A BEGINNERS GUIDE
TO
QRQ CW
by
Joe Gerry, KH6/W3GW
Introduction
Perhaps you have heard them on the low ends of either 40 or 80 meters CW. Those
signals that, at first listen, sound like a digital mode, but are not coming in on the usual
PSK or RTTY frequencies. But wait, on further listening you may have found them to
sound oddly familiar. Well, you just may have stumbled onto a high speed CW QSO, or
as practitioners of the art call it, QRQ CW.
Just what are we talking about when we say, QRQ CW? Fred, W3NJZ, proposed the
following definition in an article he wrote for the FISTS Newsletter, FISTS being a
club dedicated to the care and feeding of Morse code and CW (1). Fred felt QRQ CW
was Morse code sent at speeds from 60 to over 100 wpm and comprehended by ear
without the use of computers or code readers. We are not talking about CW operators
sitting at their 'mills' , or typewriters, making 100 percent copy of a Press Wireless
transmission as in the old days. No, QRQ CW is conversational Morse code, sent at
high speed, read by ear, with QSK, so that we approach a duplex conversation, similar to
a conversation on the telephone.
History
For most of us old timers the word 'telegraph' brings back memories of visored
operators sitting at railroad depots, tapping a key, and listening to a clicking sounder. The
word comes from the Greek 'tele', meaning 'far' and 'graphein', meaning 'writing'. William
Pierpont, N0HFF (SK), in his book, 'The Art and Skill of Radiotelegraphy', tells us the
first telegraphs used smoke, reflected light, and mechanical systems called semaphores to
transmit messages (2). Indeed, semaphore links transmitted messages across Europe
2.
up until the middle of the 19th century. Vestiges of these old semaphore links exist today
in place names, such as Telegraph Hill in San Francisco. These systems used relay
stations every few miles, required at least two operators, one to read the signals and one
to write them down, and needed fair weather and daylight. Talk about QRS! Speed must
have been measured in letters per minute rather than words per minute.
The telegraph we all remember was invented by Samuel Morse, as any school kid
could tell you in my day. Well, Pierpont tells a different story in his book suggesting that
Alfred Vail, Morse's assistant, played a key role in the development of ‘Morse' code.
Pierpont drew heavily on a book by George Oslin, 'The Story of Telecommunications',
to make a case for giving more credit to Vail (3). By the way, Bill’s book is free for the
downloading on the internet and is a gem. No self respecting CW operator should be
without it.
Morse's genius saw a way of using electromagnetism to transmit messages over wire
using a code. His original code, devised in 1832, used, dots to stand for the numbers 1
through 9, a code book where words and letters were assigned a number based on this
dot code, and a stylus system for recording these dots on a moving strip of paper at the
receiving end of the wire. The receiving operator would read the dots on the strip of
paper by eye, translate the dots into numbers, and than use the code book to translate the
numbers into words. The system was cumbersome, slow, and relied on sight to read the
message. Now here is where it gets interesting. According to Oslin and Pierpont, it was
Alfred Vail who saw the weakness in Morse's code and improved it by using dots,
dashes, and spaces, to represent letters directly, doing away with the code book, and
3
allowing the receiving operator to read, by eye, the words directly off the tape. Vail’s
code used dots, dashes, long dashes, spaces, and longer spaces to form what would
eventually become the American Morse code. Vail received no recognition for his role in
coming up with this code, nor for his role in the development of the straight key and
sounder, at least, according to Oslin’s take on history.
American Morse code presented difficulties due to its use of varying dash and space
lengths. For example, the letter ' i ' was .. or two dots with one space and the letter 'o'
was . . or two dots separated by two spaces. The letter ‘L’ was a long dash and the
number ‘0’ was a longer dash. Spaces between dots and dashes, letters, words, and
sentences, varied as well. The Europeans saw the weakness of these variable dash and
space lengths and changed Morse’s code by adopting uniform lengths for dashes and
spaces, calling the new code the Continental code. This required changing about a third
of the American Morse characters. The Americans kept using American Morse and the
Europeans kept using Continental Morse until the advent of wireless made a standard
code mandatory. For a variety of reasons, including the difficulty in reading the 'ditty'
American Morse in the presence of static and spark gaps, the Continental code became
the International code and was adopted by all, including the United States, by the start of
World War I. One rarely hears American Morse on the air these days, unless you hear
one of us J-38 or Vibroplex users send an American Morse long dash for zero when we
tell you we are running 100 watts!
Another event occurred around the time the new code was coming of age. Both
Morse and Vail found that they could 'read' the letters by listening to the taps made by the
4.
stylus as the code was imprinted on the moving paper strip. Eventually, after some
resistance, copying by ear rather than by eye became the standard. The telegraph sounder,
invented in 1856, soon replaced Morse's paper strip, at least until the middle of the 20th
century when, the high speed commercial circuits went back to using paper strips or 'slip'
to record Morse sent at speeds of up to 400 wpm. The majority of circuits, by the
end of the Civil War, employed operators 'reading' by ear, not by sight, just as we do
now on the Amateur bands.
Where were we with regards to copying speed in the old days? An operator in 1840
reading a strip of paper by eye and using Morse's original number code probably copied
at less than 10 wpm. Copying speed increased to 25 to 30 wpm by 1860 when operators
started copying by ear and writing down what they heard. Using typewriters, that came
into use in the 1880s, Pierpont describes some telegraphers being capable of copying
at 50 wpm. I wonder about that 50 wpm claim, though. Were the telegraphers in the
1880s really able to send at 50 wpm with straight keys? Remember, the Vibroplex 'bug'
did not come on the scene until 1904
Until the dawn of the 20th century, telegraphers focused on sending speeds. After all,
many operators were able to copy code much faster then they could send it on their
straight keys. The J. H. Bunnell Company offered the first sideswiper in 1880. This
device allowed the Morse characters to be formed by a sideways rather than an up
and down motion. Many found sideswipers more comfortable at speeds up to 30 wpm.
One still hears sideswipers on the air. Bob, W6BNB, Yann, F5LAW, and Ben, N6SL,
keep their sideswipers limber on their net that meets twice a week on 40 or 20 meters.
5.
In 1904, Horace Mann came up with the idea of using a vibrating spring to form the
dots automatically, with the dashes being formed manually. His 'bug' soon caught on
with telegraphers and wireless operators, allowing them to send more comfortably and
faster, with a skilled operator able to send code at speeds approaching 50 wpm. His
company still makes bugs, many of which are still heard on the amateur bands today. My
Blue Racer and Original models see service daily in my shack.
Speed contests became the rage in the first half of the 20th century. By that time,
operators were focusing on receiving speeds rather than sending speeds. An article in the
November 1933 issue of QST describes a speed contest held in Chicago. Hundreds of
operators showed up for this contest, including a 9 year old girl who took the 25 wpm
trophy, and Ted McElroy, who lost this one but went on to set the, still standing, world
record of 75.2 wpm in 1939. Mind you, these were copying contests, with the contestants
putting down what they heard over 5 minutes using a 'mill' or typewriter. Try it
sometimes using your computer keyboard and a W1AW code proficiency run or the tapes
on the ARRL website. Even folks who can copy high speed conversational code by ear,
will admit how difficult it is to copy text accurately on a mill, like the old timers
did on ships and land stations in days past.
Still, up until the early 1940s, CW operators interested in increasing their speed
remained limited more by how fast they could send on their bugs and straight keys
then by their ability to copy high speed code. QST for April 1940 led off with a project
that was, in retrospect, revolutionary. Harry, W2ILE, captured the cover of QST for
April 1940 with a picture of what he described as an ‘electronic bug’ that used, of all
6.
things, a thyratron, to generate dots and dashes! The next issue of QST in May 1940,
described a simpler circuit that could be constructed cheaply with readily available
parts. With these 'electronic bugs', hams could now comfortably send good code up to
40 wpm.
