|
Anyone see Jay Leno last night?
What a butt whippin. That so called "worlds fastest texter" was in total
shock when two average "real hams" whooped him like grannies stepchild. At least twice as fast than so called modern technology. Dan/W4NTI |
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message .net... What a butt whippin. That so called "worlds fastest texter" was in total shock when two average "real hams" whooped him like grannies stepchild. At least twice as fast than so called modern technology. Dan/W4NTI YAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWN! |
the full video is at:
www.qrq.org.uk QRQ=MUST SEND FASTER !!! -- --73deG1LVN http://qsy.to/ChorleyFM bring a bottle! |
gareth wrote: the full video is at: www.qrq.org.uk QRQ=MUST SEND FASTER !!! -- --73deG1LVN http://qsy.to/ChorleyFM bring a bottle! Those two OM's put a can of "Whoop Ass" on the two kids. CW comes through again! |
"No One You Know" wrote in message
ups.com... Those two OM's put a can of "Whoop Ass" on the two kids. CW comes through again! And a hefty bit of SWR grease on teh rubber ducks -- --73deG1LVN http://qsy.to/ChorleyFM bring a bottle! |
Phone would'a kicked all of their asses! Heck...Echolink would have SMOKED
'em too! "No One You Know" wrote in message ups.com... gareth wrote: the full video is at: www.qrq.org.uk QRQ=MUST SEND FASTER !!! -- --73deG1LVN http://qsy.to/ChorleyFM bring a bottle! Those two OM's put a can of "Whoop Ass" on the two kids. CW comes through again! |
|
"King" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message .net... What a butt whippin. That so called "worlds fastest texter" was in total shock when two average "real hams" whooped him like grannies stepchild. At least twice as fast than so called modern technology. Dan/W4NTI YAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWN! Jealous eh? Dan/W4NTI |
"Hamguy" wrote in message ... Phone would'a kicked all of their asses! Heck...Echolink would have SMOKED 'em too! Think so, do you? I'll bet I can get more thru put on CW than you can on phone in the same amount of time. I'm not talking about a short sentence. I mean real traffic. Dan/W4NTI |
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"King" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message nk.net... What a butt whippin. That so called "worlds fastest texter" was in total shock when two average "real hams" whooped him like grannies stepchild. At least twice as fast than so called modern technology. Dan/W4NTI YAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWN! Jealous eh? Dan/W4NTI two well trained cw operators vs a couple of kids... sounds like something the military would arrange . |
Dan/W4NTI wrote: "Hamguy" wrote in message ... Phone would'a kicked all of their asses! Heck...Echolink would have SMOKED 'em too! Think so, do you? I'll bet I can get more thru put on CW than you can on phone in the same amount of time. I'm not talking about a short sentence. I mean real traffic. Dan/W4NTI My money would be on Dan. He is a "real" cw operator, good fist too! Les |
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message nk.net... "Hamguy" wrote in message ... Phone would'a kicked all of their asses! Heck...Echolink would have SMOKED 'em too! Think so, do you? I'll bet I can get more thru put on CW than you can on phone in the same amount of time. I'm not talking about a short sentence. I mean real traffic. Dan/W4NTI Tell him Dan. We don't need no stinking text messaging. Echolink : Play amateur radio operator "No radio or antenna needed". Ace - WH2T |
|
Dan/W4NTI wrote: What a butt whippin. That so called "worlds fastest texter" was in total shock when two average "real hams" whooped him like grannies stepchild. At least twice as fast than so called modern technology. Dan/W4NTI I was sent this and thought it would fit in whit this post. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- First, the message consisted of 39 characters sent in approx. 22 seconds, which using the FCC rule of 5 characters per word comes out to about 22 WPM, not 41. SMS is limited to 160 characters per message, which the kid said he's entered in 57 seconds, and that would come out to 32 WPM using the same rule. There is some latency in SMS, the telcos say it's less than 10 sec. But the point is, the CW ops won with a comfortable margin of error even though they used a slower rate than they could have. Here are a few comments from K6CTW, who was on the receiving end: ----------------------------------------------- Well to answer some of the questions I have received: 1. Ben was just getting ready to start entering the last 2 words when I was done. 2. None of us had any idea of the text we would be sending, not only for the "show" but also for the 3 rehersals (in which we smoked em every time) 3. Chip, K7JA was sending and I, Ken, K6CTW was receiving. 4. The radios were FT-817's provided by Chip's company Yaesu and HRO. Reason for that choice was that we needed the most frequency agile radios we could get. When I talked to the technical folks, they recommended we START at 2 meters and go up because of all of the lower frequency noise and RFI from the other TV equipment. When I got there, we took out a spectrum analyzer and studied all of the interference possibilities. I ended up choosing 432.200 MHz because that guaranteed no RFI from their equipment and we were high enough not to overload their front ends either. This was then verified and it was what we were using at the FT-817's lowest setting. 