TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] 'Real CW?'

To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] 'Real CW?'
From: Ynkedragon@aol.com
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 08:33:53 EDT
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
In a message dated 04/10/2005 13:33:26 Eastern Daylight Time, k3tx@fast.net 
writes:

<<  It took me nearly forever to get good enough to pass 5 wpm.
 . . .  So just to prove I could work G frequencies I tried
CW. . . And just like most others, once the speed got to a comfortable level I
had learned that CW was it. >>

Dave,

Your experience parallels mine.  Almost FOUR years to learn 5 wpm CW.  Got 
the general after several attempts and swore I'd never work CW again.  But, the 
station I had back then (as a struggling college student) wasn't too 
competitive on phone (Johnson Ranger into a long wire) but worked pretty well 
on CW.  

Still, I wasn't a great CW op (still don't consider myself that even tho' I 
now contest op at around 40 WPM) but got a whole lot better after learning and 
passing the 20 WPM test for extra.  Then, and only then, did CW become an 
effective means of communications for me.

Proficiency turns many chores into effortless performance, whether speaking 
French, changing the oil in the car, swimming a mile or working the weak ones 
down on 7.001 MHz.  For me proficiency began to happen > 20 wpm.

Of course, CW is better with a TenTec.

73,  Blair k3yd
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>