{Mumlier 60 — 0ctoEer 1.998

fiegian ’Z'efegrap/i Instruments

Ursum EDITORIALANDSUBSCRIPTIONOFflCES:. Morsum Magnificat, 9 Wetherby Close,t Broadstone. Dorset BH18 SJB, England.16a Phone/FAX: Broadstone (01202) 658474;

ISSN 0953,6426 International +44 1202 658474

MORSUM MAGNIFICAT was first published as a quarterly magazine in Holland, in 1983, bythe late Rinus HellemonsPAOBFN. Now published six times a year in Britain, it aims to provideinternational coverage of all aspects ofMorse Ielegraphy, past present and future. MORSUMMAGNIFICAT is for all Morse enthusiasts, amateur or professional, active or retired. It bringstogether material which would otherwise be lost to posterity, providing an invaluable source of

interest, reference and record relating to the traditions and practice of Morse.

EDITOR Geoff Arnold G3GSRCONSULTANT EDITOR Tony Smith G4FAI

(13 Morley Road, Shen'ngham, Norfolk NR26 81E. England.Phone: 01263 821936. e-mail address: tony@morsum.demon.co.uk)

MM home page — http://wwwmorsumdemon.co.uk© G C Arnold Partners 1998 Printed by Hertfordshire Display plc, Ware, Herts

ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTIONS (six issues):UK £13.00 Europe £14.00

.

Rest ofthe World £17.00 WAll overseas copies are despatched by Airmail —Overseas cheques. etc., must be payable in Sterling and drawn on a London Clearing Bank.Payment by Mastercard, Eurocard or Visa is also accepted; quote your card number and

expiry date. checking that you have written them clearly and correctly.We no longer accept payment via PostGiro or PostCash International, or by

International Money Orders handled through the Girobank system.For security reasons,we cannot accept orders forsubscriptions,magazines, books, etc., via e-mail.

Make all chequespayable to ‘G C Arnold Partners’.

“When does my subscription expire ...?”The answer is to be found on the envelope that contained your latest MM. where thenumber on the top line of the address label tells you the last issue you’ve paid for.

Also. we shall jog your memory with a renewal reminder included with that final issue.

MM Back IssuesLimited stocks of Issues Nos. 31, 32, 34—36 and 39—59 only are now available from the

Editorial offices (see top of page). Price including postage £2.20 each to UK; £2.40 to Europe:£2.75 elsewhere by airmail. Deduct 20% if ordering 3 or more.

ON OUR FRONTCOVERBelgian instruments — key, inker and galvo — made by Charles Richez, Bruxelles

Collection: Fons Vanden Berghen

CommentT IS NOW MORE THAN FOUR YEARS sincewe first commented in MM on the reports of analarmingly high level of ‘false alarms’ generatedby GMDSS and EPIRB equipment on board ships.

(These satellite/terrestrial-based systems, the ‘GlobalMaritime Distress and Safety System’ and the ‘Emer-gency Position Indicating Radio Beacon’, are intendedto replace the traditional safety functions of the seago—ing radio officer and Morse.) The INMARSAT organi—sation’s journal Ocean Voice had thenjust revealed thatsomething in excess of 97 per cent of calls received atthe emergency control centres fell into this category.

Articles since published in various journals havesought to reassure that these new ways for handlingglobal distress and safety traffic to and from ships willgreatly improve safety of life at sea, as compared withthe ‘bad old days’ when seafarers had to rely on thosearchaic, manual W/T communicators. Unfortunately, itseems that things are not going to plan.

The feature ‘GMDSS Update’, commencing on page8 of this magazine, details some of the problems as seenby N6SL and KlsMF, both actively involved in theintroduction of GMDSS. It does not make reassuringreading for seafarers.

It can be argued, of course, that the fact that there arenow far fewer ships, spread more thinly around theworld’s oceans, means that a global system must replacethe more localised communications which served shipsin trouble in the past.

In the dash to save the money previously expendedon the radio officer’s salary, by offloading all his re—sponsibilities on to the navigating officers, too littleaccount seems to have been taken of what other dutiesthose officers will have in an emergency situation. Also,not unusually, lack of liaison between government de-partments and public service agencies has not helpedefforts to engineer a smoothly working system.

There are now a mere three months to go to theofficial CW cut—off date for GMDSS—equipped ships,and yet more W/T coast stations are closing down. It isearnestly to be hoped that it will not, as NGSL fears, takea modern—day Titanic disaster to get things sorted out.

COWow/ G3GSR/,MM60 — OctoEer 15 /

Contents2 News8 GMDSS Update12 CW Under the Stars15 Readers’ ADs16 Fleet Air Arm Panel,

Lighting Control 24 Volt20 The Meaning of CW23 Short Break:

Should Women be Sparks?24 Reflections from

Uncle Bas — 2626 Major Fuller and the

Fullerphone36 Showcase38 Long Route to the Code42 Info Please!43 Your Letters

flit/en's23 & 37

Cal-Av Labs Inc.19 FISTS CW Club41 The QRP Component Co.7 G-QRP Club

1 1 G4ZPY Paddle KeysInternational

fMewsRevision of

Amateur Morse Requirementincluded in RA Strategy

Britain’s Radiocommunications Agen-cy’s ‘Strategy for the future use of theRadio Spectrum in the UK, 1998’ is alarge document which covers the wholespectrum range of all radio services. Ofparticular interest to many readers ofMM is the Agency’s statement concem—ing the future of amateur radio, as fol—lows:

The Agency will continue to active-ly support the development of the Ama-teur Radio Service, both nationally andinternationally. There are approximate-ly 61 000 amateur licences on issue inthe UK. The number of full licences onissue has fallen slightly in the last fewyears while the number of novice li-cences continues to increase steadily. TheAgency continues to enjoy a unique andconstructive relationship with the RadioSociety of Great Britain (RSGB) andmeets regularly with them to discusstechnical and licensing issues relating toamateur radio.

The Amateur Radio Packet Networkcontinues to be an area of high growthand development. The Agency has beenworking closely with the RSGB to pro—vide a licensing framework for its ex-pansion and development but theemphasis has shifted to promote a moresimplified system.

Consultation on Spectrum Pricing

will provide an opportunity for the Agen—cy to discuss the development of ama—teur radio and to look at the best way inwhich to provide the many additionalfacilities enjoyed by radio amateurs. Thelicensing structure, the revision of theamateur licence including the Morse re—quirement for HF operation, and how tofacilitate experimentation within theamateur radio service are all issues whichthe Agency will continue to discuss withthe RSGB over the next five years.

With increasingdemands on the spec-trum the pressures on the Amateur bandsare very real. The Agency will thereforehave to balance the needs of amateursagainst the demands of existing and newradio services, and promote the most ef-ficient and effective use of amateur ra—dio allocations. However, occasionallyit may be possible to give amateurs ac-cess to additional spectrum which is notin so much demand, such as the newVLF to HF bands. An example of this isthe new European harmonised LF allo—cationwhich is now available to all ClassA licence holders.

FCC Requests Views onMorse Test Requirements

As part of a biennial review of Regula-tions, the FCC has issued a 33—pageNotice of Proposed Rulemaking(NPRM), dated 29 July 1998, which pro—poses the elimination of unnecessaryrules and the streamlining of the licens—

MM60 — OctaEer 1998

ing process in the United States Ama—teur Service. Amongst other things, theFCC proposes to reduce the number oflicence classes from 6 to 4; and requestscomment on possible changes to theMorse test and the written examinations.

On the subject of the Morse test, theFCC says:

‘Currently, three telegraphy exami-nation elements are administered by ateam of three Volunteer Examiners toham operator applicants. The elementsan examinee passes determines the classof operator license granted. In a telegra-phy examination, the VEs determine theexaminee’s level of skill in sending andreceiving text in the international Morsecode.

‘The rules delineate three levels ofskill in telegraphy, based upon the rateat which an examinee correctly receivesa telegraphy message: five, thirteen andtwenty words-per—minute (wpm).

‘In the early days of amateur radio,radiotelegraphy was the primary com—munication mode of all radio operators,including amateurs. Testing for Morsecode telegraphy was necessary to ensurethat amateurs could recognize and stayaway from Government and commer-cial stations as well as stay clear of mar—itime distress messages.

‘Today, radiotelegraphy is just onefacet of many diverse modes of radio-communication that require a techno—logically literate licensee. In 1990, inresponse to the sentiment of the amateurcommunity, we established a codelessTechnician Class operator license. In sodoing, we stated that the amateur serv-ice should attract technically inclinedpersons. We also stated that we believed

MIM60 — Octofier 1998

that telegraphers would be in less de—mand than electronics and communica-tions experts.

‘Therefore,we provided an entry lev—el opportunity to otherwise qualified per—sons who found that telegraphy was abarrier to pursuing the purposes of theamateur service. Those purposes includeencouragement and improvement of theamateur service by providing opportuni—ties for advancing both communicationand technical skills, and the expansionof the existing reservoir within the ama—teur radio service of trained operators,technicians and electronics experts.

‘The decreasing role of telegraphyas a communications mode is also dem-onstrated in our implementation of theGlobalMaritimeDistress and Safety Sys-tem (GMDSS). In permitting GMDSSto replace the mandatory Morse codeequipment and operator, we recognizedindustry movement to newer and bettertechnology for distress situations. TheGMDSS relies on satellite and automat-ed terrestrial communications systemsfor distress and safety communications.The Commission noted that by incorpo-rating these advanced communicationstechniques into the safety system,GMDSS would significantly improvesafety of life and property at sea through—out the world.

‘The intemational Radio Regulationsthat apply to the Amateur Radio Servicerequire that all amateurs licensed to op—erate below 30MHz demonstrate theirability “. .. to send correctly by hand andto receive correctly by ear, texts in Morsecode signals.” The Radio Regulationsdo not specify any particular speed. Wenote that the 1995 World Radiocommu-

3

nications Conference (WRC—95) re—solved that Article 325, which includesthe international amateur code require—ment, be considered at the 1999 WRC.Subsequently, this consideration was de—layed to the WRC scheduled to be heldin 2001. (We now understand thatWRC-99 has been delayed until the year 2000— with WRC-01 taking place in 2002.)