5. I already knew that 28-30 wpm would easily keep us in front of even the current world record holder, and also it is the fastest speed that I can make nice readable copy on paper with a "stick". 6. The telegrapher "costumes" were the producer's idea but it was fun for both Chip and I. 7. In rehersal I, K6CTW had a number of lines which would have really done a nice job of plugging ham radio and telegraphy however at our last dress rehersal, they decided to cut them out to make the segment "fit". (maybe next time). 8. I decided that I would be the receiver because I'm not bothered by crowd noise etc. If you enjoyed the segment, PLEASE email, write, etc. to let "The Tonight Show" know about it. That way we may have a chance for a bigger segment next time. Thanks for the kind comments from all and let's keep on having fun! (It is a hobby after all). 73, Ken, K6CTW ----------------------------------------------- 73, Bob W9RAN |
Dr.Ace - WH2T wrote: "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message nk.net... "Hamguy" wrote in message . .. Phone would'a kicked all of their asses! Heck...Echolink would have SMOKED 'em too! Think so, do you? I'll bet I can get more thru put on CW than you can on phone in the same amount of time. I'm not talking about a short sentence. I mean real traffic. Dan/W4NTI Tell him Dan. We don't need no stinking text messaging. Echolink : Play amateur radio operator "No radio or antenna needed". Ace - WH2T How do you figure that the CW throughput will beat phone - at least for clear text. I know that good CW ops can sail along at 50 wpm ( like my Dad, unfortunately not me). But I thought speech was more like 200-300 wpm. So if you do not need to spell out unusual words, phone should beat CW easily. The results could differ if we factor in odd ball words or code groups and QRM/QRN but I thought this was simply clear text. John |
Dan must be pretty fast if he can pound-out 200-300 words per minute!
Again...phone/voice will beat CW ANY day in a speed contest. "KC8GXW" wrote in message ... Dan/W4NTI wrote: What a butt whippin. That so called "worlds fastest texter" was in total shock when two average "real hams" whooped him like grannies stepchild. At least twice as fast than so called modern technology. Dan/W4NTI I was sent this and thought it would fit in whit this post. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- First, the message consisted of 39 characters sent in approx. 22 seconds, which using the FCC rule of 5 characters per word comes out to about 22 WPM, not 41. SMS is limited to 160 characters per message, which the kid said he's entered in 57 seconds, and that would come out to 32 WPM using the same rule. There is some latency in SMS, the telcos say it's less than 10 sec. But the point is, the CW ops won with a comfortable margin of error even though they used a slower rate than they could have. Here are a few comments from K6CTW, who was on the receiving end: ----------------------------------------------- Well to answer some of the questions I have received: 1. Ben was just getting ready to start entering the last 2 words when I was done. 2. None of us had any idea of the text we would be sending, not only for the "show" but also for the 3 rehersals (in which we smoked em every time) 3. Chip, K7JA was sending and I, Ken, K6CTW was receiving. 4. The radios were FT-817's provided by Chip's company Yaesu and HRO. Reason for that choice was that we needed the most frequency agile radios we could get. When I talked to the technical folks, they recommended we START at 2 meters and go up because of all of the lower frequency noise and RFI from the other TV equipment. When I got there, we took out a spectrum analyzer and studied all of the interference possibilities. I ended up choosing 432.200 MHz because that guaranteed no RFI from their equipment and we were high enough not to overload their front ends either. This was then verified and it was what we were using at the FT-817's lowest setting. 5. I already knew that 28-30 wpm would easily keep us in front of even the current world record holder, and also it is the fastest speed that I can make nice readable copy on paper with a "stick". 6. The telegrapher "costumes" were the producer's idea but it was fun for both Chip and I. 7. In rehersal I, K6CTW had a number of lines which would have really done a nice job of plugging ham radio and telegraphy however at our last dress rehersal, they decided to cut them out to make the segment "fit". (maybe next time). 8. I decided that I would be the receiver because I'm not bothered by crowd noise etc. If you enjoyed the segment, PLEASE email, write, etc. to let "The Tonight Show" know about it. That way we may have a chance for a bigger segment next time. Thanks for the kind comments from all and let's keep on having fun! (It is a hobby after all). 73, Ken, K6CTW ----------------------------------------------- 73, Bob W9RAN |
Top posting to save some scrolling.
All of this comes down to one thing, CW beat the TEXT guys. Whatever is faster or slower, the rabbit or the hare, it's all redundant. There has been three such test that I've heard of and in all three CW won. Maybe the text lagged by 10 seconds, maybe K6CTW filled in the last 2 words. The bottom line is that it was a race and CW won! Hamguy wrote: Dan must be pretty fast if he can pound-out 200-300 words per minute! Again...phone/voice will beat CW ANY day in a speed contest. "KC8GXW" wrote in message ... Dan/W4NTI wrote: What a butt whippin. That so called "worlds fastest texter" was in total shock when two average "real hams" whooped him like grannies stepchild. At least twice as fast than so called modern technology. Dan/W4NTI I was sent this and thought it would fit in whit this post. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- First, the message consisted of 39 characters sent in approx. 22 seconds, which using the FCC rule of 5 characters per word comes out to about 22 WPM, not 41. SMS is limited to 160 characters per message, which the kid said he's entered in 57 seconds, and that would come out to 32 WPM using the same rule. There is some latency in SMS, the telcos say it's less than 10 sec. But the point is, the CW ops won with a comfortable margin of error even though they used a slower rate than they could have. Here are a few comments from K6CTW, who was on the receiving end: ----------------------------------------------- Well to answer some of the questions I have received: 1. Ben was just getting ready to start entering the last 2 words when I was done. 2. None of us had any idea of the text we would be sending, not only for the "show" but also for the 3 rehersals (in which we smoked em every time) 3. Chip, K7JA was sending and I, Ken, K6CTW was receiving. 4. The radios were FT-817's provided by Chip's company Yaesu and HRO. Reason for that choice was that we needed the most frequency agile radios we could get. When I talked to the technical folks, they recommended we START at 2 meters and go up because of all of the lower frequency noise and RFI from the other TV equipment. When I got there, we took out a spectrum analyzer and studied all of the interference possibilities. I ended up choosing 432.200 MHz because that guaranteed no RFI from their equipment and we were high enough not to overload their front ends either. This was then verified and it was what we were using at the FT-817's lowest setting. 5. I already knew that 28-30 wpm would easily keep us in front of even the current world record holder, and also it is the fastest speed that I can make nice readable copy on paper with a "stick". 6. The telegrapher "costumes" were the producer's idea but it was fun for both Chip and I. 7. In rehersal I, K6CTW had a number of lines which would have really done a nice job of plugging ham radio and telegraphy however at our last dress rehersal, they decided to cut them out to make the segment "fit". (maybe next time). 8. I decided that I would be the receiver because I'm not bothered by crowd noise etc. If you enjoyed the segment, PLEASE email, write, etc. to let "The Tonight Show" know about it. That way we may have a chance for a bigger segment next time. Thanks for the kind comments from all and let's keep on having fun! (It is a hobby after all). 73, Ken, K6CTW ----------------------------------------------- 73, Bob W9RAN |
KC8GXW wrote: Top posting to save some scrolling. All of this comes down to one thing, CW beat the TEXT guys. Whatever is faster or slower, the rabbit or the hare, it's all redundant. There has been three such test that I've heard of and in all three CW won. Maybe the text lagged by 10 seconds, maybe K6CTW filled in the last 2 words. The bottom line is that it was a race and CW won! (2) Yaesu FT-817's $1178.45 (2) Telegrapher uniforms $ 156.99 The look on the text guys face Priceless |
Lloyd wrote: On 14 May 2005 17:53:38 -0700, wrote: NNTP-Posting-Host: 131.22.200.44 - nelson.keesler.af.mil My money would be on Dan. He is a "real" cw operator, good fist too! Says Les as he (1) misuses taxpayer-furnished computing equipment at Keesler AFB, and (2) fails to mention that he doesn't hold a ham license and therefore isn't qualified to comment on someone's "fist." The really odd part of this whole thread is that anyone at all thinks the subject is important. If a code operator can send faster than someone at an itty-bitty keyboard can, does a fish need a bicycle? I can copy it faster than you can send it peckerbreath! Les |
wrote in message oups.com... Dan/W4NTI wrote: "Hamguy" wrote in message ... Phone would'a kicked all of their asses! Heck...Echolink would have SMOKED 'em too! Think so, do you? I'll bet I can get more thru put on CW than you can on phone in the same amount of time. I'm not talking about a short sentence. I mean real traffic. Dan/W4NTI My money would be on Dan. He is a "real" cw operator, good fist too! Les Thanks Les, good to hear from you again. Dan/W4NTI |
wrote in message ups.com... Lloyd wrote: On 14 May 2005 17:53:38 -0700, wrote: NNTP-Posting-Host: 131.22.200.44 - nelson.keesler.af.mil My money would be on Dan. He is a "real" cw operator, good fist too! Says Les as he (1) misuses taxpayer-furnished computing equipment at Keesler AFB, and (2) fails to mention that he doesn't hold a ham license and therefore isn't qualified to comment on someone's "fist." The really odd part of this whole thread is that anyone at all thinks the subject is important. If a code operator can send faster than someone at an itty-bitty keyboard can, does a fish need a bicycle? I can copy it faster than you can send it peckerbreath! Les If this is the "real Lloyd" then he is the one that has nothing to say. A no code Tech with total inability to even learn 5 wpm. I would take Les any day, even without a ticket, over this loser Lloyd. Dan/W4NTI |
"John" wrote in message ... Dr.Ace - WH2T wrote: "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message nk.net... "Hamguy" wrote in message ... Phone would'a kicked all of their asses! Heck...Echolink would have SMOKED 'em too! Think so, do you? I'll bet I can get more thru put on CW than you can on phone in the same amount of time. I'm not talking about a short sentence. I mean real traffic. Dan/W4NTI Tell him Dan. We don't need no stinking text messaging. Echolink : Play amateur radio operator "No radio or antenna needed". Ace - WH2T How do you figure that the CW throughput will beat phone - at least for clear text. I know that good CW ops can sail along at 50 wpm ( like my Dad, unfortunately not me). But I thought speech was more like 200-300 wpm. So if you do not need to spell out unusual words, phone should beat CW easily. The results could differ if we factor in odd ball words or code groups and QRM/QRN but I thought this was simply clear text. John I base it on my experience as a traffic handler in both Amateur and MARS radio. I base it on my experience of personally copying 5 character coded groups in phone and in CW modes on a military circuit. CW has better through put. You hit on the problem yourself. Having to slow down to make sure the other operator copied the text sent. Normally by using the phonetic alphabet. A good CW circuit does not have that problem, and with the use of "cut" characters a whole word/sentence can be sent without sending each individual character. Dan/W4NTI |
"SMUG G1" wrote in message ups.com... What's the URL? www.qrq.org.uk as usual? look at www.qrz.com then follow the link. :) |
Lloyd wrote: On 15 May 2005 10:51:16 -0700, drooled: Lloyd wrote: On 14 May 2005 17:53:38 -0700, wrote: NNTP-Posting-Host: 131.22.200.44 - nelson.keesler.af.mil My money would be on Dan. He is a "real" cw operator, good fist too! Says Les as he (1) misuses taxpayer-furnished computing equipment at Keesler AFB, and (2) fails to mention that he doesn't hold a ham license and therefore isn't qualified to comment on someone's "fist." The really odd part of this whole thread is that anyone at all thinks the subject is important. If a code operator can send faster than someone at an itty-bitty keyboard can, does a fish need a bicycle? I can copy it faster than you can send it peckerbreath! Don't matter. You've spent years dissing ham radio while stealing from the taxpayers. Time for you to STFU, geezer, 'cause your opinion don't mean squat. (I see you quietly stopped using Keesler AFB computers to proxy your posts. You must be a little frightened that the CO will find out.) Hey Dan: Why do you ignore Les' misuse of Air Force property? Some patriot you are. Dan and I are friends dimwit. Kinda burns you up, me being able to post when I want doesn't it? Dissing ham radio? Not me, I repair radios for amateur operators all the time. I'm not worried about anyone saying anything about me posting from a computer where I work. Find someone else to stalk you dork! Les |
wrote in message
oups.com... - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Dan/W4NTI wrote: "Hamguy" wrote in message ... Phone would'a kicked all of their asses! Heck...Echolink would have SMOKED 'em too! Think so, do you? I'll bet I can get more thru put on CW than you can on phone in the same amount of time. I'm not talking about a short sentence. I mean real traffic. Dan/W4NTI My money would be on Dan. He is a "real" cw operator, good fist too! Les Thanks Les, good to hear from you again. Dan/W4NTI Little does Lloyd know. That isn't the real dumbass No-Code Lloyd, just another gay stalker. Dan was a high speed morse intercept operator in the military. I can tell the difference between straight keys, keyers, and bugs. Just happens I can copy code just fine. Never had a desire to get a ham ticket. No big deal to me. Dan and I have known each other for several years. Les |
wrote in message oups.com... Lloyd wrote: On 15 May 2005 10:51:16 -0700, drooled: Lloyd wrote: On 14 May 2005 17:53:38 -0700, wrote: NNTP-Posting-Host: 131.22.200.44 - nelson.keesler.af.mil My money would be on Dan. He is a "real" cw operator, good fist too! Says Les as he (1) misuses taxpayer-furnished computing equipment at Keesler AFB, and (2) fails to mention that he doesn't hold a ham license and therefore isn't qualified to comment on someone's "fist." The really odd part of this whole thread is that anyone at all thinks the subject is important. If a code operator can send faster than someone at an itty-bitty keyboard can, does a fish need a bicycle? I can copy it faster than you can send it peckerbreath! Don't matter. You've spent years dissing ham radio while stealing from the taxpayers. Time for you to STFU, geezer, 'cause your opinion don't mean squat. (I see you quietly stopped using Keesler AFB computers to proxy your posts. You must be a little frightened that the CO will find out.) Hey Dan: Why do you ignore Les' misuse of Air Force property? Some patriot you are. Dan and I are friends dimwit. Kinda burns you up, me being able to post when I want doesn't it? Dissing ham radio? Not me, I repair radios for amateur operators all the time. I'm not worried about anyone saying anything about me posting from a computer where I work. Find someone else to stalk you dork! Les Sounds to me he is jealous. He must have been stopped by his boss (the pimple faced 16 year old) from using the Pizza joints coco II machine. Dan/W4NTI |
wrote in message oups.com... wrote in message oups.com... - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Dan/W4NTI wrote: "Hamguy" wrote in message ... Phone would'a kicked all of their asses! Heck...Echolink would have SMOKED 'em too! Think so, do you? I'll bet I can get more thru put on CW than you can on phone in the same amount of time. I'm not talking about a short sentence. I mean real traffic. Dan/W4NTI My money would be on Dan. He is a "real" cw operator, good fist too! Les Thanks Les, good to hear from you again. Dan/W4NTI Little does Lloyd know. That isn't the real dumbass No-Code Lloyd, just another gay stalker. Dan was a high speed morse intercept operator in the military. I can tell the difference between straight keys, keyers, and bugs. Just happens I can copy code just fine. Never had a desire to get a ham ticket. No big deal to me. Dan and I have known each other for several years. Les Certainly can. In fact a guy on a "keyer" also has a nice signature. Lots of folks that don't know...just don't know. Dan/W4NTI |
I hope you idiots that bottom post without snipping almost all of the
relevant quoted message understand that 95% of us wouldn't take the trouble to see what such an ignoramus posted. Jim "John" wrote in message ... |
"KC8GXW" wrote in message ... KC8GXW wrote: Top posting to save some scrolling. All of this comes down to one thing, CW beat the TEXT guys. Whatever is faster or slower, the rabbit or the hare, it's all redundant. There has been three such test that I've heard of and in all three CW won. Maybe the text lagged by 10 seconds, maybe K6CTW filled in the last 2 words. The bottom line is that it was a race and CW won! (2) Yaesu FT-817's $1178.45 (2) Telegrapher uniforms $ 156.99 The look on the text guys face Priceless Let me say right off- CW is my favorite and almost only mode. With that said this contest (which I enjoyed watching) was more about the data entry system than it was the mode. Given large ergonomic keyboards I believe the touch typist could beat my paddle handily. W4OP |
"Dale Parfitt" wrote in message news:dvShe.8021$Y12.1109@trnddc09... "KC8GXW" wrote in message ... KC8GXW wrote: Top posting to save some scrolling. All of this comes down to one thing, CW beat the TEXT guys. Whatever is faster or slower, the rabbit or the hare, it's all redundant. There has been three such test that I've heard of and in all three CW won. Maybe the text lagged by 10 seconds, maybe K6CTW filled in the last 2 words. The bottom line is that it was a race and CW won! (2) Yaesu FT-817's $1178.45 (2) Telegrapher uniforms $ 156.99 The look on the text guys face Priceless Let me say right off- CW is my favorite and almost only mode. With that said this contest (which I enjoyed watching) was more about the data entry system than it was the mode. Given large ergonomic keyboards I believe the touch typist could beat my paddle handily. W4OP I agree that a good touch typist on a proper keyboard could beat either one but what this exercise demonstrated is that just because something is old doesn't mean it is obsolete and just because something is new doesn't mean it is the end all and be all. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
RST Engineering wrote:
I hope you idiots that bottom post without snipping almost all of the relevant quoted message understand that 95% of us wouldn't take the trouble to see what such an ignoramus posted. Jim I see that your last brain cell finally threw in the towel and died. :-( -- Former professional electron wrangler. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com