Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
Nils Haeggstrom (N6PEH)
on
December 31, 2003
View comments about this article!
I find the use of computers to send and receive CW, to be most objectionable. Their operation is clogging up the lower end of the bands. These stations, with their 100 WPM QSO's, give me a break!
I’d like to see each band assigned a sub-band for just hand sent code. I think about 10 kHz should do it, for the handful of real CW operators that will be left.
This is normal, hand sent code: --... ...--
This is what you hear today: __ __
Ridiculous Code Speeds are here to stay.
N6PEH QRT!
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by OLDFART13 on December 29, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
There are some ops who can send at very high speeds. I am not one of them but there are some out there. I have heard them and have seen them and I can only look and listen in amazement at some of these ops. I have passed the 20wpm exam and I still operate at abt 15wpm but could still operate over 20wpm if I wanted, but it is like work then.
So, don't assume that all high speed CW is sent with a computer. There is plenty of room on the CW subbands for all of us. Spread out OM.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KE4MOB on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Noble idea, but define "hand sent". I suppose we can all say that sending via a straight key is hand sent. What about a bug? Or a keyer and a set of paddles? Even using a straight key, if memory serves, I think McElroy hit around 50 WPM (on a straight key!!).
My suggestion: spend more time in the Novice subbands!!
But look at it this way...it's code at high speeds. But it's still the code. A new application of an old idea isn't all that bad, is it?
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>>for the handful of real CW operators that will be left.<<<<
So this topic isn't really about CW speed at all then.
Let me get this right, this topic is about seperating "real" CW operators using straight keys by hand, from CW operators that utilize modern day computer technology to generate CW?
Are you suggesting we start resurecting spark gap transmitters to generate "real cw" instead of using modern day computerized rigs?
Not to be rude or anything but computers can in fact generate CW more accurately and uniformly than a single straight key operated by a human being.
Paddles are one example of computerized technology that is used to generate CW for this very reason?!
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N0TONE on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
What's ridiculous?
If a fist has the proper swing, I can copy "routine" traffic at 60 wpm. Sent by the typical idiot who does not know how to properly set up his computer keyboard, I can do about 45. In quick-QSO conditions (contests or health and welfare) I can copy nearly 80. Given that there are LOTS of other hams that I QSO with, I know I'm not the only one. My shack does not have a computer in it at all. I tend to send with a paddle and keyer and of course, only receive by ear.
You want hand-sent? I can muster 30wpm with a straight key, but will develop glass arm in a matter of minutes. At 20wpm, I can keep it up for hours.
CW speed is not segregated by frequency. It is segregated by operator. If you can't copy the speed someone is sending, then don't answer his CQ. If you CQ at a given speed, and someone answers too fast, ask him to QRS. If he doesn't, end the QSO.
If you want to increase your CW speed (as all good CW ops do), then you'll want to be QSOing at a speed where you only copy 50-70 percent of what's sent. That's called "exercise".
AM
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by AI4CB on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I haven't heard any "100 wpm" cw on the HF bands. I do however hear cw at 30-40 wpm, even a few up to 60 wpm.
Believe it or not, much of that is actually hand-sent by real people. And many people can, with practice, copy that by ear. Copying cw by computer does not work very well. You get better results just receiving by ear.
Most of the CW I hear is 15-30 wpm, which is a fairly comfortable speed.
You can usually find the slower 5-10 wpm on the Novice subbands on 80 or 40 meters.
So, basically, I don't see the problem.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W8ZNX on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Nils
this is not the time for
real vs not real cw op
schism
fone ops
are looking there
covetous eyes at cw bands
not that mny ops usn computer to
rec es send, rag chew qso's
lots of older high speed ops
use keyboards to send
ops that enjoy running high speed
head cpy high speed code
use key board es buffer
run speeds that
they can no longer send
by hand
real conversations
some high speed
ops bn runing cw
30 yrs or more
wrkd hard be able to hd cpy
45 wpm or faster
not copying single letters
but words es phareses
60 wpm can snd like 100 wpm
if ur still pluging away at 15 wpm
some feel that there are not enuf
hs ops left any more
CFO ops becoming SK' s
we now have 5 wpm extra ops
bottom 20, 40, 80
kinda like Porgy with his goat cart
on left lane of interstate hiwy
u are goina get runover
slow speed code
boring boring boring
cure for insomnia
was young squirt novice
hard presed to run 8 wpm
most of the ops wrkd wr also
novice ops
u run slow speed ok
keep at it u wl get fast
not by working only
other slow ops
if the ops to fast fer u down
band its not there falt
jst move up band
I am not high speed op
still pluging away at 25 wpm stick cpy,
30 with a mill
slowly geting better at head copy
sure cure op other end using comput to cpy
use a bug with OT
Lake Eire Swing
Mac dit dit
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K0EWS on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
<<I’d like to see each band assigned a sub-band for just hand sent code. I think about 10 kHz should do it, for the handful of real CW operators that will be left. >>
I got an idea: Call CQ with whatever keying device you want, at the speed you want, and sooner or later, someone will answer it. Also, don't forget the ARRL's Straight Key Night. It happens tonight, and it is one of my favorite events. Tonight the CW bands will be filled with folks ragchewing on straight keys! Try it out for yourself!
At any rate, just call CQ, or answer calls for CQ where you are comfortable, and you will work plenty of stations.
BTW, when I'm working a station, I don't care what they use to send code. If the copy is good on my end, I'm happy. 73 es HNY
k0ews
|
| |
|
Code is here to stay!!!
|
|
|
by K3ESE on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Morse code is sweet. When I struggled to do 13 wpm, 20 wpm sounded like arrogant speed demons showing off. Now, I operate CW every day, and sometimes, I hear some "ridiculously" fast code. I think it's totally fine! Those guys are a small subset of us hams, and they're having fun!
I'd never, ever be interested in operating any digital modes...to me, it's like letting a computer have all the fun...but lots of hams like it - more power to them! I have plenty of bandwidth to roam...and my sig is so narrow, I can have a lovely QSO right next to, or among, other sigs, using my filters, both digital and biological.
Now, I happen to think that talking over radio is unnatural - I'd like to see that mode relegated to a very small segment of the bands.
|
| |
|
RE: Code is here to stay!!!
|
|
|
by KB1FLR on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I hear occasional bursts of high speed code, but most code is, to my ear, sent by hand. While I agree that sometimes the CW subbands are kind of tight, given how little spectrum CW uses we should all be able to either find a spot to call cq or QSY to a less crowded band.
