[TenTec] Best Straight Key
John - G3JAG
patents@dx0man.prestel.co.uk
Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:22:13 -0000 (GMT)
No two hams will agree on either morse keys or antennas !! Or on how
best to set them up.
Kathleen and Ari; it does not matter what key you use. As long as you
are comfortable with it and as long as you make the effort to send code
that sounds right, no-one will chew your ears off, and most operators
will slow down to a speed which is comfortable for you. You can send
good code with about anything if you practice enough. I have never
heard a TenTec radio that keyed badly and that is a heck of a bonus for
anyone starting out to use code. My concern is that everyone is now
obviously brainwashed into believing that iambic keyers are necessarily
the best !! Yes, its a losing battle.
Unfortunately, there is now no choice; no-one actually makes an
Ultimatic (non-iambic) keyer anymore. In fact I do not think anyone ever
did sell one commercially; it was a design you built yourself, so
everyone unwilling or unable to build had to stay with a Vibroplex, the
OZ7BO-type multivibrator keyers, or a hand key. All the early
automatic keyers were homebrew. The first Ultimatic was designed
following a detailed analysis of what an automatic keyer needed to do
to be really user-friendly. But the first version was multi-relay-based
and a total pig to set up. An old timer friend and mechanical genius got
it working, but only when the weather was right. Nothing with that many
relays was a commercial proposition. I took his advice and chickened
out until the 12 tube one relay version appeared.
My final salvation was logic chips and the relay-less Ultimate keyer
from QST (May 67, I think). The author, W1HFA, deliberately set out to
reproduce the advantages of the old Ultimatics, but without the setup
problems. If you insist you can switch it to iambic. Auto-space is also
an on-off option. Its now been in use for many years without a glitch.
Lots of "improved" solid state keyer designs have appeared both before
and since then featuring all sorts of goodies, but they seem to be all
iambic, probably because the designers think it is a "good thing", or
more likely they didn't think at all - they just copied the logic
slavishly from earlier designs. Now there are cute kits and keyers
available from several sources, but the downside is that everyone has to
get used to the alternating dots and dashes that go with the iambic
approach. And don't they love it ?? Maybe I need to learn to type with
some more fingers and then use a keyboard gizmo.
After 40+ years in my bomb shelter I'm idle, I guess, so when I
finish my Elecraft K2 kit, it will have to sit on top of my Ultimate
keyer, or the Elecraft guys will have to re-programme the micro for me.
And as for Unix (TM), I use its Linux clone all the time. It gets
better and better - and I'm a retired patent attorney, not a programmer.
Microsoft has lost that battle already in the file server field. The
desktop is close behind; this SUSE Linux 6.3 is pretty good.
73 John G3JAG
Without CW its just CB
-----------------------------------------------
On 20-Dec-99 John/K4WJ wrote:
>
> At 10:12 PM 12/19/99 +0000, John - G3JAG wrote:
>
>>IAMBIC - UGH !@! I am convinced that the so-called iambic keyer owes
>>its design entirely to sloppy, corner-cutting programming. It can
>>only have been developed by a phone man. Very few useful code
>>combinations can be sent using it. Far more useful is the "ultimatic"
>>logic of yesteryear. For those unfamiliar with it, squeeze both
>>paddles
>>and the last to close takes control, no mindless alternation between
>>dots and dashes. So a single squeeze can be a W, G, J, 7 or a 3 etc.
>>just by working the English on the timing of the second closure
>>(whilst
>>hanging onto the first one, no need to let go). Much more
>>user-friendly
>>than just squeezing an A,C, N, or a period.
>
> If the Ultimatic is so good, why aren't people clamoring for it? Why
> is the
> Iambic keyer so popular and not many folks know what an Ultimatic
> keyer is?
> You have to send the same dots and dashes to form a character that I
> do, as
> we are both using the same code. Why is it "mindless" to form those
> characters when I use my iambic keyer but not mindless when you do it
> using
> your Ultimatic?
>
>>Years ago I built the 12 tube Ultimatic keyer from QST; now I use the
>>most recent solid state version (hardly recent; its from the same
>>QST as contained the first review of the Drake TR-7 !!). Since then,
>>iambic has become fashionable, but it remains pretty useless. If only
>>the programmers of the beautiful Super CMOS III would see the light
>>and
>>substitute Ultimatic logic for just one of those awful tedious
>>emulations !! Yes, I also have a Super CMOS III and yes, I did phone
>>the designers, but no joy.
>>
>>Once you have tried it you will not go iambic again out of choice. I
>>do
>>have the option, but I never use it. Auto-character space on the
>>other
>>hand is never turned off.
>>
>>John G3JAG - Over 40 years on CW, but now heading for my bomb
>>shelter.
>
> The war has been over for more than 50 years. You've probably been
> spending
> too much time in the bomb shelter and that is why your a lil behind
> the
> times..hi..hi..I couldn't resist this one. Iambic is a very good way
> to
> send CW. At least for me this is true. I would suspect that if the
> Ultimatic method was better the folks that created the CMOS II and
> III
> would have designed it to work like the Ultimatic.
>
> But then I always thought Beta was a better format for video tape and
> look
> what happened to it. Same with UNIX. I always thought it was a better
> operating system than Microsoft DOS and look what is happening to
> UNIX. I
> lost my Beta and Unix crusades and I think your going to lose your
> Ultimatic crusade.
>
> 73 and Iambic forever,
>
> John/K4WJ
>
>
>>
>
> 73..de John/K4WJ
> ***********************************************************
> John/K4WJ in Pembroke Pines, FL
> QTH 26 00 51 N
> 80 16 16 W
>
> K8PXG from 18 Jun 59 to 11 Feb 97
> K8WJ from 12 Feb 97 to 07 Apr 97
> ZF2HZ from 17 May 84 to 31 Dec 84
> ***********************************************************
>
>
> --
> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
> Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
> Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
----------------------------------
E-Mail: John - G3JAG <patents@dx0man.prestel.co.uk>
Date: 20-Dec-99
Time: 21:37:20
This message was sent by XFMail
----------------------------------
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm