🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <691@wells.UUCP> k3tx@wells.UUCP (Dave Heller) writes:
>In article <7197@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU>, ins_atge@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Thomas G Edwards) writes:
>N3HAU seems to have learned the code just to get his Tech ticket (assume he's

actually I learned it to get my novice :)

>a Tech from the makeup of his call).  Doesn't anyone realize that some of us
>(which includes a large proportion of the real good amateur operators) use CW
>by choice as the most relaxing and interesting mode?

Oh yeah.  There are alot of serious CW hams.  It's near impossible to make
voice contacts on HF any more with all the QRM.  CW lets you blow through
all that stuff for regular reliable communication.  Besides, HF bandwidth
needs conserving and CW is a good way to do it.  

>And for the traffic nets CW seems to work better 
Than voice.  Especially in emergency situations.  Alot of people forget
that a serious emergency could wipe a whole lot of Packet BBS's
off the air, making packet NTS a little more difficult.  (I'm not downing
packet, this is just reality).

>>{Hitting RUDAK sats with 5 watts on CW}
>> Of course, I really haven't used code since then...
>Nothing to brag about.
Probably not...I think the only way one can build code speed up from
the 6-8 WPM level is serious on-air practice, and I just haven't had the
time recently to get on HF.  Even though HF allows world-wide contacts
and such, the QRM makes is fairly unappealing to me.  Occasionally I
glide by the shack, but I can talk to hundreds of people on 2m FM
voice or packet with almost no noise.  Yes, someday I want to do
20 WPM, but that day is far off when I have more liesure time.

-Tom
N3HAU