Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW Communication
I still miss that 500 kHz chatter 73, Arie PA3A Sparks on several ships using the good old ARRL deluxe keyer Non-revenue chatter on the marine CW frequencies in the 50's ran anywhere from 10 to 35-40 WPM. The Company urged revenue traffic in the 18-20 WPM range. They'd found that speed range maximized traffic throughput over time. Of course, revenue traffic was almost always longer than "5NN TU". [:-) 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Try sitting down for eight (8) hours on MF (500KHz) during the summer months as I have done frequently while @ WPA/Port Arthur TX working for RC 73 Tom/K1TL... __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW Communication
Non-revenue chatter on the marine CW frequencies in the 50's ran anywhere from 10 to 35-40 WPM. The Company urged revenue traffic in the 18-20 WPM range. They'd found that speed range maximized traffic throughput over time. Of course, revenue traffic was almost always longer than "5NN TU". [:-) Yep, a few hours on the Holy Frequency could lead to a persistent headache. 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 11/3/2019 5:14 AM, Tom Lizak wrote: There was a sign posted in the operating area @ WCC/Chatham Radio, Chatham MA and it said: "SPEED IS ESSENTIAL, BUT ACCURACY PARAMOUNT" ..my $0.02 worth ! Try sitting down for eight (8) hours on MF (500KHz) during the summer months as I have done frequently while @ WPA/Port Arthur TX working for RC 73 Tom/K1TL... __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
[Elecraft] Analysis of a CW Communication
There was a sign posted in the operating area @ WCC/Chatham Radio, Chatham MA and it said: "SPEED IS ESSENTIAL, BUT ACCURACY PARAMOUNT" ..my $0.02 worth ! Try sitting down for eight (8) hours on MF (500KHz) during the summer months as I have done frequently while @ WPA/Port Arthur TX working for RCA ! 73 Tom/K1TL... __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION
I participate in in the weekly mini-contests sponsored by CWOps, called CWTs. I generally operate in the 1 hour session at 0300 UTC. At that time, most of my contacts will be in North America. Naturally my signal will be weaker there than most of the competition, so I mostly search and pounce. I have found that requests for repeats or miscopies of my call (which is different from what most of the operators are primed to expect) increase rapidly when I call at more than about 27 wpm. Just a data point. Victor 4X6GP > On 3 Nov 2019, at 3:20, Tony Estep wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 6:44 PM EricJ wrote: > >> ...At 45 wpm, most ham ops need you to send your call three times or >> more... >> > === > Yeah, it's pretty obvious that sending a call faster and more times isn't > an automatic way to improve end-to-end communication -- you could send it a > lot of times at 100 wpm and work nobody. There's a tradeoff between the > time it takes to send your call, and the probability that the other guy > gets it correct. There's an optimal point on this curve. > > Most of the players in DX pileups send at a speed under 30 wpm; the DX > station tends to set the pace. After you participate in thousands of > pileups you recognize that the consistently successful DXers have a lot of > skillful strategies for getting their call through, and sending faster is > not one of them. Neither is sending your call more than twice, max. > > DXpeditioners who have been on the other end will attest that there's very > little likelihood of a guy sending at 40 or above having his call copied > among the screaming, howling pile. > > Tony KT0NY > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to k2vco@gmail.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION
It is wise to listen to CW stations across the band and determine what speed they are running. Then operate at the speed that MOST of the stations are using. This will get the MOST responses. I used the trial version of CW Skimmer for this purpose recently. I have other software that will do the same. I find MOST stations are running 20 to 25 WPM with fewer below and a few above that. Of course you will always find the 40WPM+ stations and a few at 10 WPM. Those are the exceptions. The average speed is where the MOST contacts will be made. 73 Bob, K4TAX On 11/2/2019 9:50 PM, Randy Heise wrote: As a 20wpm Extra of advancing age, I admit I can no longer copy at 35. In fact, I will also admit that now days I begin to have trouble at around 20. I’m not a contester, but what I’ve taken to doing is haunting the Novice bands. I answer CQ’s about 2 to 3wpm faster than they’re being sent. I do it to honor the Extras/Advanced/Generals that “Elmered” me some 55 years ago. Try it! It’s a lot of fun. Yeah, I know ... kinda off-topic! But this website is about building things! We can also build the next generation of CW operators. Randy, NB7E Sent from my iPhone On Nov 2, 2019, at 5:37 PM, marvwhee...