OT: Decoding high speed CW
Locked
12
12
 
|
On 3/29/2016 4:45 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:
> In the 1950's the U.S. 2nd class commercial Radiotelegraph license exam > required 20 wpm sending and receiving. Receiving was 5 character random > groups that included all punctuation and most of the special characters you > see above the numbers on a keyboard. After 6 months of sea duty as an > assistant radio officer, one could apply for a First Class license that > required the same but at 25 wpm. I don't recall how long we had to copy, > just the elation LS experienced at passing, Hi! My memory is 16 WPM code groups and 20 WPM plain text for the Second Class. The one year at sea was for the endorsement permitting the person to be the sole operator on cargo ships. The requirement to sit for the First Class exam was one year or more experience handling Public Correspondence (message traffic to and from commercial ship or shore stations excluding most military experience). Passenger ships required two or more operators, one of whom had to hold a First Class license acting as "Chief Operator". The code requirements for the Second Class have been carried over for the "combined" lifetime Radiotelegraph Operator License. The FCC will no longer issue First Class Licenses because Manual Morse is no longer required for safety and distress traffic in the Maritime Services now that the satellite and SSB-based GMDSS is in operation and there is no need for a "Chief Operator" on ships.. I finally got my Second Class before the "cut-off", one of the last 8 so issued. It gets renewed only once in 2018 and then it goes "lifetime" losing the Second Class designation. ---- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane T2-00000208 ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
So... this may be too far OT and forgive me for being ignorant, but I'm genuinely curious. Is Morse used at all anymore in any commercial or military enterprises? Or is amateur radio "it" for CW these days? I honestly don't know if we're the only ones left using it on planet Earth or not....
LS W5QD |
|
|
I may be wrong and it wouldn't be the first time but I think the Navy
still teaches pilots Morse code. On 3/29/2016 7:34 PM, lstavenhagen wrote: > So... this may be too far OT and forgive me for being ignorant, but I'm > genuinely curious. Is Morse used at all anymore in any commercial or > military enterprises? Or is amateur radio "it" for CW these days? I honestly > don't know if we're the only ones left using it on planet Earth or not.... > > LS > W5QD > > > -- R. Kevin Stover AC0H ARRL FISTS #11993 SKCC #215 NAQCC #3441 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by lstavenhagen
On 3/29/2016 5:49 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:
> As far as I can tell, Morse is entirely a hobby now. Maritime radio > stopped monitoring Morse on 12 July 1999. I did some searches and I > don’t think the US military offers a Morse skill rating now. Manual Morse is still alive in the Maritime Services through Public Coast Station KSM, the former RCA Coast Station KPH, with receivers in Point Reyes, CA and transmitters in Bolinas, CA. It is owned by the National Park Service and operated by the Maritime Radio Historical Society with properly-licensed operators. We operate on weekends, on genuine restored coast station equipment, and there are still several vessels that use Manual Morse for traffic. We accept message traffic at no cost - we're funded by grants from the Park Service and member donations. And we still keep "Silent Period" watch on 500 KC as in the "good old days". We also operate a ham station on several HF bands - at full legal power - licensed as K6KPH but using maritime calling and traffic procedure. See: www.radiomarine.org The military still trains a small cadre of Morse intercept operators - now rated as Crypotologic Technicians - because "the others" still use Morse for various purposes and we need to know what they are up to. It is not used for tactical or command communications. See: http://ve7sl.blogspot.com/2016/02/cw-lives.html ---- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 T2-00000208 From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Peter Pauly
Ron wrote:
> In the 1950's the U.S. 2nd class commercial Radiotelegraph license exam > required 20 wpm sending and receiving. Receiving was 5 character random > groups that included all punctuation and most of the special characters you > see above the numbers on a keyboard. After 6 months of sea duty as an > assistant radio officer, one could apply for a First Class license that > required the same but at 25 wpm. I don't recall how long we had to copy, > just the elation LS experienced at passing, Hi! Ron, this is what I recall from the FCC commercial radiotelegraph Morse exams: Third Class and Second Class: 20 wpm plain language receive for five minutes, perfect copy required for 100 consecutive characters (one minute). 20 wpm plain language send (straight key use mandatory) for up to five minutes, perfect sending required for 100 consecutive characters (one minute). 16 wpm random character groups receive for five minutes, perfect copy required for 80 consecutive characters (one minute). 16 wpm random character groups send (straight key use mandatory) required for up to five minutes, perfect sending required for 80 consecutive characters (one minute). The test for First Class was as described above at 25 wpm plain language and 20 wpm code groups. Written exam elements 1, 2, and 5 were required for Third Class. Written exam elements 1, 2, 5, and 6 were required for Second Class and First Class. Element 6 required some short answer and schematic drawing. Everyone generally took the exam for element 8 Ship Radar as well. I passed the Second Class exam almost 40 years ago, but my old study books for the exam indicate that the tests listed above were in place even before WWII. AFAIK, the only change occurred in the early 1990s when the FCC began giving credit for all of the above if the candidate held an Amateur Extra license. That, of course, wasn't even remotely equivalent...I guess the FCC just got lazy. I took several ham Morse exams at the FCC in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Contrary to some claims otherwise, I do not ever remember the 13 wpm test being random code groups on a ham exam. That is far more difficult than plain language to a ham new to Morse. A good practical capability to function at 25 wpm was sufficient for starting a merchant marine radio officer career. Until it all disappeared on 12 July 1999, the MF Maritime Morse band (410 to 535 kHz) was the most magical spot in the entire radio spectrum...especially at night! I got solicited by the Radio Officer's Union in 1991...there weren't enough radio officers to man the US-flag merchant vessels that got re-activated after Desert Storm. What I really regret is that during my US Navy days there was nothing so small and capable as the Elecraft K1. I could have had a fine time *ashore* with a K1. Mike / KK5F ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Peter Pauly
In a desperate attempt to make this subject at least vaguely on
topic, note that future CW use is important to the future requirements for ham radios. If new hams aren't interested in CW, then good support for CW will become less important, particularly as older ones leave the hobby. There are a couple of things which give me hope for the continued use of CW: CW is the easiest mode to use for DXCC. Between the large number of stations active on CW, and CW's ability to work in bad band conditions, I think it will continue to attract users. Digital might be a contender for bad conditions, but it seems to me the QSO rate is always slower for Digital vs. CW. The number of licensees in the US continues to climb in all three license classes. Even if we assume that all the technicians are only interested in VHF/UHF FM for emergency services use, we still have growth in generals and extras. These people will be using HF for contesting, among a myriad of other uses. Many contests have incentives for CW in their scoring systems. 73 Bill AE6JV On 3/29/16 at 5:34 PM, [hidden email] (lstavenhagen) wrote: >So... this may be too far OT and forgive me for being ignorant, but I'm >genuinely curious. Is Morse used at all anymore in any commercial or >military enterprises? Or is amateur radio "it" for CW these days? I honestly >don't know if we're the only ones left using it on planet Earth or not.... ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | gets() remains as a monument | Periwinkle (408)356-8506 | to C's continuing support of | 16345 Englewood Ave www.pwpconsult.com | buffer overruns. | Los Gatos, CA 95032 ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
I took 3 FCC code exams: the 5wpm for my novice in 1973, and years later, the 13wpm for the Advanced and the 20wpm for the Extra. But ironically, I think the FCC removing the code requirement was a good thing for CW in amateur radio. Now that people aren't forced to learn it and have to use it, and potentially develop a bad taste in their mouths for it in the process, they're more attracted to it as another activity they can pursue in the hobby. Just like the digital modes and so forth. The FCC no longer practices "mode discrimination" and amateurs are free to use whatever mode they like.
