Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Phony CW or Slow RTTY  (Read 733 times)
OLDFART13
Member

Posts: 242


WWW

Ignore
« on: January 02, 2004, 09:11:04 PM »

You should write an article about it and have it published on the homepage.
Logged
N6PEH
Member

Posts: 104




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2003, 03:20:33 PM »

When I listen to the lower ends of the band, where CW is King, I am amazed at how proficient a lot of the operators are at sending and receiving morse code!

It is incredible how fast, so many operators really are.  I think to myself, how can I ever attain such lightning like speed.

On a good propagation day, .025 through .070 is packed with streaming, screaming CW.  If you’re a 10 wpm man, forget it.

Maybe someday, a device will become available that will assist the average, mortal type operator with his/her CW QSO’s.  Kind of like, a computer, that will decode received CW into text, and enable the sender, to use the keyboard for sending.  The speed  for characters and sending could then be increased to a ridiculous speed just by adjusting the computer.  I know this may seem to take the essence from the language of CW.  But just think how impressed everyone will be.  And I can say I work a lot of CW!

I know all of these super fast, CW gods may take exception, but as it is, few will really ever notice.  Phony or not!

Take your hand off the keyboard and put it back on the paddle.  Oh yeh, turn the monitor off too.
Logged
OLDFART13
Member

Posts: 242


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #2 on: December 24, 2003, 06:34:32 PM »

Since you are an advanced class op, I will assume you are being sarcastic and can tell the difference between super fast CW and Digital.  I have never been a very proficient CW op and most of my CW is at 10-15 wpm.  I can copy faster but it is too much like work at that speed.  I used to be considered a very slow op but now days I’m considered average at those speeds.  But I have seen many operators who are extremely fast at CW.  I’m talking about speeds that amaze me.  I have seen a lot of it in person and know that there are hams out there that can operate very fast and I can only look in amazement sometimes.  

The fast code is usually found at the bottom 25kc of the bands.  I would imagine that you realize that is where the exclusive extra portions of the band are.  So, it only makes sense that the fastest CW ops operate there.  Now, if you are hearing super fast CW at the .070 freqs then you are probably hearing PSK31.   I do most of my CW operating between 050-065 freq because that is where the slower ops (like myself) are.  It is also close by the FISTS and the CW QRP freqs.  I used to operate in the novice portions of the band because that is where slow coders used to operate but that is no longer the case.  
Logged
W5HTW
Member

Posts: 729


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #3 on: December 24, 2003, 07:32:44 PM »

Couple of nights ago I heard two VERY strong signals around 7025 KHZ.  Both were probably S9 +30db.  As I listened, I heard the standard prosigns (AR, SK, BK, etc) being sent as individual letters, not as dinomes or real CW.  That is usually a giveaway that it is computer code.

I began wondering if the increased use of computer-copied code, requiring very strong and clear signals for good copy, is encouraging a new trend in CW - the kind where only 1500 watts output, and a real RST of 599, will do.  We have seen this trend on voice for everyone to run maximum (or above) legal power, even for nearby QSOs, and if the signal report isn't "40 over 9" then you are too weak to talk with.  We may be seeing that trend beginning on CW as well.  If so, we could start to experience much more difficulty with low power or even 100 watt contacts on the CW bands.

Perhaps technology isn't always progressive.  When I came into amateur radio 'high power' was a rare commodity, as AM kilowatt transmitters were few and far between, and very expensive.  The vast majority of us ran 100 watts input on AM.  In the early days of SSB this was also true.  But today just about every ham on HF has a 1500 watt (or 3000 watt, perhaps a carry-over from CB where the rules don't matter) amplifier, either in use or ready to use at a moment's notice.  

CW has always been a "get through" mode that didn't require high power.  For many years I almost never heard a station claim to be running "a kw" on CW, though a few did run 300-500 watts.  That seems to be changing.  We seem to need "maximum smoke" to operate.  

I really don't have a problem with computer generated CW as far as it being practical (given the above power considerations) but for someone to use a keyboard to transmit CW and then claim CW proficiency is a bit like the passenger on the airliner getting off at the destination and telling his friends what a great time he had piloting the aircraft.  

Ed
 

 
Logged
N7DM
Member

Posts: 671




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: December 26, 2003, 01:22:42 PM »

'Not too sure what Super-High-Speed CW is...  I  *have* heard the keyboard guys on 40 meters...around 7030...going, most likely  50 to 60... *I* can read 40 in my head, and *I* only get part of what they are sending.

For CW to be 'conversation', it is good to be able to 'converse' in the range of 25 to 35..  I usually call CQ at 27...   'Get a lot of answers at that speed... and between that and QSK, it makes for some nice conversations.

When I call CQ at that speed, I expect to be answered by someone that can read it. Likewise, when I answer a CQ...slower OR faster than that, I match the called speed...period.  The 'old way'...

I hope you will join in, at whatever level you can. If you have read many postings here, you are familiar with the idea of reading it in your head, a skill that throws open the door to enjoyment...

73
Logged
VE7AOP
Member

Posts: 32




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: December 26, 2003, 08:27:13 PM »

There are far better modes for machine decoding such as RTTY or PSK31.  Modes such as these are designed for keyboards and software.  I use these modes as well as voice.  CW is different.  The nuances and individual style of CW operators does not lend itself to accurate machine decoding even when keyboard generated.  For CW lovers (speaking for myself) the fun and satisifaction starts when the ears & brain begin to hear CW as a language of sound and go beyond the tiring tedium of translating dots and dashs.  It then it becomes a whole new experience.  You set back, relax, and carry on a QSO as if it were another language.  Differences in rhythm, including mistakes, are not much different then listening to someone speak in accent different from yours.  CW ops call this accent the 'fist'.  Electronic keyers have tended to minimize these style/accent/fist differences to some extent.  It takes time and effort to get to this point where one can listen to CW like another language. Learning any other spoken language takes time and effort. CW is easier.  I am a 'live and let live' type of guy.  There is a radio mode for everyone out there from voice, digital modes, SSTV and CW.  It is encouraging to see new CW ops, young and old, on the air.  For me I think it has something to do with the language, sound or rhythm aspect of CW that attracts some hams to it and others not.  When I feel like operating digital I boot up my computer and use PSK.
Logged
N7DM
Member

Posts: 671




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: December 26, 2003, 08:40:51 PM »

You have it right!  [I don't have any knowledge nor experience with those Digital Modes, though]

I'm surprized I don't recognize your call. Used to QSO a lot of VE7 on 80/40...from here in Post Angeles..

73.... 'keep your stick on the ice'..

Logged
KC8YXA
Member

Posts: 14




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2004, 10:20:22 PM »

It seem in just about every forum I read about CW I see key or keybord witch is faster Im not going to knock eather yes im a no code Tech and yes I want to move up in class . Ive been learning code slowly I know I only need to get my code upto 5 WPM typeing comes easy to me and when "notice" I said when I pass I will use a key and not a keyboard . I would hate to see CW become a lost art and thats what it is to me an art. I spend countless hours on the CW bands listening to different operators and how the send. Its not hard to tell the difference between someone
new and an oldtimmer its just music to my ears.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!