Keyer design made steady progress over the decades. Jim Ricks, W9TO, designed
the ‘T.O. Keyer‘, that was offered by Hallicrafters in 1960 as the HA-1. Jim’s ‘hollow
state’ keyer allowed code to be sent up to speeds of 65 wpm with a paddle. Later on, Jim
would become infamous as the 'Big Bird' of the Chicken Fat Operators. Solid state chips
such as John Curtis' 8044 chip, formed the basis for keyers used by hams in the 1960s
and 70s. Further refinements, over the next 40 years, brought us memory and iambic
keying. Today's PIC based keyers give us microprocessor based designs that function as
mini-computers on a tiny chip. Still, these nifty devices, and the beautifully machined
paddles they were often mated with, left many CW operators stranded at maximum
transmit speeds of 50 wpm or so. Could we go faster? This was the question many high
speed CW operators asked themselves in the early 1970s.
QRQ CW
Those operators who felt the urge to send faster than 50 wpm had to wait for the
birth of CW generating keyboards. Sure, a few hardy souls could get up to higher speeds
using keyers, but mere mortals couldn’t or wouldn’t because it just took all the fun out of
it having to work so hard and ending up with sloppy code at that. You need a keyboard
to send CW at speeds over 60 wpm. There, I’ve said it! Keyboards for some were not
7.
’real’ CW. George Hart, W1NJM, in QST for May of 1964, fired the first shot of this
continuing battle with his editorial ’Whither CW’. George was not impressed with
the idea of being able to send perfect CW using a typewriter keyboard rather than a
straight key or paddle. None other than Bill Eitel, W6UF, of EIMAC, fame got into the
fray back then with a letter to George defending keyboards as a valid means for ‘real’
CW operators to send CW (4). Well, not to belabor the point, I happen to agree with
Fred, W3NJZ (1). In his FISTS article, Fred felt that anyone trying to send conversational
CW at over 60 wpm on a keyer rather than a keyboard would soon see just how much
more enjoyable it is to send code by keyboard at those speeds and also would quickly
realize just how much skill is required to use a keyboard at high speeds. Remember, no
one is suggesting typing out what you hear at these speeds. Modern day QRQ CW
operators read the code by ear and send it with a keyboard.
Believe it or not, the first Morse code generating keyboard came out in 1910! Edwin
Pierson, of the Topeka Telegraph Company, built a mechanical ‘code typewriter’ that
sent Morse code in response to the operator’s typing a letter on a typewriter keyboard.
His machine used no electricity and was powered by a spring that required periodic
rewinding. You could type ahead by 72 characters, giving you time to rewind it as you
sent your message. Harry, K8ANV, describes this amazing gizmo in QST for May, 1963.
Since only one of these machines existed in the 1960s and was on display at the
Kansas State Historical Society, we amateurs were left to designing and building our own
Morse code generating keyboards.
Early efforts at code keyboard construction showed up in QST in the 1960s. These
8.
construction projects were not for the squeamish. For example, W6MURs ‘Codamite’, in
QST for May of 1961, used digital logic to key the spaces between the elements of a
letter rather then the dots and dashes that made up the letter. He used an expensive
magnetic core shift register. The alternative was to wind and wire 80 odd cores to make
your own shift register. The project was described as something that might be of interest
to amateurs, but one that would not be economically feasible for most of us. Also, the
spaces between letters and words were up to the operator and there was no memory,
meaning you couldn’t type faster than you sent.
Paul, W2QYW, went a step further with his code keyboard described in QST, August
of 1965. He used a shift register with many small magnetic toroids with hysteresis
properties that allowed the generation of ’0’ and ’1’ states. His article does a great job in
explaining how residual magnetism in these small cores allowed us to create Morse
characters. Fascinating reading for those of us who grew up during the computer
age. Unfortunately, you had to wind a lot of cores if you couldn’t get the surplus units
Paul used back in 1965. Also, you typed at the speed the code was sent and the unit
provided only a two dot memory!
In the early 1970s, K4KN designed and offered a keyboard capable of speeds of over
80 wpm. It was popular but hard to get hold of because of high demand. Wally, K5TO,
used his skills in the burgeoning computer field to build his own keyboard in the 1970s
(5). Wally tested his keyboard at 1500 wpm in loopback testing and found it to be
accurate, but, of course, no attempt to transmit code at this speed was ever considered.
Other keyboards came about in the 1970s and 80s, but once personal computer
9.
software caught up with the demands of more complicated applications, software
programs working in conjunction with the now ever present home computer became the
way to send QRQ CW on the air. Nowadays, Fldigi, CWtype, YPlog, and other software
programs use the modern PC to directly key our transceivers at speeds of 60 wpm and
beyond. Modern software contain memory and buffers that allow us to type much faster
than the code is sent with perfect spacing between letters and words. One problem that
came up with PC based software early on was a ’stuttering’ sound to the code sent when
serial and parallel ports were used to key the rig. Tom, W4BQF, described in an article
how Tony, VE6YP, came up with a solution to this problem for his program, YPLog
(6). Tony found that a computer’s CPU generated random interrupts, as part of its
’housekeeping’ chores, that interfered with smooth output when using serial or parallel
ports to key the rig. His solution involved rectifying the audio output from the computers
soundcard with the resulting voltage used to drive a transistor switch that would then do
the transceiver keying. Soundcards are not subject to the CPU’s housekeeping so no
interrupts. Keying speeds of 160 wpm were found to be possible using this soundcard
based approach. This method of keying is also used by many QRQ operators using other
Morse code generating software such as Fldigi and Cwtype.
QRQ Clubs
Operators eager to increase their QRQ CW skills began to from groups of kindred
souls in the 1970s. Bill Eitel, WA7LRU/W6UF/W6AY, the legendary co-founder of
EIMAC, set out in 1974 to form the Five Star Club, made up of operators who proved
capable of sending and receiving Morse code at speeds of over 80 wpm. Thom, K8IF,
10.
qualified as member number 7 in 1975, after Gene, W2KFA, submitted a tape to Bill
confirming that both he and Thom had completed a QSO at over 80 wpm. Quite an
achievement! Thom kept the tapes and recently downloaded them to the QRQ website
(7). The membership requirements for the Five Star Club were a point of contention for
some. Bill would not accept anyone who used a keyboard with a buffer, so you typed
at the same speed you sent and the spaces between letters and words were up to
you. There were some excellent CW operators who were disqualified for using a
keyboard with a one letter buffer! I suspect the Five Star Club membership never grew to
over 10 operators. The Club is not active today.
The Chicken Fat Operators started out just after the Five Star Club in the mid 1970s.
Mike, W8MW, recently put down his recollections of his days as a CFO member back in
the 1970s and early 80s (8). He recalls that time being somewhat of a CW epiphany
with many CW operators pushing themselves to get to ever higher speeds. Soon, most
found keyboards to be mandatory at speeds above 50 wpm. Some of the members
could QSO at over 100 wpm. One became a CFO member after being nominated by two
members. To be eligible for membership, one had to have a love for CW and a desire to
ragchew at speeds above 40 wpm and higher. Jim Ricks, W9TO, of TO keyer fame, was
the Big Bird and CFO #1. Members met on the air for roundtable ragchews called
‘cluck-ins’ and, according to W8MW, rubbed chicken fat on their radios and antennas to
improve performance. Members who got big britches and wanted more competition and
recognition for attaining high speeds were rubbed down with chicken fat until these elitist
thoughts faded away, or so I am told. Well anyway, as you can imagine, the spirit of the
11.
group tended to be of a less serious nature. The group faded out in the 1990s, but lately
Andrew, NV1B, has rebuilt the coop in an attempt to bring the group back to life.
The Speed Operators Bunch, SOB, formed more recently, with members aiming for
QSOs at greater than 70 wpm. I have not heard any activity form this group lately. The
Fast Operators Group, or FOG, is still active and meets on 40 or 80 meters twice a week.
The group welcomes checkins at speeds greater than 50 to 60 wpm. Many of the
operators have mentored newcomers in the spirit of passing the torch to a new generation
of QRQ operators. If you look carefully at the FOG website you will see a picture of the
secret ingredient Fred, W3NJZ, uses to QRQ so successfully (9)!
Our European friends have left us in the dust as far a high speed telegraphy contests
are concerned. The first IARU High Speed Telegraphy World Championships were held
in Siofok, Hungary, in 1995. The Europeans compete in High Speed Telegraphy events
like we do in Chess or Basketball. Barry, W2UP, participated as the sole American in
1995, but took a team to represent the United States to Bulgaria in 2009. All the
contestants have their amateur licenses except for the young ones, some of whom are
SWLs. The eastern Europeans take HST especially seriously (10). Carlo, IK0YGJ, just
wrote ’Zen and The Art of Radiotelegraphy’ describing a European odyssey to QRQ CW
(11). I found his European perspective on CW most interesting. Carlos’ book is a free
download and sits next to Bill Pierpont’s book on my hard drive.
What about the state of QRQ CW today ? Well, we all owe a lot to Chuck, AA0HW,
for his efforts at promoting QRQ CW and for setting up this website. I got most of my
material for this writeup from this site. Early on, Chuck realized that on the air
12.
QRQ practice might not be practical for all the operators interested in QRQ world-wide.
For example, I found it a challenge to check into the Saturday morning QRQ net on 40
meters at the sunspot minimum, from Maui, at 9:30 AM Maui time! Well Chuck came
to our rescue by devising a way to use free software to set up an internet QRQ net where
we could get all get together, have fun, and practice QRQ, using the internet rather than
the airwaves. First, you download a Morse generator such as Fldigi or Cwtype, then a
free virtual soundcard to use in addition to your computer’s default soundcard, and finally
a free voice over the internet program called Mumble. Getting all this software
configured looks a lot harder than it really is. Chuck even put a video on the iCW website
at, http://groups.google.com/group/i_cw?hl=en showing us digitally impaired old guys
how to set everything up. Anyway, once you are set up, you can check in and carry on a
roundtable just like you would on the air. Of course, this is not the same as being on the
air, but it gives many of us who live in the boondocks another option for staying in touch,
exchanging QRQ tips, and getting QRQ practice. One neat little wrinkle in all this was
Chuck setting up so I could key his Icom in Missouri from my QTH on Maui by his
rectifying the audio I sent over the internet. I have been able to check into the QRQ nets
on 40 and 80 meters this way, using a combination of the internet and the ionosphere. To
be sure, I am looking forward to cycle 24 ramping up so we can all meet on the higher
bands for some real ionosphere based QRQ CW QSOs!. In the meantime, internet CW or
iCW has allowed myself and others from Eutope to get together with our mainland QRQ
brethren during the sunspot minimum.
13.
Learning How
Back in the 1950s, those of us aspiring to become radio amateurs had to learn Morse
code to get a license. If we were lucky, we started with the American Radio Relay
League’s ‘ Learning the Radiotelegraph Code’. By lucky, I meant we were counseled, at
the start, by the authors, to learn the sounds of the elements of each letter rather than
memorizing a chart showing each letter as a series of dots and dashes. We started off
learning Morse code as an aural language and not a visual one. This approach saved us a
lot of trouble later on as we worked to increase our speed.
Nowadays, many swear by the Farnsworth method of learning Morse code. With this
method each letter is sent at the speed we are aiming to reach with long spaces between
each letter. These spaces between letters are then progressively shortened as we become
more proficient at recognizing letters. For example, an individual letter might be sent at
15 words per minute followed by a long space before the next letter so that the combined
speed of letters and spaces is 5 wpm. The idea behind the Farnsworth method is for us
to learn each letter as a distinct sound rather than a string of individual dots and dashes.
After we learned the letter sounds, the next step was stringing the letters together to
form words. Most of us found that our speed increased as we practiced until we reached a
point where we couldn’t copy individual letters anymore. Most reached this point at
speeds of 25 to 30 wpm. To get to higher speeds we kept practicing until we got to where
shorter words and parts of words such as ’the’, ’and’, ’ing’, and ’ion’ were recognized as
single sounds and not a collection of letter sounds . We all went through this progression
to get to where we could copy 30 to 40 wpm. Of course, there were plateaus but
14.
continued practice did the trick.
Ok, none of this is news, but tell me, you say, how someone can learn to ragchew at
speeds over 60 wpm and up to 140 wpm? Tom W4BQF, Bill KB9XE, and Fred W4NJZ,
all have some interesting thoughts on learning QRQ CW (1,6). They make the point that
copying at speeds greater than 60 wpm is done in the head. Copying code by hand or on a
typewriter is an entirely different skill than reading in your head. Most of us can copy
much faster in our heads than we can on paper. As I said earlier, if you don’t believe me,
try copying the on-line W1AW code practice on the ARRL website using a typewriter or
word processor. You will get my point soon enough! QRQ CW should be like talking on
the telephone with and old friend according to Tom, W4BQF.
The next point made by our experts, regarding QRQ, concerns the infamous ’brick
wall’ we all run into at speeds over about 55 wpm. The letter sounds are a blur at these
speeds and the only way to make progress is to learn word sounds. This is not an easy
task by any means. It requires quite a bit of practice. One neat approach to getting
practice in recognizing word sounds is to use the program ’RufzXP’ (12). This program
was designed by Mathias, DL4MM, and Alessandro, IV3XYM, and is used in high speed
code competitions in Europe. You hit a button and a call sign is sent to you. Then, you
type it in a box and if correct you get another call sign sent to you at a higher speed.
Current record holders are approaching 200 wpm for copying call signs!
Chuck, AA0HW, modified RufzXP by loading it with a list of the 3000 most common
words used in the English language (13). So, instead of getting call signs, we get single
words sent at a preset speed. It is kind of like using the Farnsworth system with single
15.
words instead of single letters being sent at our target speed. I usually don’t type in
the word but just work at recognizing it by ear. I have found this program to be a great
way to get through that 55 wpm brick wall mentioned earlier.
RufzXP fits the bill nicely for single words but how do we get practice receiving text at
speeds over 60 wpm? The W1AW Code Proficiency program stops at 40 wpm. George,
W1NJM, K1JD, and N4KB, no longer send high speed CW over the air and they usually
stopped at 60 wpm. The old days of listening to Press Wireless or KPH for code practice
are long gone, of course, and even these stations did not send at over 40 wpm.. One
could tape on the air QRQ QSOs and if the tape recorder were battery operated, a
variable resistor could be placed between the unit and the battery to vary the speed. The
problem here is finding QRQ QSOs on the bands to record. These high speed QSOs are
making a comeback but are still a rarity. Even so, those of us out in the boondocks do not
get the chance to listen in, due to distance and propagation.
So what to do? Well, modern computer software has come to our rescue. Todays
computer programs have come a long way since Julian, G4ILO, first wrote a program for
the Sinclair ZX81 computer in 1982 (14)! Modern day programs such as Fldigi and
Cwtype were developed to be an interface between the transceiver and the computer
keyboard. We type and the program generates Morse code that keys our transceivers.
These programs are versatile, allowing us to vary speed, weight, and rise and fall times to
produce beautiful code. I have been able to use Fldigi to generate Mp3 files of high speed
code from text files to use for practice. First I copy text from any source to a text file.
Next, I delete all the punctuation, using three spaces for a comma and seven spaces for a
16.
period (Chucks, AA0HW, suggestion). I than hit the transmit button and the program
sends the text, in Morse code, at the set speed. The program records the sent Morse and I
am left with an Mp3 file I can copy to my digital Mp3 player to listen to while the wife
and I take our daily walk here on Maui! Fabian, DJ1YFK, wrote another neat program
called ‘ebook2cw’ for creating Morse code from text files (15). Another good source for
neat Morse programs is G4ILO’s site (16). For me, though, I have to admit I am partial to
Fldigi. It produces beautiful code.
Code readers and computer programs that can decode on the air CW are available. Do
they have a place in learning high speed code? I think some would agree that code
readers and programs that convert Morse code directly to text on a screen can serve a
purpose as ‘training wheels’ rather than crutches. These devices have a place in helping
us learn to read high speed code in our heads and can act as an aide in getting us past the
infamous brick wall between 50 and 60 wpm. Certainly, no one would want to see high
speed CW become just another computer translated digital mode. Anyone who did not
want to take the time to learn to read high speed code in his or her head would be better
served by going straight off to PSK or RTTY.. On the other hand, as part of my practice
routine, I have used Fldigi to encode a text file and send it through my computers sound
card while I read the text being sent. After a while, I found I would only need to glance at
the screen if I got derailed. The rest of the time I was reading on my own. Once I was
reading on my own, I would jack up the speed. Others have used these programs to read
the code when they check into the QRQ nets. If they get derailed, a quick glance at the
screen brings them up to speed. One caveat, though, often these code readers fall down at
17.
speeds over 60 wpm and they can’t tell the difference between Morse code and a static
crash, something the human brain does quite nicely. Again, think of code readers as
training wheels
Finally, QRQ CW at speeds over 60 wpm is sent by a keyboard. Period. Earlier, we
discussed the good natured controversy concerning keyboard generated code, but the fact
remains that few if any of us can comfortably send code on a hand key, bug, or electronic
keyer at speeds over 60 wpm. In reality, though, most of the QRQ operators I know use
all of these devices depending on the speed they are sending. For me, I use my J-38 when
I get on the Straight Key Century Club frequencies. My Vibroplex bug and K1EL keyer
do the honors when I am chasing those last few countries I need for my DXCC. But when
I check into the QRQ nets, it’s my keyboard all the way.
Conclusion
Not everyone will find QRQ CW their cup of tea or easy to accomplish, but I would
hope there is at least a twinge of interest in those of you who clicked on this site and are
reading this. For me, I found it took a few years to get from 35 wpm to 60 wpm and, still,
I get derailed easily at high speeds. But, I have met some great operators while working
on my QRQ skills and gained some insight into what I thought were my own personal
limitations. I can’t emphasize enough how much help I have gotten from this website and
from my weekly iCW net checkins.
Many have written the epitaph for Morse code over the years, but the mode will not die
anytime soon. Not even the dropping of the code requirement for licensing has stopped
the members of ARRL, FISTS, QCWA, or SOWP, form mentoring a new generation of
18.
amateurs interested in CW. The newer clubs such as SKCC attest to the continuing
interest in Morse code among those Hams just entering our ranks. QRQ CW is just one
facet of what may well be a modern rebirth of interest in Morse code and CW among
radio amateurs operating on our bands today. .
References
1. http://qrqcwnet.ning.com/forum/topics/1993813:Topic:446
2. http://www.qsl.net/n9bor/n0hff.htm
3. George P. Oslin, ‘The Story of Telecommunications‘, Mercer University Press, 1999.
4 http://qrqcwnet.ning.com/page/william-eitel-w6uf?xg_source=activity
5. http://qrqcwnet.ning.com/forum/topics/1993813:Topic:603
6. http://sites.google.com/site/tomw4bqf/copyingcwover70wpm
7. http://qrqcwnet.ning.com/forum/topics/old-masters-tape-to-mp3-of
8. http://qrqcwnet.ning.com/forum/topics/1993813:Topic:881
9. http://www.k0ru.net/fog/index.html
10. http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2009/06/03/10858/
11. http://www.qsl.net/ik0ygj/enu/index.html
12. http://www.rufzxp.net/
13. http://www.paulnoll.com/Books/Clear-English/English-3000-common-words.html
14. http://qrqcwnet.ning.com/profiles/blogs/a-classic-morse-code-tutoring
15. http://fkurz.net/ham/ebook2cw.html
16. http://www.g4ilo.com/software.html
19.