I've heard it said that CW usage has actually gone up since the CW requirements were dropped, and I believe it. The lower end of 20 meters is essentially unusable when a CW contest is going on, or at least it's good thing I have rigs like my K's that can handle 800 S9+30db sigs every kc in the band hi hi. So to bring it back around to Elecraft, I should think the incentive to continue to support strong CW capabilities in the K rigs will continue to be there for quite a long time.... 73, LS W5QD |
|
|
In reply to this post by lstavenhagen
USN still has the CTR rating and teaches Morse Intercept Ops at Corry Station, Pensacola, Florida. http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=92864 Prior to being located at Corry, Morse Intercept Ops (CTR's) were trained at Fort Devens, MA. I attended Manual Morse Radio Op School at NTTC San Diego. Most students at the time came from the SEAL community and/or Marine Recon BN's, with the exception of a few of us Marines who were shipping over into the SIGINT/EW MOS's... Todd KH2TJ CT Marine Walter Underwood wrote: > As far as I can tell, Morse is entirely a hobby now. Maritime radio stopped monitoring Morse on 12 July 1999. I did some searches and I don’t think the US military offers a Morse skill rating now. > > > >> On Mar 29, 2016, at 5:34 PM, lstavenhagen<[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> So... this may be too far OT and forgive me for being ignorant, but I'm >> genuinely curious. Is Morse used at all anymore in any commercial or >> military enterprises? Or is amateur radio "it" for CW these days? I honestly >> don't know if we're the only ones left using it on planet Earth or not.... >> >> LS >> W5QD >> >> >> > Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Mike Morrow-3
On 3/29/2016 6:51 PM, Mike Morrow wrote:
> I passed the Second Class exam almost 40 years ago, but my old study > books for the exam indicate that the tests listed above were in place > even before WWII. AFAIK, the only change occurred in the early 1990s > when the FCC began giving credit for all of the above if the > candidate held an Amateur Extra license. That credit was only for the code requirements (which I took advantage of) not for the written elements which were different from the ham exam elements contents. The Telegraph exam contents remained the same as they were in the 60s (or earlier) up until last year, the only change being was that diagrams no longer had to be drawn after the testing became privatized. >That, of course, wasn't even remotely equivalent...I guess the FCC just got lazy. No comment. I was a FCC code examiner for three decades and lazy didn't apply. > I took several ham Morse exams at the FCC in the late 1960s and early > 1970s. Contrary to some claims otherwise, I do not ever remember the > 13 wpm test being random code groups on a ham exam. That is far more > difficult than plain language to a ham new to Morse. Code groups were never part of ham exams at any speed. ---- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Peter Pauly
I wrote:
>> I passed the Second Class exam almost 40 years ago, but my old study >> books for the exam indicate that the tests listed above were in place >> even before WWII. AFAIK, the only change occurred in the early 1990s >> when the FCC began giving credit for all of the above if the >> candidate held an Amateur Extra license. Phil replied: > That credit was only for the code requirements (which I took advantage > of) not for the written elements which were different from the ham exam > elements contents. Of course...I should have written more clearly if my post implied otherwise. > The Telegraph exam contents remained the same as they were in > the 60s (or earlier) up until last year, the only change being > was that diagrams no longer had to be drawn after the testin > became privatized. I took the written elements once, the only radiotelegraph candidate at the Kansas City FCC office. The 100-question exam was 10 percent short answer and schematic draws. After the examiner graded all the multiple-choice questions and I passed from just those, he asked if I minded if he did mot grade the remaining 10 non-M/C questions...i.e. zero credit. I said OK. I wrote: >> That, of course, wasn't even remotely equivalent...I guess the FCC just >> got lazy. > No comment. I was a FCC code examiner for three decades and lazy > didn't apply. I have no doubt...I was not casting aspersions on the examining staff. They were not the ones who made the decision in the early 1990s to accept a ham 20-wpm read-only test requiring (after 1980) answering 10 multiple-choice questions about plain-language text, in place of the far more rigorous commercial Morse tests. >> I took several ham Morse exams at the FCC in the late 1960s and early >> 1970s. Contrary to some claims otherwise, I do not ever remember the >> 13 wpm test being random code groups on a ham exam. That is far more >> difficult than plain language to a ham new to Morse. > Code groups were never part of ham exams at any speed. Exactly! Yet some report, even here in the past few days, that their ham Morse exams were random character code groups. Thanks for information to the contrary that can be neither doubted nor disputed! 73, Mike / KK5F ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
Oops, my apologies: one of those was me, my excuse will have to be that it was in 1973 and I guess those memories are no longer what they used to be!
