[LCWO LOGO]  

Login

User name:
Password:


Language
Български Português brasileiro
Bosanski Català
繁體中文 Česky
Dansk Deutsch
English Español
Suomi Français
Ελληνικά Hrvatski
Magyar Italiano
日本語 한국어
Bahasa Melayu Nederlands
Norsk Polski
Português Română
Русский සිංහල
Slovenščina Srpski
Svenska ภาษาไทย
Türkçe Українська
简体中文
Who is online? (19)


LCWO Discussion Forum [Atom LCWO Forum Feed]

This is a simple discussion forum for LCWO users. Feel free to use it for any kind of discussion related to this website.

Thread: 20WPM learning question

Back to the Forum

AuthorText


Posted: 2022-04-07 21:40
I have now, at this time, learned all of the characters at 20WPM (character speed) and 5WPM overall speed.

During that time, I also trained myself to send at not far from the same speed character speed by imitating the sound I heard during listening on my Vibroplex Single Paddle key.

But, honestly, when I am listening, although I can do well at 20WPM/5WPM I cannot come remotely close to 20WPM/20WPM. At that speed it just all blows past my old brain.

A friend of mine just practiced with me to help my first real QSO and when I transmitted he came back at the same speed as my transmit which blew right past me.

So, he said I should slow way down during transmit if I cannot listen at 20WPM/20WPM because polite folks will slow down to whatever I am transmitting at.

He says I can send WAY faster than I am receiving.

Any thoughts on this paradox would be welcome.


Posted: 2022-04-07 21:53
Michael, I don't think its a paradox at all. It is much easier to send than receive. As a fellow beginner my advice is to find the speed you can comfortably receive at and then practice at or slightly above for some time. So if you can copy at 10 wpm set your practice for 10-12/20 then gradually increase speed until you reach 20/20 or whatever your goal is.


Posted: 2022-04-08 09:58
I did my first round of LCWO a few years ago at 20/5 wpm (it turned out it was actually 10 wpm but that's a different story). I thought I could start copying real morse but I was wrong. I suggest you just redo the whole course at 20/15. I've just finished the lessons at 20/15 and still I can't copy real morse on air, never mind prosigns and abbreviations that mean nothing to me.

I'd stay away from those who say you should learn at 10/10. Nobody sends at 10/10. You want at least 20/20 on air and I'd say most cw you hear on air is computer to computer, especially during contests.


Posted: 2022-04-08 21:46
OC and K7ASP.

Thank you for you replies and suggestions. I can honestly say that it is hard for me to copy 20WPM at 5WPM. But, I can stay at that and see if I can increase speed. It may be a hopeless case at age 62.

Thanks again.


Posted: 2022-04-09 07:06
This weekend you will hear a straight key activity on the bands https://www.skccgroup.com/operating_activities/weekend_sprintathon/

Learning from beginners speed 10/10 and increase with proficiency has the advantage that you learn all speeds. Of course there is activity below 20 wpm.

Doing 20/5 20/6 20/7 .. you just learn one speed.

The best you can do is stick with your friend and let him help you.

73

Gerd.


Posted: 2022-04-10 14:23
df9ts - Gerd,

Today I dropped back to 10WPM from 20WPM in Morse Trainer. For the first five minutes everything sounded strange, but, after 20 minutes I had most characters. So, the 20WPM was not wasted.

After an hour I am, in Morse Trainer where there is lots of time, totally comfortable with all characters at 10WPM.

I will do 10WPM in Morse trainer for several days before I switch back to the "Lessons" and try 10WPM/10WPM.


Posted: 2022-04-12 00:46
KN4DEX Steve I have same problem as Mr. Sanchez , I used Morse machine at 20 wpm and higher with the Cowps, letters, number,ECT.. Can send but not copy to my disappointment. So I am going to back up my 69 year old brain and try it his way . Thanks for posting everyone...


Posted: 2022-04-12 12:56
Sorry but I disagree. Learning at 10/10 is a waste of time. You need to learn at the target speed. 10/10 is ... lllliiiiikkkkeee ttaaalkiiiing veeeeryyyy slooooooowlyyyyy. Who would want to entertain a QSO with an operator sending at 10wpm? You don't learn better by slowing things down but by practicing more at target speed.

If I try copying at 10wpm I will mix up dots with dashes. Is it a dot? Is it a dash?


