I have taught myself CW and can now copy and send 15 wpm, not up there with some of you veterans but my speed is increasing. I have gotten to that point by using these programs that you are dumping on. I have used CW decoders to help me learn to send by copying what I am sending, getting characters correct and improving my spacing, and when I am trying to do a QSO with someone a lot faster then what I an copy to ensure a callsign is correct. I love the myriad of software programs available to the Ham radio community today and try as many of them as I can. I have tried all the CW Programs out and they have been instrumental in learning the code.
-- So get off your high horse about appliance operators, many of these programs have been used to train folks and helped keep CW alive.

73 Paul kc2nyu

Rob - appreciate you taking the time to provide such extensive information on subject. I am much smarter as a result. Have several "working" options to chose from when necessary. In reality don't see myself using software to send CW, but have had fun experimenting. My next challenge now is to see if I can get the N1MM contest program to key my K3.
- Charles, no have not tried to use more than one decoder at a time.

73 & Tnx Paul kc2nyu

I think my problem is that the first install didn't complete which is somehow causing this error 2343 to interrupt a re-install.

73 Paul

Rob- thanks for ALL the info provided and good to hear you like to try all these different programs also.  I have had some issues with a couple of them.
- first CWDecoder:  Downloaded and started install just fine, but I inadvertently stopped the install. When I tried to install again, I get this msg "Installer has encountered and unexpected error installing this package. This may indicate a problem with package. the error code is 2343". I have made several attempts to uninstall every trace of the program, even have run a registry cleaner several times. But each time I try - I ultimately get the same error msg. Any suggestions on how to fix, would really like to get the program running. PC is win7, 64 bit PC. 2.4 ghz processor and 4 gb of memory, radio is K3, interface is Signalink USB.
-  My MRP40 trial is down to 11 days and this morning when I started it , it is acting weird- flashing and unusable. 
- I have not been able to get the trial CWSkimmer to send or MRP40.
- The only programs I have I have gotten to send are DM780 and KCOMM (think just for K2 or K3)
- Couldn't get CwType to send with, although CwGet works fine.
- so obviously there is something I don't understand about the setups for interface radio and sending programs??

73 Paul kc2nyu

Rob- agree with your comments about not relying on software to decode. But I love to play with and experiment with different ham software and have heard so much abt CWSkimmer wanted to get to the bottom of it. I tried CWDecoder but couldn't get it to work. are you using with windows 7?

73 Paul

There has been some discussion last few days on an amateur radio.com blog regarding the best CW Decoder software. Is it MRP40 or is it CW Skimmer? The Blog author on Amateur Radio.com concluded that MRP40 was better.  I am currently using a trial version of a MRP40 and find it pretty good. I also have a trial version of CW skimmer. As of right now I would agree that MRP40 is better in that 1) it decodes everything (almost- depending on sender)  in the main window and 2) it automatically logs all heard in a log file.. I might add that CWGet also does a good job on decode as does DM-780 part of HRD suite.

But I must be missing something on CW Skimmer. Yes it shows multiple QSO's, shows a list of the callsigns and decodes the selected QSO in window that shows just the last 10 - 12 words decoded. But I don't see any place where you see the entire QSO decoded ?? or have  any record of the complete conversation.  I realize that it is used extensively in contests and in spotting networks, but as a pure decoder doesn't seem to measure up to previously mentioned programs. So am I completely  missing something on CWSkimmer??

73 Paul kc2nyu

There was a question- New or Used. He is looking only at New.

73
Paul

I know this sounds like a repeat subject, but when I search around many of the recommendations are somewhat dated. I also realize that the subject can get very subjective but here goes..... I got a call last night from my brother in law who wants to purchase a new rig for his son, who has been licensed for a few years but has only had old used gear. He mostly operates SSB and digital- no cw at this point. So two questions"

- What is the best HF -6M  rig today for under $1000
- what is the best HF - 6M rig today for under $1500

Tnx & 73 Paul

W6BYU- OK got it- hope to get to this over the weekend- thanks for explanation and suggestions

N4CR- I have two raised radials only, no In Ground radials.
Each runs in opposite directions from the base of the vertical leg of the Inverted L. Unfortunately - configuration is not optimum due size of lot- ergo not straight , had to bend around corners of lot to get necessary length.

