Matt,

Glad to hear that you're interested in learning Morse.  Don't let the learning curve (for Morse or the transceiver) discourage you.  Your transceiver is not broken, and the problem you have described is simple to resolve.

Your transceiver apparently has either Full Break-in or Semi-Break-in selected.  You must deselect break-in operation to practice CW without transmitting.  See page 30 of the FT-897 operating manual, where you will find the following instruction:

"5. To practice your CW sending (without transmitting),
press the (BK) key to make the “Parentheses” disappear.
Now, pressing the key will cause the CW side tone
to be heard, but your radio will not be transmitting a                  
signal on the air."

This is typical of many modern rigs.  The CW mode allows user selection of (1) Full Break-in operation (switching from TX to RX with little to no delay, which allows the operator to hear activity on frequency between Morse characters); (2) Semi-Break-in operation (the transceiver remains in TX for a period of time after the last character is sent - this delay period is user-adjustable); and (3) No Break-in at all (the transceiver does not go into TX when keyed, but the side tone is heard).

Good luck with your Morse practice. Between practice sessions, why don't you check out the Straight Key Century Club (SKCC) at this site: http://www.skccgroup.com/ SKCC members offer help and encouragement to newcomers to CW operation, including real-time skeds to get you through the first-time jitters.  73

Gary, K9ZMD
Ridgefield, WA

Processing delay in an SDR rig, maybe?

Searching for "1:1 current balun", or "4:1 current balun", will lead you to some sites where you can learn about building your own balun for high power operation. 

These two sites offer high power baluns for sale (and I use baluns by both manufacturers):
http://www.balundesigns.com/servlet/StoreFront 
http://www.dxengineering.com/search/department/antennas/part-type/baluns-ununs-and-chokes

Don't sweat the high SWR out there on that balanced feed line; in almost all cases, any loss in the feed line is so low that it can be ignored.  Your tuner will take care of providing your transceiver with the necessary impedance match.  Also, don't work too hard to get a resonant antenna length; again, your tuner will take care of the mismatch. 

If you want to find a balanced line length that will make the job easier for your tuner on most bands (or even just one favorite band), then Cecil has already steered you to some excellent information. 

Granted, there are circumstances when an op replying to a CQ cannot tune his TX frequency to match the CQing station (equipment limitations).  There are also circumstances where Zero Beating is a poor operating practice (for example, ZB on a DX station who is "listening up"), or frustratingly ineffective (multiple ZB replies to a CQ will QRM one another).  However, under normal circumstances, if station equipment is capable of tuning to a CQ frequency, then it is poor practice to haphazardly answer 500 Hz or more off the CQ frequency.  If the op knows how to ZB, but doesn't do it, then that's where laziness is the proper appellation.  If the op doesn't know how to ZB (or even understand the need), then that's the time for some Elmering to be applied.

Write this down: The CQing station sets the QSO frequency and should normally never change TX frequency to match a reply.  That is the convention, and doing it any other way often leads to rudely chaotic hopscotching around the band.  I'll acknowledge making one exception; namely, if I learn a replying station is rock bound, then I will move to his frequency.  Keep reading to learn the practical reasons to do so.

Under good band conditions, if a station replies within 100 Hz of my CQ, I'll always hear the signal and work the op.  No big deal.  RIT is a valuable aid to me under those circumstances, and both halves of the QSO are generally close enough to keep that little patch of spectrum clear of QRM. 

I also hear & answer stations that reply 500 or so Hz from my CQ, but that proves to be dicey on some bands.  Stations local to the other op may hear his frequency as a clear spot and jump on it.  Even if they first send QRL?, my quick QRL or C is so far off frequency that it is likely to be ignored, if even heard.  The ensuing "doubling" results in difficult copy for me.  Same for stations local to me; they may only hear my frequency as an invitingly quiet spot for their own CQ, so the op I'm trying to work is suffering QRM.  All could have been avoided if the replying op had only made a little effort to move his TX frequency somewhere near to my CQ.   Personally, I'd be ashamed if I couldn't get within 50 Hz of a CQ in less than two seconds, just by ear. (Actually, a station with CAT control & some sort of spectrum display - even as simple as HRD or MixW - can perfectly ZB a CQ in less than one second with just one mouse click.)

I have also heard and answered replies to my CQ that were over 900 Hz off my frequency (yes, I keep the band pass open while CQing).  If I then learn that the other op has a modern rig, my request for that station to tune to my signal is very reasonable.  Let's avoid the potential for QRM from another op who can't hear either of us, and let's leave one of those two widely separated frequencies free for someone else to use.

Congrats on getting that first one behind you.  For most of us, that is an unforgettable experience.  You may also have made Serge's day, because many hams find that helping a new op through that Big Number One brings back the excitement of their own first contact.   73

Gary, K9ZMD
Ridgefield, WA

A K3Y log search reveals that you didn't quit with that first contact, either.  Good for you.  BTW, you are now qualified to sign up for a stint of operating as K3Y during next year's anniversary event.   

And in the early 60s, it was not rare to hear the land telegrapher's "C" (a quick "didit dit") instead of QRL? to ask if the frequency is clear.  That OT practice diminished quickly as Novice ops misunderstood and morphed it into a "shave & a haircut" mating call to establish contact (instead of calling CQ). 