Doesn't seem like a problem to me.
Rick, KB1FLR
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K0RGR on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Computer CW is not the ultimate in digital modes, but it can work fairly well. We need to encourage those who use it to adopt a standard speed that is fast enough for decent conversation but slow enough that the average brass pounder can copy it in his head.
I think 18 WPM, the same speed, spacing, and weighting as ARRL bulletins would be ideal. 18 WPM is about as fast as PSK31, so it works well for keyboard-keyboard conversations.
I don't think we need any more sub-bands -- I'd like to see the Novice bands redeployed and Novice and Techs given access to the current General CW-only segments. By gentlemen's agreement, the slower ops should move higher in the band.
Oh, are you sure you're hearing CW? I'm hearing a lot of Hellschreiber (Hell) on the bands lately. It sounds like incredibly high speed CW, but usually found near the other digital signals.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
What is this blasphemy? Stone him!!!!
I just love my bug. Unfortunately, I'll never be able to copy at the speed that corresponds to sending with the weight all the way in.
ALL HAIL THE KING OF OPERATING MODES!!!
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by NL7AU on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The CW I copy on the air today is very much different then code I copied back in the 1970's when I was learning the art. It is different in more then one respect. First off the "language of CW" seems to be a dying. The everyday use many of the abbreviations has been lost, and the number of CW nets has drastically declined. Secondly, I hear fewer and fewer real high speed QSO's every year that are send by hand. electronic Keyers, both paddle and keyboard, have replaced Straight Keys and Bugs. The day of being able to recognize an operator by his "swing" are almost gone. To me that is sad loss.
I have been lucky enough to have know a select handful of operators who could easily break the 35 WPM mark. Watching them work CW was very much like watching a concert pianist. The speed, grace and dexterity they showed was awe inspiring. Each one of them operated with a vibroplex bug, and the impression they made on me still remains fresh in mind to this day.
Today, I still use a vibroplex, or a straight key. In recent months I have played with Keyboard CW, but it is not to my liking. I am not bragging about it, I just enjoy the old fashioned way of sending code.
As for speed... Me, I can copy 20WPM but, cannot write it down that fast. I prefer to work around 16-18 WPM. At those speeds I can carry on a QSO by ear, and enjoy it. On the air today, that may sound a little slow, but to me, that does not matter. I enjoy a good CW QSO where I can comfortably converse with someone. When working a DX pileup that is a different matter. 20WPM seems to be the norm in DXing to day, so then I move the weight back and "Do as the Romans do".
When I do have the pleasure of listening to a high speed CW QSO that is send by hand I usually stop and listen to try and pick out a few words. Someday, with enough practice maybe I will be able copy that fast, abd send well enough to carry on a QSO. Folks, let me tell you this, the Key to sending great CW is to send it slow enough to be accurate.
Speed is not the King in CW accuracy is. That is what takes the years of practice to develop.
73
Brad Humelsine
NL7AU
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N9AVY on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Nothing wrong with computer sent CW so long as the guys aren't using the computer to copy; then it's kinda like RTTY or PSK. As for me, I struggled with 5 wpm on a straight key, but managed to get to 20 wpm on it. Have a set of paddles but can't get the hang of them; still prefer straight key.
As for those who operate high speed with "bugs", I stand in awe of those fine operators. Knew one years ago who, at 50 wpm, was bored between characters !
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W9WHE on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
What about a special, seperate, restricted sub-band for EACH of the following:
1) DXers
2) Rag chewers
3) Audiophiles
4) Boat-anchors
5) Electronic engineers (B.S.)
6) Electronic engineers (M.S. and Ph.D)
7) Dentists and oral surgeons
8)Hams that never shower (Need big sub-band here)
9) All those Em comm guys (to keep an eye on them)
10) E bay rip-off and other con-artists
11) K1MAN
12) Contesters.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K1MKF on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
This is great! Now it's a code vs. code debate. I really don't care as long it isn't in the phone subband. And Yes, I know that it's allowed there.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W7HV on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
When I first read the subject line I was thinking ridiculously slow, not fast. I like rag chewing between 25 and 30 wpm and ops working at that speed are in the distinct minority. During contests you'll here the majority of STNs working between 25 and 35 but that aint rag chewing. I occasionally tune across much faster QSOs (>40wpm) but those are relative rarities.
It’s pretty tiring to send at >30 wpm with paddles and a keyer so many of the faster ops use keyboards, though they still copy in their heads. You can sometimes recognize keyboarders by the perfect word spacing, use of commas and periods instead of the ubiquitous BT, and use of whole words instead of common CW abbreviations, but mostly it's the lack of fumble figgered sending errors that gives them away.
CW is a skill that is acquired, developed, and exercised by the operator. Digital modes are something a computer does. Talking on the radio? Well just about everybody can talk and most do it too much.
Lou
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by CWTITAN on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
GEE WHIZ, WHERE DO THESE GUYS COME FROM. I DON'T THINK I HAVE HEARD TOO MANY 100 WPM GUYS ON, BUT IF THERE IS, SO BE IT. I ROUTINELY OPERATE 40 TO 45 WPM AND IF THAT SOUNDS LIKE 100 WPM TO YOU, BETTER MOVE DOWN TO NOVICE AREA AND PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE LIKE ALL OF US OLD FA-TS DID. I AM SICK OF THE NO CODE GROUP, THE WHINERS...ETC....GET A LIFE AND WORK FOR SOMETHING FOR A CHANGE....LIFE SOMETIMES IS HARSH....HARD WORK WILL CURE THAT......73 OM
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W5GNB on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well,
CODE is going to be a thing of the past in a few years anyhow, just give it a little time and you won't have to be bothered with ANY code speeds once the PHONE CB'ERS get the full band coverage !!
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by WB2WIK on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I work CW quite a lot and have almost never heard "100 wpm" CW being used by anybody. HSCW (high speed CW) used to be quite popular to work meteor scatter on the VHF bands, and that is typically much faster than 100 wpm, more like 400 wpm, and of course computer generated and decoded. However, since more efficient software for generating signals and decoding them when they're even below noise level -- like WSJT -- have evolved, hardly anybody's doing that anymore, either.
A lot of what might *sound* like 100 wpm code is really much slower, and "hand sent" by electronic keyers and paddles in the hands of experienced operators. I work CW at 50 wpm frequently, and find many who can work faster if they have better dexterity than I do! I've never used a computer to decode CW in my life, kind of defeats the purpose of using code...might as well go fully digital, if you've got a computer running, anyway.
