NO HF SOTA operation unless you learn CW! (Part 1)

[OE6FEG]

If we trace the reasons for dropping the CW requirement from the license, we find that it boils down to a drop in people entering the hobby and a belief that it needed to be made easier to get licensed. While it has not stopped the gradual decline, I think there is some truth in that, although some would say that the license classes should have been adjusted rather than dropping the requirement altogether. In particular, I think what a lot of people miss is the need to make it possible for younger people to get licensed. I often find that it is children who have the greatest enthusiasm for Morse code, but have to wait many years before they are able to get on air and enjoy the fruits of their labours. In many countries, the door remains firmly closed to precisely the demographic we need to appeal to. In this respect, I think England has got the right balance. The Foundation License allows even quite young children to get on air and, as some activators on this site have shown, 10 watts is more than enough to provide a lifetime of enjoyment in SOTA. Unfortunately, it is not so here in Austria, where children have to wait until they are 14 to get licensed and people who should know better pin their hopes on the increased interest in new digimodes like FT8 .
I digress. Children are desperate to learn Morse code but, just as with any other musical instrument, they often lack the staying power to see the learning process through. I am fortunate, in that I work in a primary school and so I get to see the Morse learning process from a focussed pedagogical viewpoint. I can say that there are definitely different types of learners, and what works for one may prove a hinderance to someone else. You have to play around a bit and find what works for you. I’m also fortunate, in that the teachers I work with are very open-minded. Next year, I will have my first 1st year class in about 4 years. I spoke with the main teacher of that class and she agreed (was very excited in fact) that when I am teaching the English alphabet, I can include the Morse character for each letter. I have been modifying a set of picture cards for precisely this purpose:

It will be interesting to see what effect this has, and whether it helps the pupils to start learning Morse right from day 1. Those pupils who lose interest or show no aptitude for Morse can simply forget about it. But if even a small handful pick it up, I will start an afterschool club for them to practice and hopefully get on the air.
As OE6MAD (Mario) showed last week, when he posted his first activation, (First activations - OE/ST-308 & OE/ST-320) the Graz Morse Code School has not just got a great many people on the air using CW, it produces a steady stream of competent SOTA activators as well (if I do say so myself). I know the Long Island CW School also does a great job in this regard. CW can be saved, but it needs highly motivated individuals willing to come together and start the schools. The Graz CW School also has a special pyramid system, so as soon as you graduate and get on air, you are usually given the job of tutoring some new students. It is this manner of actively growing the teaching/learning community that also plays a big role in keeping CW alive.
To everyone learning CW and looking for that one tip that will help them, I would say that just half an hour a day can be enough to get you on air, but it is best when that half hour is first thing in the morning. Set your alarm to go off half an hour earlier and do your practice before going to work. If you travel on public transport a lot, use that time to listen to Morse through headphones; don’t waste a single second. And remember, the CW operators get the coolest toys to play with, it’s worth the effort!
73 es GL de OE6FEG/M0FEU
Matt

[DD5LP]

@OE6FEG

If we trace the reasons for dropping the CW requirement from the license, we find that it boils down to a drop in people entering the hobby and a belief that it needed to be made easier to get licensed.

Hi Matt,
I believe, what you have described here was the reason for introducing the two or three level licensing systems in many countries. The Foundation or Technician level forms an introductory level and this indeed increased the number of people entering the hobby when numbers were dropping off.

The Morse test while possibly seen as a block to entering the hobby on the shortwaves by many people, I believe was removed by the licencing authorities as there was no longer the need, for example, for Radio amateurs to recognise and report a call for help from ships on the high seas using CW on 160 or 80 metres as ships had stopped using Morse code and moved to using satellite communications.

One of the basic principles of SOTA is to be inclusive. Should there be a restriction on using SOTA on HF to only the CW mode as inferred by the provocative “NO HF SOTA operation unless you learn CW!” title of this thread, that would be in direct conflict with this basic principal.

I realise that some operators just love CW and want to promote its use but it would be wrong to take what could be seen as an elitist position of stopping others who are more interested in other modes such as SSB, FM and Digital and are not interested in or simply cannot manage to learn CW.

As has already been said, it can be easier in low signal conditions to make a contact using CW than SSB. One could say that makes the SSB contact more of an achievement.

Of note was a push in Australia led by Ron, VK3AFW to promote the use of CW in SOTA as initially there were very few SOTA operators using the mode in SOTA in VK. I’m sure Ron will expand on this but I believe his approach was to teach the minimum exchange needed for a SOTA contact to form as a basis of Morse code understanding. Ron was very successful with this approach as can be seen by the increase in the number of CW SOTA operators in VK.

73 Ed.

[DL6GCA]

In general - I like morse code.