I probably mixed that up with my code practice tapes, which definitely did have 4 letter code group parts.... 73, LS W5QD
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Mike Morrow-3
Just for my own edification, were code groups ever part of the
commercial exams? It's been nearly a lifetime, but I sat for the 2nd Telegraph in 1956 [I was almost 16], and I vaguely think I remember two parts to the code element -- plain text and groups. I also very vaguely think I remember the speeds were different [20 and 25? or maybe the other way around? or maybe not]. It was an accident. I intended to sit for the Extra since I had just passed the 2 yr service requirement and got to the FCC in the morning just before the telegraph exams. The Extra was in the afternoon. He told me to fill out the app and if I passed I'd get credit for the telegraph element on the Extra. I was closest to that intimidating Boehme tape reader with the "steam gauge" speed dial, and ... not making this up ... the examiner had garters on the sleeves of his shirt and a green eyeshade. I passed, he gave me the written exam ["What's to lose?" he said] which I passed exactly. Lots of M-G set questions which I didn't know, but using maritime circuits for code practice paid off in operating knowledge I guess. I'd appreciate actually knowing if groups were part of the exam since I can't trust my memory. 73, Fred K6DGW - Northern California Contest Club - CU in the Cal QSO Party 1-2 Oct 2016 - www.cqp.org On 3/30/2016 12:49 PM, Mike Morrow wrote: >> Code groups were never part of ham exams at any speed. > > Exactly! Yet some report, even here in the past few days, that their > ham Morse exams were random character code groups. Thanks for > information to the contrary that can be neither doubted nor > disputed! > > 73, Mike / KK5F ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
I took four exams from 1948(Class C) given by W5CEO through 1952 at the FCC Office in Dallas(Extra). None of these were code groups.
73 Don K5AQ On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 5:18 PM, Fred Jensen <[hidden email]> wrote: Just for my own edification, were code groups ever part of the commercial exams? It's been nearly a lifetime, but I sat for the 2nd Telegraph in 1956 [I was almost 16], and I vaguely think I remember two parts to the code element -- plain text and groups. I also very vaguely think I remember the speeds were different [20 and 25? or maybe the other way around? or maybe not]. It was an accident. I intended to sit for the Extra since I had just passed the 2 yr service requirement and got to the FCC in the morning just before the telegraph exams. The Extra was in the afternoon. He told me to fill out the app and if I passed I'd get credit for the telegraph element on the Extra. I was closest to that intimidating Boehme tape reader with the "steam gauge" speed dial, and ... not making this up ... the examiner had garters on the sleeves of his shirt and a green eyeshade. I passed, he gave me the written exam ["What's to lose?" he said] which I passed exactly. Lots of M-G set questions which I didn't know, but using maritime circuits for code practice paid off in operating knowledge I guess. I'd appreciate actually knowing if groups were part of the exam since I can't trust my memory. 73, Fred K6DGW - Northern California Contest Club - CU in the Cal QSO Party 1-2 Oct 2016 - www.cqp.org On 3/30/2016 12:49 PM, Mike Morrow wrote: >> Code groups were never part of ham exams at any speed. > > Exactly! Yet some report, even here in the past few days, that their > ham Morse exams were random character code groups. Thanks for > information to the contrary that can be neither doubted nor > disputed! > > 73, Mike / KK5F ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net/ Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: OT: Decoding high speed CW
|
Administrator
|
Folks - we are flooding the reflector with the posts on this OT thread. Let's
take it off-list and close the thread at this time 73, Eric /elecraft.com/ On 3/30/2016 4:29 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote: > People seem to be confusing US Ham and Commercial license exams. > > Fred is right, the COMMERICAL RadioTelegraph license back then had code groups was well as plain text according to my memory and ex-FCC man Phil's (K2ASP) comments. > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: OT: Decoding high speed CW
|
|
In reply to this post by donhall161
