12 wpm?

[Ian Jackson]

I seem to recall that, when I were a lad, the UK amateur licence
required that, on CW, you had to send your callsign at no more than
12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about ID-ing your station at least
once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this was to avoid taxing the ability
of those monitoring to read it.] This doesn't seem to have been a
requirement for many years. Does anyone know when it was dropped?

A related subject is the speed of the morse ID of repeaters. Most seem
to be far faster than 12wpm - hence (I guess) the frequently heard plea,
"Can anyone tell me which repeater this is?"

[Ottavio Caruso]

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that

I am not a native speaker, but isn't this
, when I were a lad,

wrong?

Post by Ian Jackson
the UK amateur licence
required that, on CW, you had to send your callsign at no more than
12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about ID-ing your station at least
once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this was to avoid taxing the ability
of those monitoring to read it.] This doesn't seem to have been a
requirement for many years. Does anyone know when it was dropped?

Wasn't it about 2002/2003? I wasn't a ham there and then but I remember
a video from Steve Hartley on Vimeo talking about that.

[Jim GM4DHJ ...]

Post by Ottavio Caruso

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that

I am not a native speaker, but isn't this
, when I were a lad,
wrong?

Post by Ian Jackson
the UK amateur licence required that, on CW, you had to send your
callsign at no more than 12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about
ID-ing your station at least once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this
was to avoid taxing the ability of those monitoring to read it.] This
doesn't seem to have been a requirement for many years. Does anyone
know when it was dropped?

Wasn't it about 2002/2003? I wasn't a ham there and then but I remember
a video from Steve Hartley on Vimeo talking about that.

for you perhaps

[Jim GM4DHJ ...]

Post by Jim GM4DHJ ...

 > I seem to recall that
I am not a native speaker, but isn't this
, when I were a lad,
wrong?

Post by Ian Jackson
the UK amateur licence required that, on CW, you had to send your
callsign at no more than 12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about
ID-ing your station at least once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this
was to avoid taxing the ability of those monitoring to read it.] This
doesn't seem to have been a requirement for many years. Does anyone
know when it was dropped?

Wasn't it about 2002/2003? I wasn't a ham there and then but I
remember a video from Steve Hartley on Vimeo talking about that.

for you perhaps

but who cares

[Brian Morrison]

On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:38:09 +0000

Post by Ottavio Caruso

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that

I am not a native speaker, but isn't this
, when I were a lad,
wrong?

It's a play on various old comedy sketches, such as the Four
Yorkshiremen, which would use speech that sounded more countrified
rather than the King's/Queen's English of the establishment.

Of course these days few are taught about English grammar at school, so
language structures such as a conditional clause requiring the
subjunctive mood are heard more rarely.

The correct form above would be "If I were a lad" but that's not really
what is meant, clearly an older man is no longer a lad.

You'll note that comedy, such as it is these days, doesn't do these
sorts of wordplay sketches any more because since people don't learn
grammar as they used to they don't recognise the jokes as readily.

Everything has indeed gone to the dogs.

Hi Jim!

[brian]

Post by Brian Morrison
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:38:09 +0000

Post by Ottavio Caruso

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that

I am not a native speaker, but isn't this
, when I were a lad,
wrong?

It's a play on various old comedy sketches, such as the Four
Yorkshiremen, which would use speech that sounded more countrified
rather than the King's/Queen's English of the establishment.
Of course these days few are taught about English grammar at school, so
language structures such as a conditional clause requiring the
subjunctive mood are heard more rarely.
The correct form above would be "If I were a lad" but that's not really
what is meant, clearly an older man is no longer a lad.
You'll note that comedy, such as it is these days, doesn't do these
sorts of wordplay sketches any more because since people don't learn
grammar as they used to they don't recognise the jokes as readily.
Everything has indeed gone to the dogs.
Hi Jim!

In my day we had proper sentences with subjects and predicates. One of
me mates, right clever lad, could parse sentences with his eyes shut.
Tell that to the kids today.

Brian.

[Roger Hayter]

Post by Brian Morrison
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:38:09 +0000

Post by Ottavio Caruso

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that

I am not a native speaker, but isn't this
, when I were a lad,
wrong?