‘In preparation for consideration of jthe code requirement at a future WRC,the ARRL surveyed amateur licensees,both members and non-members, to de—termine their attitudes on the Morse coderequirement. Some 63 percent of ARRLmembers agreed that “for the foreseea—ble future, it is important to retain theMorse code requirement in the intema—tional regulations,” while 30 percentagreed that “the Morse code requirementfor amateur radio licensing is no longerrelevant in the international regulations.”Among all amateurs, members and non—members, 57 percent favored retainingthe Morse code requirement, while 35percent regarded it as not relevant.

‘Among ARRL members that ad—dressed what the code speed require-ment should be for full amateurprivileges (AmateurClass Extra), 41 per—cent favored a requirement in the 10—13wpm range, versus a minority of 32 per-cent who favored the current 20 wpmrequirement.

‘Based in part on these survey re-sults, an ARRL committee proposed toreduce the General Class code speed re—quirement from 13 to 10 wpm, and forall code examinations to specify one outof five minutes of copy.

‘In view of the changes in the tech—nologies that amateurs use to communi-

4

cate generally, and views with regard tothe Morse code requirement specifical-ly, we seek comment on all aspects ofthe Morse code standards used in ourexaminations. Do the three levels of 5,13, and 20 wpm remain relevant in to—day’s communications practices? Shouldwe continue to have three different lev-els, or should these be reduced to one ortwo — and, if so, what should be therequired speeds?

‘Were we to reduce the requiredMorse code elements, should we addelements to the written examination toensure a working knowledge of the new—er digital technologies which, in part arereplacing the Morse code?

‘Or, should we consider specifyingthe method of examining for Morse codeproficiency, such as requiring fill-in—the-blank or copying one out of five minutessent, instead of allowing the VEs todetermine how to test for code speed?We request comment on these and anyother issues related to our code speedrequirements.’

TelegraphyWaivers for theHandicapped

The NPRM of July 29 also includes thefollowing:

‘Additionally, in (petition for rulemaking) RM—9l96, the ARRL requestsamendment of the amateur rules whichallow telegraphy examination credit forthe higher telegraphy speeds to exami-nees with a disability. Specifically, theARRL requests that the examinee berequired to attempt the higher—speedtelegraphy examination before exami-nation credit is given pursuant to a doc—tor’s certification. In addition, the ARRL

MM60 — October 1998

requests that volunteer-examiner coor—dinators (VECS) be authorized to request 1medical information from the certifyingphysician pertaining to the examinee’sdisability.

‘It should be noted that these issuesonly remain if we retain the higher te—legraphy speeds requirement, since if therequirement were eliminated a personwith a disability would not have to ap—ply for examination credit.

‘We tentatively conclude that, if wedo maintain the requirement, neither of

‘

these proposals is an appropriate meansto address potential abuses of the physi—cian certification requirement. We be—lieve that these proposals place an unfair .burden on examinees with disabilities,and raise serious privacy and confidenti—ality concerns. We seek comment onARRL’s proposal and our tentative con-clusion.’

The full NPRM can be downloadedfrom

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1998/fccQ8183.txt and interestedparties may file comments on or before1 December 1998, and reply commentson or before 15 January 1999. Com—ments are to be filed via a definedformal system.

EUCWFraternisingCW 080 Party 1998

The European CW Association’s 18thCW Fraternising Party will be held on21—22 November 1998 as follows (alltimes UTC):Dates, Times, and Frequencies:21 November1500—1700 7.010—7.030MHZ

l4.020—14.050MHZ

MIA/[60— OctoEer 1998

1800—2000 7.010—7.030MHz3.520—3.550MHz

‘ 22 November‘ 0700—0900 7.010—7.030MH2

3.520—3.550MHz1000—1200 7.010—7.030MHz

l4.020—14.050MHZAll amateur and SWL stations in

Europe are invited to participate in oneof the following four classes:A — Members of EUCW clubs usingmore than 10W input or 5W output.B — Membersof EUCWclubs using QRP(less than 10W input or 5W output).C — Non—members of EUCW clubsusing any power.D — Shortwave listeners.Exchanges: Class A & B, RST/QTH/Name/Club/Membership number.Class C, RST/QTH/Name/NM (i.e., nota member).Class D, Log information from bothstations.Call: CQ EUCW TEST. Stations maybe worked or logged only once a day,per band, during the contest.Scoring: Class A/B/C — 1 point per QSOwith own country, 3 points per QSOwith other EU country.ClassD — 3 pointsfor every complete logged QSO.Multiplier,all classes: 1 multiplier pointfor each EUCW-club worked/logged perday and band.

EUCW clubs are AGCW-DL (Ger—many); Benelux-QRP; BTC (Belgium);CTCW (Portugal); EAQRP (Spain);EHSC (Extremely High Speed Club);FISTS; FOC (First Class Operators);G—QRP; HACWG (Hungary); HCC(Spain); HSC (High Speed Club); HTC(Switzerland); INORC (Italy); MCWG(Macedonia);OHTC (Finland);OK—QRP

5

(Czech Republic); SCAG (Scandinavia);SHSC (Super High Speed Club);SPCWC (Poland);UCWC (Russia); UFT(France); U-QRQ—C (Ukraine); VHSC(Very High Speed Club), 3A—CW—G(Monaco); 9ACWG (Croatia); I—QRPC(Italy). Members of these clubs are es—pecially asked to support this eventwhichis one of the principal EUCW activitiesof the year.Logs: to include date, UTC, band, call,info sent, info received, and pointsclaimed per QSO.Summary: to include full name, call,address, total points claimed, station de—tails, power used, and signature. Entriesto be received by the EUCW ContestManager, Guenther Nierbauer DJ2XP,Illinger Strasse 74, D66564 Ottweiler,Germany, not later than 31 December,1998.

Certificates will be awarded to thethree highest scorers in each class. Ad-ditionally, this event offers a good op—portunity to make contacts qualifyingfor the ‘Worked EUCW’ Award (seebelow).

EUCW is an association of amateurclubs which aims to promote and en—courage amateur CW. Members of theindividual clubs mentioned are automat—ically members of the Association. Inaccordance with the aims of EUCW, theCW Fraternising Party is open to bothmembers and non—members of EUCWclubs.(Information: EUCWBulletin)

Worked EUCW AwardThe European CW Association’s‘WorkedEUCW’ Award offers an awardcertificate printed on heavy parchment

6

type paper depicting the map of Europe‘at the time of Samuel F.B. Morse’.There are three classes of award, ‘Stand—ard’, for contacts made using any au—thorised transmission power; ‘QRP’, forcontacts made using not more than 5watts RF output transmission power; and‘SWL’, for shortwave listeners”.

Open to both members and non-mem-bers of EUCW Clubs, the requirementsof the award are confirmed CW onlycontacts (SWLs — CW stations heard)with 100 different stations who are mem-bers of EUCW clubs, over 3 differentamateur bands with a minimum of 20stations worked or heard in each band.The total of 100 stations worked or heardover 3 bands must include at least 3members of 6 different EUCW clubs.

Only contactsmade on or afterMorsebicentennial day, 27 April 1991, countfor the award, with up to 40 stationsworked or heard on that day countingfor double points. Full details of theaward may be obtained by sending 2IRCS to the EUCW Award Manager,Guenther Nierbauer DJ2XP, IllingerStrasse 74, D—66564 Ottweiler, Germa-ny.

The EUCW Fraternising CW QSOParty (see above) offers an excellent op—portunity to gain qualifying points for

‘ this prestigious CW—only award.

Reprint of Phillips CodeA reprint of the 1923 version of ThePhillips Code in its original format isavailable from Ken Miller, VE7CTW,5300 Cantrell Road, Richmond, BC V7C3G8, Canada.

Included is documentation describ—ing some additions that were made to

MM60 — OctoEer 1996’

the code; a sampling of wire codes(telegraphers’ equivalent to the current‘Q’ signals); a listing of some commonservice message abbreviations; and thestock market abbreviations supplement.

The price is $25 (CDN) in Canada,or $17 (US) for addresses outside Cana—da. Foreign payments in US funds only.The price includes airmail postage whereappropriate, and all applicable taxes.

It is also available from The NilskiPartnership, The Poplars, Wistanswick,Market Drayton, Shropshire TF9 2BA,England, price, including postage, £10(UK), £10.20 (Europe, airmail), £10.50(Rest of the World, airmail). Paymentby cheque drawn on a London clearingbank, payable to ‘The Nilski Partner-ship’; 01' by Visa, Eurocard or Master-card, quoting number, expiry date andthe name on the card.

UK Closure of 500kHz on VideoThe radio operators at Land’s EndRadio/GLD station, in conjunction withDiscovery Films, have put together avideo to mark the closure of all UKcoast station distress and commercialoperations on 500kHz at 23592 on 3]December 1997.

Directed by John Chappell, SeniorRadio Operator, the video is 59 minuteslong. It is introduced by John who out-

lines the history of the coast station serv—ice in the UK including the Titanic CQDand SOS messages (copies of these ap—pear in the video).

The remainder of the presentation isin Morse, being recordingsof the four CQshutdown messages and the interchangebetween operators in the UK and Europe,and as far afield as VCM, SAA and SPE(a written transcript is provided).

The video shows the scene live atLand’s End Radio Station with footagefrom other stations. It is an excellentand moving record of the occasion, plac-ing on record the last poignant momentsof UK transmissions on 500kHz.

The video is available for £10.50 inthe UK; £11.49 Europe; £13.49 USAand elsewhere (all prices include postand packing), from Discovery Films,Kings Court, 17 School Road, HallGreen, Birmingham B28 8JG, England.Tel: 0121—743 4330. Fax 0121—742 4427.

Alternatively, from outside theUK, order by e—mail from: Discovery-Films@cornwall-online.co.ukclearly statingyour full postal address, to receive thevideo with an invoice for payment byEurocheque or sterling money order.

