f2tu.philippe at orange.fr
Tue Nov 4 18:36:38 CET 2008
For a very weak signal, it is very important to separate words and
letters and to increase these spaces. Especially to separate words
(call). On QRZ, we must reduce the speed. Make points longest, what is
not easy. Many good telegraphers unable to read a slow telegraphy, hi.
Philippe PIERRAT - F2TU
Edward Cole a écrit :
> I hope no one figures to send 60wpm CW to me on 23cm when I am QRV.
> It took me 24 years to just pass 13wpm for my General Class License.
> On 2m-eme I have run about 17wpm with computer generated CW (much
> better than my "fist" with a straight key). That is the upper limit
> for me for getting the basic calls and signal reports.
> Perhaps in time my copy skills will improve on CW, but If you send 25,
> 35, ... and higher it will just lead to my asking for lots of repeats.
> I understand that "conditions" can determine that some speeds work
> better and I can adjust my sending speed. The pre-scripted computer
> CW can also be modified for shorter or abrieviated exchange.
> Well, I guess I will see how it goes. We expect delivery of the
> linear actuators on Wed. and the main bearing hopefully by Fri. This
> should allow all the assembly of the dish mount this coming weekend so
> that the 4.9m dish may be installed by a boom truck during next week.
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> 50-years as a Ham: Nov. 11, 1958 - 2008
> At 11:58 PM 11/3/2008, Bergonti, Sergio wrote:
>> Ok Russ,
>> Yeah, I think speed has to be appropriate, sometimes one can fly at 60,
>> with another station or in different condx one has to adapt for best
>> efficiency to get a qso done at any other slower speed. Regarding RST
>> that makes sense, it is up to the sensibility of the operator to judge
>> if it is the case to struggle again to get an RST thru the other station
>> or maybe decide for a safer 'O'.
>> Regarding the length of the exchanges, that is also true, I personally
>> tend to somewhat 'tailor' the length of the exchange to the intensity of
>> the signal for both pleasure. Also if I haven't heard a station for a
>> long I like to spend a bit more time, how can I explain this... CW it is
>> still an 'alive' mode so it can carry some emotions (I think). In a
>> more practical way I guess that the success of 23cm or EME in general,
>> has brought a lot of new team/operators and some of them strictly follow
>> the 'official' EME qso format. Perhaps they just need a bit more
>> practice, also handling RSTs...
>> Sergio IK2MMB
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Russ K2TXB [mailto:k2txb at dxcc.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 2:29 PM
>> To: Bergonti, Sergio; moon-net at list-serv.davidv.net
>> Subject: RE: [Moon-net] QRS
>> Thanks for your comments Sergio. It seems you mostly agree with me,
>> slow is mostly good when signals are very weak. I think that is what I
>> too. But I do have one more point that perhaps I did not make clearly
>> before. In a contest when conditions are usually good, and again
>> about 23 cm, the faster speeds work well for most contacts. If one gets
>> call from a very weak station, or calls one who is sending very slow,
>> it is surely a good idea to slow down. And if signals are weak it is
>> better to use O/RO reports than to try to stay with RST.
>> Another thing; in contest when signals are good why make the exchanges
>> long? Sending calls at either the beginning or the end on a
>> transmission is
>> usually sufficient and depending on conditions use a 2x2 or a 1x1 call
>> instead of the more usual 3x3 or greater. If signals are very good then
>> suspend calls entirely (except at start and sign off). "RRR RRR GM GM
>> 579 579 BK" will often suffice and allows both stations to finish more
>> quickly and see who else is on the band.
>> In schedules and out of the contest it becomes a whole different story.
>> Then there is no need for hurry, slow speed and timed transmissions are
>> useful and appropriate much of the time.
>> 73, Russ K2TXB
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Bergonti, Sergio [mailto:Sergio.Bergonti at lamresearch.com]
>> > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 5:05 AM
>> > To: Russ K2TXB; moon-net at list-serv.davidv.net
>> > Subject: RE: [Moon-net] QRS
>> > Sorry to the audience to bring up this subject again, but I
>> > do not agree at all about the provided explanations. I think
>> > the subject requires more thinking. Some bullets for thoughts:
>> > 1. The operation frequency must be taken in consideration; I
>> > have main experience on 1296 so I am referring mainly to this
>> > freq. Other freqs may have different behaviors thus operating
>> > practices/requirements.
>> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
More information about the Moon-net