Posted: 2022-04-12 15:00
"lllliiiiikkkkeee ttaaalkiiiing veeeeryyyy slooooooowlyyyyy."----oc
But oc, that that is entirely subjective.
There is no such thing as a "too slow". The demand is actually 1/2 of an argument.
That is clarified when it is proposed that there is a single, identifiable, objective standard for learning, and/or practicing.
This is one more of those scenarios where it is presumed that there is only "one way" to do something and it is an absolute fact. No data substantiates that information.
About 2 years ago, I was learning characters at 3/3.
Regarding that, where is the authority, the ultimate authority, who dictates the speed that is the only speed that any interested person can learn at?
Certain individuals, at various places and times continually affirm such things, but that still remains unsubstantiated.
If I may, permit me to show you something that I regard as relevant.

Fact: In all the world (ALL THE WORLD) in regards to this one particular website (The jolly good ship LCWO.net) there are usually less than 45 persons attending.
There is no objective data on the percentages of persons practicing Morse Code that succeed.
Logically therefore, and factually therefore, what is the point at learning CW at any speed, if it is a "dying method" of communication and a basically obsolete method of communication?
So the question may well be asked;
What reasons justify the issuance of commands, that all persons learn CW at a specified speed?
Also my friend, bear in mind what is being presumed with the demand of abandonment of certain levels of learning, which is this ---- How long will it be until CW is regarded as "obsolete" until Amateur Radio Bands are themselves regarded as "obsolete" and thereby presumed to be the domain more appropriate to certain institutions, and the "airwaves" are off limits to all amateurs.
Either that OC, or the entire spectrum of the airwaves are designated the domain for an elitest few, rather than the many amateurs.
The consequence of the limitation that you seek to impose upon others, is not that the activity is enriched with an influx of participants. The result is the discouragement of other persons from ever attempting to participate at all.
There is of course, the option of Voice Communications of course. Yet here again, the same dilemma appears. If people who learn more slowly are discouraged, the number of persons participating is greatly reduced. The consequence of that is that there will be a limited number of persons participating, and any group of greater numbers and political influence will simply disenfranchise the amateur radio lobby.
By the way my friend, "too slow" is also akin to other social influences which adopt nontechnical and nonacademic vocabulary to suggest that somewhere, in some context, there is an objective standard. That just does not exist.

Personally, I feel that if a 73 year old "has been" like myself can improve speed, after beginning at 3/3 or even slower, there is no such thing as an actual barrier to other persons learning how to make progress in the same manner.



Posted: 2022-04-13 01:28
As a matter of fact high speed proficient hams fail often at organised competition starting speed 5 wpm. So be aware.


Posted: 2022-04-13 13:27
Hi nonagenarian. I am trying to sort out the meaning of that information.
Is the idea that "high speed proficient hams" are the universal standard?
When I remind myself to be aware, the attention may also turn to the persons who are by category, not "high speed proficient hams". As a result, I have the opportunity to consider the reality of persons who do not qualify. Beginners in the study of CW for example, are not "high speed proficient hams".
This enables me to consider a rather broad spectrum of persons who may have an interest in CW operation. The brute fact which appears therefore, is that a small percentage of persons in the world actually qualify as proficient hams, and there is a larger percentage of hams and other learners who occupy lesser categories.
The point here being, that it is not a necessity to presume that "proficiency" exists as singular standard for all persons.
By analogy, a person learning physics, is not obligated to be proficient. The essential requirement of a person learning physics is to study. Few persons could learn physics, if they were expected to be as proficient as an experienced physicist.
The fact that I cannot run a 4-minute mile, does not preclude me going for a daily jog or a daily walk in the park.
One thing that I greatly enjoy, is when some persons feel discouraged, and feel no hope at all, begin learning at a modest level, and then gradually find success after starting slow.
For myself, I hold to a singular purpose, which is that all persons trying to learn something, should be encouraged to learn, and also be praised for their effort.
Perhaps this singular attitude about learning was instilled in me many years ago, when in a moment of crisis, a friend shared a wisdom with me. He said;
"There is not just one way to be."
Thus, I am not a proficient, and I never feel comfortable telling other persons that they absolutely must do something "one way". In that regard, "speed" is something that can be easily moderated for convenience. Proficiency is a secondary acquirement. It follows initial learning.
Most persons do not qualify as a "proficient" in math, but usually learn Arithmetic prior to learning Algebra. In fact, many people study Pre-Algebra, before studying Algebra. After Algebra, Calculus perhaps becomes the subject.
Do you know many beginners studying math, who are guided directly into Calculus?
I think that it is equally effective for a learning to operate at a level consistent with their actual ability.