Discovery Films have a website at :http://www.cornwall-online.co.uk/discovery_films

G-QRP Club

498 Manchester Road, Rochdale,large s.a.e. or two IRCs

The G-QRP Club promotes and encourages low—power operatingon the amateur bands with activity periods, awards and trophies. Facilitiesinclude a quarterly magazine, Morse training tapes, kits, traders’ discountsand a QSL bureau. Novices and SWLs welcome.Enquiries to Rev. George Dobbs GaFtJV, St Aidan’s Vicarage,

Lancs OL11 3HE. Send a

MM60 - Octofier 1998

HE SEPTEMBER 1998 ISSUEof The World Wireless Beacon,Newsletter of the Society ofWire-

less Pioneers, Inc., contains two articlesabout the implementation of the GlobalMaritime Distress and Safety System(which will replace Morse at sea) due tobe implemented by 1 February 1999.(See MM38, p.8, for a detailed explana—tion ofwhat is involved. — Ed.)

Ben Russell, N6SL. a member of theGMDSS Task Force, writes “All com—mercial shipping was scheduled to haveGMDSS equipment up and running nolater than 1 February 1999. On this dateGMDSS ships will no longer use CW. Itshould be noted that the United StatesCoast Guard (USCG) will not haveDigital Selective Calling (DSC) up andrunning on MF or VHF, and will missthe deadline by at least one year.

“The International Maritime Organi—zation (IMO) had to revise its policy onVHF—FM to require that all commercialvessels will continue to monitor VHF—FM Channel 16 (156.8MHZ) until 1 Feb-ruary 2005, to permit GMDSS and nonGMDSS vessels to communicate. TheCoast Guard will continue to monitor2182kHz for SSB calls until their com-puter interface problems are solved.”

Different ApproachesHe says: “The FCC and the USCG

seem to have approached the GMDSS indifferent ways. The FCC requires that ‘US ships have two GMDSS operators,

8

GMDSS UpdateProblems Ahead

with one having only GMDSS duty dur-ing an emergency. The USCG supports‘the IMO srcw 95 (Standards of Train—ing, Certification, and WatchkeepingCommittee) which will require that alldeck officers receive several weeksof GMDSS training. Unfortunately, thesmall crew sizes and other responsibili—ties of the deck officers may not permitany of these trained personnel to be ful—ly available for distress communications.

“It would appear that our differentGovernment agencies have not fully co-operated with each other due to fiscalproblems. The FCC is reducing its per—sonnel who can monitor and inspectmaritime radio installations by permit-ting licensed technicians to performannual inspections and issue necessarySOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea) docu-ments.

‘

Serious Problems Ahead“One just has to listen to VHF—FM

Channel 16 on any weekend to hear thepoor procedures. That distress frequen-cy is not much better than the Citizens

MM60 — OctoEer 1998

Band these days and the FCC no longerrequires small personal vessels to haveFCC radio station licences or operatorlicences... The lack of ship licencesmakes identification of calls difficultbecause some private boat owners justuse personal names to call their friendson Ch. 16. ..

“It looks like deep sea ships mayhave a serious problem between 1 Feb—ruary 1999, and approximately 2005 dueto lack of shore facilities around theworld that have operational GMDSScapabilities and the loss of CW capabili-ties with trained operators at sea and onshore. At present there is a high falsealarm rate caused by poor training andby the system design.

“It may take a modern day Titanicdisaster to get correct the problemscaused by the IMO and GMDSS.”

A Personal ViewWill Halpin, KISMF, an active ship—

board Radio Electronics Officer, and anadjunct GMDSS instructor at the Amer-ican Maritime Officers School, who isalso on the mailing list for the GMDSSAdvisory Group, contributes a personalView of GMDSS today.

He says that although the system hassome good design elements “the biggestfly in the ointment is the way the ‘sys-tem’ is being implemented. Those in the‘innercircles’ of GMDSS planning seemto be isolated from the real world.

“In my travels around the states andthe globe I’ve had a lot of opportunitiesto converse with vessel operators, shore-side technicians, FCC inspectors, andUSCG personnel from seamen to fullCaptains. From SAR crews to ship Cap-

MMGO— Octafier 1998

tains, to Group Commanders, one thingis certain. In the real operational worldof GMDSS most individuals are still inthe dark as to its functions and its man-dates under CFR. .. Apparently the trick—le-down theory of economics is alsobeing applied to the dissemination ofGMDSS info.

99 Percent False Distress Alerts“Now add to the above the fact that

the system started its phase-in in Febru-ary of 1992 with a drop dead date of 1February 1999. All cargo ships over300gt and all passenger ships are re-quired to have the GMDSS gear installedby that date and have two GMDSS li-censed operators aboard. All fine anddandy except that the shoreside will not,repeat not, be in place.

“The VHF segment (A1 Sea Area)will most likely not be ready till 2005,as per the Coast Guard’s admission. TheMF DSC equipments already installedare giving them problems, thus the A2Sea Area portion of GMDSS is sporadicat best.

“Then factor in the fact that present-ly about 99 percent of the DSC DistressAlerts are proving to be false along withalmost as many false 406MHz EPIRB(Emergency Position-Indicating RadioBeacon) alerts. By the way, USCGcutters do not fall under the mandatedcarriage requirements so they will notbe equipped with SITOR or DSCcommunications.”

N0 Confidence in System“The equipment (at least most ship—

board types) is fairly reliable but there isno confidence in the system. You can’t

9

have a 99 percent ‘cry wolf’ figure andexpect people to have faith that GMDSSworks. On top of this, most commercialcargo ships have done away with theRadio Officer (an attentive reading of .the few lines of the TelecommunicationsReform Act of 1996 pertaining toGMDSS will actually prove there is NO irequirement to eliminate the R/O, theposition is just no longer mandated bylaw) so the Mates assume this functionalong with the dozens of other collateralfunctions they have on watch.

“In times of distress or emergenciesthis GMDSS designated primary opera—tor’s sole function is to set watch onthe Distress and Safety frequencies(80.1123), yet a check of most vessel’sEmergency Bill will show that this sameindividual has other designated respon—sibilities such as a Fire Party Leader, or ;supervising the lowering of the lifeboats,etc.

“For whatever reason, the USCGand FCC have yet to straighten this out.Shipping companies have vast politicalinfluence and Congressional inquiriessquelch enforcement effectively."

Not Their Job“Is it a safe system? I think not. At

least not in its present form. The philos-ophy of the Distress and Safety radiowatch is just not emphasized stronglyenough. The Mates are overburdened as

it is. Too many individuals (Captainsincluded) feel that it is not their job tokeep track of the safety of other vessels.Many refuse to maintain a proper radiolog or conduct proper routine testing, asmandated under the CFR, as they claimit interferes with the proper navigationof their vessel.

“They want to sail without an R/O,yet they refuse to truly accept the man-dated responsibilities that go along withthe new system. This of course doesn’tshow up on an annual FCC inspectionbecause these inspections are now beingconducted by the private sector. Usuallythe same company that has the contractfor ‘shoresidemaintenance’ gets the FCC

. inspection job as well. Talk about thefox guarding the hen house!”

CWStill Alive“As stated initially, this is just one

individual’s opinion. Is CW dead? Wellout here in the Far East 500kHz is alivewith vessel traffic and shore stations call-

% ing with their traffic lists. The same canbe said for the coast of South America.

“Can these same ships communicatewith a modern GMDSS equipped vesselother than by VHF? And even if they

‘ are within VHF range do they have com-mand of the English language as man-dated by the IMO for communicators?There’s a lot to be said for the old Q—

'37signals

Please mention Morsum MagnificatWhenresponding to advertisements

10 MM60 — Octofier 1998

ADVERTISEMENT

G4ZPYPADDLE KEYSINTERNATIONAL41 MILL DAM LANE, BURSCOUGH,

ORMSKIRK, LANcs., ENGLAND L40 7TGTEL/FAX (01704) 894299E-mail: g4zpy@|ineone.net

Web site: http://website.lineone.net/~g4zpy/index.htm

The 3-in-1 Combo

Use it as a Combo, or use the key on its own, orthe Iambic keyer on its own. Incorporatingthe TiCK-2 keyer chipfrom Embedded Research, with paddle or push—button control ofspeed, message memory, paddle selection, iambic mode, etc.Keyer or ready-assembled PCBs also available separately.

G4ZPYPaddle Keys International are Sole British & European distributorsfor ready-assembled TlCK»2 PCBS

All our keys are hand crafted and made to orderFor information on all our Products, just send a

9" X 4" S.A.S.E. (GB), or 2 IRCs Overseas

Mil/[60 — OctoEer 1998 11

VISITED MY SISTER’S FARMin Northland recently. On Satur-day evening, while everyone else

was watching the tube, I went out intothe still, clear night. I G-cramped theTrident mobile whip onto the roof—rackof the Holden, and fired up the FT7—BI keep in the back.

Eighty was alive but the QRN wasvery bad. From experience I knew thatSSB contacts with my 30W into the whipwould be difficult. N0 sensible SSB opwould want to talk to a weak portablesignal on such a difficult night.

But this rig had a good filter, therewas plenty of CW activity, and CWQSOs were no problem at all. I felt likeCW anyway, so I spent a pleasant 20minutes alternately fingering the paddleand copying in my head while watchingthe stars. We don’t see them like that inAuckland city any more.

While I was Morsing away and con-templating the thermonuclear reactors inthe sky, my brother-in-law Robbie heardthe faint music of Morse drifting in thewindow and emerged to see what I wasdoing. He stayed for an hour while Itranslated, word for word, the code thatthe ops on the other end were sending tome (I can only do that up to about 20wpm, copying from the speaker), andgave him a résumé of what I was send—ing back on the keyer. Between QSOshe plied me with questions. How did thepaddle work? How fast was I sending?How did I learn to do this?

12

CW Under the Stars— and more

by Dr Gary Bold ZL1AN

Foodfor ThoughtNow packet radio (which I’ve dem—

onstrated to him before) leaves Robbieunimpressed. He’s a software consult-ant, and spends his days doing complexthings with databases, statistical softwareand the world wide web on high—endPentiums with a zillion megabytes ofRAM.

For him, packet can’t compete withthe Internet. Nattering on SSB doesn’tgrab him either, because yuppies cannow talk across the world with the port-able brain—fryers carried in their three-piece suits. But he’d never seen or hearda CW QSO before, and he was veryimpressed.

It intrigued him to see a commun-ication mode in which a human is afundamental, bionic part of the signalprocessing chain. If he ever gets a ticket(I’m working on him), he’ll definitelybe a CW man.

Food for thought. A few years backmany of us surmised that computers

MM60 — OctoEer 1998

and digital modes would provide thenew technology to attract bright youngpeople into Hamming. But along camecheap telephone modems and the Inter-net. That was easy, fun, and requiredno licence. They went that-a—way! But(oddly some think) CW retains its fas-cination, and even appears to begrowing in popularity.

Morse is Far FromDeadThe following message (edited) ap—

peared on the ZLlAB packet bulletinboard from a VK operator:

‘CW won’t go away JUST YET. Iwas asked by my father—in-law (not anamateur) if I thought it would ever van—ish from the planet. After due delibera-tion I decided that it would not. I see itas joining a long line of time-honouredoccupations which people pursue be—cause they want to.

‘Steam trains still run; people stillride horseswhile othersmake horseshoesfor said nags; some people enjoy spin-ning yarn; many, like myself, brew ourown beer, etc. You can still find a stone-mason if you want one or, indeed, youcan become one! People still seek radioswhich have valves in them; digital watch—es haven’t annihilated the watches whichhave pointers whizzing around insteadof LCD displays.’

I agree. Morse is far from dead. Ifyou’re experienced enough to both readit and tell your shack visitorswhat you’rereading while it’s coming in (like I didwith Robbie), you’ll probably find theythink it quite fascinating. Try it some-time.

This, in fact, is how I got hookedwhen my father took me as a schoolboy

MM60 — Octofier 1998

to visit the magic cave of Tom ZLING.His effortless Morsemanship was thecall of the Lorelei that lured me intoradio, and eventually changed my lifeby making me a physicist. The magichas never died.

EvaluatingMorse SendingSince December, 1994, I’ve been

conducting an evaluation of computer-aided Morse testing on behalf of theNZART. So in the last couple of yearsI’ve listened to a lot of Morse sent bycandidates and learners. I’ve also an-swered a lot of questions.

Most people know when they’re upto the receiving standard, but are unsurewhat the examiner will make of theirfist. So one of the most common ques-tions I’m asked is ‘How can I be suremy sending is good enough to pass thetest?’

My standard answer is ‘If my Morsereading software can read you, the ex-aminer will certainly pass you.’ Actual-ly, a computer doesn’t have to be ableto read your Morse to get a pass, but ifit can, that guarantees it.

For those who couldn’t seem toget the hang of it, I’ve also conductedinformal ‘sending clinics’. I find that in30 minutes I’m able to straighten out alot of problems. It’s a bit like learninggolf or tennis — you have to get the grip,timing and rhythm right, and the restfollows naturally. You may have to un—learn some bad habits, and this is thehardest bit.

MajorProblemHow do you evaluate whether a

candidate’s sending is ‘good enough’?

13

In the Netherlands, you send to acomputer, and you’re graded on what itthinks of you. This is pretty tough.

In all other places I’m aware of,you’re evaluated by an experiencedhuman listening to what you send. Butwhile a computer algorithm can bespecified exactly, the algorithm appliedby a human can’t. A human has tojudge subjectively. Realising this, allMorse testers I know err on the side of .leniency.

My own sending—test software usesthe computer as an audio monitor, andalso attempts to decode the candidate’ssending on the screen. However, achiev—ing a ‘pass’ depends only on whether Iand my co—tester can read what was sent,in our heads.

The criterion we apply is: ‘Could thisperson send well enough to be under-stood in a QSO?’ If the answer is yes,and the speed is 12 wpm or greater, wegive a pass. The major problem we haveis gettingjittery candidates to slow down,and leave enough space between theircharacters and words.

Changing to a KeyerA letter from Wes, VK2WES, says:

“I read with interest your ‘changing to akeyer’ article in MorsumMagnificat, Nr42, where you commented on learningto use a straight key and paddle with theleft hand, and a bug with the right.

‘This is exactly the technique I hadadopted. Fortunately, I have a tendencyto be ambidextrous. Quite often I con-duct a warm-up QSO with myself,sending back and forth with paddle andbug. Friends find this amusing and dis—concerting! My speeds are a moderate

14

20—22 wpm, which is my achievementlevel 5 years after learning the code.

‘Usingthe paddle and keyer has beena great help in correcting my bug send—ing. During my learning period I alsoused the sound of the keyer code tocorrect that of my straight key. Havinglearned to use the paddle iambically Inow certainly notice the difference inthe various emulations of the ‘CMOSSuperkeyer’.’

1 Assorted Tips from my FilesOver the years, learners have sent

me tricks they have found useful. Doyou have the problem of ‘guessingahead’ and predicting, erroneously, whatword you’re copying? This is verycommon. Eventually, and sometimessuddenly, it goes away. Tricks to hastenit along are:' Use a finger of the left hand to coverup each letter after you copy it. (Youcan’t see the previous letters).' Write with a knitting needle on a dual-sheet ‘carbon copy’ blank. (You can’tsee anything you’ve written, but you canread it afterwards on the bottom copy)- Write with the eyes closed.- Type the copy on a computer with thescreen intensity right down (only forgood typists).- Try to think about something else.

Odd as someof these remedies sound,they have all been used successfully tobreak the habit by somebody.

We’ve Got it Made!How come CW ‘penetrates’ better?

Because of three factors: firstly a CWsignal is either off or at full power — it’smore efficient than SSB.

{MEM60 — Octolier 1998

Secondly, the human ear/brain pro—cessing algorithms are much better atdetecting a single tone than they are atinterpreting a complex signal like SSBspeech in noise.

Thirdly, CW filters can be muchnarrower than SSB filters, giving upto 10dB better signal-to-noise ratio.Hence a barefoot 30W CW signal willget through many times when a lkWSSB signal won’t.

Usually, I estimate that we have about

a 15dB advantage, because of the nar-1

rowband, efficient, tonal nature of CW;

Bold’s

more than this when the bands are crowd—ed. That’s why so many CW operatorscan work so much DX with wire anten—nas and low power. We’ve got it made!

(This selection of items from Gary‘The Morseman’ column, in

various issues of Break—In, journal ofNZART, has been specially edited forMM.)

Readers ’fllflsFOR SALE

HUGE VARIETY of sounders and re—lays for sale or trade. All clean and com—plete, $50 each. Also, Instructograph forsale or trade, early wind-up all mechani-cal model with 17 tapes for Continentaland Morse practice sessions, includingrailroad and stock market practice tapes.Good shape, $75, shipping extra.Dave Pennes, 4607—C Santa Cruz Drive,Indianapolis, IN 46268—5354, USA.Tel: (317) 471—9605.18 PAGE ILLUSTRATEDLIST allkinds of telegraph related items surplusto my needs. $3.00 plus equivalent of 4US stamps ($5.00 refund on $25 pur-chase). Dr. Joseph Jacobs, 5 YorktownPlace, Fort Salonga, NY 11768. Phone:516-261—1576. Fax: 516—754-4616.E-mail: joekey@aol.comTHE MM Q & Z CODEBOOK, acomprehensive list of the Q-codes andZ-codes, including a one-page list of theoriginal Q—codes of 1912. Available fromDick Kraayveld PA3ALM, Merellaan209, 3145 EH Maassluis, Holland. Price

MM60 — OctaEer 1998

£5 UK, or US$10.00 outside UK, in—cluding postage in both cases. Paymentaccepted in cash only.PHOTOCOPIES OF BACK ISSUESof MM. All out-of—print issues available.Price per copy, by airmail (US dollars,cash only): Europe $7.00; Africa/Amer-ica $8.00; Oceania $10.00. JeronimoOrellana R, EA3DOS, Av Roma 10,

‘ 08015 Barcelona, Spain.(Note: Original copies of some back is-sues are still availablefromthe editori-al office at regular prices. See insidefront coverfor details. — Ed.)

WANTED

WANTED, DEADOR ALIVE! Doubleneedle telegraph. I am also looking forother ‘special’ telegraph apparatus. FonsVanden Berghen, Lenniksesteenweg462/22, B-1500 HALLE, Belgium. Tel:+32—16-3827 21 (day) or +32-2—3560556 (evening). Fax: +32—16-38 24 38.E-mail: fovabe@telindus.beCOPY OF MM ISSUE No 23. NeilFisher GMOEFQ, 1 Parsonage Cottages,Millhill Lane, Musselburgh, MidlothianEH21 7RD, Scotland.

15

N MM59, p.58, under the heading‘Two for the Price of One’, JackBarker asked for information

about his Switchbox 24 Volt Ref No.5C/3023, obviously intended for aircraftuse, which contains two Morse keys. Inresponse, Ian Mant* G4WWX has pro-vided MM with a copy of AP 1095A,Chapter 18 (dated 1945), which coversthis unit.

In summary, the unit is properlydesignated PANEL, LIGHTING CON—TROL 24 VOLT, TBR, and is primarilyintended for use on Fleet Air ArmTorpedo—Bomber—Reconnaissance air—craft. Another type, Stores Ref. 5C/3108,has the suffix ABR, signifying use onAmphibious Bomber-Reconnaissanceaircraft.

The panels are designed to centralisethe control of all external lights on small—er aircraft whose general services aresupplied at 24 volts. Both types weighapproximately 41b (1 .814kg).

The AER panel is identical to theTBR panel except that on the former asteaming light switch is substituted forthe tail light switch. When the four pan-el fixing screws are undone, the panel asa whole can be removed from the backof the case which is attached to the air—frame. The two screws on the panel lo-cated beneath the Morse keys adjust thetravel of the keys. The Stores Referenceof the Morse keys is 5C/3027.

