I had the good fortune to be the third-string CW op at the NQ4I
multi-multi station this weekend. (Thanks, Rick!) As the slowest CW op, I
got to operate at odd times, but managed to squeeze in plenty of
operating time.
One thing I noticed that bothered me -- CW speeds. I spent 99% of the
time calling CQ. Whenever I would take over an operating position, I
would reduce the keying speed from 30-32 wpm down to 22-26 wpm where I
felt comfortable.
So, when I'm CQing at 24 wpm, why do people insist on calling at 30+ wpm?
Most operators did not do this, but called in at something close to my
speed. Many who called in at high speed slowed down as soon as I asked
for the first repeat.
But, there were a few who insisted at high speed. Given the difficulty of
copying at high speed, plus the moderate amount of interference from the
other transmitters in the multi-multi leads to a lot of repeats. Giving
repeats slows things down. Why not just answer CQs at the speed they are
being called? (Heck, at 24 wpm, I even responded to a PSE QRS request)
Another peeve are those folks who send the exchange at varying speeds.
Sending 5NN at +20 wpm may seem like it is saving time, but it threw me
off quite a few times, causing repeats. Frankly, varying speeds is
tougher to copy than cut numbers. Keep the speed constant, or at least
never speed up.
Oh, and exactly how many dits are in a 5? Is di-da-da-da-da-dah a zero or
a one? I was amazed at how poorly numbers were sent by a very few ops. It
was funny when they would send exactly the same thing on the repeat!
Sure, I'll get flame letters telling me to become a better CW op. Well,
I'm trying, and the stint at NQ4I really helped.
Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@radio.org
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
-- Wilbur Wright, 1901
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|