Posted: 2022-04-13 14:07
Hi everyone. Thank you for the good conversation.

I agree that, if I thought I could in a reasonable time, I should stay at 20WPM/5WPM and try to slowly move up the speed to 20WPM/20WPM.

But, I am 62. Also, I have some issues that probably make mortality not so very far off.

Hence, if I ever want to do CW AT ALL on the air, I need to pick something that I can do in a reasonable time, hence, I chose 10WPM/10WPM.

I completely understand high speed code guys that learned code in their suburban bedrooms when they were 12 years old, with all day long free time, will not come back to me.

But, when I was 12 I was already hauling watermelons by 7:15 am in the summer and during winter I had school and chores. I never had time to do anything but work on my dirt farm in Texas.

So, in summary, I will try to optimize the overall time I have to at least get on the air at 10WPM/10WPM KNOWING that is not what I would do if I were 12 years old again with LOTS of suburban time on my hands to learn CW.


Posted: 2022-04-13 14:09
BrucerDucer1:
Hi nonagenarian. I am trying to sort out the meaning of that information.

SNIP


Brucer - you are a bit over-sensitive you know . .

nonag is just pointing out that:-

Because fast morse and slow morse sound very different
and
when going fast you almost hear words not letters
and
the QRQ people QRQ to keep the speed, so they don't do much slow morse
and
when they do do slow morse they have to assemble the word "manually" from the letters - rather than doing it automagically
so
they sometimes have a job reading very slow morse because they fall asleep or forget the list of letters they are assembling in their heads.

Fast is not the norm. Giving up because it turns out not to be worth the effort required - is the norm
- tho I expect disappointment due to starting with unreasonable expectations, having learned that Koch taught a class to 13 WPM in a week
is probably more diplomatic and in the case of the returning ( now hopeful, ex disillusioned, more realistic ) students more accurate.

YMMV etc

cb




Posted: 2022-04-13 15:55
When Koch was developing his method, pretty much all morse operators (sparkies were they called back in the day) used vertical keys and 13wpm was indeed a reasonable speed. Nowadays CW ham operators are either using keyers (25+ wpm) or keyboards (60+ wpm) or even computer to computer(no upper limit). You can basically run and log a pile up without even touching the key. (this involves cheating, I know, but that's the way it is and it's not going to change).

A beginner should not even try to communicate with keyboard users, let alone PC-to-PC. What remains is that a good 95% of manual operators send and receive at 25+ wpm. I wasted 3 years trying to build up from 20/5 wpm, only to realize I should have started at 20/15 wpm, and looking back, I should have started at 20/20.

Yes, there are occasional slow morse contests and skeds but there's not much to learn from it.


Posted: 2022-04-13 16:00
"Brucer - you are a bit over-sensitive you know."--CB
It is normative for a person to be "sensitive" when someone shifts the subject of discussion from the matter of learning CW, to the subject of my person.
Moreover, sensitivity has little to do with the subject, as the subject introduced was "high speed proficient hams" and "being aware".
What I am aware of is the difference between discussing persons and the discussion of learning methodologies.
If you go off-topic, some sensitivities may be touched upon, as the website is committed to something other than "social media".
The subject is as stated on the top of the page:
LEARN CW ONLINE.
Nothing in that indicates, comment upon another person's "sensitivity".
Things go haywire real fast when people overlook the fact the proper subject is about how CW is learned. That is the specific subject of my remarks.


Posted: 2022-04-13 16:22
oc:
When Koch was developing his method, pretty much all morse operators (sparkies were they called back in the day) used vertical keys and 13wpm was indeed a reasonable speed. Nowadays CW ham operators are either using keyers (25+ wpm) or keyboards (60+ wpm) or even computer to computer(no upper limit). You can basically run and log a pile up without even touching the key. (this involves cheating, I know, but that's the way it is and it's not going to change).

A beginner should not even try to communicate with keyboard users, let alone PC-to-PC. What remains is that a good 95% of manual operators send and receive at 25+ wpm. I wasted 3 years trying to build up from 20/5 wpm, only to realize I should have started at 20/15 wpm, and looking back, I should have started at 20/20.

Yes, there are occasional slow morse contests and skeds but there's not much to learn from it.

By that reasoning oc, not only is there "not much to learn from it" it logically follows that there is no much to justify any study of CW at all.
That reasoning is essentially reducible to an argument for obsolescence of the subject and the activity.
All of which serves to show a singular standard of operation like; "high speed proficient hams" is being offered.
The rational conclusion is therefore, why would people in 2022 even find any encouragement whatsoever for taking up the practice when "high speed proficient hams is the subject.

All that is needed therefore, is to make explicitly clear in your communication that CW is an obsolete modality and an obsolete study, for it is a fact that few if any students of the subject will become "high speed proficient hams" or that any person interested in the practice will take it up, because no encouragment for anything less is logically justifiable nor factually justifiable.
I fail to see justification for continual discouragements of this type. Certainly, no matter how articulate your insights become, they tend continually towards discouragements to new learners, and at best, tend toward the production of so few persons in number that use the method, that it is not exactly justifiable for the FCC to do anything other than reduce Amateur Radio Bandwidths.
That is the logical end of the advocacy of such a high standard that few if any persons will ever justify taking up the practice.
One thought continually comes to mind, in regards to learning, as I consider the subject, is the peculiar habit that some persons have wherein they suppose that if the only command others to learn faster, it follows factually that other persons learn faster.
With these issues in mind, the proposition that anyone would bother with the subject, looks about like 20 miles of bad road. That is itself a generous estimate.
---
"I know, but that's the way it is and it's not going to change)."---oc
There is a grim humor in that thought. It is like a fellow on a sinking ship, demanding that the crew "sail faster".
As I study the issue, that ship may be sinking, but whether land-lubbers or not, anyone can learn CW. It will not be so much a tragedy to the land-lubbers, as it will be to those "high speed proficient hams" who lose their bandwidth.
It is a proverb that "Nothing changes, if nothing changes." Some people can refuse to change. Nothing prevents that decision.


Posted: 2022-04-14 13:28
Bruce,

I read carefully your analysis and also read the bit of reality about everyone in CW today being above 25/25 WPM.

I am really not sure what to do at this point. I am OK at 20WPM/5WPM. But, even going to 6WPM is tough for me. I find it hard to believe I could, in even two years, ever get to 25/25.

I spend about an hour every morning practicing now for about 5.5 months.

Simple QUESTION FOR ALL: SHOULD I TRY FOR 20WPM/20WPM or 10WPM/10WPM.

Thank you.


Posted: 2022-04-14 13:44
If you can do 20/5 then progressively increase to 20/20, that is try for 20/6. When you get 90% accuracy then move to 20/7 and so on. I'd just skip the 10/10, it's just useless on air. Don't forget custom characters (-> Change CW settings) because they can come useful with prosigns and also do Word Training and Callsign Training at 20/20. You'd be surprised you can actually copy callsigns at much higher speed that your morse lessons.

The reason why you have reached a plateau is because you started too slow, which is exactly what I did and why I realise I wasted 3 years.

"An easy start leads to a difficult finish" said... nobody. I've just made it up.


Posted: 2022-04-14 15:07
km2b:
Bruce,

I read carefully your analysis and also read the bit of reality about everyone in CW today being above 25/25 WPM.


That's not quite right. Lots of hams do a few CW QSOs every year at 20wpm or so.

Plenty of HAMs don't get above 20wpm.


km2b:


I am really not sure what to do at this point. I am OK at 20WPM/5WPM. But, even going to 6WPM is tough for me. I find it hard to believe I could, in even two years, ever get to 25/25.

I spend about an hour every morning practicing now for about 5.5 months.

Simple QUESTION FOR ALL: SHOULD I TRY FOR 20WPM/20WPM or 10WPM/10WPM.

Thank you.



Try 10/10 and see if you can do that. It at least sounds like proper morse.

If you up the speed progressively you will be there for ever . . .


If you are OK at 10/10 then make up some CW mp3s from ebooks books etc and sit and decode lots of morse.

It's a question of repetition until it sinks in.

You will get faster as it becomes more automatic . . .


Make sure you are using an audio frequency which works for YOUR hearing - especially if you are loosing the top end higher audio frequencies.
If you can't hear it properly then you can't decode it . . .

Go for accuracy not speed.

km2b:

He says I can send WAY faster than I am receiving.

Any thoughts on this paradox would be welcome.


When you x-mit you already know the content so you just have to convert to it morse at you own speed then work the keyer at your own speed.

When you decode you have to :-

follow the CW audio frequency through QRM/QRN/fading
filter out the sounds/silences
work out what is a dit, what is a dah, what is a work space
decode the characters and remember them ( whilst doing the above at the same time )
assemble into words abbrevs etc using the work spaces ( wdtaatst )
decode abbrevs ( wdtaatst )
understand the meaning of what you are decoding ( wdtaatst )
use what you just understood to run the QSO ( call signs, overs, errors etc), maybe noting down the message component ( wdtaatst )

Decoding is "slower" because it comprises of many more simultaneous tasks - especially doing it all in your head at the same time.