It's a play on various old comedy sketches, such as the Four
Yorkshiremen, which would use speech that sounded more countrified
rather than the King's/Queen's English of the establishment.

It's Yorkshire rather than countrified!

Post by Brian Morrison
Of course these days few are taught about English grammar at school, so
language structures such as a conditional clause requiring the
subjunctive mood are heard more rarely.
The correct form above would be "If I were a lad" but that's not really
what is meant, clearly an older man is no longer a lad.
You'll note that comedy, such as it is these days, doesn't do these
sorts of wordplay sketches any more because since people don't learn
grammar as they used to they don't recognise the jokes as readily.
Everything has indeed gone to the dogs.
Hi Jim!

[Brian Morrison]

On 25 Mar 2024 22:45:56 GMT

Post by Roger Hayter

Post by Brian Morrison
It's a play on various old comedy sketches, such as the Four
Yorkshiremen, which would use speech that sounded more countrified
rather than the King's/Queen's English of the establishment.

It's Yorkshire rather than countrified!

That, and there are others.

[Ottavio Caruso]

Post by Brian Morrison
Everything has indeed gone to the dogs.

We can blame the EU.

[Brian Morrison]

On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 09:06:49 +0000

Post by Ottavio Caruso

Post by Brian Morrison
Everything has indeed gone to the dogs.

We can blame the EU.

While there are bad things that resulted from joining the EEC/EU, this
is not one of them.

The reason for the paucity of education in English language and grammar
is down to people within the education system and the establishment who
decided that excellence should be suppressed in favour of uniformity
and who corrupted the education reforms of the 1940s so that by 1970
grammar schools were derided and comprehensive schooling (which
certainly was not comprehensive) was the soup du jour.

Those that drove this appear to have been motivated by a dislike of
Great Britain and wished to see it fail. On current progress, they
appear to have achieved their aim in some respects.

I find it deeply depressing, although as ever these things are subject
to swings back and forth and perhaps we will see a return to pride in
ensuring that people are well educated and that the country's
infrastructure works and is clean and efficient. I hope so, not so much
for me but for my children and any putative grandchildren. I think it
will be a long road.

[David Wade]

Post by Brian Morrison
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 09:06:49 +0000

Post by Ottavio Caruso

Post by Brian Morrison
Everything has indeed gone to the dogs.

We can blame the EU.

While there are bad things that resulted from joining the EEC/EU, this
is not one of them.

Perhaps its the converse, that we left the EU because we , as a nation,
didn't understand the benefits. Just shipped an old radio to a friend in
Holland. Stuck in customs for a week..

Post by Brian Morrison
The reason for the paucity of education in English language and grammar
is down to people within the education system and the establishment who
decided that excellence should be suppressed in favour of uniformity
and who corrupted the education reforms of the 1940s so that by 1970
grammar schools were derided and comprehensive schooling (which
certainly was not comprehensive) was the soup du jour.

Well as someone who missed out on grammar school but still got five
o-levels, then did three a-levels and went on to do a polytechnic degree
I am pleased we had semi-comprehensive schools.

I think I also benefited from the fact we learnt little grammar but were
encouraged to be creative..

Post by Brian Morrison
Those that drove this appear to have been motivated by a dislike of
Great Britain and wished to see it fail. On current progress, they
appear to have achieved their aim in some respects.

bollocks. We are where we are because we, as a nation look at the cost
not the value.

Post by Brian Morrison
I find it deeply depressing, although as ever these things are subject
to swings back and forth and perhaps we will see a return to pride in
ensuring that people are well educated and that the country's
infrastructure works and is clean and efficient. I hope so, not so much
for me but for my children and any putative grandchildren. I think it
will be a long road.

[Brian Morrison]

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 13:28:37 +0000

Post by David Wade

Post by Brian Morrison
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 09:06:49 +0000

[...]

Post by Brian Morrison

Post by Ottavio Caruso
We can blame the EU.

While there are bad things that resulted from joining the EEC/EU,
this is not one of them.

Perhaps its the converse, that we left the EU because we , as a
nation, didn't understand the benefits.

You mean the benefits where the traitor Heath forced the acceptance of
the entire Acquis Communautaire in 1973 on the back of a few paragraphs
in the Conservative party manifesto in 1970? The benefits where Jean
Monnet's entire plan and design of what has become the EU involved
removing control of everything from elected representatives and
replacing them with appointed technocrats in Brussels whose edicts
overrode national law without any opportunity to disagree? And a
parliament where no new laws may be proposed, only Commission edicts
rubber-stamped?

Those benefits?

As Tony Benn asked, can we get rid of these people. The answer was no,
we couldn't except by extreme measures.

Post by David Wade
Just shipped an old radio to a friend in Holland. Stuck in customs for a week..

Which is fine, that's what customs is for, controlling the shipping of
goods between non-unified trading environments.

Post by David Wade

Post by Brian Morrison
The reason for the paucity of education in English language and
grammar is down to people within the education system and the
establishment who decided that excellence should be suppressed in
favour of uniformity and who corrupted the education reforms of the
1940s so that by 1970 grammar schools were derided and
comprehensive schooling (which certainly was not comprehensive) was
the soup du jour.

Well as someone who missed out on grammar school but still got five
o-levels, then did three a-levels and went on to do a polytechnic
degree I am pleased we had semi-comprehensive schools.
I think I also benefited from the fact we learnt little grammar but
were encouraged to be creative..

Wouldn't you have liked to do all of this rather than a subset? I think
it would be immensely beneficial to everyone to understand their own
language, its origins and how it is constructed.

Post by David Wade

Post by Brian Morrison
Those that drove this appear to have been motivated by a dislike of
Great Britain and wished to see it fail. On current progress, they
appear to have achieved their aim in some respects.

bollocks. We are where we are because we, as a nation look at the
cost not the value.

Read George Orwell's foreword to Animal Farm, the one that was not
published at the time the book was but in the 1960s. I find it
enlightening.

Also read Peter Hitchens' book "A Revolution Betrayed". Also very
interesting and symptomatic of the desire by certain people to level
down at every opportunity.

[Ottavio Caruso]

Post by Brian Morrison
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 13:28:37 +0000

Post by David Wade

Post by Brian Morrison
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 09:06:49 +0000

[...]

Post by Brian Morrison

Post by Ottavio Caruso
We can blame the EU.

While there are bad things that resulted from joining the EEC/EU,
this is not one of them.

Perhaps its the converse, that we left the EU because we , as a
nation, didn't understand the benefits.

You mean the benefits where the traitor Heath forced the acceptance of
the entire Acquis Communautaire in 1973 on the back of a few paragraphs
in the Conservative party manifesto in 1970? The benefits where Jean
Monnet's entire plan and design of what has become the EU involved
removing control of everything from elected representatives and
replacing them with appointed technocrats in Brussels whose edicts
overrode national law without any opportunity to disagree? And a
parliament where no new laws may be proposed, only Commission edicts
rubber-stamped?
Those benefits?
As Tony Benn asked, can we get rid of these people. The answer was no,
we couldn't except by extreme measures.

Post by David Wade
Just shipped an old radio to a friend in Holland. Stuck in customs for a week..

Which is fine, that's what customs is for, controlling the shipping of
goods between non-unified trading environments.

Post by David Wade

Post by Brian Morrison
The reason for the paucity of education in English language and
grammar is down to people within the education system and the
establishment who decided that excellence should be suppressed in
favour of uniformity and who corrupted the education reforms of the
1940s so that by 1970 grammar schools were derided and
comprehensive schooling (which certainly was not comprehensive) was
the soup du jour.

Well as someone who missed out on grammar school but still got five
o-levels, then did three a-levels and went on to do a polytechnic
degree I am pleased we had semi-comprehensive schools.
I think I also benefited from the fact we learnt little grammar but
were encouraged to be creative..

Wouldn't you have liked to do all of this rather than a subset? I think
it would be immensely beneficial to everyone to understand their own
language, its origins and how it is constructed.

Post by David Wade

Post by Brian Morrison
Those that drove this appear to have been motivated by a dislike of
Great Britain and wished to see it fail. On current progress, they
appear to have achieved their aim in some respects.

bollocks. We are where we are because we, as a nation look at the
cost not the value.

