"Sal M. Onella" ) writes:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
news
RST Engineering wrote:

Should take all of about ten DAYS. Making sure all the letters and
numerals
and prosigns are included, making sure that the message is within the
limits
of the test time, making sure all the spellings are correct...and then
doing
it for a hundred QSOs so that you don't get the same one every time is a
NONtrivial task.

And of course, you would know exactly what is in the QSO files. Kinda
defeats the purpose.

Naw, he's the *teacher* so it's okay.


The ARRL has traditionally used QST articles for the code runs. Likely
it's not something someone will have memorized, yet if you were an ARRL
member you had the text to compare your copy with.

Nowadays, it's real easy to do something like this, since there are
code practice programs, and pretty much anything is available in
electronic form now.

It's not the same as actual QSOs, yet may be a better choice than code
groups. One advantage code groups traditionally had was that you weren't
likely to memorize them, so you only needed the one record to learn code.
Since resources aren't so limited nowadays, text is a better choice.

Given that the purpose is to get good at code, rather than get good
at knowing what a proper QSO is, one could meld the two. Take text
files almost at random, and edit them to include the exchange at
the beginning, and then the guy starts into a long rag chew, placing
his call into the transmission as required.

Micahel