[UK-CONTEST] ARRL CW

[Steve Wilson, G3VMW]

In message <mailman.24311.1267001215.3373.uk-contest at contesting.com>, 
uk-contest-request at contesting.com writes
>From: "Dennis Andrews, F5VHY" <f5vhy at wanadoo.fr>
>
>I have to disagree with Gerry on this one. I rarely send at more than 30wpm in contests and never use speeded up CW. I have the PageUp and
>PageDown keys progammed to change the sending speed - and use this a lot. This way, there is a minimum amount of failure to copy. With higher
>speeds, there is far more ? ? where others can't copy your call or the exchange. It also will put many people off calling all together - unless
>they are responding to a packet spot - in which case, they are all zero-beat on the same frequency (having hit F6 or whatever to transfer the
>spot freq to the transceiver) apart from the smart ones who realise that they need to offset by a fraction.
>

Dennis,

Sorry, but I have to agree with Gerry GI0RTN, whom I thought articulated 
the case perfectly.

As Gerry say, it all depends on the situation, i.e. where you are in the 
world and the type of contest, but from my experience 28-30wpm is way 
too slow to achieve the really good rates, i.e. over 200/hour. Optimum 
rates when operating, especially from more exotic locations I've found 
is usually with the CW speed around 36-38wpm (sometimes a bit faster) 
and usually never below 32wpm - even from home. I think one key issue is 
message exchange consistency and rhythm so that callers know what to 
expect next.

Sometimes it is necessary to use CW speed as a pile-up throttle. When 
the pile-up gets way too big, higher speed definitely regulates the 
chaos and slowing down again later usually brings back the callers. The 
odd slow speed caller isn't usually too much of a problem.

To be honest, I've not noticed loads of "? ? ?" responses at the higher 
speeds. In a pile-up situation, I always set the TX on VFO B and tune 
around with VFO A picking off the callers, who are rarely on my exact 
frequency.


>I don't consider this, in any way, detracts from QSO rates. In the ARRL last weekend, my 10-minute rate meter was frequently up to 300 and I
>had plenty of instances of 5 QSOs in the same minute.
>

Even from G, I found it wasn't too hard to achieve 10 minute rates above 
300 in last week's ARRL DX contest. The American guys are pretty good 
operators in my experience and they don't waste time on padding the 
exchange with unnecessary info like some of the EUs. Whilst I'm not in 
any way knocking your excellent effort at TM6X. If you seriously intend 
to try to win any major contest, then what really counts is a 
consistently high hourly Run rate. AFAIK, the likes of CT1BOH, RW3QC and 
4L5A et al usually opt for CW Run speeds higher than 28 wpm in the major 
contests.

Also, I agree with EI5DI and GI0RTN about speeded up reports. 
Personally, I don't see it as a problem and sometimes do it. I know 
G3SJJ dislikes the practice, but if some people see it as a means of 
achieving a few extra QSOs in a contest, maybe we should judge on 
results?

>I think you will find that Clive - GM3POI subscribes to the same ideas.
>

That's thing isn't it? We all have slightly differing views and it helps 
makes this hobby so much fun. It would be dead boring if we all thought 
the same way.

>73 de Dennis - F5VHY/TM6X
>
>PS - my trusty FT1000MP didn't seem to notice too much problem from "wide" signals - heaven forbid that the K3 has a problem!

I used my Ten-Tec Orion this year, which I think is click free and 
noticed people getting much closer e.g. with 200Hz.

73

-- 
Steve Wilson, G3VMW