The panel has a weatherproof fabriccover which completely encloses the

16

Fleet Air ArmPanel, LightingControl 24 Volt

lighting controls. When it is required tooperate the switches the cover is rolledup and held in position on top of thepanel by a fabric strap secured by a pressstud.

The Morse key on the left of thepanel controls the formation lights. Theright-hand key is designated the GEN-ERAL Morse key. This controls signal-ling (when required) of the upwardidentification light, the tail navigationand the recognition lights, These lightsmay be flashed independently, collec-tively, or in any required combination,according to the position of the appro-priate selector switches.

Other controls on the panel are forResin lights“), and a Steaming light“)(only on ABR panels, utilising the tail—light switch as an on—off switch).

MM60 — Octofier 1998

Photo/Collection:

Jack

Barker

i3

1

$1, 2::it?) (‘9’ "m nM-

12

13

i I I0

1. Formation mots: key 6. Up ident. switch 11. Navigation dimmer switch2. Formation morsc, ctc., switch 7. Mots: kcy, GENERAL 12. Navigation tail lamp switch3. Formation main switch 8. Recognition main switch 13. Panel fixing scrcws4. Formation dimmcr switch 9. Recognition sclcctor switch 14. Morse key travel adjusters5. Resin switch 10. Navigation main switch

Front Viewof TBR panel with controls identified (from AP 1095A)

MMEO — OctoEer 1998 1 7

RAF Use?John Elwood, WW7P, also sent de-

tails of his 5C/3023 panel which wasadvertised by International Military An-tiques, Inc., in 1995. The advertisement,shown below, suggests that the unit wasused in RAF heavy bombers such as theLancaster, as opposed to the smaller air—craft specified in AP 1095A.

Ian Mant reports that he has recentlyalso seen advertisements for the TBRpanels claiming that they were used inLancasters. He has, however, providedMM with a copy of the identification,recognition and navigation lighting cirvcuit diagram for Lancaster aircraft Mks.Iand III taken from the official RAF main—tenance handbook (AP 2062A) for theLancaster. This clearly shows that theselights are controlled by two No. 5C/372

Identification Switchboxes of the typereferred to in MM30/p.18, MM31/p.47,and MM33/p.136.

Confusion over RAF use may havebeen caused by the availability of sur—plus lighting control panels in their orig-inal Air Ministry marked cartons, andtheirAM StoresReference 5C/3023; alsoby the fact that AP 1095A, Chapter 18of which specifies their use in Fleet AirArm aircraft, is an RAF manual (RAFForm 2190).

It is assumed that the aviation equip-ment used by both the RAF and the FleetAir Arm during WWII must have beenprovided via the Air Ministry. If anyreader can confirm this, please contactMM.

Further InformationSought(a) Ref: (1) Can any reader explain‘resin lights’ please, and(b) Ref: (2) ‘steaming light’?(c) Is the Lighting Control Panel famil-iar to any reader who flew in, or workedon RAF as opposed to Fleet Air Armaircraft?

BRITISH MIF T944 LIGHTINGCONTROL PflNEL

Used in British Bombers such as Lancasters, etc.These are the detachable lighting control consoleswith a host of switches, levers and morse keys to

, control the aircrafts lighting and morse code‘

systems. Contained in a 9"x4"x3" removable unit- complete with it’s own integral canvas cover; this“Nerve System” could be instantly replaced alterspecified flight hours. Contained in the original AM.(Air Ministry) and Crown marked cardboard cartonDATED 1944. Lighting Control Panel, complete,excellent to unissued condition .......... $49.95 (BA4052)

Advertisement for ‘British FiAF 1944 Lighting Control Panei‘

18 MM60 — OctaEer 1998

\ STEADY - 'SWlTCHHOX l9ENTlFlCATi0N"

.qujnimrfim

Identification Switchbox No. 50/372, as used inLancasters andmany other RAFaircraft

(d) Can anyone identify typical FleetAir Arm aircraft of the period comingwithin the designations TBR and ABRas described in AP 1095A?

(*MM reader Ian Mant trades as ‘Vin—tage Technical Services’, supplying cop-ies of technical manuals on vintagemilitary equipment. His current cata-

Photo/Coilection:Murray Wi/ier, VE3FFIX

logue comprises 54 pages x A4, listingall manuals available in equipment al-

‘

phanumerical orderand in manual codenumber order. Enquiries should be ad-dressed to Vintage Technical Services,28 WelbourneRoad, Liverpool L16 6A],enclosing an SAE. Telephone enquiries:0151—722 1178.)

MM

\.’]V ll from traders.FISTS CW Club- The International Morse Preservation Society

FISTS exists to promote amateur CW activity. it welcomes members withC all levels of Morse proficiency,and especially newcomers to the key.W The club has awards, nets (including a beginners' net), dial-a--s-ked tor* beginners straight key activities QSL bureau, newsletter, and discounts

Further information can be obtained from Geo. Longden 63203, 119Cemetery Road Darwen, Lancs BBS 2L2. Send an s.a e. or two lRCs.

MM60 — October 1998 19

N 31 MARCH 1995, theUS Coast Guard formallyceased CW operations, af—

ter 94 years of service. Several monthsprevious, both the US Navy and Ma-rines had also ceased all CW operations.

Since 1995 many other Governmentand commercial communications serv-ices have abandoned the use of CW.Today, there are very few, if any com—mercial operations using CW as a modeof communications. In a world of satel-lite communications, wide—band fibreoptic, Internet and very—high-capacitydigital networks, this is as it should be.Let’s face it, CW has no place in today’s‘Information Super—highways’. In to—day’s Amateur Radio, CW competeswith high—speed, 56 and 128—KB packetbackbones, as well as Amtor, Pactor,Clover and other modes of digital trans—mission. We can transmit vast volumesof information keyboard to keyboard,computer to computer, faster than onecan send a paragraph of text at 60 wpmCW.

FrequenciesCovetedWhere we Amateurs used to be inno—

vators at the forefront of the state of theart in communications, now we barelykeep up. Other services covet our valu—able frequencies, from HF to microwave.As well, the Amateur Radio Servicefaces pressures from governments tojustify its continued existence.

In the spring of 1995, the govem—

20

The Meaning of CWIs CW an

Archaic Relic of the Past?

by Ed Sieb VA3ES

ment of New Zealand made a decisionto actively seek the suppression of thepertinent ITU regulation that requiresMorse code proficiency for Amateurslicensed to operate below 30MHZ. TheZL government was repeatedly ‘bn'efed’at great length by ‘ORACLE’, an organ—isation actively seeking to abolish CWrequirements for Hams in New Zealand.Informed insiders have indicated that‘ORACLE’ is a lobby group composedof CB radio retailers and CB groups inNew Zealand.

NZART, (the New Zealand nationalorganisation) came out strongly opposedto no-code, dismissing ORACLE as a‘small loud-mouthed organisation of nosignificance’. ORACLE openly declaredtheir intent to bypass the nationalamateur radio organisations and lobbygovernment directly to eliminate CW.

Point MissedAnd yet, through all this, ARRL and

the International Amateur Radio Unioncontinue to back the retention of CW asa requirement for licensing! Can youimagine? In this day and age! RAC

EMM60 — OctaEer 1998

(Canada’s national radio society) accept-ed the dropping of Morse as a treatyrequirement but did not back the removalof Morse as a ‘technical and operationalqualification’ for amateur radio exami—nations.

Well — those good ol’ hideboundAmateur organisations are right!

Yes, CW is archaic. Yes, it is slowand cumbersome compared to moderndigital modes. So what? All these factsare irrelevant. The facts of CW’s speedand traffic handling capacity are irrele—vant to the whole argument. Those whowould continuously harp on these mean-ingless statistics, simply miss the wholepoint of CW. The continuing relevanceof CW today and on through to the nextcentury has NOTHING to do with itsactual utility in sending traffic!

CW the Culture ofHam RadioCW (or Morse Code, if you wish)

is absolutely essential to the AmateurRadio service and is an essential part ofwhat gives Ham radio its meaning. Tolearn the Morse Code, is to open one’sheart (and mind) to the essence of HamRadio and to grasp its soul. (I believethat CW is fundamentally necessary forAmateur Radio and that it is also itsheart and soul.)

Ham Radio would be just a cold,calculating hobby without it. The HamRadio language, its jargon, wouldn’texist without it. Oh, sure we might havesome other kind of radio slang, but Ibet it would be borrowed from truckersand other users of ‘personal radio’. Wewouldn’t have Q signals or 73. And wedefinitely wouldn’t have a history. Sim-ply put, CW is the source of and forms

Mill/[60 — OctoEer 1998

the basis for the culture of Ham Radio.

Ham Without CW IlliterateTo be a ‘Radio Amateur’ is be a

‘lover’ of radio, one who studies it andappreciates it as an art. Other ‘amateurs’of art, of music, become lay experts intheir fields. They study the subject his-torically, philosophically, even sociolo—gically and develop a true appreciationof the subject in its entirety.

To reject a single important histori—cal aspect of an art or a culture, becauseit is ‘archaic’ is to lack even the mostbasic comprehension of the subject onepurports to love! To learn CW is to makea connection with Ham Radio’s past andits history. Learning CW means that onehas learned the basic reference points ofthe hobby.

An analogy: to acquire my Universi-ty degree, I had to take a few coursesthat I considered at the time quite irrele-vant. I took some Humanities coursesthat studied the role of Women in BluesMusic! I studied railroad hoboes of the1930s in my sociology classes! I studiedNietzsche, Hegel and Kant in my ‘Poli-Sci’ courses.

At the time, I wondered what theusefulness of all this was and what ithad to do with Communications andMedia, my major. Today, I appreciatethat those ‘irrelevant’ subjects made mea more literate, more well rounded per—son. Well, not to put too fine a point onit, in my opinion, a Ham without CW issimply ‘illiterate’!

Lack Fundamental UnderstandingToday, in those countries which have

‘no—code’ licences (mainly Canada and

21

the US), among the more ‘veteran’, long-time hams, there has developed a mildlycynical attitude, bordering on contemptfor the newer ‘no-code’ VHF operators.

They’re derisively referred to as ‘2-metre CBers’. This view stems from theperception that these new Hams lack thefundamental understanding of the rootsof the hobby and that without code,they’re ‘stuck on 2 metres’, unwilling orunable to expand their radio horizons.(In fact, those no—coders who came fromthe CB ranks, without CW upgrading,often continue to operate on 11 metres.Those who’ve upgraded and have HFprivileges, tend to abandon 11 metrescompletely.)

For their part, some no—coders com—plain that they feel like second-classcitizens within the Amateur community,neither fully accepted, nor able to fullyparticipate in AmateurRadio. They claimthat the increasingly irrelevant need for‘proficiency’ in CW places an arbitraryand artificial obstacle in their paths. Theysuggest that being ‘stuck on 2 metres’ isboring and is causing some to lose allinterest in the hobby.

Short-changingThemselvesTraditionally in Canada, once 1i—

censed, Hams always had the oppor—tunity to get involved in any aspect ofthe hobby without limitations. VeteranHams are convinced that ‘no-coders’ areshort—changing themselves, by failing toupgrade. This saddens many veterans asthey see this as a drastic change in thesociology of their beloved hobby; achange for the worse.

Here’s my suggestion for an appro-priate CW requirement for the late ’90s

22

and beyond. I’m not suggesting that onemust know 15 wpm or even 10 wpm toget a Ham ticket. What I’d like to see isthat every prospective Ham, whateverband they will operate, above 30MHz orbelow, be required to comprehend allthe letters, numbers and punctuation.TheCW receiving exam might be somethingsimple such as 100% copy of all charac—ters sent at a slow speed, say possibly5 wpm or so.

Failure to Appreciatethe MeaningofHam Radio

The speed itself is not critical, solong as there is 100 percent copy of allletters, numbers and punctuation, sentduring a ‘reasonable’period of time. Thesuccessful candidate would then acquirea ‘scheduled’ licence allowing HF phoneoperation in certain segments of thebands, or possible restriction to certainbands only.

Full band privileges would be ac—quired by upgrading the qualificationsthrough either a more strenuous CWexam or a tougher technical exam, what-ever the candidate’s choice.

To those who wish to become Hams,but adamantly reject CW and stubbom—ly refuse to learn the code, I say too bad!These persons have failed to appreciatethe meaning of Ham Radio and its ‘cul-ture’ and neither do they understand it.Ham Radio is not just some fancy, hightech means of communication. It’s acommunity, a service and a traditionwith deep roots and a long history. HamRadio is the whole reason for moderncommunications technology. Hams in-vented wireless communications; with—out us, there might not be any Internet

MM60 — Octofier 1998

ADVERTISEMENT

3. Knob set: knob and underskjrt. $5.

mounting shaft. $3 per pair, $20 for 10 pairs.

instructions. $23.

CAL-AV LABS, INC.1802 W. Grant Road, Suite 116Tucson, AZ 85745, USA

' Attention amateur key makers!The following parts, used in the manufactureA A of the Eureka hand key, are now available:1. Navy-style knob; moulded black phenolic, has 8-32 threaded stud protruding 0.3 inch. $2.50.2. Black acrylic underskirt. 1.5 inch dia. and 0.125 inch thick. $3.50.

4. Deluxe knob kit: 3 knobs, 3 underskirts, 8-32 tap and tap drill. $19.5. Contacts, solid silver alloy; 0.120 inch dia. hemisphere with 0.054 inch dia. 0.045 long

6. Deluxe contact kit: 10 pairs contacts, 0.052 inch dia. drill, Teflon setting block, and

Prices are in U.S. dollars. Minimum order: U.S.$15.00.

VOICE: 520.624.1300FAX: 520.624.1311E-MAIL: calav@flash.net

today! Let’s not destroy the very sparkat the soul of the hobby.

Am I being too ‘orthodox’ in myviews?Or am I being an extremist?Whatdo you think?

(From Groundwave, bulletin of the

Ottawa Amateur Radio Club, October1995, slightly revised by the author toreflect the current position of RAC,Canada’s national radio organisation.Copies of comments received will bepassed to the author. — Ed.)

Should Women be Sparks? -Question in Congress

(From The Marconigraph 1912)Since the United States Government appoint-ment of Miss Mabel Kelso to the position ofwireless operator on the liner Mariposa atSan Francisco, and also the opening up un—officially of wireless telegraphy to womenoperators both in Canada and the UnitedStates. the question has been raised in Con-gress as to whether a woman should beentrusted with the protection of lives inthis responsible position.

The Department of Commerce and La-bour, at the time of Miss Kelso’s appoint-ment, held that there was nothing in thepresent law to prevent women from assum-ing charge of a wireless apparatus.

Miss Edith Coombs has been appointedwireless operator on the steamer Roanokewhich sailed recently from San Francisco to

MEM60 — October 1998

Short 93erPortland and Astoria. Miss Coombs is thesecond woman operator on the Pacific coast.It appears there has been some oppositionto Miss Coombs going to sea as a wirelessoperator on the ground that gallantry on thepart of the men of the vessel would notallow her to remain at her post during anaccident.

But Miss Coombs insists that the travel—ling public need have no fear as to theirsafety on her account, as she has decided toremain at her post of duty until ‘the lastflickering spark of electricity’ can be sentfrom the vessel.

If necessary, she declares her intentionto remain on board with the captain until thelast soul has been cared for and the signalsof distress sent.

23

N 1955 I EARNED my dailybread working as a radio operatoron board a Norwegian freighter,

making regular voyages between the eastcoast of the USA and the Caribbean.

Being a very serious radio amateuras well as a professional radio operator,I loved to be in the radio cabin where Iwas in ‘command’. Apart from carryingout my normal duties, I could experi—ment to my heart’s content, adjustingreceivers, transmitters and auxiliaryequipment.

I had the freedom to try out variousforms of aerials. Problems with neigh—bours concerning BCI or TVI did notexist. In my view everything I did wasin the best interest of the ship, and ofsafety of life at sea in general. Who wasto complain?

IncreasedPowerFrom the start it

was clear to me thatthe main transmit—ter, which had thesize and shape of awardrobe, wouldperform much bet-ter after a smallalteration. Themanual specified300 watts HF output,but obviously 3 x 813valves in parallel can deliver so muchmore. The operation took just one dayand the results were astounding, increas—

24

Reflections fromUncle Bas - 26

In Praise of Stanleyby Bastian van Es PAORTW

ing the power to over 500 watts in theaerial.

Naturally the coast stations did notdetect any difference in signal strength,but I felt very proud that I knew so muchmore (’2) than the engineerswho designed

the rig in the first place.It was a pity,

though, that I didnot have enoughtools. With onevoltmeter, a screw-driver and a smallpair of pliers I wassupposed to keepthe equipment inshape. In my opin—ion this was not suf—ficient, but Captain

Eigil Vesti did not liketo spend a dime on things

he did not consider useful. He refused tosign the list of required tools which Ihad meticulously written down.

MM60 — Octofier 1998

Fruitful PeriodHowever when I informed him of ‘

the hourly rates of American radio tech—nicians, adding that I could do the samerepairs for ‘free’, he reluctantly signedmy order form. In the two years thatfollowed on that ship, I constructed andcreated more electronic gadgets than inthe rest of my radioamateur career.

Once, when wewere dischargingsugar in New Orle—ans I was in urgentneed of a smallhand—drill. In the en-gine room therewere several drillsavailable but all ofthose were muchtoo heavy and bigfor the small chassisI was working on.

So I went ashore and bought a Stanleyhand—drill in a hardware store in down-town New Orleans just a few blocksfrom where our ship had docked. Thissmall tool was only five dollars, in fact$4.99, nevertheless it functioned perfect—ly and I have used it very often and for along time without any problems. To beexact, for 45 years!

V

CSTOMERRELATIONS

Thank You Stanley!A few months ago the gearwheel

broke. What to do?In the city where I live the young

staff of the hardware stores did not un-derstand or maybe did not want to un-derstand my request concerning therepair of a Stanley drill. In a friendlyway, they advised me to buy an electric

MM60 — October 1998

u. 7'5 YEMS 460.. ,

drill. This was so much easier to use,and more handsome too.

But I just wanted my old Stanleyrepaired. I didn’t want a new Black andDecker. In fact I already had an electricdrill in my toolbox. Sadly I wrote a longletter to the Stanley factory in USA, ex—plaining the situation. I did not expect

an answer, after all mypurchase was 45 yearsago.

Three weeks af-ter I mailed my let-ter I was absolutelyflabbergasted whenthe mailmandropped a thick en—velope in my letter—box containing abrand new gearwheel — free of

charge. Today I re—paired my Stanley hand—drill

and I have to say that it is now function—ing just like it did when I bought it.Perfect. Absolutely amazing.

Accordingly, I feel obliged to writethis article as a compliment to StanleyInc, in New Britain, USA. Who dares tospeak of poor service! MM

When I went to sea in I 950, the stand-ard radio room tool kit in British mer-chant ships comprised: knife; adjustablespanner; wireman ’s pliers; screwdriver;DC voltmeter for checking HT and LTbatteries; battery hydrometer and a4—02 reel of20swg tinned copper wire.

Anything more was bought and paidfor by the senior operator, and I met morethan one ChiefR/O who kept his preciousMulticore solder in the safe! — Ed.

25

URING the first years ofWWI, the German Armyintercepted Allied forward

communications carried through tele—phone and buzzer telegraph systems con-nected via single wire and earth return.The Fullerphone was invented in an at—tempt to stop this breach of security.

It was a DC Morse instrument ofhigh sensitivity. A keyed small current(microamps), not capable of intercep-tion by induction or earth leakage, wascarried by line to the receiving instru-ment where it was converted to an audiosignal by a vibrating ‘chopper’.

This solved the problem of ‘eaves—dropping’ and interception became im—possible except by connecting a similarinstrument to the line. It was so success—ful that it was the only WW1 telegraphinstrument which remained in use upthe end of WWII.

ReplacementforMorse SounderSetsAfter the war, on 24 April 1919, a

paper ‘The Fullerphone, and its Appli-cation to Military and Civil Telegraphy’,by (then) Major A.C. Fuller, was read tothe Institution of Electrical Engineers inLondon. Fuller described in detail, thedevelopment of the Fullerphone, its cir-cuitry, and its advantages in military op-erations.

He went on to suggest that in thelight of experiments and trials recentlymade, the Fullerphone could replaceMorse sounder sets on any hand—worked

26

Major Fullerand the

Fullerphoneby Tony Smith

There have been two previousarticles in MM relating to thissubject. ‘The Fullerphone’(MM5, p.29), outlined the

history and operation of thisBritish military field telegraphinstrument, and ‘Who BuzzedFirst?’ (MM26, p.12) described,among other things, the claimof Alfred Charles Brown to

have patented a similar devicesome 19 years before CaptainA.C. Fuller, RE, invented the

Fullerphonein 1915

line in civil telegraphy. He listed theadvantages that could be expected:(a) Greater saving of battery power.(b) Simplicity of office wiring andmanipulation of instruments.(c) Very long distances could be cov—ered without translation or relaying.(d) Maintenance of lines could be re—duced to a minimum.(e) Lines could be of very high resist—ance — with strength probably becoming

MEM60 — Octofier 1998

lipinjackreceiversockets

w. a); Buzzer /DSecondary choke choke “11 1‘?T U Head receiver (o

000 R:l

t EI

w mth 1111de j midi ,7“ L * 250 Y2 ‘13 X‘gtu-ELI} M 1-6 12Potentiomctcr

o

_._A_L._

-d

2—.—

I’

P—l

.4 i Jdmicro: sodte s

Circuit of the Fullerphone

the ruling factor rather than conductiv-ity.(f) Lines could be very leaky; contactswith foliage, etc., being of slight impor—tance(g) No disturbance whatever was causedto neighbouring or parallel telephonecircuits, and no disturbance need befeared to telephone circuits when theFullerphone was superposed.(h) It would be possible to work longstretches of land line and then cable andland line again without any conversionor re—transmission, although these pos—sibilities had not yet been tested to thelimit.

To make the Fullerphone more suit—able for office use, a different method of

‘

calling had been devised (instead of themilitary ‘buzzer’ calling system); and amultiple chopper could be provided,located outside the instrument room toavoid the noisy distraction of a numberof choppers working together in thetelegraph office.

MM60 — OctoEer 1998

Fuller had constructed multiplechoppers to deal with 6 and 10 circuitseach, driven by a 4-volt accumulator,requiring only about 150 milliamperesto provide chopping for all the instru—ments as well as signalling currents forall the lines.

Exchange WorkingFor exchange working, Fuller

claimed that it made little difference tothe signal whether the line over which itwas transmitted was 100 miles, longer,or shorter. “Hence the present necessityfor re-transmission at intermediate sta-tions is removed and direct throughplugging can be employed.”

He also claimed that by the use ofauxiliary apparatus the system could beused for recording of signals at relative-ly high speeds. By means of a specialrelay designed by Capt. LB. Turner, RE,modified for high speed work, “the auralsignal received can be readily madeto operate an ordinary telegraph relay

27

at high speed, hence direct-printingsystems such as the Creed can beemployed.”

“In the same way, the signalsreceived can, after amplification, beuprighted and made to give beautifulrecords on a siphon or other recordingdevice.”

CablesFuller reported that he had not yet

had an opportunity to ascertain to whatextent the system could be applied ad-vantageously to cable practice. However,he felt that with the (then) currentknowledge of amplifiers, and the possi—bilities opened up by experience withthe 3-electrode valve, great advantagesin submarine telegraphy were assured.

The normal audible signal from theFullerphone was suitable to apply tothe grid of an amplifying valve via asuitable transformer.

ConclusionsSumming up, he stated that for

military work the Fullerphone had prac—tically superseded the vibrating systemformerly employed. It was now beingtried for working long lines in backareas where it would almost certainlyreplace all Army hand—worked Morsesounder sets. These Fullerphones wereto be of two patterns — the trenchFullerphone, weatherproofed and wellprotected, for the forward area; and theoffice pattern further in the rear.

“For civilian use, one cannot expectsounder sets that are established and giv—ing satisfaction over well-constructedroutes to be discarded in favour ofFullerphones; but it is expected that the

28

advantages to be derived from the newsystem will lead to its adoption in coun—tries not already thoroughly developedfrom a telegraphic standpoint.

“An opening should also arise intropical countries where maintenancedifficulties are considerable — and it isprobably not too much to say that thesystem would give satisfaction wherever

.

difficulties from any cause render Morsesounder working precarious.

“For cable work the author feels —with due deferenceto certain experiencedsubmarine telegraph engineers — that aninvestigation of the possibilities of a sys-tem combining Fullerphone, amplifiers,special existing relays, and recordingand printing devices, would prove veryprofitable.”

Early DifficultiesIn the discussion that followed, there

was a mixed, and sometimes hostilereception to Major Fuller’s paper, espe—cially to his suggestions concerning thepossible use of the Fullerphone in civiltelegraphy.

Lieut.—Colonel Evans, RE, referredto difficulties that had occurred in theArmy on the first introduction of theFullerphone. It was introduced in a hur—ry and sufficient previous instruction inits use could not be given. This resultedin considerable prejudice against theinstrument which was gradually beingovercome, although a good deal stillremained.

He attributed this to the lack of in-struction in the first instance, to certaindefects in the earlier pattern of the in—strument, and to the fact that numerouspatterns were subsequently produced,

MM60 — OctaEer 1998

Fu/Ie/phone Mk. III, 1918. Note folding keyPhoto/Collection:Pat Allely GW3KJW

MM60 - Octofier 1998 29

with the result that two ends of a linemight have different types of instrument“which the operators could not explainto each other”.

One other original difficulty, whichwas not properly explained to users, wasthe disturbance from earth currents orleakage currents. The instrument was re—designed, and a potentiometer introducedto overcome the problem, but again lackof instruction created great difficultiesthat could have been avoided had therebeen more time in which to instruct bothoperators and officers.

Although there was still some preju-dice against the Fullerphone, it was theintention that it should be widely adopt—ed in the Army, although it was notyet possible to say when the sounder orbuzzer would be discarded.

Prior Invention ClaimedReference was made at the meeting

to two earlier specifications of a Frenchtelegraph engineer, Clement Ader, gen-erally on the same lines as the Fuller—phone, namely weak DC currents to theline, chopped up by rotary commutatorsat the receiving end. These were cov-ered by Patents Nos. 7625 and 17528 of1887 (see MM26, p.15, for more detailsofthe latter. 7 Ed.).

Mr A.C. Brown, while congratulat-ing the author on the way he had workedout the Fullerphone w which he was in—clined to call the ‘Brownphone’ — alsoclaimed prior invention. In 1896 he hadinvented and patented a complete setof apparatus almost exactly like theFullerphone, under Patent No. 30123of that year.

It was made principally to work

30

through broken lines or cables. His in-struments had been used for workingthrough broken submarine cables by theDirect United States Cable Company,and had maintained communicationthrough broken cables for a considera—ble time; they were also used by theEurope and Azores Company and, hebelieved, some were used by the EasternTelegraph Company. This apparatus wasoffered to the War Office in 1897, but itwas not wanted then “because it was tooearly."

1

Defence ofMajor FullerMajor E.O. Henrici, RE, after de-

scribing the development, and laterdisadvantages, of the Army’s earliervibrator system, now gradually beingreplaced by the Fullerphone, defendedMajor Fuller’s invention. From the re—marks made at the meeting about priorinvention, he commented, it mightappear there was nothing new in theFullerphone but he disagreed. He alsopointed out that the name was NOTproposed by Major Fuller.

Major Fuller’s concept which ena-bled a direct current to line to be inter—rupted at the receiving end, so as toactuate a telephone receiver, while al—lowing no detectable ripple to appear inthe line current, was new. If such acombination had been suggested previ-ously, it was not known to the authori-ties of any of the powers engaged in thewar, and was not used in the Army untilMajor Fuller suggested it; and it wasimmediately copied by other powers,including Germany.

Mr G.H. Nash, said “I have beenlistening tonight to some very pointed

MM60 — OctoEer 1998

criticisms which one expects to receivein a technical institution, but I could nothelp feeling sorry for the author in theface of these. The condition at the Frontwas dreadful. I suppose thousands of jmen have been killed because of over-heard circuits by the Germans, and theauthor has, I consider, saved a largenumber of lives by doing something inthe years 1916—17 which settled thequestion of overhearing messages at theFront.

“Whether his patents or details arenew or old matters little; the fact is thathe did do it at that critical time, and weall owe him our thanks for it. I can onlysay it was a pity that people who hadthat information did not bring it forwardin 1914.”

Matter ofRegretReferring to the German monitoring

of British buzzer circuits, MrW.J. Thor-rowgood commented that before the warit was common knowledge and a well-recognised fact that conversation ortelegraphic signals on single-wire cir~cuits could be picked up on telephonereceiving instruments; also, if secrecywas desired, a double—wirecircuit wouldgive the secrecy desired.

He thought it a matter of regret, inview ofthe losses suffered, that the mil—itary authorities were not aware of thesewell-known facts and were surprised tofind that the Germans were receivingtheir signals. However, he congratulatedthe author on adopting these principlesin 1916, thus getting over a very seriousdifficulty.

Referring to Major Fuller’s sugges-tions on the use of the Fullerphone

.‘MM60 — OctaEer 1998

in civil telegraphy, Mr Thorrowgoodthought the time had come when tele—graph signals and signalling were out ofdate and that stress should be laid ontelephone communication between vari-ous places instead of telegraphs as theywere at that time.