You need to save your Brain for the meaning - so the decoding really needs to be an automatic response.

You get this by decoding lots of morse . . . ( eg mp3 )


YMMV as ever

cb



Posted: 2022-04-14 15:32
cb-Chris.

Thank you for your detailed response. I will find some pre-recorded CW and write it to a CD and listen in my car when I am driving and in the mornings.

KM2B


Posted: 2022-04-14 15:35
km2b:
cb-Chris.

Thank you for your detailed response. I will find some pre-recorded CW and write it to a CD and listen in my car when I am driving and in the mornings.

KM2B


If you have earphones. don't forget your cellphone - you have it with you all the time and you can easily select from 1000 tracks

Check out some different audio frequencies - you need those edges . . .

cb


Posted: 2022-04-14 17:14
http://www.9h1mrl.org/ukrae/arc_cd/extra/morse/html/c21.htm

"Never listen to Morse at a character speed of LESS than 12 wpm. Use 14 wpm or faster, if possible. "


Posted: 2022-04-14 17:45
The article cited oc refers to "The Futility of Wrong Practice".
That is specifically, not the issue here. The specific issue is categorically, either "wrong teaching" or "right teaching".
Many people writing as authorities in public media, use negative reinforcement continually.
For example, when a person learning mentions their improvement in ability, immediately someone jumps on them to tell them; Waaaaaay toooooo sloooooow...etc. Negativisms permeate instruction in many subjects.
I think it was a little over a month ago when someone posted a topic about "I will never learn CW" or something like that.
A lot of the thinking involved is that CW is exclusively a skill associated with Amateur Radio.
Moreover, if anyone has even a little ability, they can appear in public media, and continually remind others that They Must Go Faster. That is not very helpful in my estimation.
A website administrator can meet with criticism for placing a Peace Symbol on the page. A person hoping to find at least a little appreciation from a group, is not recognized, but roundly criticized immediately.
Negativisms and disparaging communications can permeate on the Internet as people are discouraged from even trying to learn something that can be useful.
Thus, when a person hopes to learn something voluntarily, the individual is introduced to "authorities" which are not abolute authorities at all.
Any of a thousand "authorities" (self-appointed) or otherwise, can tell me to do something "faster" and it only serves to show that voluntary learners are actually, subject to no authority at all.
In the past, when I have tutored in the language (just as CW is a language) every individual effort is appreciated.
In that context, all the proverbial Carrot and Donkey Models of instruction become dismissible.
A Self-Motivated Indidual is the sole "authority".
The only "authority" is the person who decides to learn at the speed which is most convenient.
It remains to be seen whether or not someone can prove that people who practice, never find improvement. I propose that there is no data to support such a conclusion.
The essential point is that I have no need, nor I see a need to tell people to "go faster" because as people use a skill, they develop the skill. If that were not true, there would never have been CW used as a common method of communication.

.

.

.


Posted: 2022-04-14 20:44
oc:
http://www.9h1mrl.org/ukrae/arc_cd/extra/morse/html/c21.htm

"Never listen to Morse at a character speed of LESS than 12 wpm. Use 14 wpm or faster, if possible. "



Depends how good you are.

Some people will have a job getting to 15/15 - age, hearing etc. ( not counting lack of comitment )

So THEY have to decide themselves - give up or go as far as they can.


"Aptitude" is the most important issue - that's why the military test people before training and select the most likely to succeed.


Advice from those with high aptitude who wizzed through is actually:-

Start and train at the speed you which to achieve 25/25 30/30 etc


Those with high aptitude don't need this group and can get up to 40/40 ( with some effort ).


The rest have to do their best against the great demons of no achievement and disillusionment after reading about Koch and his demonstration and having high expectations.


Dropping down to a lower word rate helps stave off lack of success at the cost of taking longer
but
if you are lower aptitude you will take longer anyway
and
the choice is probably take longer vs give up due to lack of progress.


At any rate keep the char rate as high as you can - but once you have got through lesson 40 at 20/2 or some such ( but - even 10/2 if you need to do that to avoid giving up ) YOU have to decide what to do next.



Going through the course again at 20/3/4/5/6 etc is probably a lifetime's job and only for those who enjoy it for it's own sake, in my view, but if it suits you then go for it.