WB2WIK/6
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N3EHY on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
C'mon!Live and let live. If you can't copy, don't call!!
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KA3RFE on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
What basis do you have to complain? If the high speed code guys bother you so much, go someplace else. There's plenty of room on the CW portions of the bands.
73, Pete KA3RFE
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by AD6WL on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have used a keyboard to generate CW. It is during contest that I use the software to generate the exchanges. I have even used a CW reader to help with fills on some exchanges during contests. But, when it comes to rag chewing I use a paddle, keyer and my brain to decode. I can copy abt 60% at 20wpm. I’m not sure if I’m a real CW op but I enjoy the mode very much. Instead of working to increase my speed I am enjoying CW QSOs at a more comfortable pace of 13wpm and having fun with it. I think speed will come in time.
73, Jim
AD6WL
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K0RGR on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Nobody's saying that you shouldn't master receiving code by ear, but if FCC adopts some of the leading proposals in the near future, we'll have Techs running either CW or digital modes on HF.
I think it would be a good idea to encourage people with little or no Morse skills to try to use the computer to do CW QSOs. That way, they are exposed to the mode, and may find out how great it is, and may desire to learn it on their own. No matter how good the computers, we know they'll need to learn the code if they intend to do any DXing or contesting.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N8CPA on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
And if you're going to use a computer for Morse, please use + for AR and = for BT to keep armchair copy consistent. Otherwise, it's a dead give away you're pounding plastic rather than brass. :D
Steve
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N5DJY on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I liked what NOTONE had to say. I just like to go into the shack, cup of coffee in hand. Operate some very simple QRP rigs, send some oh so fast CW on my straight key and Iambic, and forget about my workday!! Try not to make the hobby a this and that, can and can't, more rules....we need like a dead ICOM. Enjoy it and hey, just relax...Lon
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by RobertKoernerExAE7G on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Great inane rant!
How dare people send CW faster than you can copy!
Just what the hell is wrong with them anyway?!
Ooooooooooo. Now those RTTY ops are the real evil ops. They spawned all of the nefarious digital communications.
How about those SLOOOOOOOOW scan ops? Dastardly huh?
How about those insane ops using gear that drifts slightly?
Very impressive that you went QRT at the end of it.
Bring Back the Russian Wood-Pecker!
Have FUN
Bob
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W8VOM on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Sorry but pounding Plastic is not the *same* as pounding brass or a paddle for that matter! My wife has never learned the Morse code but she can put all of you to shame running code on a keyboard. When I put a Key or a Paddle in front of her she is LOST!
A Keyboard is simply a "Translator" and many of us do not need or want to use a translator. If you *need* a translator fine but please understand that there is more skill with hand sent CW. This can be proved at every Field Day event. I dont care who uses a keyboard but it is just not the same as hand sent CW!
I am sick of these people who *think* they are CW Gods because they can run 100 wpm CW on a keyboard.If they can also run 100 wpm using a Straight key, then they have true bragging rights! Doing the translation in your head requires more skill and they know it.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K8NQC on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
And I also object to the phone operators who talk too fast. I find it more relaxing when operators speak slowly and distinctly. I also like my QSL cards made out with a quill pen. Happy '04 Bill
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W4EWJ on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
in the old days there was something called a
BHOME keyer (may have spelled that wrong) it
consisted of a heavy duty keyboard that punched out
a tape that keyed the xmtr...forgot how fast they
would go, then there was BURST generated by a wind
up machine ... fast...now keyers, keyboards either
manual or PC. I remember that the Air route (ICAO)
oprs were the fastest using a bug...about 30-35WPM
also the guys on the INDIAN NATIONAL RAILROAD were
pretty good...and the trans China railroad...the
Russian fishing fleet were and are currently the best
cw oprs also the Russian Merchant Marine which still
uses a lot of cw for health and welfare tfc. And
theres the cw number stations and coded group folks
out there that send about 20wpm and ever so often if
you are paying attention the current BURST cw
(7000kcs) is at some speed around 100wpm...machine
generated and PC decoded.
My point is that you gotta define "ridiculous"
believe the guy means that he aint able to copy
therefore its "ridiculous" "one mans treasure" PAL
who gives a damn how fast somebody else is sending
as long as the person he is talking to can copy...
and there folks that simply like keyboard cw at
60-70wpm...they are on 7032kcs several eves a week.
Lets see if we cant have a cw copying contest like
they used to have in Europe years back...I went to
one session in Hamburg, Germany where a Russian Lady
who was the R/O on a Soviet Ice Breaker copied
english morse (as opposed to cyrllic)solid at
55wpm...pretty impressive....Mclroy would have loved
her.
CW forever
Earle
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W4EWJ on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Oh .... yea theres one more thing
skill in copying cw is when you can put it down on
paper...not in your head...amateur radio cw in
your head is just fine, Theres no records to be
kept...its simply conversation so no need to record
on a mill. But let me see how many of you can copy
60wpm on a mill...
Earle
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KC2HJN on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Oh god, the code vs. no-code crap just died down a little, ,now it's "real" code vs. "fake" code.
When will you guys stop?
I thought the whole debate was about effeciency and "code getting through when other modes can't".
I guess soon we'll hear how people who don't do code by hand are not real hams.
If you were the only ham operator, then you could change the rules to fit your ideals. You are not. Other people enjoy different aspects of the hobby. (yes I said hobby)
If YOU can't copy what they're transmitting, then maybe YOU need to move on.
Technology is here to stay boys, if you can't or won't deal with it that's too bad. Some find it interesting to try new things. I thought it was about ADVANCING the art of communications, not stagnating it.
Keep doing it and enjoying it the way you like but don't rag on others for doing the same.
Marty
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N8CPA on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Speaking of mills, I used to enjoy listening to CW from NMN. During its last days, every now and then, an operator who was a slow typist would serve a trick at the mill. You would hear single words sent at 22WPM with 7-8 second gaps between them. I don't know if those xmssns were live or pre-recorded, but the gaps were left intact at time of transmission.
BTW, RYRU is this weekend. I will pre-can my exchanges because........ I.........too........am........a........slow....
....typist.........ZZZZ
Steve
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by AG4RQ on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
All CW is good CW. I personally will never use a computer for CW, but more power to those who want to.
