"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message
...
Subject: Morse and Contests
From: "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@getrid of this mindspring.com
Date: 4/30/2004 1:01 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: t


"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message
...

Heck, if we're gonna go for "rare", how about from the Iniuit
Territories...?!?! Add in the cost of the bush plane and dog sled too,
OK...?!?!

73

Steve, K4YZ
(already shivvering just thinking about it!)

You wan't me to PAY??? Next you will charge 5 bux for the computer grade
QSL card.

Oh No!...All my QSL cards are "real" QSL cards...

And if you pay to get me to VY1 or VY0, I P-R-O-M-I-S-E you will get
FREE QSL service, Dan! Heck, I'll even drive down and HAND DELIVER
your
card with a six pack of your favorite brew, even if it's Crown Royal!

=)

73

Steve, K4YZ

Your in luck Steve....while having a hole dug for my tower I found a box
full of money.

Its confederate, Alabama state issue. How much you need?

Dan/W4NTI

"William" wrote in message
om...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
link.net...
"William" wrote in message
om...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
link.net...
"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message
...
Subject: Morse and Contests
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 4/27/2004 7:34 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Idly musing, I thought of this a few moments ago. It isn't a CW
testing

question, but is related by being a CW operating question.

With the likely demise of Morse code testing, is there any
reason to
have contests give double the points for Morse code contacts?

Sure...why not? It requires some REAL skill to do. In this
regard,
as in
any other pursuit in life, greater skill should be rewarded.

While of course all contest rules are inherently arbitrary, does
it
make sense to have one mode of contact be "more equal" than
others?

Not "more equal"...Just better compensation.

As a Nurse with my experience, credentials and skills, I
expect to
be
compensated accordiningly. So why not be "compensated" in a
contest
that
required using honed skills, too...?!?!

Put another way, if you think that CW contacts should be worth
double
points, is it fair to have say, PSK31 contacts worth the same
double
points such as in Field day? Our GOTA station racked up a fair
number
of
points operating PSK31, and it was certainly no more difficult
than
operating Phone.

And how long would it take a "new" Ham to master using a
keyboard?

I've seen a number of cases where a phone operator has worked
hard
and
logged a lot of QSO's, only to be beaten by a CW op with little
more
than half that number.

Shudda been on the paddles!

Seriously, though...Most contests differentiatemodes in
awards...

Steve, K4YZ





Simply stated....CW Contesting requires real skills. Digital
requires
the
ability to type.
Phone is way down there from the above requirements.

If you want to do so....Give phone 1 point, digital 2 points, and
CW 5
points per qso.

That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.

Dan/W4NTI

Your opinion looks wrong to me.

My opinion is that the point schedule should be inverted from what you
propose. I mean, when Aaron Jones was keeping the Morse Myths list,
it would appear that a CW QSO just couldn't fail. It always got
through, no matter the propogation, the power level, the QRN, or the
QRM. Each and every Op would QRS for the new guy and everything was
just so wonderful.

Meanwhile phone Ops practice dog-eat-dog, QRM each other, use bad
phonetics, and propogation is always iffy. Furthermore, they marry
their Technician sisters and don't even QSL.

Bass turds!

Give the phone ops 5 pts per completed QSO, the CW Ops get 1.

And what was your score in the last major DX contest?

Name the last Major DX contest.

Or lets make it
easier. How many DX QSO's have you had in a major contest....????

Don't recall. Go look it up in CQ. 1990 - 1991 time frame.

If under 300, you are disqualified from inputing on this discussioon.

Dan/W4NTI

Dan, you're wrong again. You don't speak for CQ Magazine nor the
ARRL, though it appears that you would like to.

The last major DX contest was the CQWWPXPhone. But what does that have to
do with what your saying?

I don't claim to represent anyone, other than myself. Again what does that
have to do with things?

I simply want to assertain your credibility.

Give me a callsign and I'll look you up. I don't think 'William' is valid
for a ham call.

Dan/W4NTI

"N2EY" wrote in message
m...


Perhaps someone can explain a certain operating habit I hear on Field
Day - but only one 'phone:

I hear most FD 'phone ops repeating the *received* exchange. That is,
you'll hear:

"November Two Echo Yankee from November Three Kilo Zed, roger your One
Bravo Eastern Pennsylvania, OK on your 1B EPA, please copy my three
alfa ...."