I remember the FCC engineer administering the test consisting of plain
text code for my Extra class CW test, and some of the words were not spelled normally to see if we really copied each letter. I do not remember a code test for the commercial license, but maybe credit was given for an Amateur License. I kinda doubt that. We were allowed 5 hours if radar endorsement was included. The cost was around $45 ?? pass or fail. Dick, n0ce On 3/30/2016 6:29 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote: > People seem to be confusing US Ham and Commercial license exams. > > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by k6dgw
On 3/30/2016 3:18 PM, Fred Jensen wrote:
> I'd appreciate actually knowing if groups were part of the exam since I > can't trust my memory. Yes, and a little-known secret that can be revealed now was that some of the groups were mirror-images of each other! ---- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Peter Pauly
Hi All,
I think all the FCC code exams were plain text, not code groups--at least to my memory going back to the 50's. The reason may be obvious, in that the examiner had to check them "on the spot", and code groups would have been too difficult to check. I took the Extra Class exam in front of an FCC examiner, and I know that was plain text. I think those guys had the test material memorized, because they were checking them off pretty fast! On my test I bracketed a big section I knew was right, and showed it to the examiner. He looked at it for about 3 seconds, and said, "Yeah, you passed"! In the Army, all we used were 5 letter code groups, and those were a bearcat to check! I had that job for a while, and hated it! Sometimes the hardest part was even deciphering what had been written down. Unfortunately, penmanship was never part of the curricula! Dave W7AQK ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: OT: Decoding high speed CW
|
|
In reply to this post by lstavenhagen
My Conditional Class code exam in 1954, administered by an Extra Class ham,
was mixed code groups (5-letter as I recall) sent from an old Signal Corps manual at 15 wpm or so with a bug. I imagine that a few others who lived in the boondocks had similar experiences. The rules, of course, called for plain language text. Jerry AI6L -----Original Message----- From: lstavenhagen [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 1:00 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: Decoding high speed CW Oops, my apologies: one of those was me, my excuse will have to be that it was in 1973 and I guess those memories are no longer what they used to be! I probably mixed that up with my code practice tapes, which definitely did have 4 letter code group parts.... 73, LS W5QD Mike Morrow-3 wrote >> Code groups were never part of ham exams at any speed. > > Exactly! Yet some report, even here in the past few days, that their ham > Morse exams were random character code groups. Thanks for information to > the contrary that can be neither doubted nor disputed! > > 73, > Mike / KK5F ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: OT: Decoding high speed CW
|
Administrator
|
Hi folks - We closed this OT thread yesterday due to the excessively high number
of postings. 73, Eric Moodulator /elecraft.com/ On 4/1/2016 9:17 AM, Jerry T. Dowell wrote: > My Conditional Class code exam in 1954, administered by an Extra Class ham, > was mixed code groups (5-letter as I recall) sent from an old Signal Corps > manual at 15 wpm or so with a bug. I imagine that a few others who lived in > the boondocks had similar experiences. The rules, of course, called for > plain language text. > > Jerry AI6L > > -----Original Message----- > From: lstavenhagen [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 1:00 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: Decoding high speed CW > > Oops, my apologies: one of those was me, my excuse will have to be that it > was in 1973 and I guess those memories are no longer what they used to be! > > I probably mixed that up with my code practice tapes, which definitely did > have 4 letter code group parts.... > > 73, > LS > W5QD > > > Mike Morrow-3 wrote >>> Code groups were never part of ham exams at any speed. >> Exactly! Yet some report, even here in the past few days, that their ham >> Morse exams were random character code groups. Thanks for information to >> the contrary that can be neither doubted nor disputed! >> >> 73, >> Mike / KK5F > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |