Adventures with Morse Code

Adventures with Morse Code

Author: Onno (VK6FLAB) July 15, 2023 Duration: 6:11
Foundations of Amateur Radio

If you've ever looked at Morse Code, you might be forgiven if you conclude that it appears to be a less than ideal way of getting information from point A to point B. The idea is simple, based on a set of rules, you translate characters, one at a time, into a series of dits and dahs, each spaced apart according to the separation between each element, each character and each word.

The other day I came across a statement that asserted that you could send Morse faster than binary encoded ASCII letters. If you're not sure what that means, there are many different ways to encode information. In Morse, the letter "e" is the first character, represented by "dit", the letter "t" is the second character, represented by "dah". In ASCII, the American Standard Code for Information Interchange, the letter "e" is the 69th character, represented by 100 0101. The letter "t" is number 84 on the list, represented by 101 0100.

A couple of things to observe. The order of the characters between Morse and ASCII are not the same. That doesn't really matter, as long as both the sender and receiver agree that they're using the same list. Another thing to notice is that in Morse, letters are encoded using dits and dahs and appropriate spacing. In ASCII, or technically, binary coded ASCII, the letters are encoded using zero and one.

I'll also mention that there are plenty of other ways to encode information, EBCDIC or Extended Binary Coded Decimal Interchange Code was defined by IBM for its mainframe and mid-range computers. It's still in use today. In EBCDIC, the letter "e" is 133 and the letter "t" is 163. It was based around punched cards to ensure that hole punches were not too close together. It was designed for global use and can, for example, support Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Greek. Another encoding you might have heard of is UTF-16, which supports over a million different characters including all the emojis in use today.

Before I continue, I must make a detour past the ITU or the International Telecommunications Union. The ITU has a standard, called "Recommendation M.1677-1", approved on the 3rd of October 2009, which defines International Morse code. I'm making that point because I'm going to dig deeper into Morse and it helps if we're talking about the same version of Morse. I have talked about many versions of Morse before, so I'll leave that alone, but I will point out a couple of things.

The ITU defines 56 unique Morse sequences or characters. The obvious ones are the letters of the alphabet, the digits and several other characters like parentheses, quotes, question mark, full-stop, and comma, including the symbol in the middle of an email address, which it calls the "commercial at symbol" with a footnote telling us that the French General Committee on Terminology approved the term "arobase" in December 2002, but it seems that seven years isn't enough time to convince the ITU to update its own standard, mind you, the rest of the world, well, the English speaking part, calls it "at", the letter "a" with a circle around it, as in my email address, cq@vk6flab.com.

Another thing to note is that this standard is only available in English, Arabic, Chinese, French and Russian, so I'm not sure what the Spanish, Hindi, Portuguese, Bengali and Japanese communities, who represent a similar population size do for their Morse definitions. It's interesting to note that as part of its commitment to multilingualism, the ITU actually defines six official languages. Specifically, the "Spanish" version of the standard appears to be missing.

There's other curious things. For example, the standard defines a special character called "accented e", though it doesn't describe which accent, given that there are four variants in French alone, I found at least seven versions and it completely ignores accents on the i, the c, the o, special character combinations like "sz" in German and "ij" in Dutch. This isn't to throw shade on Morse, it's to point out that it's an approximation of a language with odd variations. I'm also going to ignore capitalisation. In Morse there's none and in ASCII, there are definitions for both, capitalised and not.

In addition to things you write in a message, there's also control codes. The ITU defines six specific Morse control codes. Things like "Understood", "Wait", and "Error". ASCII has those too. The first 31 codes in ASCII are reserved for controls like "linefeed", "carriage return", and "escape".

There are other oddities. The ITU specifies that the control code "Invitation to transmit" is symbolised by dah-dit-dah. If you're familiar with Morse, you'll know that this is the same as the letter "k". The specification says that multiplication is dah-dit-dit-dah, which is the same as "x". There's also rules on how to signify percentages and fractions using dah-dit-dit-dit-dit-dah, the hyphen, as a separator.

At this point I haven't even gotten close to exploring efficiency, but my curiosity is in overdrive. Is Morse really optimised for English, or are there other forces at work? I'm already digging.

I'm Onno VK6FLAB


For anyone curious about the crackle of a distant voice emerging from the static or the thrill of making a contact across the globe using nothing but radio waves, Foundations of Amateur Radio offers a friendly, steady guide. Hosted by Onno (VK6FLAB) from Australia, this long-running podcast acts as a companion for newcomers navigating the initial, often overwhelming, steps into this vast hobby. Each episode deliberately unpacks a single facet of amateur radio, breaking down technical concepts, equipment, and operating practices into digestible pieces. You'll hear practical advice on how to get started, find your place within the global community, and discover which of the hobby's countless avenues-from building antennas to satellite communication or emergency service-might spark your passion. It’s not about dry theory; it’s about demystifying the process and sharing the genuine rewards that keep enthusiasts engaged for a lifetime. Having evolved from its earlier incarnation in 2011, this podcast builds from the ground up, week by week, creating a solid resource that grows with you. Tune in for a down-to-earth conversation that makes the airwaves feel a little more accessible and a lot more inviting.
Author: Language: English Episodes: 579

Foundations of Amateur Radio
Podcast Episodes
What's in an S-unit? [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 10:43
Foundations of Amateur Radio The other day fellow amateur Randall VK6WR raised an interesting question. Using his HP 8920A RF Communications Test Set, which you might recall from our adventures in measuring radio harmoni…
Where is the spark .. gap? [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 8:35
Foundations of Amateur Radio The thing I love most about this amazing hobby of amateur radio is the sheer size of the community and the depth of knowledge that comes with it. Case in point, the other day I mentioned the…
Bald Yak 18: Everything Everywhere All at Once? [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 7:02
Foundations of Amateur Radio The other day I was playing around with RDS, or Radio Data System, it's a digital signal that's often embedded in a commercial broadcast FM transmission. Among other things it contains inform…
Bald Yak 17: Adventures in Radio Data Systems [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 5:01
Foundations of Amateur Radio While spending some quality time discovering what I don't know about GNU Radio, I explored the notion of attempting to at least understand a little more about how an FM signal works. Dependin…
Bald Yak 16: How do you decode FM? [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 6:51
Foundations of Amateur Radio How do you make a hole? That's a pretty straightforward kind of question, and by the time this sentence is finished, there's going to be at least as many answers as people who considered it.…
One step forward ... three steps back. [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 5:38
Foundations of Amateur Radio Still excited from my minor victory in discovering a missing puzzle piece associated with the project I'm working on, I spent the past week introducing my head, if not literally, at least fig…
Bald Yak 15, Playing with Radio .. now with software [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 6:48
Foundations of Amateur Radio A little while ago I discussed a lovely article by programmer, artist, and game designer "blinry" called "Fifty Things you can do with a Software Defined Radio". This week it occurred to me t…
How to go about documenting your setup? [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 5:22
Foundations of Amateur Radio How to go about documenting your setup? Possibly the single most important thing that separates science from "fiddling around" is documentation. Figuring out how to document things is often n…
Transmitting into a dummy load .. for a year .. on purpose. [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 8:34
Foundations of Amateur Radio Just under a year ago I started an experiment. I set-up a beacon for WSPR, or Weak Signal Propagation Reporter, transmitting at 200 mW into a dummy load using eight bands between 80m and 10m.…
How to become a radio amateur today? [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 6:02
Foundations of Amateur Radio The other day a fellow amateur revealed that they qualified for membership of the QWCA, the Quarter Century Wireless Association .. twice over .. there may have been some innocent whistling i…