73 Paul

OK- took some readings on the analyzer of just the radials. X is lower at the high end of the 160m band -- indicating the radials are too short. So... my next project is to make them longer. The question is how much longer. Each is 128 ft long now-- what if I were to add another 64 ft and retest? Or is there a more scientific way too determine length to add??

This is proving to be an excellent experience for me, appreciate all the contributions from the group.

73
Paul

OK guys, I have lengthened my two above ground radials from 65 ft to 128 ft each. The back side of my lot is 131 ft, so both of these, 3 ft above the ground radials, make a 90 bend at the corners of the lot. I also added a 1:1 balun at the end of the antenna/radials connection. I took a new set of readings, on all bands just for an overall reference of where I stand. Keep in mind the original goal was to get on 160M. Overall the change in radial length didn’t improve SWR that much but did lower the impedance readings on many bands.

-   SWR on 160M went up, but impedance dropped by half.
-   On 80M SWR and impedance readings are about the same -- very high
-   60M stayed the same
-   40M SWR went up
-   30M SWR slightly up
-   20M SWR about same but impedance is down
-   17M SWR slightly better, impedance is lower
-   15M  SWR about the same, impedance is way down
-   12M  SWR up slightly but impedance way down
-   10M  SWR up slightly but impedance way down
-    6M   SWR slightly better, impedance slightly better. This band has overall best SWR averaging 5.
   
-   So … overall making the radials longer improved impedance, didn’t affect SWR all that much. Looking over the readings on all bands, the SWR is going down as frequency increase, so I do I deduce that the antenna is too short??

Tnx Paul
kc2nyu

Robert-
- my bad, I didn't read your statement carefully- now understand.
- roger wasting my time until I fix radial problem.
- so I need to extend each of the radials from 65 ft to 128 ft.
- earlier post said I need to "tune" the radials-- how do I do that?

will work on radials and then report back.

Tnx and 73
Paul

--- I do have an MFJ antenna analyzer. So far I just checked 160M, and the SWR at 1800khz was 10.5, at 1900 was 6.5 and at 2000 was 3.6. I will check other bands.

---- How do I " tune" the radials to 160M  ?

73 Paul

First - thanks for all the good advice. which raise more questions and a few comments:

- first reply fm AA4PB, may have a typo, in both sentences it says If SWR goes down, should one be "goes up" ?_______________________________________
Check the SWR at different frequencies. If the SWR goes down as you increase frequency then the antenna is too short. If SWR goes down as you decrease frequency then the antenn is too long.


-- I can make thetwo above ground radials longer; but my lot backs up to a golf course and have small yard so in ground radials not easy to do.

-- I have a 1:1 balun , would that work as a feedline choke ?

-- I have two 8 ft ground rods driven at the base of the tree. I currently just using to connect to lighting arrestor on feedline. Had been told previously that radials should not be tied to ground, and as Tom says that would serve to decrease signal.

73 Paul

Antenna theory has never been a strong suit of this history major, so need some advice from the forum experts.
-I put an Inverted L using single strand 14 ga insulated wire. Goal was to get on 160M, so dimensions are 62ft vertical and 68ft horizontal. Vertical runs up pine tree, horizontal runs thru one tree and is secured to another tree. Have two 65 ft above ground radials (3 ft above ground), one runs under the horizontal leg and the other runs off in opposite direction. Right now both the SWR and the Impedance is too high.
-   So here’s my question --- do I shorten or lengthen the wire to lower the SWR and Impedance? Depending on the answer, do I also modify length of radials?

Tnx & 73
Paul