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: Prev 1 2 [3] 4 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Sending CQ at the speed at which you want to converse -v- QRS Etiquitte.  (Read 20111 times)
PA0BLAH
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: September 08, 2012, 12:22:55 PM »



We were trained to do this while intercepting enemy cipher traffic so that the cryptographers could have an accurate letter count to begin their analysis of messages


Come on Ray, that were reciphered codes, that is something else as ciphers. mid-1944 WEC was intercepting clearly some 2000 Japanese signals a day. To judge from their requests for repeats, many were taken with greater accuracy by the WEC then the addressees.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 12:24:46 PM by PA0BLAH » Logged
W7ASA
Member

Posts: 267




Ignore
« Reply #31 on: September 08, 2012, 04:55:00 PM »

Bob -

Clearly you don't know where I was, who 'they' were and when it was happening, which is certainly fine with everyone who matters.



de Ray
W7ASA  ..._ ._


Logged
S51M
Member

Posts: 14




Ignore
« Reply #32 on: September 09, 2012, 12:16:42 AM »

... But I think Amateur Radio is not about technology but the Art and Skill of Communication.  As for CW I think it's not about speed or even accuracy but Fellowship, friendship between people with a shared passion...   I operate both Straight Key and Paddle/Keyer and I will gladly slow down to whatever speed the other operator is comfortable with.   I assume that's his sending speed but not always. If I know he can copy faster than he sends from experience I will keep a comfortable speed for me...  The important skill is the ability to sustain an interesting conversation not  to send or receive fast.   This is achieved by a willingness to accommodate the other operator. I know more conversation can occur in a given time with higher speeds but we should strive for quality not quantity...

Just my 2 cents worth...

Jim
K4AHO


Jim, i agree 100% with you.  Excellent, that's real Ham Spirit. Congratulations!

73 ES GL DE S51M, Bruno
Logged
PA0BLAH
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: September 09, 2012, 08:12:46 AM »

... But I think Amateur Radio is not about technology but the Art and Skill of Communication.  
Jim
K4AHO


Jim, i agree 100% with you.  Excellent, that's real Ham Spirit. Congratulations!

73 ES GL DE S51M, Bruno

""Amateur Radio is not about technology "" is said here.

You can think that, but IMHO you are dead wrong. Everybody can give his own emphasis on hobby aspects, like fishing and biking or up hill skiing  but ham radio is  an extreme  particular hobby defined by governments together in a meeting of the IRU as:

1.56     amateur service: A radiocommunication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs, that is, by duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest.

So when you think you can just buy commercial equipment, and your license is degraded to answering 20 out of 40 in advance published questions , with the accompanying answers, which in truth do not exits, because stupid questions don't exist,  you have to be ashamed to make your own degrading definition to suit yourself as a non valeur only communicating with other non valeurs in stupid talks about nothing or - Oh My God (which is Zeus- piece be with him - hence  so no blasphemy, because Zeus is not ur God) - "contests" exchanging 599 tu. otherwise, with a true report  you are classified as LID. Technical investigations HAHA.

So al those guys advertising keys, antennas and what have you, with  their call N3ZN etcetera labelled are dead wrong, because they use their hobby for pecuniary interest.

Bob
« Last Edit: September 09, 2012, 09:13:14 AM by PA0BLAH » Logged
S51M
Member

Posts: 14




Ignore
« Reply #34 on: September 13, 2012, 09:07:34 AM »



"
1.56     amateur service: A radiocommunication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs, that is, by duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest.

So when you think you can just buy commercial equipment, and your license is degraded to answering 20 out of 40 in advance published questions , with the accompanying answers, which in truth do not exits, because stupid questions don't exist,  you have to be ashamed to make your own degrading definition to suit yourself as a non valeur only communicating with other non valeurs in stupid talks about nothing or - Oh My God (which is Zeus- piece be with him - hence  so no blasphemy, because Zeus is not ur God) - "contests" exchanging 599 tu. otherwise, with a true report  you are classified as LID. Technical investigations HAHA.

So al those guys advertising keys, antennas and what have you, with  their call N3ZN etcetera labelled are dead wrong, because they use their hobby for pecuniary interest.

