Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "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. 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. 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. 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. 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. On the other hand, less experienced people can run phone contacts faster than CW contacts. 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. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FCC Assigns RM Numbers To Three New Restructuring Petitions | Policy | |||
Rev.Jim the troller (was Bootlegging in 1948?) | Policy | |||
With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? | Policy | |||
Ham Radio In The Post-Code Testing Era | Policy | |||
With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? | General |