[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Paddle Opinions

To: "Paul T. Antos" <wb2abd@roadrunner.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Paddle Opinions
From: Zack Widup <w9sz@prairienet.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 08:14:44 -0500 (CDT)
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I heard an east coast US station calling CQ DX on 40 CW using a straight 
key last night.  He got some replies from EU stations, too.

I don't know about SS, though.  I'd have a glass arm halfway through or 
sooner.  :-)

73, Zack W9SZ

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Paul T. Antos wrote:

> Clive wrote:
>> So what the iambic operator doesn't seem to have is
>> redundancy, because he took a short cut to sending CW by a
>> method which imo has little to no value, but clearly has a
>> demerit.
> I have to admit that I don't have redundancy in this matter. Mark me down for 
> a whole bunch of demerits. I made my first paddle for a homebrew TO keyer out 
> of wood with TWO strips of aluminum because it felt and played better. There 
> was no iambic at that time (that I knew of). Maybe a fat paddle is what I 
> need.  I never ever heard anyone complain when I called them in a contest. 
> Straight keys for SSCW, anyone?
> I guess what we should all be railing about is what the best keyboard is for 
> doing RTTY, huh?
> Paul WB2ABD
> SOC 764
CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>