REMEMBER you don't have to just stick with one way.


brushup ( a 40/40 I think ) advised switching to regular timings ( BUT you are back doing the courses again )

( i.e. x/x whatever low value x is where you are able to decode with correct timings )

and then increase x i.e 10/10 11/11 12/12.

That will suit some people - BUT now you are beyond lesson 40 and have all the characters at 20 or 15 or whatever, you are in a different business - speeding up.



Either way the fix is to DECODE lots of morse and see how far you can get. Make progress or you will give up.

So I always suggest listening to lots of computer morse also buy a HAM radio and leave it switched on, make some mp3 files to suit where you are
- but you have to be decoding the morse.


You will learn by repeated decoding morse code until decoding it becomes an automatic process.

You need to save your brain for dealing with the content.

No education theory needed here - commitment and effort are needed now.


BUT


There are a few more gotchas.

1/ Make sure you an hear the code - if you can't here it you won't decode it.
Does your hearing have a flat response or can you hear the code better by moving a few Hz of audio.
Can you just repeat the morse to yourself as you hear it or is it distorted or muffled somehow. That should help with starting learning head copying where you need to be processing the signal whilst doing several other things at the same time


2/ Concentrate or don't concentrate - which works. Dreaming won't help but if you concentrate too much then that won't work either.

If you settle down to your nightly morse session and find yourself thinking about tomorrow's chores or falling asleep then you are on a hiding to nothing.
Better to do 1 min decoding sessions every so often from the cellphone mp3.



Decode decode decode. Don't give up.


You won't be going beyond your maximum potential - but that's the same for everyone.


As long as you aren't trying to lean CW visually, you have made the best start.


If you have high aptitude then you can follow the various advices about same speed as you want to do and go at 25/25
or don't learn below 15 or whatever.

Try them out and see. Only you can decide for you.

Else - are you going to give up, or see how far you can take it. Lower aptitude won't necessarily spoil things.
Do you need 25/25 even.

Probably not for most QSOs

YMMV as I always say - because you have to decide for yourself

cb


Did I say don't give up ??



Posted: 2022-04-15 16:59
Yes Chris, you did an excellent job of explaining that learners should Just--Not--Quit. That is most commendable. The feeling that you convey is one that is not seen frequently.
I would have written an answer like that but I was...er....busy with urgent duties... in the yard or something...somewhere...um... apology to Bill and weather reports to follow...eating crow for dinner you know.


Posted: 2022-04-16 15:27
cb:

As long as you aren't trying to lean CW visually, you have made the best start.

YMMV as I always say - because you have to decide for yourself

Don't give up.


I'd agree with those three things being the most important/true things for everyone.


Posted: 2022-04-18 22:47
Hi Michael,

my opinion:

1)
if you can recognize all characters, try to go to 12/12 without thinking, with instant recognition.
With this speed you can make QSOs.

2)
Try to learn to recognize eg the following words:

pse gd ge tks fr call my name hw cpy fb dr ur rst 599 QTH hr rig pwr ant es vy tnx fer ur info all ok QSO cul tu 73 ?

3)
exercise to decode call signs

4)
make a minimal QSO template with your name, QTH, rig etc. and exercise sending with a key you like.

5)
Go on QRS frequencies
in Europe (USA I don't know)

3555 kHz - CW QRS Centre of Activity
14055 kHz - QRS Centre of Activity
21055 kHz - QRS Centre of Activity

In the USA look for the SKCC frequencies
https://www.skccgroup.com/
1.8135 3.530 / 3.550 7.038 / 7.055 / 7.120 10.120 14.050 / 14.114 18.080 21.050 / 21.114 24.910 28.050 / 28.114 50.090

6) make QSOs and have fun.

If you don't understand something, send eg "name agn" or "name ?".
If you did not understand the callsign, send back what you heard e.g. DD5? and I'll give back DD5RK as long as you got it.

continue offline training, hearing and sending

7) see you on air, and exchange QSL cards.

I started 2 years ago on LCWO, so be careful what I say, it can all be wrong. ;-)

73 Rüdiger DD5RK






Posted: 2022-04-22 13:53
If you type at an average speed, you should be able to hit around 41 words per minute (WPM). Even though 41 wpm is just an average typing speed, it's more than enough to help you qualify for most jobs that require you to write or type on a keyboard, such as being a secretary, accountant, or typist.
https://spacebarcounter.org/

Back to the Forum

You must be logged in to post a message.