73 & Happy New Year de AG4RQ
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N5XM on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
This is a very interesting thread. Everybody has their opinions. I don't care what kind of sending style you have as long as it is readable. I don't care if people use keyboards, but unless they have a problem with shaking, or are easily fatigued, I can't see why anyone would not want to send their own code. My first thousand QSO's were with a hand key, and I'm glad they were. I was forced to make characters properly and space them properly, or else I sounded like doo-doo. I like to make a lot of contacts, so that when I got above 18 wpm or so, my typical 8-10 Saturday QSO's left my arm and wrist weak and cramped. I became proficent with paddles, and with a bug, but I use single-level paddles exclusively now, which means nothing. How fast I copy depends on how good the fist on the other end is. I'm not sure speed means anything. I just want to be the best op I can be period. What difference does it make if I can send beautiful CW at 40wpm if there isn't anyone around to copy at that speed. I just think it's not how fast but how good. Either way, it takes work to get proficient, and some folks haven't figured that out yet.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W1RFI on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have to wonder why some seem to want to solve every percieved problem in amateur radio by breaking our community and bands into smaller and smaller pieces. I can understand why some folks have a favorite mode -- mine is CW -- but why should we get upset at merely hearing another mode on the ham bands. That diversity is part of our very strength and when I hear a band crowded with many different types of signals, to me, I am hearing a healthy amateur radio.
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W1RFI on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> And if you're going to use a computer for Morse,
> please use + for AR and = for BT to keep armchair
> copy consistent. Otherwise, it's a dead give away
> you're pounding plastic rather than brass. :D
And some like me won't care whether one is pounding plastic or brass. I will be pleased to know that another ham is trying CW, no matter how he or she does it. If they find that the mode has value, they will probably also discover the value of being able to send it with a keyer and decode it by ear.
I wonder if the hams of the 60s had the same discussion about those that used an electronic keyer instead of a hand key or a bug. For that matter, I wonder what the hams of the 30s thought of bugs...
Ham radio has unlimited potential, and I am pleased that others are exploring that potential in a way that is different than mine. They might just find something we have missed.
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K0EWS on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W1FRI,
Very well said sir, and Happy New Year to all. Now let's all LIVE AND LET LIVE, and let's all get on and enjoy Straight Key Night!
Eric
k0ews
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by WA0EAJ on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A good idea, but only half there.
With the widespread abolition of our FIRST digital mode (CW), and although I enjoy the stuff (former USN Radioman), it's high time to make use of CW an "elective"... think about this - everybody who WANTED to use it would have to pass a test, in the thinking of "Incentive Licensing" (exceptions would be any General, Advanced, or Extra who took their test PRIOR to the drop-date of cw). In other words... if you haven't passed the CW test, you're not ALLOWED to operate the first 25 kc (Excuuuuuuse me - kHz) of the bands, 'cause that's where REAL cw lives.
See... it's the Tom Sawyer approach - you don't HAVE to do it...you GET to do it... but ONLY if you're GOOD ENOUGH!
ZUT AR
Tom D. - Denver
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by WA0EAJ on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Ted McElroy held the WORLD CW COPYING RECORD, earned in 1937, with an amazing speed of 75.2 wpm!
As an aside comment:
I actually knew a kid in US Navy Radioman "A" school in San Diego, CA (1963) who taught himself to copy RTTY at 60wpm (typewriter, of course)... No Jive, I saw him do it.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by OLDFART13 on December 31, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I see nothing wrong with people using computer generated and decoded CW. This is a way for no-coders to pretend to be real HF ham operators. Some of them may even be inspired and do the required work to become more proficient operators.
73 and Happy New Year to all.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KC9ETP on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm sorry, but I'm sitting her giggleing like a little girl.. You guys are funny.
Several of you should read The Art & Skill of Radio Telegraphy (it's on the FIST. website) and see how REAL coders worked.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W1RFI on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> See... it's the Tom Sawyer approach - you don't HAVE
> to do it...you GET to do it... but ONLY if you're
> GOOD ENOUGH!
Wouldn't one think that if someone actually does operate CW they have demonstrated that they can?
How would it look if this were extended to all of life? How about one is not allowed into our national parks unless they can prove that they can hike a 10-mile trail first? For that matter, let's prove they are REALLY worthy and require that they do a 50-mile hike. After all, without that hiking test, those that enter our parks would be riff-raff that are best kept out.
If the FCC changes the licensing requirements, do you think that telling those who might be interested in trying CW that they are not good enough to try it will be a good way to promote the mode? If not, then doing so is no more productive now.
If all of this emotional baggage were associated with any other operating mode, I don't think it would be very popular. Why not say positive things about CW use instead of saying negative things about people who might want to try it?
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W1RFI on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> Either way, it takes work to get proficient, and
> some folks haven't figured that out yet.
I am okay to about 45 wpm, so I guess I am proficient, but it didn't take any work at all. I got on the air at 5 wpm, liked operating CW and over decades of having fun, my code speed improved naturally. Work is raking the lawn; operating CW was not work at all for me. It was and is quite enjoyable. Maybe that is the part that some folks really need to figure out if they are going to promote the use of CW as an operating mode.
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W1RFI on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> I don't care if people use keyboards, but unless
> they have a problem with shaking, or are easily
> fatigued, I can't see why anyone would not want to
> send their own code.
I can see lots of reasons to use a keyboard instead of a keyer. I can copy 45 wpm, but at 45 wpm, I make too many darn mistakes with my paddles, especially if I have been off the air for a bit. But with a keyboard, I could enjoy 45 wpm QSOs without shaming myself with my sloppy fist. At some point, for most, I think the ability to copy increases past the ability to send; at 53, I am still in my youth, but I don't have the manual dexerity I had when I was 20.
I can copy CW easily in my head, just as well as I can copy spoken English. With a keyboard, I could start typing my response to things before the other ham was finished sending. My typing skills are not quite up to 45 wpm reliably, so that, too, would help me enjoy 45 wpm QSOs without being hampered by my manual abilities. With a keyboard, most of us would be capable of more and better CW operation, limited only by the power of our minds and not by the limitations of our bodies.
Computers and keyboards are modern electronics technology and amateur radio is well served to make good use of the same tools that benefit our world as a whole.
Getting back to the premise of the thread, I cannot imagine why anyone would characterize that as "ridiculous." I never would have imagined that some CW proponents could be critical because other CW operators have become too proficient. Is this like being middle class and hating the rich for being too uppity and hating the poor for being lowlifes?
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N0NYA on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"I can't keep up so you should slow it down"
Gee isn't that the same attitude the school boards around the country adopted? Don't make the kids learn more, just lower the standards to make them look (and feel) better.
Rather than slow the entire CW ham bands down, why don’t you take some initiative and improve your own speeds.
I don’t know about the rest of you, but I sure am sick of the current “dumbening” down of amateur radio.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by WD0BCX on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WHAT A GREAT IDEA, A SUBBAND FOR HAND KEYED CW !!!!
I haven' heard such a GREAT suggestion for 30 years !!!
I LOVE to work the olw J 38 and can't keep up in this old rig I got for old time sake. I recently got a Kenwood TS 900, the predicessor of the 520 and all the subsiquent modles and it is grid block. The tic won't work on it.
I think that a partition should be made to the FCC for a hand key or 10 to 15 WPM subband.
When I was taking my NOVICE my elmer, K0KBD said " I don't care how fast you send the code Willie but you better send it rite if your going to be one of my buddies" I have never forgotten that.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by WD0BCX on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WHAT A GREAT IDEA, A SUBBAND FOR HAND KEYED CW !!!!
I haven' heard such a GREAT suggestion for 30 years !!!
I LOVE to work the old J 38 and can't keep up in this old rig I got for old time sake. I recently got a Kenwood TS 900, the predicessor of the 520 and all the subsiquent modles and it is grid block. The tic won't work on it.
I think that a partition should be made to the FCC for a hand key or 10 to 15 WPM subband.
When I was taking my NOVICE my elmer, K0KBD said " I don't care how fast you send the code Willie but you better send it rite if your going to be one of my buddies" I have never forgotten that.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W9SN on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
This has to be the most rediculous topic I have ever read! Somebody needs a new hobby!! Dit Dit.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K7VO on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Yeah, 100WPM is ridiculous. You need 200WPM to reliably work meteor scatter when there is no meteor shower on VHF frequencies. This is something the Europeans have been doing on 6m and 2m for years to work all over the continent. I wish more hams here were interested.
Oh, and no, I can't copy 200WPM in my head. My top speed is more like 25WPM. Computers are useful tools, just like keys, paddles, speakers, radios, etc... I am amazed when some hams, a hobby that is supposed to advance the technology of radio, are opposed to "new" technology that's only been around for 20-25 years.
73,
Caity
K7VO
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by GOODBUDDY on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I can hardly wait for the FCC to eliminate the 5wpm code speed. Then we "REAL" no-coders can pass our Extra exams and begin to whine about all the space that the CW sub-bands occupy. Its coming very soon, watch and wait. Your CW speeds will not matter then.
******************************************************
Unfortunately its this type of petty BS that gives casual surfers of eham a bad impression. This type of subject belongs on rec.amateur.misc with all of the cretins that lurk there.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by GOODBUDDY on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I can hardly wait for the FCC to eliminate the 5wpm code speed. Then we "REAL" no-coders can pass our Extra exams and begin to whine about all the space that the CW sub-bands occupy. Its coming very soon, watch and wait. Your CW speeds will not matter then.
******************************************************
Unfortunately its this type of petty BS that gives casual surfers of eham a bad impression. This type of subject belongs on rec.radio.amateur.misc with all of the cretins that lurk there.
|
| |
|
How about ridiculous SSB speeds?
|
|
|
by WB4M on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Why, it was just the other night.. I was tuning across 20 meters when suddenly, I heard a SSB QSO in progress, and the hams were talking around 900 WPM! How asinine! Just below them, was a nice QSO going on and they were only talking at 600 WPM.. much easier to copy.
And another thing.. I want to form a separate sub-band for those who operate VOX to keep them away from the "real SSB ops" who use their hand to key the microphone! Hand-squeezed mics are much better to listen to and the better ops use them.
I'll petition the FCC tomorrow about this.. or maybe the next day....
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W3DCG on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have to say... the idea of 60wpm CW by computer, is an odd one to me. If the computer is already interfaced for CW as a "digital" mode, it seems there are many more appropriate modes to use with a computer, rather than good ole CW. They work better, and may occupy less bandwidth.
I'm sure the writer here means truly rediculous speeds that actually do occupy much space, and for Code Reader programs to work well, signal must be good, so often Max barefoot and/or Amps are being used, in theory, on both ends for such truly rediculous speeds.
I agree that I have heard a few QRQ that start to blurr to my ears, while it is possible they were really ear copying, however their signals were very loud.
I do know, speed is a relative term. For me, some days I'm just pooped for several reasons, and 25 wpm sounds a bit fast. Otherdays I'm refreshed, or after listening to 30wpm or faster CW for extended periods then 25 wpm sounds "slow" while it does still sound very much like music to my ears. I miss the soothing rythm of CW when it starts to approach 36 wpm and higher. I also feel like some style is lost at high QRQ levels.
Monitoring QRQers who truly are going around 40wpm or more, you can detect, they are sending with keyers/paddles because it is not perfect computer generated code, and so these people are sending by hand and head copying. Plus there are errors. Then they might instead of ? or didit didit or the 8 dits seldomly used these days to signify an error, they may send only three or four E's, and you can then detect they are using a keyer/paddle, because of the spacing between those E's not being perfect. But then sometimes they know you get it from context and just keep on going with no error acknowledgment. Whatever...
For those who want to still do higher speeds well, are not using a code reader, but for whatever reason cannot manipulate a paddle or bug like they once did, I enjoy hearing their perfectly weighted and spaced computer/keyboard CW, and it keeps them doing something they love.
But if people are out there doing Rag Chews at Ultra-man computer generated speeds, I wonder why. I heard of Super-Burst mode canned messages for working Meteor Scatter, so perhaps that is one good reason.
To each their own... regarding Ultra-speed computer CW QSO's, and perhaps depending on the power output and occupied bandwidth, it might sometimes be more courteously operated in the wider-mode sub-bands AKA Phone arenas. hi hi.
My considered opinion is, within reason, whatever blows your skirt up, if it makes you happy, enjoy it if you can, because life is too short for anything else.
Do what thy will be it harm none.
HNY everyone!
73.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K4CDK on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
OH NO, HERE WE GO AGAIN -- THIS POOR OLD HORSE HAS JUST ABOUT BEEN WHIPPPED TO DEATH ! ! ! ! ! !
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N0JZQ on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I use a flintlock black powder rifle instead of a modern smokeless powder centerfire rifle. It's a lot of fun to shoot. Lots of smoke and it smells bad !
Scott
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KB7LYM on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Relax Folks ! To High Speed, To Low , To many spaces, to much of this and to much of that.
Buy a Record called " There are tears on the strings of the Gypsys Violins
Happy 2004
Now remember... R E L A X !!!!!! .