Why do so many deem it necessary to tell me what I just told them?
Heck, I know what class and section I'm in!

On CW, the single letter "R" does the job, and some ops don't even
bother with the R - they send their exchange as an indication that
they got yours. Or they send "TU" - (thank you) which does the job of
"roger" and "73" both.

--

One other point: Neither FD nor SS have the signal report as part of
the contact. FD is callsign, section and class, SS is serial number,
class, callsign, check and section, plus date and time which you don't
have to send but which are part of the required logging.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Well Jim, I think it means that phone ops are lids and real hams do it with
continous wave.

Dan/W4NTI

N2EY wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

Dee D. Flint wrote:

"Jack Twilley" wrote in message
...


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



"Mike" == Mike Coslo writes:

Mike With the likely demise of Morse code testing, is there any
Mike reason to have contests give double the points for Morse code
Mike contacts?

Jack How is the presence or absence of Morse code testing related to
Jack the point multiplier for Morse code contacts? They're
Jack orthogonal, as far as I can tell.

Mike I was always told that the increased points offered was an
Mike encouragement to work CW.

That doesn't really answer the question. A Technician can send CW on
certain HF bands, even without a higher-class license-holder present.
A ham with any other license can work phone contacts. Therefore,
whether or not an amateur has passed a Morse code test has nothing to
do with woether or not they can use Morse code. Even if the
multiplier is to provide encouragement to use Morse code, it still
doesn't have anything to do with whether or not hams are tested.


That's certainly true. But how many non-code-tested hams do you think
are actually making CW contacts of Field Day?


hmmm, not my quote.

Now, if you're going to assert that the potential end to Morse code
testing will eventually cause hams to stop learning and/or using Morse
code, and that therefore the multiplier is akin to the "marriage
penalty" [1], well, I'm not sure that's true. If it is, NCI should be
raising holy hell about the pro-code conspiracy behind all these
contests, right?

[...]

Mike I've seen a number of cases where a phone operator has worked
Mike hard and logged a lot of QSO's, only to be beaten by a CW op
Mike with little more than half that number.

Jack And how hard did that CW op work?

Mike I doubt twice as hard as the Phone person.


It's not just about how "hard" something is.

NO doubt about that. My CW QSO's would be worth about 50 points if
learning effort was included!

You could measure it yourself, you know. Work two similar contests
(say, two of the QSO parties coming up soon). Operate solely in phone
for the first contest. Score your points and keep track of your
experience with notes or something. Operate solely in CW for the
second contest. Do the same sort of scoring and note-taking. Report
back to the group with your personal experience.


Not necessarily a good comparison. Conditions during one weekend may
be better, for example.

When I know the code, I'll do the same thing, if only to satisfy my
own curiosity.

Mike - Mike KB3EIA -

Jack.


Actually Jack, that would not be quite a fair measurement. The CW op has
put in many hours of practicing and participating in contests to get his/her
speed up to a really useful contest level. Although the phone op has also
put in hours participating in contests to get his/her abilities honed to
contest level, it is far fewer hours than the CW op to get to the top levels
of ability. So the double points, at least to me, also acknowledges the
longer preparatory stage that it takes to get good at it.


That all depends on the person. Some folks pick up contest operating
(in any mode) pretty quickly, while for others it's a real strain.

It's not called "radiosport" for nothing!

hmmmm, I have to disagree somewhat.

This is kind of putting CW on a pedestal.


Data modes get the same scoring on FD, and count as a separate "band".

Let's take FD as an example.

I spend a lot of time planning, putting up antennas and tents and hours
and hours of operating. Some of our CW ops help in this effort also,
including the hardest working one out of the bunch. But some others
simply show up and work a few hours, then go home.


Been there, done that - the hard work, that is.

The point is, if you give extra points because of effort involved, then
you have to decide what constitutes "effort".


It's not about "effort" so much as it's about "rewarding a desired
activity". That's why there are power level multipliers, all sorts of
bonus point thingies, and different classes of operation.

The spectrum efficiency of CW and data modes makes them worthy of the
moide multipliers.

In the contests in which I've participated, I have noticed that the best CW
ops can usually run more stations in less time because of the need for fewer
repeats than the best phone ops.


So much for Morse being "slow" and "error prone"...

I have been amazed how quickly they can run. Humbled in fact. Adn I
think that kind of flies in the face of those that say that CW is slower
to work in a contest than SSB.


The point is not how many words are transmitted but how fast the
message gets across. The need for phonetics and repeats on 'phone
slows things, but the big slower-downer is the fact that if the other
op is using paper logs (still very common on FD) you can't go faster
than he/she can write. Which is normally less than 30 wpm.


On the other hand, less experienced people
can run phone contacts faster than CW contacts.

If you compare the person to them self, that is true.


I'm not sure what that is intended to mean.


In my own contesting experience, my all time high was 310 contacts and it
was a CW contest. My second best was down around 150 contacts and it was a
voice contest. I'm running only 100 watts and wire antennas. I found it
much easier to break through pileups and bad conditions on CW. But it took
time to learn CW.


My best on Field Day was 629 contacts - all CW. Almost all S&P, too.
Plus 11 on 2 meter FM simplex during breaks. That was in 1B-1
category, which meant I had to do everyhting myself - setup, takedown,
etc. Also copied the W1AW message and sent a message report to the SM
(via CW, of course) for the bonus points. The W1AW message was copied
Saturday morning but the SM message was sent during FD.

All of this was with 100 W and wire antennas. It is by no means top
performance - really good ops with somewhat better setups (no beams or
high power, though) have done much better.

But it took some time to learn just how to put a station together too.

I'll defend testing CW, and I've been willing to put in a lot of effort
to take my CW abilities to the "he stinks" level. But it sure seems like
an unnatural advantage to have double points.


I think the mode bonus is more than justified by the spectrum
efficiency.

You are the only person I've heard of using BW as a justification. Not
that it isn't some kind of justification, but it is unusual.

I remember when there was no mode bonus on FD. The result was that FD
was 'phone heavy and CW/data light.

--

Perhaps someone can explain a certain operating habit I hear on Field
Day - but only one 'phone:

I hear most FD 'phone ops repeating the *received* exchange. That is,
you'll hear:

"November Two Echo Yankee from November Three Kilo Zed, roger your One
Bravo Eastern Pennsylvania, OK on your 1B EPA, please copy my three
alfa ...."

Why do so many deem it necessary to tell me what I just told them?
Heck, I know what class and section I'm in!

Here is my take on why that happens. Most contacts I make ask QSL? So I
simply repeat it back. Then I give them my exchange. I also say "please"
copy (exchange) If I'm the person initiating the QSO, I generally don't.
I actually heard a ham chewing another one out for saying Please copy
(exchange)in the VAQSO party. Told him saying "please" made him sound
like an idiot. I was next to QSO with him, and gave him the prettiest,
drawn out pulleeeezze he ever heard.


On CW, the single letter "R" does the job, and some ops don't even
bother with the R - they send their exchange as an indication that
they got yours. Or they send "TU" - (thank you) which does the job of
"roger" and "73" both.

That brings up a mini-beef I've had with CW ops. At one time, I was
trying to copy on the air operations. It wasn't until I found that
almost everything was abbreviated that I realized I was often copying
correctly. It was like a code within a code.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Morse and Contests
From: "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@getrid of this mindspring.com
Date: 5/1/2004 4:25 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net

Your in luck Steve....while having a hole dug for my tower I found a box
full of money.

Its confederate, Alabama state issue. How much you need?

HEY! Take it to a collector! It's proably worth 100 times whatever the
face value was!

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Morse and Contests
From: "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@getrid of this mindspring.com
Date: 5/1/2004 4:28 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: et

Dan, you're wrong again. You don't speak for CQ Magazine nor the
ARRL, though it appears that you would like to.

The last major DX contest was the CQWWPXPhone. But what does that have to
do with what your saying?

I don't claim to represent anyone, other than myself. Again what does that
have to do with things?

I simply want to assertain your credibility.

Give me a callsign and I'll look you up. I don't think 'William' is valid
for a ham call.

Dan, that's Lennie's padawan learner and devoted fan, Brian Burke,
N-ZERO-IMD. I emphasize the ZERO since I feel it's particularly applicable to
him!

