|[AMRadio] 40M AM?|
ars.w5omr at gmail.com
Mon Feb 18 12:14:04 EST 2008
Bob Macklin wrote:
> I was surprised at how well it could copy CW when the CW was obviously
> generated by another computer. It had a 99% correctness. This does not
> happen when the CW is sent by hand. If the sender is really good it might
> copy 75% but most of the time it is less than 50%.
> My observation yesterday was that a significant amount of the contesting was
> being done by computers.
I disagree that it 'had to be done by computer'.
Back in the mid 80's, as a 'Johnny Novice' (literally, still a novice)
running 15wpm code on a Speed-X bug. That was the best Bug I've ever
operated. Beats the Vibroplex, hands down.
I worked, on a regular basis, a WD5J... something or another, out in
East Texas always on 40m, somewhere between 7.110 and 7.125 and he was
using a new (at the time) Commodore 64 with a CW program on it. He sent
me a print out of the text I was sending with my bug. Solid Copy for 5
whole minutes, at an average for 15wpm.
Computer programs are -much- more refined these days.
I've always received compliments on my 'fist'. Have been accused more
than twice of running some sort of code-generating device (computer,
keyboard, whatever) while all the time I was using a bug.
73 = Best Regards,
More information about the AMRadio mailing list
This page last updated 17 Dec 2017.