@nwlink.com wrote: In addition those sending at 45 wpm miss a lot of Q's because many, many stations will not respond to them because they can't copy their callsign. -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On Behalf Of EricJ Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 4:43 PM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION Sending at the speed of the receiving station is usually the best way to improve probability of exchanging call signs. At 45 wpm, most ham ops need you to send your call three times or more to get it so you haven't accomplished much in the way of speedier communication. Also simple math. Eric KE6US On 11/2/2019 3:00 PM, Jim Danehy wrote: Some prefer the challenge of isolating a CW signal in order to decode it. They use filtering. Eliminating interference is difficult. Interference comes from numerous sources. An exchange of call signs is the desired result in a pile up or contest exchange. Sending at a lower speed does not improve the probability of accomplishing that communication goal. CW speed is a critical part of the communication equation. An operator sending at 15 wpm has 1/3 the rate of success than one who sends at 45 wpm. The later sends his call 3 times to only one for the slower station. Simple math. It might sound like bragging. A thinking person will understand how critical speed is to a CW operator. Some rely upon filtering. That only gets you so far with the goal. I like the improved success that comes adding speed. Bragging ? I like to succeed. I use every tool I have. Just my way of competing. Some can do it better than others. Jim W9VNE Sent from my iPhone __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to eric.c...@gmail.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to marvwhee...@nwlink.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to ran...@greywolfstudios.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to rmcg...@blomand.net __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION
As a 20wpm Extra of advancing age, I admit I can no longer copy at 35. In fact, I will also admit that now days I begin to have trouble at around 20. I’m not a contester, but what I’ve taken to doing is haunting the Novice bands. I answer CQ’s about 2 to 3wpm faster than they’re being sent. I do it to honor the Extras/Advanced/Generals that “Elmered” me some 55 years ago. Try it! It’s a lot of fun. Yeah, I know ... kinda off-topic! But this website is about building things! We can also build the next generation of CW operators. Randy, NB7E Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 2, 2019, at 5:37 PM, marvwhee...@nwlink.com wrote: > > In addition those sending at 45 wpm miss a lot of Q's because many, many > stations will not respond to them because they can't copy their callsign. > > > -Original Message- > From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On > Behalf Of EricJ > Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 4:43 PM > To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION > > Sending at the speed of the receiving station is usually the best way to > improve probability of exchanging call signs. > > At 45 wpm, most ham ops need you to send your call three times or more to > get it so you haven't accomplished much in the way of speedier > communication. Also simple math. > > Eric KE6US > >> On 11/2/2019 3:00 PM, Jim Danehy wrote: >> Some prefer the challenge of isolating a CW signal in order to decode it. > They use filtering. Eliminating interference is difficult. Interference > comes from numerous sources. >> >> An exchange of call signs is the desired result in a pile up or contest > exchange. >> >> Sending at a lower speed does not improve the probability of accomplishing > that communication goal. >> >> CW speed is a critical part of the communication equation. An operator > sending at 15 wpm has 1/3 the rate of success than one who sends at 45 wpm. >> >> The later sends his call 3 times to only one for the slower station. > Simple math. It might sound like bragging. A thinking person will understand > how critical speed is to a CW operator. Some rely upon filtering. That only > gets you so far with the goal. >> >> I like the improved success that comes adding speed. Bragging ? I like to > succeed. I use every tool I have. >> >> Just my way of competing. Some can do it better than others. >> >> Jim >> W9VNE >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> __ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email >> list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to >> eric.c...@gmail.com >> > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message > delivered to marvwhee...@nwlink.com > > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to ran...@greywolfstudios.com > __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION
I don't care what you say ... higher speed does not necessarily translate to better communication. In fact, as I demonstrated here* and as countless 160m ops will attest, lower speed is typically more intelligible under conditions of low S/N ratio: * http://www.ab7e.com/weak_signal/Callsigns20-25-30-35wpm.mp3 And as others here have said, you dramatically cut down your pool of likely respondents if you insist on operating above 45 WPM in a contest, and if you're sending your call three times in a row in a pileup you're just an unnecessary part of the QRM. Dave AB7E On 11/2/2019 3:00 PM, Jim Danehy wrote: Some prefer the challenge of isolating a CW signal in order to decode it. They use filtering. Eliminating interference is difficult. Interference comes from numerous sources. An exchange of call signs is the desired result in a pile up or contest exchange. Sending at a lower speed does not improve the probability of accomplishing that communication goal. CW speed is a critical part of the communication equation. An operator sending at 15 wpm has 1/3 the rate of success than one who sends at 45 wpm. The later sends his call 3 times to only one for the slower station. Simple math. It might sound like bragging. A thinking person will understand how critical speed is to a CW operator. Some rely upon filtering. That only gets you so far with the goal. I like the improved success that comes adding speed. Bragging ? I like to succeed. I use every tool I have. Just my way of competing. Some can do it better than others. Jim W9VNE Sent from my iPhone __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to xda...@cis-broadband.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION
On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 6:44 PM EricJ wrote: > ...At 45 wpm, most ham ops need you to send your call three times or > more... > === Yeah, it's pretty obvious that sending a call faster and more times isn't an automatic way to improve end-to-end communication -- you could send it a lot of times at 100 wpm and work nobody. There's a tradeoff between the time it takes to send your call, and the probability that the other guy gets it correct. There's an optimal point on this curve. Most of the players in DX pileups send at a speed under 30 wpm; the DX station tends to set the pace. After you participate in thousands of pileups you recognize that the consistently successful DXers have a lot of skillful strategies for getting their call through, and sending faster is not one of them. Neither is sending your call more than twice, max. DXpeditioners who have been on the other end will attest that there's very little likelihood of a guy sending at 40 or above having his call copied among the screaming, howling pile. Tony KT0NY __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION
In addition those sending at 45 wpm miss a lot of Q's because many, many stations will not respond to them because they can't copy their callsign. -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net On Behalf Of EricJ Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 4:43 PM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION Sending at the speed of the receiving station is usually the best way to improve probability of exchanging call signs. At 45 wpm, most ham ops need you to send your call three times or more to get it so you haven't accomplished much in the way of speedier communication. Also simple math. Eric KE6US On 11/2/2019 3:00 PM, Jim Danehy wrote: > Some prefer the challenge of isolating a CW signal in order to decode it. They use filtering. Eliminating interference is difficult. Interference comes from numerous sources. > > An exchange of call signs is the desired result in a pile up or contest exchange. > > Sending at a lower speed does not improve the probability of accomplishing that communication goal. > > CW speed is a critical part of the communication equation. An operator sending at 15 wpm has 1/3 the rate of success than one who sends at 45 wpm. > > The later sends his call 3 times to only one for the slower station. Simple math. It might sound like bragging. A thinking person will understand how critical speed is to a CW operator. Some rely upon filtering. That only gets you so far with the goal. > > I like the improved success that comes adding speed. Bragging ? I like to succeed. I use every tool I have. > > Just my way of competing. Some can do it better than others. > > Jim > W9VNE > > > Sent from my iPhone > __ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email > list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to > eric.c...@gmail.com > __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to marvwhee...@nwlink.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: [Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION
Sending at the speed of the receiving station is usually the best way to improve probability of exchanging call signs. At 45 wpm, most ham ops need you to send your call three times or more to get it so you haven't accomplished much in the way of speedier communication. Also simple math. Eric KE6US On 11/2/2019 3:00 PM, Jim Danehy wrote: Some prefer the challenge of isolating a CW signal in order to decode it. They use filtering. Eliminating interference is difficult. Interference comes from numerous sources. An exchange of call signs is the desired result in a pile up or contest exchange. Sending at a lower speed does not improve the probability of accomplishing that communication goal. CW speed is a critical part of the communication equation. An operator sending at 15 wpm has 1/3 the rate of success than one who sends at 45 wpm. The later sends his call 3 times to only one for the slower station. Simple math. It might sound like bragging. A thinking person will understand how critical speed is to a CW operator. Some rely upon filtering. That only gets you so far with the goal. I like the improved success that comes adding speed. Bragging ? I like to succeed. I use every tool I have. Just my way of competing. Some can do it better than others. Jim W9VNE Sent from my iPhone __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to eric.c...@gmail.com __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
[Elecraft] Analysis of a CW COMMUNICATION
Some prefer the challenge of isolating a CW signal in order to decode it. They use filtering. Eliminating interference is difficult. Interference comes from numerous sources. An exchange of call signs is the desired result in a pile up or contest exchange. Sending at a lower speed does not improve the probability of accomplishing that communication goal. CW speed is a critical part of the communication equation. An operator sending at 15 wpm has 1/3 the rate of success than one who sends at 45 wpm. The later sends his call 3 times to only one for the slower station. Simple math. It might sound like bragging. A thinking person will understand how critical speed is to a CW operator. Some rely upon filtering. That only gets you so far with the goal. I like the improved success that comes adding speed. Bragging ? I like to succeed. I use every tool I have. Just my way of competing. Some can do it better than others. Jim W9VNE Sent from my iPhone __ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