Bob


Bob, intersting thinking. I guess with the very busy lifestyles, fast development and stressful jobs many radio amateurs are too tired for any technical investigations and searching for the new tech stuff in our hobby. For mostly of radioamateurs that's only - thanks God - A HOBBY and nothing else.

Commercial equipments and technical investigations give to us some kind of help and easy hobby for everyone. 
The real problem of our hobby seems to be in content of our QSO's, silence on the frequencies and less and less value of the human. Machine-to-machine communication, "5NN - false RST &  QSO No" is making us stupid.

73 De S51M, Bruno


Logged
KF7ATL
Member

Posts: 54




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: November 04, 2012, 10:40:30 AM »

Ray,

You make a valid point, and I can understand where you are coming from. However, being a relatively new ham (3 1/2 years) I would like to counter with this: If I only answered CQs sent at or below my comfort level, A) my speed would never improve, and  B) I would rarely be able to work any DX.

Just my 2 cents.

Garth, KF7ATL
Logged
W7ASA
Member

Posts: 267




Ignore
« Reply #36 on: November 04, 2012, 03:39:48 PM »

Hi Garth,

Thanks for your toughts on this.  It's good the hear the different thoughts about code speed, CQing & etc  My question was not about moderate differences in response speeds, such as calling CQ at 25 and being answered at 18-20WPM.  That's pretty normal. It's more about calling CQ at 35 and being called at 13 WPM.  There's nothing wrong with that, except that it's pretty clear that the CQ'ing station is calling in higher speed for a reason. The answer is probably what one of the other fellows said  - and was indeed simpliicity itself: if you want to answer the station at half your calling speed, then do so and if not, then continue to call at your original higher speed.
Having a nice, rag-chew on my old Vibroplex at middle speeds like high twenties to mid-thirties is a special joy form me.

What I often do when calling is to call at different speeds from time to time. If the first few calls QRQ don't work.  I'll drop to a little over 20 , then mid- 20's and back to QRQ. It's a LOT like fly fishing; seeing what's biting at the moment.

Why you're fly fishing, let the fish select your bait.


73 de Ray
W7ASA ..._ ._
Logged
NK7Z
Member

Posts: 865


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #37 on: November 04, 2012, 06:50:07 PM »

Hi Garth,

Thanks for your toughts on this.  It's good the hear the different thoughts about code speed, CQing & etc  My question was not about moderate differences in response speeds, such as calling CQ at 25 and being answered at 18-20WPM.  That's pretty normal. It's more about calling CQ at 35 and being called at 13 WPM. 

Hi Ray,

Thinking back to my Novice days, 40 years ago, I remember how hard it was to find anyone with whom I could communicate with the first few weeks...  I tend to answer a slower reply...  It is agonizing though...  I figure someone wants to try to go a bit faster so they try someone faster...  So I answer them back at about 20% faster than they transmit...  That helps them learn, and if they don't like it, they give a report and then leave... 

Logged

Thanks,
Dave
For reviews and setups see: http://www.nk7z.net
M0LEP
Member

Posts: 212




Ignore
« Reply #38 on: November 05, 2012, 02:02:22 AM »

If I only answered CQs sent at or below my comfort level, A) my speed would never improve, and  B) I would rarely be able to work any DX.

The flip answer, of course, is "Call CQ yourself." Then, in theory, you'll be in control of the speed. It probably won't stop folk answering your CQ at twice the speed, though. I say "flip answer" because I find calling CQ is about a thousand times harder (give or take an order of magnitude) than answering CQ, but that's a different issue...

73, Rick M0LEP
Logged
G4LNA
Member

Posts: 26




Ignore
« Reply #39 on: November 05, 2012, 02:40:11 AM »

If I only answered CQs sent at or below my comfort level, A) my speed would never improve, and  B) I would rarely be able to work any DX.

The flip answer, of course, is "Call CQ yourself." Then, in theory, you'll be in control of the speed. It probably won't stop folk answering your CQ at twice the speed, though. I say "flip answer" because I find calling CQ is about a thousand times harder (give or take an order of magnitude) than answering CQ, but that's a different issue...