There is always CB aye :)
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W6EZ on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Well, at least we know one person went fishing on New Year's day.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K6BBC on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I would like to see this:
Every KC up in frequency should be a raise in WPM by a factor of one. For instance, 14.003 would be for 3 WPM. .004 4 WPM, and so on. I like things in neat packages. I guess it’s the same idea as eating the peas out of the peas and carrots or eating the inside of an Oreo first. These little things bring order to ones world. I like order. Don’t you? I had a dog named Candy when I was little. She ran away. Have you seen her?
K6BBC
|
| |
|
Rethink the term "Ridiculous"
|
|
|
by K4IQT on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Ridiculous to you, maybe.
My Elmer and I often passed the time on winter evenings back in 1959-62 chatting at 50-70 wpm, using modified bugs (no weights, shortened weight shaft). He was a true OT, having been a wireless op on Great Lakes ore boats back in the twenties and thirties, and that speed was no "reach" for him at all. He taught me well - it was no problem for me, either, after 6 months or so of heavy-duty training. Not many could copy us, but it was never "ridiculous".
I can no longer handle more than 30 wpm receiving and about 25 wpm transmitting, because of aging brain, ears, and fingers. However, if you hear a high-speed (ridiculous) code transmission going on, see if you can learn to copy it in your head - there's not time to write it down verbatim.
If instead you resent having that signal in your passband, then just QSY!
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by 2E1SDX on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
you just cannot win nowdays
send morse code to slow and you get slated(seen it many times on the cluster) **rubbish to slow**
send to fast and you get slated for it in this thread.
just do your own things guys, live and let live
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N8UW on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I was an intercept op in the 70s and we admired fellow ops who could copy a weak or QRMed signal more than the guys who could copy 30+. All this was code groups, copied on mills.
25 years later as a new ham, I've found whatever I could want on the bands. If I want slower rag chews, I can go to 80M at night, novice or FISTS freqs anytime. I can find a speed challenge, hunt for weak QRP and DX sigs, or jump into a contest with my homebrew computer CW. All with a G5RV at 30 feet. My objective is to enjoy the hobby. This is an argument in search of a problem, just like the code/no code stuff.
And I took a REAL Ohio Driver's Licence Test, back when you had to parallel park.
Chuck, Vegitarian Ham
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W5HTW on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It really doesn't bother me one way or the other. I personally feel I'd rather "do it myself" with a straight key than with a keyer or computer. However the reality of life is such that the keyer made it easier for me, and until SKN, I had not used a straight key since about 1975. Before that I spent nearly 20 years on a straight key only. But it's work!
The difference, then, between the keyer and the computer is at least with the keyer I have to know the code, which is a personal achievement. It's the difference between being the pilot and being a passenger on the plane.
What I do wonder, and it has been touched upon here in this thread as well as in others, is since computer-copied code requires a really good signal, does this encourage high power CW to become the norm? CW has long been the playground of the 100 watts or less group, though, of course, there have been exceptions. Twice lately I have been listening and found two very strong signals communicating with each other, and the manner of code indicated it was computer generated. Not a problem, except the weak signals that could be around them are not heard. Put several of these high power signals on the band and that is all that will be able to get through. The solution will be for us all to go to 1500 watts, just as in the phone bands. (I rarely use an amplifer there, and never on CW.)
Perhaps computer-copying software will improve and the big signals won't be necessary. That is certainly worth hoping for. But there may be a tendency for those who don't want to know CW as a personal achievement, to lean on other technical aids as well, such as the amplifier. I think it is too early to tell if that will be the case or not.
Aside from that aspect, matters not to me. I'll plod along at 15-25 wpm with a keyer or 10-15 wpm with the old key, and I'll be happy enough. Iwll, of course, start to use a computer keyboard when anyone caught using a key or keyer is automatically shot at sunrise.
Then again, maybe not!...
73
Ed
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N3QT on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I recognize your concern. The solution will be found in the middle ground somewhere between "No-Code", "KNOW-CODE" and "RIDICULOUS-CODE".
My humble opinions:
1) More bureaucractic policy at this point will not encourage but may instead hinder.
2) The amateur bandwidth is a resource from the loins of which generated the nativity of a great many new technologies. Why regulate the possibility of more growth and progress any more than it needs to be.
3) Experimentation with strict respect to Part 97 has its udeniable place within the hobby as do skills viewed as a Federal Resource and emergency communication assets.
~~
N3QT.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K0EWS on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I look at the different ways of making CW as different musical instruments. Each serves a purpose, but all make the music. Really, it's the difference between a harpshichord, piano, organ, and synthesiser. You have to know how to play the piano. However, as Ed has suggested, there are organs now that will play a whole song at the touch of a finger, and some folks will use that method, and that's fine, but they are still going to have to copy, and I've not found a computer program yet that will do it all that great. The best I've seen is CW get, and with a very narrow filter on a very good signal. However, that being said, I prefer to send my code manually most of the time, with either the paddles or the bug, but I also use a keyboard, and a straight key. In general, I let the other op I work determine what I use. If the other op is going fast, I'll keyboard; the same with contesting; just for the ease of use. For general stuff and ragchewing, I use the paddles or bug, and sometimes the straight key if I'm going slow, or working a slow speed operator, or if I want to just get some work in with it. All methods are good, all methods work, and everyone should get on and do CW rather than complain about the method or speed.
73 to all
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K3YD on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N6PEH said: <<I find the use of computers to send and receive CW, to be most objectionable. Their operation is clogging up the lower end of the bands. These stations, with their 100 WPM QSO's, give me a break!>>
100 WPM? Machine copy? I rather doubt it! I know some guys work at about 60 WPM about 7030 KHz, and while some may send with keyboards, they invariably copy mentally. Otherwise there's a lot of 25-40 WPM operation down at the low end of most bands.
I have seen some software which supposedly copies CW--none work as well as the computer "between my ears."
N6PEH, you may be mistaking highly developed CW skills of some very good operators(or maybe some digital modes) for computer sent/received CW. Expecting these high-speed ops to operate at a speed you can always copy is as asinine as expecting Mario Andretti to race at 55 MPH.
I'm not the fastest op on the band, not the slowest either. I got faster by listeing to, and trying to copy faster op's. You can too--if you try.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by WA6BOB on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
No matter what speed it is, let it be as it better than none. Don't want to see it go.