It was hilarious - back in the days of receivers with barn door-wide front ends - to hear one Novice op do that "shave & a hair cut" lidism on his own crystal frequency, followed by a slew other lids replying with "dit dit"s spread across the entire Novice band. 

I wouldn't worry about a little sag in the middle of your antenna.  I've never seen a dipole yet that was pulled so tight that the wire was completely horizontal.  Here's another consideration: tight wire + vibrations can equal a multi-buck repair bill for a masonry chimney.  If your chimney isn't masonry, then just don't pull the wire so tight that the eye bolt pulls out of the wood.

You probably already know this, but please pardon me for asking if you intend to "drop the ladderline to the ground", then run it on the ground back to the radio shack?  If so, that is a non-starter.  You need to get the ladder line elevated from the ground and avoid long runs close to things (like metal rain gutters, the kid's metal swing set, and wet privet hedge leaves) that can upset the feed line balance or increase loss.  Three times the width of your balanced line is generally adequate spacing to avoid problems.

Gary, K9ZMD/7
Ridgefield, WA

Balanced line has substantially lower loss than coax, and is suitable for very long runs of transmission line.  To maintain the unbalanced 50 ohm (coax) entry to the house, as well as at the antenna feed point, you can use a balun at each end of the long balanced feed line.   Sort of like the following:

 (xcvr) ----coax ----[balun] ====== mucho mucho ladder line ======[balun] -----coax----(antenna)

See this site  http://www.dxengineering.com/search/department/antennas/part-type/baluns-ununs-and-chokes/product-line/dx-engineering-maxi-core-special-line-transformers?autoview=SKU for information about suitable baluns and a better description of their application.
Gary, K9ZMD/7
Ridgefield, WA

Up to three pages of speculation already, some of it on target, some of it over the top.  Anyone who has been around long enough will remember that the subject was addressed some time ago by the FCC.  Riley Hollingsworth, who was then the voice (and seemingly the only hammer) of the FCC enforcement division, quite clearly stated that stations operating illegally on the amateur bands had no protection from interference; therefore, an amateur station transmitting over those illegal signals was not in violation of the regulations pertaining to interference.

Everything in your camper is in the near field of that antenna.  Also, the frame of the camper surrounding your domestic electronic gear is part of the return path for antenna currents (which radiate, too). Seems pointless to fight common mode RF current with a choke on your coax when radiated RF has such a short leap through the air into your domestic electronics. 

Ferrite beads and/or capacitive bypassing on all leads of your domestic stuff might diminish the symptoms; however, dealing with the cause is more effective. Diminishing the strength of the RF field around your camper requires getting some space between your camper and the antenna, or lowering your transmitter power.   

It may be sufficient to raise the antenna higher and use 4 or more tuned, elevated radials for the bands you plan to operate.  The more radials you install, the less critical it becomes to tune them.  You might find experimentally that 10 radials the same length as your vertical will do the trick.  Or not.

If higher w/elevated radials is not an option, then move the antenna far enough away to diminish the strength of the RF field surrounding the camper.

If higher and farther away are both not feasible, then reducing the RFI in your camper may depend on a combination of reduced output power and bypassing/choking all leads to your entertainment equipment. 

Gary, K9ZMD/7
Ridgefield, WA 

There's an old thread on the zed showing how a fellow replaced his spring with some earth magnets.  Very cool job, and not too hard to replicate.  He also made the key quieter by gluing a little rubber bumper under the rear adjustment screw.
A miracle (!) I managed to find the thread: http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?236151

Gary, K9ZMD/7

Simple fact, it makes no difference if a station is heard too weakly for a QSO, or just not heard at all - the end result is still the same, it is not going into the log.  The nice guy who sends "SRI NIL" may be considerate, or he may just encourage the weak station to keep trying.   (Hope springs eternal.  I transmit, therefore I am there.  I hear myself really strong, surely you could too, if you'd just try a little harder.  What's wrong with you, ain't you got no receiver?)

Gary, K9ZMD/7
Ridgefield, WA

Hi Sigurd - that same thought about "NV" occurred to me about 12 hours after I posted  -  it has too many dits to be doubledash.  I was wrong to mention it in the context of doubledash, but I'm dead certain I've occasionally heard it on the air, complete with all those dits.  Thanks Pat, for helping me out there.  Guess I'm not going nuts after all.  I first heard that NV from a very fine bug fist, so I doubted that it was just due to a runaway bug.  Other times, not so sure.    73

Gary, K9ZMD/7

P.S. I admire all your years of service.  Myself, I bailed at 25 years when "enjoying" morphed into "enduring".

Publications I read during the late '50s had pro sign lists that included BT with an over-bar (to indicate it was to be sent without a space between those letters).  Correctly sent, it was a distinctly separate character that those publications referred to as a "double dash".   Until the advent of computers, I don't recall ever seeing the "double dash" in print as = , so I can't say if that might have been the prescribed way to write it for record copy. Do we have any old military ops who can recall that from their training?  Did the old mills even have a key for the = sign?  

I suppose that BT pro sign could also have been listed as an over-barred DA or NV . . . but it wasn't.  In recent years, however, I have seen it informally referred to as NV by folks who were not familiar with its pro sign BT origin. Regrettably, I've even heard it sent on the air as NV, in two distinctly separate letters.

Gary, K9ZMD/7
Ridgefield, WA