Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org)
Message-ID: <200705240713150992.0CEEB0DD@smtp.wanadoo.fr>
In-Reply-To: <005801c79cd8$53507800$0b01a8c0@server>
References: <c03.1143fd78.3384d926@aol.com>
 <005801c79cd8$53507800$0b01a8c0@server>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 07:13:15 +0200
From: "John RABSON" <john.rabson@wanadoo.fr>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: LF: LMCW
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

I believe the term CW was originally coined to reflect the fact that you=
 had a continuous sine wave transmission when the key was down, whereas=
 with the previous technology (spark) you had a transmitted signal which=
 was more-or-less narrowband white noise.

And it does anyone remember some low-power HF experiments with a=
 transmitter whose frequency was stabilised by putting the crystal=
 oscillator in the operator's armpit?

73
John F5VLF/G3PAI

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 23/05/2007 at 02:18 J. B. Weazle McCreath wrote:

>LFers,
>
>I've always thought that the term CW was a misnomer, since it
>isn't continuous in the strickest sense, being keyed on and off 
>in some specific pattern.  Perhaps the CW setting of the mode
>switch on rigs should be changed to PD, for primitive digital.
>
>73, J.B., VE3EAR - VE3WZL
>Solar and wind powered
>Lowfer " EAR"  188.830
>EN93dr
>
>http://www.hurontel.on.ca/~weazle
>
>P.S. - I am aware of how CW got its name.