Read George Orwell's foreword to Animal Farm, the one that was not
published at the time the book was but in the 1960s. I find it
enlightening.
Also read Peter Hitchens' book "A Revolution Betrayed". Also very
interesting and symptomatic of the desire by certain people to level
down at every opportunity.

Oh no, another Brexit lunatic!

[Radio Man]

On 28-03-2024 09:56, Ottavio Caruso wrote:


Fuck off back home ,to the greasy wops .

[Radio Man]

Post by Radio Man
Fuck off back home ,to the greasy wops .

Stop forging me Reay.


You have been warned.

[Radio Man]

Post by Radio Man

Post by Radio Man
Fuck off back home ,to the greasy wops .

Stop forging me Reay.
You have been warned.

Yer a fooking twat .I am the real Radio Man . Always was 'always willbe .

now washthe shit off yer face ,wop lover.

[Jim GM4DHJ ...]

Fuck   off back home ,to the  greasy wops .

hate crime

[Ian Jackson]

Post by Ottavio Caruso

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that

I am not a native speaker, but isn't this
, when I were a lad,
wrong?

It's sort of a figure of speech, imitating how certain English accents
say it (generally associated with Yorksheer).

Post by Ottavio Caruso

Post by Ian Jackson
the UK amateur licence required that, on CW, you had to send your
callsign at no more than 12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about
ID-ing your station at least once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this
was to avoid taxing the ability of those monitoring to read it.] This
doesn't seem to have been a requirement for many years. Does anyone
know when it was dropped?

Wasn't it about 2002/2003? I wasn't a ham there and then but I remember
a video from Steve Hartley on Vimeo talking about that.

Dunno. Might have been.

[Jim GM4DHJ ...]

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that, when I were a lad, the UK amateur licence
required that, on CW, you had to send your callsign at no more than
12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about ID-ing your station at least
once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this was to avoid taxing the ability
of those monitoring to read it.] This doesn't seem to have been a
requirement for many years. Does anyone know when it was dropped?
A related subject is the speed of the morse ID of repeaters. Most seem
to be far faster than 12wpm - hence (I guess) the frequently heard plea,
"Can anyone tell me which repeater this is?"

When everything else was dropped as a waste of time...like everyting

[brian]

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that, when I were a lad, the UK amateur licence
required that, on CW, you had to send your callsign at no more than
12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about ID-ing your station at
least once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this was to avoid taxing the
ability of those monitoring to read it.] This doesn't seem to have been
a requirement for many years. Does anyone know when it was dropped?
A related subject is the speed of the morse ID of repeaters. Most seem
to be far faster than 12wpm - hence (I guess) the frequently heard
plea, "Can anyone tell me which repeater this is?"

The two beacons I made keyers for in the early 80s had to be 12 wpm or
less . One of them the timing capacitor dried out and the speed went up
quite a bit.

IARU guidelines say "The callsign should be sent in plain CW at least
once per minute, not exceeding 60 characters per minute" == 12WPM

I can only find TV repeaters in the RSGB blurb.

"identification of the station will be accomplished by
modulating the audio transmitted by an automatic callsign generator,
using F2 modulation and International Morse Code at a nominal speed
of 12 words per minute and, additionally, may use F3 modulation,
speech. Identification shall occur at periods of not greater than 15
minutes."

Repeaters are a good deal faster. I struggle and I'm good to 20wpm
without repeats . My brain has to sync to the morse speed.

Bleep dah-di-dah.

Brian GM4DIJ

[Peter Able]

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that, when I were a lad, the UK amateur licence
required that, on CW, you had to send your callsign at no more than
12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about ID-ing your station at least
once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this was to avoid taxing the ability
of those monitoring to read it.] This doesn't seem to have been a
requirement for many years. Does anyone know when it was dropped?
A related subject is the speed of the morse ID of repeaters. Most seem
to be far faster than 12wpm - hence (I guess) the frequently heard plea,
"Can anyone tell me which repeater this is?"

