Re: Vibroplex - seen on ABC Pan Am (OT)

[Mike Morrow-3]

Lee wrote:

> I have just signed up to this list, so I have not seen this whole
> thread, but I have to say that I am disapointed with what I am
> hearing.  I agree that hams should take pride in their sending, but I
> also believe that hams should encourage new hams by helping them out,
> not by shunning them just because their code is sloppy.

Relax, Lee.  Relax.

This is a classic case of one's needing to read all of the thread
before getting bent out of shape.  The thread discussed in the main
the difficulties and "distinctive" Morse telegraphy that sometimes results
from use of a mechanical bug, like the classic Vibroplex keys.  The
"interesting" Morse styles that may result from such key use is often
attributed to those having long and sometimes professional experience
as a Morse operator.  This is a topic that has been discussed by operators
ever since bugs appeared more than 100 years ago (see the reference
in one post to a **1964** QST article).  New operators were not once,
even in passing, a part or subject of this discussion.

The list archives may always be reviewed in order to properly analyze
the content of a thread.  See http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/elecraft .

> I know I wasn't perfect when I first put my hand to the key and I
> would bet that most of you were not either. I wonder how many abandoned
> the hobby because nobody would answer their CQ.

Back in the days when Morse testing was required, most classes held by
ham clubs tried to get students ready **only** to pass the five wpm
copy test.  These classes invariably turned out hams who had no capability
to send at any speed Morse that could be deciphered.  The only real
corrective measure required student work with an "Elmer" with some
patience.  Sending **good** Morse is always more difficult than reading
good Morse.

> Lee
> Currently Expired (was N4RKI)

Welcome back, Lee.  73,

Mike / KK5F
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Bob K6UJ]

I am restoring an old Johnson Viking transmitter and plan to do a little AM hamming for fun on the low bands.
I would like to use my Elecraft K3 for receive.
I want to be extra careful and protect my K3,  whats the best way to configure the push to talk an antenna changeover for
protecting the K3 ?  

Bob
K6UJ
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Lee Herbst]

Thank you for pointing out the archive. I have read through all of
this thread and I understand what you are saying. However, I stand by
my original words. Please don't take me the wrong way, I am not angry,
just disappointed that some hams would refuse to answer a sloppy CQ. I
guess, realistically, this has been that way for a very long time. I
just hope those are in the minority.

And thank you, I look forward to getting back on the air.

73,

Lee


On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Mike Morrow <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Lee wrote:
>
>> I have just signed up to this list, so I have not seen this whole
>> thread, but I have to say that I am disapointed with what I am
>> hearing.  I agree that hams should take pride in their sending, but I
>> also believe that hams should encourage new hams by helping them out,
>> not by shunning them just because their code is sloppy.
>
> Relax, Lee.  Relax.
>
> This is a classic case of one's needing to read all of the thread
> before getting bent out of shape.  The thread discussed in the main
> the difficulties and "distinctive" Morse telegraphy that sometimes results
> from use of a mechanical bug, like the classic Vibroplex keys.  The
> "interesting" Morse styles that may result from such key use is often
> attributed to those having long and sometimes professional experience
> as a Morse operator.  This is a topic that has been discussed by operators
> ever since bugs appeared more than 100 years ago (see the reference
> in one post to a **1964** QST article).  New operators were not once,
> even in passing, a part or subject of this discussion.
>
> The list archives may always be reviewed in order to properly analyze
> the content of a thread.  See http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/elecraft .
>
>> I know I wasn't perfect when I first put my hand to the key and I
>> would bet that most of you were not either. I wonder how many abandoned
>> the hobby because nobody would answer their CQ.
>
> Back in the days when Morse testing was required, most classes held by
> ham clubs tried to get students ready **only** to pass the five wpm
> copy test.  These classes invariably turned out hams who had no capability
> to send at any speed Morse that could be deciphered.  The only real
> corrective measure required student work with an "Elmer" with some
> patience.  Sending **good** Morse is always more difficult than reading
> good Morse.
>
>> Lee
>> Currently Expired (was N4RKI)
>
> Welcome back, Lee.  73,
>
> Mike / KK5F
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html