73

Steve, K4YZ

The CW op has
put in many hours of practicing and participating in contests to get
his/her
speed up to a really useful contest level.
Well I think most CW ops are in there at a minimum of several nights a week
.....I try to get on ever night time permitting ....Speed ... 25 WPM I think
generally speaking ..... The CW op really doesn't practice as such but
just gets on the air and enjoys an efficient non-verbal mode.




Some of our CW ops help in this effort also,
including the hardest working one out of the bunch. But some others
simply show up and work a few hours, then go home.

Or really don't show up at all ..... I remember one fellow from our club who
had an antenna raising party on FD.

On CW, the single letter "R" does the job, and some ops don't even
bother with the R - they send their exchange as an indication that
they got yours. Or they send "TU" - (thank you) which does the job of
"roger" and "73" both.
73 de Jim, N2EY

I always ask the WPA section guys or even the PA guys or others where they
are at and how things are going ....a slight off topic tends top break up
the flow from time to time. I am not in there for blood or a free pass for
everlasting life due to a FD score. FD does present itself in many ways to
get the message out and get the public to see first hand an aspect of our
service. Heck ...we even give the cops free food ..I think the word gets
out on the police radio ...

73 Tom KI3R Belle Vernon Pa .... W3CSL Monessen ARC on FD

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message ink.net...
"William" wrote in message
om...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
link.net...

And what was your score in the last major DX contest?

Name the last Major DX contest.

Or lets make it
easier. How many DX QSO's have you had in a major contest....????

Don't recall. Go look it up in CQ. 1990 - 1991 time frame.

If under 300, you are disqualified from inputing on this discussioon.

Dan/W4NTI

Dan, you're wrong again. You don't speak for CQ Magazine nor the
ARRL, though it appears that you would like to.

The last major DX contest was the CQWWPXPhone. But what does that have to
do with what your saying?

You wanted to know my score in the last "major" DX contest. I just
wanted to make sure you didn't think Field Day was a major DX contest.

I don't claim to represent anyone, other than myself. Again what does that
have to do with things?

I think CQ magazine can get along just fine without you running
interference for them.

I simply want to assertain your credibility.

Oh, is that what you were doing?

Who put you in charge? John Dorr?

Give me a callsign and I'll look you up. I don't think 'William' is valid
for a ham call.

Dan/W4NTI

Dan, get with the program. Everyone else knows my callsign.

Best of Luck, bb

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Morse and Contests
From: "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@getrid of this mindspring.com
Date: 5/1/2004 4:28 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: et

Dan, you're wrong again. You don't speak for CQ Magazine nor the
ARRL, though it appears that you would like to.

The last major DX contest was the CQWWPXPhone. But what does that have to
do with what your saying?

I don't claim to represent anyone, other than myself. Again what does that
have to do with things?

I simply want to assertain your credibility.

Give me a callsign and I'll look you up. I don't think 'William' is valid
for a ham call.

Dan, that's Lennie's padawan learner and devoted fan, Brian Burke,
N-ZERO-IMD. I emphasize the ZERO since I feel it's particularly applicable to
him!

Yes, Steve, the zero in my call is particularly applicable since it
represents the 10th Call District. I was licensed while stationed in
Nebraska. So I am a 10.

You are the Master of the Obvious.

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in
nk.net:


"N2EY" wrote in message
m...


Perhaps someone can explain a certain operating habit I hear on Field
Day - but only one 'phone:

I hear most FD 'phone ops repeating the *received* exchange. That is,
you'll hear:

"November Two Echo Yankee from November Three Kilo Zed, roger your One
Bravo Eastern Pennsylvania, OK on your 1B EPA, please copy my three
alfa ...."

Why do so many deem it necessary to tell me what I just told them?
Heck, I know what class and section I'm in!

On CW, the single letter "R" does the job, and some ops don't even
bother with the R - they send their exchange as an indication that
they got yours. Or they send "TU" - (thank you) which does the job of
"roger" and "73" both.

--

One other point: Neither FD nor SS have the signal report as part of
the contact. FD is callsign, section and class, SS is serial number,
class, callsign, check and section, plus date and time which you don't
have to send but which are part of the required logging.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Well Jim, I think it means that phone ops are lids and real hams do it
with continous wave.

Dan/W4NTI




At last your real agenda comes out, Dan. Somehow. I'm not surprised. You
want the code test kept because you consider all of us phone ops to be
lids.

Alun, N3KIP