From my 1960s licence:

The call sign, which may be sent either by morse telegraphy at a speed
not greater than 12 words per minute or by telephony, shall be sent for
identification purposes ...

PA

[Ian Jackson]

In message <uu1n6f$303kb$***@dont-email.me>, Peter Able <***@home.com>
writes

Post by Peter Able

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that, when I were a lad, the UK amateur licence
required that, on CW, you had to send your callsign at no more than
12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about ID-ing your station at
least once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this was to avoid taxing
the ability of those monitoring to read it.] This doesn't seem to
have been a requirement for many years. Does anyone know when it was dropped?
A related subject is the speed of the morse ID of repeaters. Most
seem to be far faster than 12wpm - hence (I guess) the frequently
heard plea, "Can anyone tell me which repeater this is?"

The call sign, which may be sent either by morse telegraphy at a speed
not greater than 12 words per minute or by telephony, shall be sent for
identification purposes ...
PA

Indeed. My licence is of the same vintage.

IIRC, when various 'innovative' transmissions started to appear (eg
digital, such as packet radio) I think there was still a requirement to
ID in a readily understandable plain-language mode (morse or voice) -
but I don't think this is required any more. [Was plain language ID ever
required for RTTY?] Where ID IS in morse, it certainly does seem to be a
lot faster than 12wpm.

[Peter Able]

Post by Ian Jackson
writes

Post by Peter Able

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that, when I were a lad, the UK amateur licence
required that, on CW, you had to send your callsign at no more than
12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about ID-ing your station at
least  once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this was to avoid taxing
the ability  of those monitoring to read it.] This doesn't seem to
have been a  requirement for many years. Does anyone know when it was
dropped?
 A related subject is the speed of the morse ID of repeaters. Most
seem  to be far faster than 12wpm - hence (I guess) the frequently
heard plea,  "Can anyone tell me which repeater this is?"

The call sign, which may be sent either by morse telegraphy at a speed
not greater than 12 words per minute or by telephony, shall be sent
for identification purposes ...
PA

Indeed. My licence is of the same vintage.
IIRC, when various 'innovative' transmissions started to appear (eg
digital, such as packet radio) I think there was still a requirement to
ID in a readily understandable plain-language mode (morse or voice) -
but I don't think this is required any more. [Was plain language ID ever
required for RTTY?] Where ID IS in morse, it certainly does seem to be a
lot faster than 12wpm.

I think that the licence quotation answers your question, Ian - at leas
at that time. Identification must be by 12wpm morse code telegraphy or
telephony. The 1977 printed licence updates the speed to 20wpm.

BTW, I still have my original licence. When all of the Gestetner'd,
licences were replaced with a printed one you were instructed to return
the previous licence. I was issued with G3PMJ. Right name and address -
wrong call sign. I reported this to the authorities and they told me to
keep my current licence document. So I did, eventually returning the
G3PMJ licence document.

So the authorities mucked up things - even back in the "good old days" !

PA

[Jim GM4DHJ ...]

Post by Ian Jackson
writes

Post by Peter Able

Post by Ian Jackson
I seem to recall that, when I were a lad, the UK amateur licence
required that, on CW, you had to send your callsign at no more than
12wpm (at least when obeying the rule about ID-ing your station at
least  once every 15 minutes). [Presumably this was to avoid taxing
the ability  of those monitoring to read it.] This doesn't seem to
have been a  requirement for many years. Does anyone know when it was
dropped?
 A related subject is the speed of the morse ID of repeaters. Most
seem  to be far faster than 12wpm - hence (I guess) the frequently
heard plea,  "Can anyone tell me which repeater this is?"

The call sign, which may be sent either by morse telegraphy at a speed
not greater than 12 words per minute or by telephony, shall be sent
for identification purposes ...
PA

Indeed. My licence is of the same vintage.
IIRC, when various 'innovative' transmissions started to appear (eg
digital, such as packet radio) I think there was still a requirement to
ID in a readily understandable plain-language mode (morse or voice) -
but I don't think this is required any more. [Was plain language ID ever
required for RTTY?] Where ID IS in morse, it certainly does seem to be a
lot faster than 12wpm.

mine says g4dhj