The administration with which hewas connected (not stated. — Ed.) wasintroducing telephony to supersede thetelegraphs as much as possible. Thesingle-needle or Morse telegraphs werebarriers to direct communicationbetweenprincipals, but telephones facilitateddirect conversation. He advocated thetelephone and thought it had many ad-vantages over this or other telegraph sys—tems, except in special circumstances.

Telegraphists Preferred SoundersMr H. Wilson had not the slightest

doubt that if the great majority of tele—graph operators were asked, they wouldvote in favour of sounders rather thanbuzzers as being less trying to read,quite apart from the fact that withbuzzer working they had, of necessityto wear headgear receivers.

He thought that the savings in bat—tery power outlined by Major Fuller weremore apparent than real, taking into ac—count the fact that the telegraph officesof that time had to have large accumula—tor systems anyway for other work.

He also thought that the wiring ofa Fullerphone office would be morecomplicated than for sounders, involv-ing separate earths for each Fullerphone,and after comparing the multiplicityof components, switches, etc., in theFullerphone with a simple polarisedsounder (one condenser and a single

31

current key), suggested that the case forsimplicity had not been made.

He also doubted the claim that verylong distances could be covered withouttranslation or relaying. He agreed withthe author’s conclusion that the Fuller—phone had many outlets for good serv-ice, but thought it a mistake to try tomagnify or exaggerate the uses to whichit might be put.

Unnecessary Loss of LifeLieut.—Colonel A.C. Booth felt that

the discovery of the Fullerphone wasnot made early enough in the war andthat many lives were lost unnecessarilybefore it became available. However,there were several other instruments lesscapable of being tapped than the vibrat—ing buzzer, and he thought these couldhave been used in forward areas in theearly days of the war.

The ordinary sounder was one, andanother was the Wheatsone ABC whichwas extremelydifficult to tap. Thereweresome hundreds of the latter available,and they were recommended to the sig-nal authorities on several occasions tono avail.

He offered constructive criticism ofthe Fullerphone on several counts. Itsraison d’étre was that it should not betapped, but the addition of a telephonewas the most perfect means for this tobe done. Despite regulations to the con-trary, there was always the temptation touse it forjust a few words, but those fewwords could mean losing a battle. Heurged the author to have the telephonetaken off the Fullerphone.

He also criticised the potentiometerprovided to eliminate the effects of earth

32

currents, which he said was unpopularwith operators who did not fully under—stand its function. He preferred simplic—ity for those in trenches or dugouts, andsuggested the potentiometer could beomitted.

Limited Use in CivilApplicationsMr E.S. Ritter (communicated)

thought Major Fuller deserved greatcredit for developing an instrumentwhich undoubtedly met a serious mili-tary need at the time it was produced.However, he felt that the military au-thorities deserved a certain amount ofcensure for not making a want of thisnature more widely known amongstthose who should have been in a posi—tion to supply the want.

The ideas underlying the instrumenthad been known for a long time, but itwas to the credit of Major Fuller that hehad put them together in the form of agood practical working instrument.

With regard to the use of the instru—ment for civil work, however, he feltthis would be strictly limited in itspresent form, because of its susceptibili-ty to slowly-varying earth potentials; itsunsuitability for high-speed working; theneed to use headphones, which might beunacceptable to operators used to sound—er operating; and the fact that the ‘inter—ruptor’ required occasional adjustment.

Despite these objections, he thoughtthe instrument could be used to advan—tage as a telegraph ‘speaker’ to link upvarious testing offices and linemen’s hutsalong a main underground or overheadroute. Linemen in search of faults mightcarry it as a portable set.

It could also be used to replaceMorse

MM60 — OctaEer 1998

Fullerphone Mic/V, 1939,

sounder circuits where for any reasonthey might be causing disturbance to tel-ephone or other circuits. It might also beused to connect sparsely populated coun-try villages to towns somedistance away,with the telephone fitted to the instru-ment proving of some additional use.

Author’s ResponseReplying to many of the comments

made, Major Fuller (communicated), in—dicated that his early design did includethe potentiometer, which was ruled outby the authorities partly for the sake ofsimplicity and partly to speed up supply.After experience confirmed the desira-bility of including the potentiometer, itwas introduced into the later models.

He denied contemplating ‘the uni—versal employment of the Fullerphonein civil telegraphy’, as had been sug-

MEM60 — Octoher 1998

with Key SignallingNo. 2(Iand/ine version of theKey WT 8 Amp).This redesigned modelwas more sensitive andeasier to use than itspredecessors.A tropicalised version ofthe Mic/V was designatedthe Fullerphone Mk. V

Photo/Collection:Jack Barker

gested by one speaker,but still held the viewsexpressed in the ‘conclu-sions’ to his paper, asindicated above.

Regarding MrBrown’s claim to prior

invention, Major Fuller commented thatas, according to Mr Brown, it was ‘madeto work through broken wires or cables’,there must be some radical differencebetween it and the Fullerphone as theone condition for which the latter wasuseless was that when the conductor wasentirely broken.

Though no doubt the action of theWar Office in 1897 was disappointing toMr Brown, since it was not administer-ing long submarine cables, their actionwas at least defensible. He went on toask why Mr Brown had not put forwardhis device in 1914?

Military Scientific DevelopmentSecret

Major Fuller indicated that the Al-lied military authorities were quite aliveto the fact that messages could be

33

overheard to some extent, as were theother belligerentPowers.The matteronlybecame serious when the amplifyingvalve was developed during the earlystages of the war.

He commented that it still appearedto be taken for granted in civilian circlesthat the technical military authoritieswere behind their civilian confréres.Thisimpression should be erased. The factthat military scientific development wasof necessity carried on behind a screenand without publicity should not beoverlooked.

Limited VisionResponding to Mr Wilson’s criti—

cisms, Major Fuller thought that certaintelegraph engineers, especially thosefrom the British Post Office, seemed tohave their vision limited to the extent ofthe British Isles. He was not expectingthe Fullerphone to displace establishedsystems, but he did conceive its use inrural locations in countries with vastspaces, such as the Argentine, Canada,China or Russia.

Concerning Mr Wilson’s remarksabout the complexity of wiring forFullerphone offices, he had intended toconvey the information that where therewere Morse sets and Fullerphones work—ing in the same office there should betwo, and only two earths — one for theMorse sets and one (common) earth forall the Fullerphones.

With regard to Mr Wilson’s claimthat the great majority of telegraph op-erators would vote in favour of soundreading rather than buzzer, Major Fullerhad found that telegraphists were veryfaithful to their first love. Those taught

34

on sounder preferred sounder. Thosetaught on buzzer preferred that instru-ment. As the greater number of telegra—phists at that time (at any rate, in thePost Office) were sound reared, theiropinion would doubtless favour thesounder.

Robust ResponseRegarding Colonel Booth’s comment

that the ordinary sounder and the Wheat-stone ABC could have served in for-ward area instead of the vibrating buzzer,be doubted whether it would have beenpossible to work with these instruments.Considering the very leaky conditionsof the cables, the expenditure of batterypower would probably have been exces-sive.

Major Fuller’s paper and much ofthe discussion revolved around techni—cal matters and the circuitry of the Full—erphone (described in MM5. — Ed), butas can be seen above the main impactwas a critical reception of Major Full-er’s invention and his suggestion that itcould be used on civil circuits, by anumber of civil telegraph engineers, anda robust response by others, includingFuller himself, to the criticisms made.

As Mr Nash commented during thediscussion, pointed criticisms were tobe expected in a technical institution,and it appears to have been a very livelyand interesting meeting.

Universal Adoption DelayedMajor—General Algernon Clement

Fuller, CBE, died in 1970 at the age of85. His 1919 forecast that the Fuller-phone would replace all Army hand-worked Morse sounder sets took longer

{Mil/[60— OctoEer 1998

to come to fruition than he anticipated.It was not until the early 19303, when

the Post Office began to abandon Morseoperation, that the Army, realising itwould lose a ready—made reserve of POtrained telegraphists, decided to adoptthe Fullerphone universally for its land-line circuits. Even so, sounders survivedin the Army intoWWII, as evidenced by‘WhatHappened to the Sounder’, MM4,p.4, and ‘I Like the Sound of Morse’,MMl7, p.16.

The much maligned buzzer field tel-egraphs also went on, too, virtually upto the beginning of WWII, when theTelephone D Mk.V came into service,retaining a facility for Morse communi-cation which, in practice, was rarely, ifever, used. (An article, ‘Morse Tele-phones’ by John Packer which discuss-es this in more detail will appear in MMshortly. — Ed.)

No evidence has been discovered byMM that the Fullerphone was ever usedfor civil telegraphy in any of the wayssuggested by its inventor in his paper tothe IEE. If any reader is aware of anyfacts to the contrary, please contact MM.

Poetic AppreciationThe following untitled, uncredited

poem which describes how the Fuller—phone worked, appeared in the Journalof the Royal Signals Institution, 1965,and is reprinted by kind permission ofthe editor. The ‘D3’ mentioned is theTelephone D Mk.III, the workhorse offorward area line communications inWWI, which utilised the straightforwardbuzzer system found to be so suscept—ible to enemy monitoring.

MM

IMM60 — October 1998

In the good old days when the D3 buzzed,the current alternated,

And Jerry heard all the news that came,he simply sat and waited.

Then Captain Fuller came alongto put this fault correct,

Said he, 'This current talks too much,I’ll make it go direct.

And old DB he danced with glee untilhe had a fever,

‘You’ll never get a buzz’, said he,“That way in a receiver.’

80 Captain Fuller bit his lip, and thenagain he spake,

‘l’ll interrupt the current with arapid make and break.’

‘Ha Hal’ laughed old D3 again, 'Ha Ha’he sneered, “That’s fine,’

‘You’ve merely got a current then that‘svery much like mine.’

Then Captain Fuller turned on him andshouted ‘Get you hence sir,’

‘l‘ll soon upset your little game byfetching a condenser.

‘He’ll watch the current all the time,as keen as a retriever,

‘And keep it in the line direct, butbroken in receiver.’

‘But even then’, cried old D3, ‘I thinkyou’ve bought a pup,