CW forever........
http://www.csun.edu/~skatz/johnpage/cw.html
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by AA4PB on January 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I suggest we dedicate the center 1Khz of each band to spark. Real radio operators use spark :-) Naw, some techy would probably key it at 100 WPM with a darn ol computer.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by N4TY on January 3, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Been doing CW since 1972. I spent all the lunch money I had on building a tube keyer, so I could retire my J-38.
Now that I'm older, I've tried CW on a straight key, and my tennis elbow can't take it. Some of us are just not physically capable of using a straight key.
Even though I can copy way up there, I'll always QRS and answer at the caller's speed, no matter how slow. It's the courteous thing to do. We can all live together, no matter what the speed.
Tyler - N4TY
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W2RBA on January 3, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hey, I've got a keyn idea! How about subbands where the use of a J-38 key is required? One for J-37s, one for no-name keys, etc. This would keep the bands pure, for sure!
[Uh, how about sending at a speed you are comfortable with and responding at the speed the other guy was sending at? Too reasonable?]
73!
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by AG4RQ on January 3, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
How about a sub band for ops that want more sub bands?
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by AB2DP on January 3, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I woild like to ask you a question:Why do you think that the Morse Code is ridiculous? Just because you don't know it? You don'y have the ability to receive and transmit it with high speed? Train yourself!!!
This is something obvious making a difference between beginners and masters. To go to the highest level of achievement you must master this. Almost everybody wants extra class. Extra class for what ? For coming on the air with full legal limit? I hope you got a good reason for reflections.Regards,Michael
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by WA2JJH on January 4, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Someone had a good idea. Go to the Novice CW sections.
Help newbies get their code speed up with a good old JJ-38.
Otherwise, computer CW is not ruining my life.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by DIABLO666 on January 4, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I got an idea! Just let brass pounders operate where they want and make the digibrats do there thing on a specific part of the bands. Or better yet just kill them all and let me sort it out.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by AB2DP on January 4, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well, after a life in Amateur Radio I must say you wrong. What makes you to think that for instance, everybody should have first class? Just to go on the air with full legal power? What is the difference between a MASTER in this field and a normal operator?
These are just two question I want to address them to you.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K7PIG on January 5, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Sending manually (straight key) at 50 wpm is rather a well learned process, the adjustment must be closer then the thickness of one piece of paper.
Leave the CW frequencies alone.
I operate in the Novice portion of 75 meters quite early in the mornings 1430Z. Call but no relies. 40 meters those darn Foreign Broadcasters just rip everything up and the Asian folks on SSB.
Heck, I'll send at 5wpm to 10wpm, just a-ok with me.
Maybe we'll meet on CW hopefully.
Ray, k7pig.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by WA3KYY on January 5, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W1RFI said:
>I wonder if the hams of the 60s had the same >discussion about those that used an electronic keyer >instead of a hand key or a bug. For that matter, I >wonder what the hams of the 30s thought of bugs...
The hams of the 30s probably used bugs. According to the serial number on my Vibroplex "Original" it was built in 1922. I suspect a lot of line telegraphers who were also hams used their bugs.
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by G0CJM on January 5, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I suppose my answer can only be, for you to advise me what interfaces there are available to the IC718 so that i too can be one of the many who uses the PC as a means of sending and receiving CW.... i live and breathe CW and you will seldom hear me on ssb/am or fm. To each his own. Best Wishes to all, Reb g0cjm
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K0ZN on January 6, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hey, "D.B."..... PLEASE explain how you got away with it!! That was one cool job!!
(I'm not too crazy about the annonymous names, but gotta give you credit for a great one!)
I just have to wonder how "ridiculously" crowded the bands would be if everyone got off the internet and got ON the air!
I think the ARRL got it right... BPL will be a problem because all the HAMS will be on it using the internet!!
It is beyond me to understand why so many people want to politically divide and "fracture" this hobby in to small subsegments. The technical diversity is what makes this interesting. Back in the "old days" you were either a ham or you weren't... Now some want subbands for left handed, brown eyed SSB operators.... gimme a break....
If he was just trying to stir up a lot of emails with a tongue-in-cheek subject, he gets an A++ for success.
73
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by AC3P on January 6, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KC8VWM said <<Are you suggesting we start resurecting spark gap transmitters to generate "real cw" instead of using modern day computerized rigs? >>
Spark gap transmitters are not capable of "real CW".
That said, I don't know where the 100 wpm cw is. I hear mostly 15 - 20 wpm, with some faster.
Also notice a lot of 5 wpm down outside the Novice bands.
That's when I hear cw stations. There seems to be fewer of them than there were 10 years ago.
73
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on January 6, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>Spark gap transmitters are not capable of "real CW".<<<
AC3P,
Your kidding right??? My spark gap radio has a stamp on the side that says, "Spark Gap CW Transceiver. Made in Bedrock by the Fred Flinstone Quarry Company 15 Million BC."
Works just as good as any modern day rig.
Hold on, I'll be right back - something about a neighbors new plasma TV set blowing up while watching the Ohio State game.
73
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by WW0W on January 8, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I'd say that a "real" CW op is defined as someone who can manually copy the code. How they send it is irrelevant. When you need to use an automated copying system, that isn't CW anymore, just computer communications... unless the FCC starts allowing people to copy CW with a computer for their exams :)
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by WF7A on January 8, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm a dyed-in-the-wool CW op who enjoys hand-keying more than using a keyboard keyer or computer, but let's not forget the purpose of amateur radio: providing fast, reliable and accurate communications in times of need or emergency. If CW whizzes by at 100 WPM, so much the better since it helps us fulfill our duty as efficient communicators.
On the other end of the speed CW spectrum, I'd like to see a voluntary prosign added at the end of a call to let other ops know that you have a disability and need a little more patience on their part and for them to slow down. Because of my afflictions (poor hearing ability and a past seizure), I'm literally not up to the same speed as I was when I first earned my Extra call years ago; most ops rightfully think that if you have an Extra call you can easily copy 20+ WPM. It would be easy to simply add a prosign, e.g., WF7A/D (D for Disability), to let others know that you're not a speed demon.
Just my 1/50th of a dollar's worth...
Rich
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W4CNG on January 8, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Just what rigs are out there that will do 100WPM CW, hand or computer keyed? There are too many of them that cannot do 20WPM without klicks and other problems. So how much QRM is created in the CW sub band when these rigs are on the air, more especially at power levels above 100 watts? There are too many folks that cannot send at 1 to 15 WPM with good copy to worry about those few (read that real minority) that can do it above 30 to 40 WPM. I do not spend that much time down below, but with the possability of BPL, that may change, especially if I can drive my electric membership corp into insanity if they try to use that mode of internet access. CW may have more benefits than originally thought of as a means of basic communications.