73, Rick M0LEP

That's interesting you say that Rick, I find the opposite myself, maybe the subject of another thread rather than this one.
Logged
GILGSN
Member

Posts: 208




Ignore
« Reply #40 on: November 05, 2012, 10:14:35 PM »

Hi Ray,

I think someone answering a 40wpm CQ at 15wpm is probably using a decoder. I would suggest staying at your speed. If he replies, it means he is able to copy at that speed.

I can send twice as fast as I can copy, and that creates a whole new set of problems because I have to slow down my sending so that I don't get too fast a response. What I did is post my copy speed on my QRZ.com page. I can always update it later. If I really want a QSO, I turn on Fldigi, but that's cheating, though it works well as a backup to paper.

Gil.
Logged
K8AG
Member

Posts: 352




Ignore
« Reply #41 on: November 06, 2012, 09:37:49 AM »

However, I do question whether it's polite for a very slow station to answer a much faster CQ, knowing full well that he's unable to keep-up with what he is hearing, yet expecting the fast CQ'ing station to drastically drop back to accommodate this slow pace.

Hi Ray,

CQ means that you want to talk with anybody.  This means anybody no matter what speed.  Sometimes people come back faster than I can copy.  I do my best.  I can ALWAYS go slower.  If you only want QRQ then CQ QRQ should be the call just like CQ DX is the call when you don't want to be pestered by the locals.

My 2 cents.

73, JP, K8AG
Logged
STAYVERTICAL
Member

Posts: 875




Ignore
« Reply #42 on: November 06, 2012, 01:46:59 PM »

Yesterday I answered a Russian station sending cq at 40wpm.
My return speed 18WPM.
I am using a hand key, have no keyer, and didn't have my PC set up for sending CW.
So 18 to 20WPM is about my present speed for comfortable rag chewing on a hand key.

We ended up having a qso for 90 minutes - a very enjoyable one.
At one time he asked me if I was ok receiving at his speed - and I explained I could receive it fine, but was using a hand key.
No problems, no fuss - the way it should be.

Most stations will not mind listening at a lower speed than they are sending, and are happy to qso.
Even contest stations will respond to slow speed replies, providing you can receive them so they don't have to repeat endlessly.

I have been at the pointy end of DX pileups, and really for these situations - the stations only want to get a log entry,
So the 599 tks qso 73 type of exchange is ok, since the goal is not a ragchew.

Provided you can receive fine at the senders initial speed, I don't see any problem in responding at a slower speed.
Some people will be annoyed, but they are in the minority in my experience.
Personally, receiving a range of speeds keeps me sharp, and also expands my QSO pool.
And in the end, thats what ham radio is about - communication between people by mutually agreed protocol.

73 - Rob
Logged
W7ASA
Member

Posts: 267




Ignore
« Reply #43 on: November 07, 2012, 04:21:36 PM »

Hey RD - Good to hear from you!

Perhaps, I'm pursuing that Morse 'Nirvanah' by sliding the Vibroplex weight back.  I have also been out where I had a straight only & so topped-out  well below the speeds at which I can receive.  That's fine.  BT&DT.  However, for me personally, I did not answer the QRQ QSOs I heard, because of my limitation [using a push button on top of a wilderness rig as a key while on a wilderness trip] at that time. I know that you are a considerate operator and that you CAN QRQ [ex-Sparkie], because I've had the honor of a couple of brief exchanges with you on marine CW.  Much like yourself, I operated at the best pace I could send good code at as closely matched to the other fellow's speed, which does vary with equipment and operating conditions. That's normal. I've also called CQ, seemingly forever, at times, whether fast, slow or in between - that' s life.  I was an ex-intercept operator [among other things] and frankly, I have not been able to send as fast as I can receive since I was 19 years old, even with a fancy set of paddles in years passed. I would LIKE to change that, which is why I send CQ a bit faster than I am absolutely comfortable sending, but still send what I am told is good code.

-...-  //BREAK//  ha ha

I was taught from the beginning:

'Call CQ at the speed you want to QSO.'
and
'Be ready to adjust your sending speed slightly for the comfort of the other station.'

