The 500Hz filter I fitted in the 897 still seems quite wide. Does
anyone use a narrower one?
Hi Tom,
For over 20 years I used the grey matter between my ears to filter out the unwanted signals to reasonable effect (I always maintained my morse capability after passing the test), then came the dawning realisation that this was becoming harder year by year. I therefore bought a s/h 500Hz filter for my TS130V from a chap in the States on eBay - excellent, I found that I could read signals much more easily. I thought this was as far as I wanted to take it, but on a bit of a whim sent off to the States for a 300Hz filter for my 817, basically on the grounds that I would find it harder to concentrate on a cold blustery summit than in a warm shack.
Having now compared the two, I would change the filter in the TS130V to a 300Hz one, even for operating from a warm shack. The narrower filter is an awesome beast, but I get the feeling that I might have missed a few callers who have not netted accurately. Having said that, the majority of the regular SOTA chasers are excellent operators and they are spot on frequency - at times this makes deciphering callsigns somewhat difficult, as I’m sure you’ve experienced.
I had the INRAD 250Hz filter fitted when I purchased my FT-920, and use the DSP filtering to further reduce the bandwidth on receive.
When I bought the FT-817, I insisted on the narrowest available CW filter there too. I think it is a 300Hz, but I’m not entirely sure. Anyway, I got a good price on it from ML&S as it was stock they had bought in from G3TUX when he ceased trading.
Interesting idea about asking John to add a 2m column to his table. That could significantly increase the amount of 2m CW, at least in January, as the keenest participants would be there searching. Imagine how popular you would be on Snaefell with a few watts of CW on 144MHz …
The 500Hz filter I fitted in the 897 still seems quite wide. Does
anyone use a narrower one?
Hi Tom
I have 350 Hz in my 706… which is also good for RTTY
I wish I’d had 250 Hz at the weekend but 250 is a tad narrow for RTTY sometimes if callers are a little “off”. IMHO 500 would be too wide for RTTY contesting.
But I note that on SOTA CW activations, some callers have been outside the passband of the 350 hz filter… I have to be careful to open up from time to time.
< There is a QRS Corral at the top end of the band
< as well for the 12-18 wpm guys.
Hi Phil,
I took my morse test at Mablethorpe back in 82. The examiner said that their traffic was usually made at 14 wpm. His attitude to higher speeds was why send faster and risk having to repeat what you send. Morse is supposed to be a language and we all hate people that gabble, isn’t that a fact! Hence why I love SOTA CW and hate contest CW.
73, Gerald
still using a straight key… and people can tell!
Thanks for the comments. Yes, when taking “off-frequency” into account, then maybe 500Hz is about right.
To get myself “on frequency” when calling a SOTA or contest station, I tune so that a little light on my 897 flashes in sync with the station’s sending. I presume this is right, but guess it could depend on a customizable setting on my rig - ie at what CW tone frequency it flashes at! It seems to be OK for most DX spot frequencies, but on quite a number of others, I have to move up slightly from the frequency on the DX cluster to get the light to respond.
Pleased to see the general enthusiasm for 2m CW. I hope to work some exciting VHF DX from summits on 2cw next year, and hope that the groups of 2m CW chasers continues to build. How about that extra column John?
In reply to M1EYP:
At home for 40m I use my very old TS-530SP with a straight key. It has a 270Hz filter. Zero beat the CW in TUNE position, switch to CW and push NAR button MAGIC.
Pleased to see the general enthusiasm for 2m CW. I hope to work some
exciting VHF DX from summits on 2cw next year, and hope that the
groups of 2m CW chasers continues to build. How about that extra
column John?
I bought mine from W4RT Electronics at $114… then got caught for import duty, VAT, etc. At the time I couldn’t get a 300Hz filter from W & S or others , so it was my only option.
I have the Yaesu 300Hz filter in my '817 - quite expensive. Recently I bought an '857 over here but I bought the InRad narrow CW filter direct from the States over the internet. Total $149.00. Even though I had to pay the VAT on top of that when it arrived, it was very good value.
For info, I have fitted the W4RT Electronics CW Filter (purchased from RadioWorld) to the FT817 and find it fine for most SOTA activations - if you have 10 stations calling on same freq at 599, then a narrower filter doesn’t help too much!!
I was involved again in CQWW CW as part of G6PZ Contest Group - slightly lower score than last year - approx 4,600 Qso’s and 6.5 million score. Band conditions were variable, highlights working Far East/VK during Afternoons on 40m, but we were using the Monster SteppIR beam - what a beast!!
I don’t think John WGV would or should agree to change the format of his CW Table (which includes 6m). The CW Table is too well established over many years as a predominantly HF Table (6m is like HF in the summer with Es and like true HF at the peak of the cycle anyway). I would not myself want the goalposts moving as a contributor to it over many years.
Where have I heard about not moving the goalposts before?
On CW filters it’s worth sticking a wanted ad on Ric’s flea market. I’ve managed to get several CW filters on there for about half price after putting in a wanted ad. I wouldn’t dream of operating in morse without a narrow filter myself, it’s got nothing whatsoever with your ability to read morse in QRM, QRN or in the presence of other signals.
The ideal solution with Xtal IF filters is to have both and varying combinations of filtering in more than one IF, which you can do with the FT1000MP and other rigs that aren’t fully DSP. Then you can switch in different filters in two IFs. The smaller cheaper rigs such as the FT857 FT817 are only designed to use one narrow xtal filter in the 8-9 MHz IF. However if you can fit 250 and 500 Hz filters into the 455 KHz IF as well as the 8 MHz IF,such as in the FT1000MP rig, although they cost more, the filter skirts are so much tighter and they work even better. I am a fan of the Xtal filter and they are worth every penny, so if you are a CW operator why spoil the ship for an 'happorth of tar?
If I had the choice of a 300 or a 500 Hz filter in an FT-817 or 857 I would choose the 300Hz filter every time. You can take callers on that all the time and when the pile up dies down either open up to full bandwidth or use the clarifier to find anyone who might be calling a few hundred hertz off your own TX frequency.
Fair comment about whether other bands should/could be added to the table. If the owner/originator of the table, and a long-serving participant prefer not to, then that is convincing enough for me as well!
We are always pleased to welcome new participants to the UK CW table. The table has almost a 25-year history so I’m a recent newcomer, having only been participating for 18 years! You can find out about the history of the table at http://g3wgv.com/cw/cwtable.htm
Given its history as an HF table, I think it very unlikely that the participants would want to include VHF. Indeed it caused a few raised eyebrows when I added in 6m a few years back. The nature of the table means that there would be little point in adding 5MHz.
Of course, if someone wanted to run a VHF table then that would be great. I’d be happy to make my software available and would probably participate.