Good Luck
Steve W4CNG, owns a 50 year old J38 and 6 year old iambic set of paddles.....
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KT4XF on January 9, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
There is a sub band for SLOW CODE; it's called the NOV/TECH+ band...sure wish I could get down with the HSCW guys but my ADVANCED license won't allow me. I hope I'll be Grandfathered to the Extra class someday.. .. ..
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K1CJS on January 10, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
For sale:
A kicked to death nag not in the best of conditions. It has now been turned over to present a new side of the carcass to be pummeled.
Lets stop this rediculous baloney and get back to our beloved hobby. PLEASE!!!
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W1RFI on January 11, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> There is a sub band for SLOW CODE; it's called the
> NOV/TECH+ band...
The subband for slow code is the entire amateur allocation, with the exception of 5.3 and 219-220 MHz.
> I sure wish I could get down with the HSCW guys but my ADVANCED license won't allow me.
Most of the high-speed CW I hear on HF occurs above the lower 25 kHz. You can operate high-speed CW there with the best of them if you like.
> I hope I'll be Grandfathered to the Extra class
> someday.. .. ..
The last time the FCC did restructuring, they didn't do any grandfathering. They just allowed hams to continue to renew the licenses they had. If you want to upgrade to Extra, you can either hope they do it differntly the next time around a few years hence or you can upgrade to Extra by taking the written exam.
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K6BBC on January 11, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
No thanks Ed, I'll stick with my ADVANCED CALSS - you know, the one I had to take in front of an FCC examiner.
K6BBC
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KL7HF on January 11, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Your assumption about QRQ are not accurate.
Most of the high speed cw contacts are hand
sent. A few use keyboards, but not many.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W1RFI on January 12, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> No thanks Ed, I'll stick with my ADVANCED CALSS -
> you know, the one I had to take in front of an FCC
> examiner.
If you upgrade, that doesn't change your accomplishment of taking your Advanced test before an FCC examiner. If they were to grandfather you to Extra, as your earlier post said you wanted, that would be the same thing. And many Advanced licenses were issued through the VEC program, so the license class itself is no proof that you were tested by the FCC.
And, frankly, I value the privileges that my license gives me far more than I value the specific steps the FCC had in place at the time I got my license. For most, the accomplishments we do with our licences greatly exceed what we had to do to get them.
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by TECH2003 on January 12, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The Code is Ridiculous at any speed.
Steve
NCI-3069
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W5VPU on January 12, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Ridiculous." Means "deserving or inspiring ridicule, absurd, or preposteous, silly or laughable. See Synonyms at foolish." A quote from the American Heritage Dictionary of the English language.
Why would you ridicule the efforts of other hams who have as much right to the bandwidth as you or I? Before the law, none of us is special.
A lady op for decades has directed a CW traffic net each morning at speeds of 40 wpm -- without a computer. She won't operate on SSB. Just paddle and keyer. I surely can't imagine calling her preference "ridiculous." It is her preference. Just like yours is your preference.
So you ridicule everyone who does not fit your preferences? We used to call ops with that attitude "Lids." Now they are simply labled egotistical and narcisistic.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by CODEBASHER on January 12, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Boy and I thought that you Know-code guys were awful towards the No-Code group. I see your real agenda is to keep the frequencies to your selves an not let anyone else on even if they know code. slow code (5wpm) is same as no-code in your books. I think it high time for the Code to go away and open the bands up to some real Hams instead of you Old Deadbeats.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on January 13, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Code - No Code - Slow Code - Fast Code - Hand Code - Computer Code - For Code - Against Code -
Code Code....
Who cares..
Let's get on with it.
For heavens sake, someone hurry up and make a decision on this entire CW issue PLEASE.
I don't care either way - Do something!!
73
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by W8OB on January 13, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
cool idea but where are you going to find a real ham that doesn't know cw????????
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by AE6IP on January 13, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> cool idea but where are you going to find a real ham
> that doesn't know cw????????
In the EOC, running the resource net, during the ARES drill.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K4JSR on January 14, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
My goodness! There has been more smoke, more heat and
less light on this topic than there has in the Presidential debates!
One of the main reasons that the hyperspeed cw, generated by computers, came about was covered in a
73 Magazine article a bunch of years ago. According to the article the hi speed cw was in response to an FCC ruling regarding the maximum speed for RTTY on
the ham bands. It seems that the FCC wanted the max speed of ham RTTY kept at or below 100 wpm. Evidently
the FCC still was using ancient methods of copying
RTTY. Remember that this was prior to any of the now
commonly used digital modes, some of which have become obsolete. Anyway, the computer geeks started
using RTTY and found they could go far in excess of
100 WPM, thus causing pink paperwork from the FCC to
appear in their shacks. They soon realized that there
was no speed limit on Morse Code! Now if you don't get the picture there is no hope for you, know code or no code! Am I the only one here that is old enough
to remember? Sheesh! :-D
Unfortunately I got rid of my old 73 collection and cannot look up the article. But it was far enough
back that I though that I would never have a computer.
Someone who is better at research than I could do a GOOGLE and maybe even check with Wayne Green.
Go for it and quit belly aching!
73, Cal K4JSR From my padded ham shack in Beautiful
Downtown Bethlehem, Ga. Where the meds are good,
the women beautiful, and DX is OK, too.
|
| |
|
RE: Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by K4JSR on January 14, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
One cute addendum;
The FCC also required the RTTY folks to ID as required
with CW! Those were the good old days!
Repeaters had to have WR#XXX calls.
Autopatch traffic had to be logged by the repeater operaters. And some people think things have gotten worse!
Back to the handbasket, folks! They are about to leave without us!
73, Cal K4JSR
|
| |
|
Ridiculous Code Speeds Are Here to Stay.
|
|
|
by KA4ETR on May 25, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hello OM!
Been a Ham on & off for 40 years and used nothing but a hand key. Never learned to use a bug, because I enjoy the hand key. Use CW mostly and I always slow down to talk to Novices. Sending CW with a computer is a little ridiculous! 73!!
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Other Recent Articles
Student Sends MIT Letter to Space:
Amateur Radio Club Talks to Hams Worldwide on Centennial:
New Communication Exhibit Helps Kids Get the Message:
Transmission of Images - No Internet, Satellite, Cable, or Cells Needed!
Deltona Youth Loves to Ham It Up on the Radio:
|