If you want to go faster, ask: "QRQ?" and slower "PSE QRS" or some variation of these two.

Standard abbreviations and Q-signals increase overall throughput.

All good guidance.

Here's the original center-line of this thread,  (and I have read and appreciated the the various, interesting thoughts on the subject)

In the 'spirit' of QRS we slow down a bit now and again to help the other fellow, but to what degree is it more than 'a bit' and becomes an imposition, like someone driving 30 in a two lane highway with a line a mile long behind him?

After all - we're hams doing CW for enjoyment, rather than to maintain a net speed to pass traffic to all operators. I am sometimes calling CQ for other operators in the 35 WPM range, because I want to have a QSO near that speed. If I never push to send faster, I'll never develop the reflexes I need to send accurately, closer to the speed at which I can receive. - I would never improve.

Quick Note:  Increased speed is neither better nor worse - it is simply 'faster'.  Fast code sent poorly is nearly worthless: it tells me that you're alive, but no much else.  Shocked  I'd rather enjoy a conversation at 10 words per minute in clean code than trying to decipher rubbish at 35 with a ton of fills and or zero content.

As an example: I love downhill skiing but to tell you the truth, I am simply terrible at it. I'm generally good at anything physical, but downhill skiing simply illuded my grasp. However, I dated a Double Diamond skiier, we'd go our seperate ways on the slopes and meet for lunch at the lodge.  She had a BALL skiing runs with names that sounded to me like : The Spleen Shredder & etc. while I really enjoyed skiing on my favorite bunny slope called "Blue Bird" - which was ab-so-loooot-lee as mellow as it sounds.  Grin   I was looking for pristine beauty in the clear mountain air - not a near death experience. If I wanted that, I'd have stayed in uniform (or married to my ex-wife ... )    Shocked  

As one fellow put it quite thoughtfully:  "If I only answered CQs sent at or below my comfort level, A) my speed would never improve..."

That makes perfect sense. The same applies to me.  If I am almost constantly sending & receiving at half my code speed to please others, rather being allowed to CQ long enough to be answered by those who are a little faster, then I would never improve. In short - I'm also training to increase my accuracy at higher speeds. I don't call the fellows who are sending 60 WPM though I can answer at almost 40 with my bug. They are calling QRQ+ because they want to QSO at QRQ+ speeds..  If they wanted a QSO at my relatively crawling pace of mid-thirties, they'd have been CALLING CQ at that speed in the first place - right?  That's logical.

When using my straight key, I search for CQ's at straight key speed. Should I find none /which is most of the time/ then I CQ at straight key speed. This is what I do and recommend that same to all hams. If the ham does not hear a CQ that matches  their tastes after a short bit of knob-twisting, then call CQ - Ez-Pz!   If I am sending with the bug at higher speeds, I am - obviously - requesting contact at aproximately that speed, in the same way that I am also -logically- asking for contact in the same mode. Little faster or slower - that's fine and all part of the game.  Notice it says ' a bit faster or slower', half speed or less...  

Call CQ to attract someone in the speed range that suits you. It's fun & enjoyable.  Send your CQ in the speed range where you want to communicate. By taking the initiative YOU solve many problems, because you call for what you desire and also allow contacts for those who declare:"I don't hear anyone calling CQ at XX WPM."  I say "XX" because I rarely hear a "CQ at 30-40", which is why I am calling at those speeds in the first place.

If you don't hear "CQ": call "CQ". Other hams will thank you.



73 de Ray
W7ASA ..._ ._



« Last Edit: November 07, 2012, 05:17:05 PM by W7ASA » Logged
M0LEP
Member

Posts: 212




Ignore
« Reply #44 on: November 07, 2012, 04:47:38 PM »

That's interesting you say that Rick, I find the opposite myself, maybe the subject of another thread rather than this one.

If you call CQ then each reply is a new unknown. If you're answering a CQ you've probably had a chance to listen to a few earlier QSOs, and to have noted down a fair bit of the basic info, so you'll be less likely to need to ask for repeats...

Over this side of the Atlantic I guess I hear fewer than one caller in 20 calling at less than 20wpm.

73, Rick M0LEP
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3] 4 Next   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!