
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.
···
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:
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 ohnosec.org
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 ohnosec.org
_______________________________________________
App_rpt-users mailing list
App_rpt-users@ohnosec.org ohnosec.org