I got my licence at 16 (1977)… without CW and was only allowed to use frequencies above 144 Mhz.
In the early 80’s I passed the CW exam to be able to be active on HF as well… but rather because it interested me and I was interested in 2m operating modes such as Aurora, MS (at that time still with Uher Report), EME,…, where one should also be able to use CW. Today, all that has been replaced by digitalisation.

It is well known that the average age of OMs is quite high. To prevent the decline of amateur radio, the requirements for obtaining a licence have been lowered. Lowering standards has been quite fashionable for a long time…

When I took up amateur radio again after a 20-year break, I found out that doing CW is like riding a bicycle… you’re quickly back into it.

In the past, when an SSB qso broke down on HF, I could be sure to finish it successfully with CW. Today I can no longer assume that.

I still think CW has charm and opens up many possibilities. But it’s up to you to recognise that and learn CW.

73 Armin

[OE6FEG]

Just to be clear, I’m not against digimodes in any way, they’re just not the way I personally like to fill the log. I also agree that they do need more bandwidth (which could be freed up by creating a new ‘digital telephony’ segment above the digimodes). What I object to, is the idea that the popularity of digimodes can reverse the decline in interest in ham radio.
To be more specific to the title of the thread: I wouldn’t be in favour of a complete HF ban for no code hams. Perhaps just a few bands, like 6m for instance.
73 Matt

[G8ADD]

@DD5LP

As has already been said, it can be easier in low signal conditions to make a contact using CW than SSB. One could say that makes the SSB contact more of an achievement.

Exactly!

It seems to me that there are two main reasons for using CW. Firstly because it is a good mode for marginal conditions, and secondly because it is pushed on you by an elitist frame of mind where some people have the impertinance to say that you aren’t a proper ham if you don’t use CW. Its a mode, one of a palette of modes available to us, use it if you like it, don’t use it if you don’t. Forget twaddle about its past importance, ignore the elitists that want it to be compulsory. The choice to use it is yours alone.

[VK3AFW]

Hi,
Firstly I thank Ed for his kind remarks but I think only 1 new CW op came up from our training and practice sessions.

CW was important to mercantile ships, the military and even the Post Office up to around 1950 when typing became a more useful skill. Radio amateurs were prize recruits for WW1 and WW2 and they were used as trainers and station supervisors. Old habits die hard and CW was kept as a qualification in AR well beyond its apparent useful date.

I find the extra 8 dB or so cf SSB hard to pass up, although I did so today with 10 and 15 m full of JAs calling CQ test. I could not nut out the scoring so kept out of it.

Today the two thumb tappers hold sway.

The SSB gang have of late started running 100 W on summits to an elevated GP in order to get dx contacts. I saw one such station today and the battery box made a grand seat. It weighed two anvils.

Have fun whatever your mode.

73
Ron
VK3AFW.

[M0LEP]

@OE6FEG

the reasons for dropping the CW requirement from the license

That was mainly down to it no longer being an ITU requirement. At WRC-03 the ITU dropped Morse proficiency from its requirements for amateur licences.

@VE6JTW

CW is easy to learn with dedication and persistence

I’d qualify that. I’ve met a very few folk who sat down with a Koch trainer, and were receiving accurately at 20wpm within a fortnight, and one of them went from nothing to 50wpm+ in just a few months. For most folk it takes a fair bit longer, and for some it’s a serious struggle. I make no secret of the fact that I consider the two years I spent doing regular daily Koch-style training to be two years wasted as far as learning Morse was concerned, and I’ve had a few others confess they also found it pretty much impossible. It works for some, not for others. It is most certainly not easy for everyone.

While there was a time when Morse proficiency was an essential part of any amateur’s skill set, those days are long, long past. These days CW is just another popular mode, to be used or not as you like.

[VK1DA]

It’s my recollection that the argument about whether CW proficiency was a valid (contemporary) requirement even in the 1970s was that as it was in the ITU requirements, no country could ignore the requirement to examine amateurs for morse proficiency.

I think a hard look at what happened when ships at sea needed to call SOS post about 1930 would reveal that they would do it on the 500 khz band which until 20 or so years ago (it doesn’t matter) was still monitored by competent operators at shore stations and in theory at least also by other ships radio officers. It was almost never monitored by radio amateurs unless they were also professional operators of a coastal station or a ship. I never monitored the 500 khz band.

So you could ask why was morse a requirement for radio amateurs. Well, here’s my theory. When all this was dreamt up, pre 1930s, (in fact not far past 1901, Titanic was sunk in 1912), radio wasn’t neatly divided into bands and tuned by people using receivers with sub khz bandwidth as they do today. Transmitters were a choice of spark or higher powered spark. That was a wideband mode. It probably covered DC to 1 MHZ and beyond, if anyone had the equipment to examine it. A tuned circuit, probably in the antenna matching, probably reduced the bandwidth to a couple of hundred khz.

Receivers were little better than what we would now call a crystal set. Tuning was equally broad. So everyone with a “receiver” heard everything if they were in range. That is why amateurs needed to be competent enough to copy and respond to an SOS, because if it happened, they might be the only operator in range, awake and able to respond. They may have to summon help by riding their horse down to the nearest police station, but that may have been better than nothing. Better equipped amateurs might have one of those new fangled telephones.

So why did the requirement for amateurs to be competent at morse stay in the rules? Perhaps the IARU feared that pointing out that more modern modes and equipment had actually made amateurs redundant for the purpose of hearing SOS calls, might have unpleasant consequences?

Indeed the WIA used to point out that by raising the question of morse proficiency, we might be opening up a pandora’s box of issues that in some scenarios could result in a significant downgrade of amateur privileges, or worse. So the sleeping dog stayed comfortably sleeping on the rug and nobody disturbed it.

(No ship would ever call SOS on an amateur band, would they? )

Re learning morse, which is the topic here, I equate it [edit: compare it] with learning a language, a very small vocabulary, but still, the brain needs to learn new stuff. Something that is easy at age 12-15 is much more difficult at age 50+. I’m still trying to learn more Spanish than I did in 2019, it is slow going and I don’t put enough time into it. But I am gradually learning more. An incentive like having to book a hotel room, or order a meal, accelerated my learning in 2019 much more than anything else has since.

73 Andrew VK1DA/VK2DA

[M0LEP]

@VK1DA

I equate it with learning a language

For me, to begin with, it was more like learning to read and write again, but using sound. Maybe it starts to become more like a language when you get to the point of hearing words rather than letters…

[G4TGJ]

I thought the reason that Morse was a requirement was so a ship or coastal station (or whoever) could ask you to QSY if you were causing interference. This was a possibility as many of our bands are shared with other services. Anyway, Morse isn’t and shouldn’t be a requirement any more as it is no longer used by professional services.

I had to take a Morse test in 1983 to get on HF and having had to learn it I embraced it. I’ve always found it a shame that many of those who had to take a test never then used it on the air. That seems like such a lost opportunity.

I use CW for most of my ham radio because I like to use homebrew equipment and CW transmitters are much easier to build and more efficient. QRP works well. And I don’t have to shout into a microphone and disturb others in the house or on the hill top. For SOTA activations I do also like to use 2m FM but that’s a more relaxed mode as signals are usually strong from local stations.

I was away from ham radio for many years. After 2/1/89 I didn’t have a CW QSO until 23/11/17. I had to relearn the code but it was much quicker than the first time. Strangely though, I originally didn’t get much faster than the 12wpm test speed but have now got much nearer 20wpm and could probably get faster if I went on the air more from home. I do use a paddle now though rather than the straight key I took my test with.

[M1EYP]

@M1BUU

I think it’s fair to say that Morse for me is a struggle

Nonsense. You are a CW activator. My own target was to reach a standard of CW whereby I could do SOTA activations with it - so that level is success AFAIAC.

[M1EYP]

@GI4ONL

unless you are prepared to put in the time and effort you will NEVER master learning CW

Nonsense.

It’s quite easy to get to a level of proficiency whereby you can do CW SOTA activations or CW contesting, and IMO we shouldn’t be putting people off by saying that it requires lots of this hard work and dedication stuff

[M0WIV]

@MM7MWL

BUT in the past year I am up to 5wpm

I’m sure you may have heard this but learning at 5wpm is now really frowned upon. The problem is at that speed you are counting dots and dashes and referring to an imaginary look-up table in your head.

The recommended way is to learn at a higher speed, say 16wpm or even more and begin to learn the sound of the characters. For example K sound like “baa di baa” to my ear. Other ears may hear something different but that doesn’t matter. So instead of thinking of K as sounding like “kay” you hear “baa di baa”.

There are lots of online resources but for me the app Morse Mania worked very well and it was actually fun to use. It now has a feature to allow sending but I can’t get on with it - tapping a screen doesn’t work for me.

[M1EYP]

@G8ADD

fits nicely into a waltz if you start on the down beat, emphasise the upbeat and bend the spacing a bit

Nonsense.

Try doing that when playing a ballroom or sequence waltz for a Warners or Saga cruise dancing crowd. You will not be popular.

[MM7MWL]

@M0WIV

learning at 5wpm is now really frowned upon.

I agree, John. I use the Farnsworth method at 15wpm and learn the overall sounds, not the individual dots and dashes. My point was that from zero knowledge I can now copy at an average of 5wpm on my CW journey - I hope - to much faster speeds in future. But it takes time and effort and practice - and lots of listening.

[G8ADD]

@M1EYP

Nonsense.

Tom, that is three times you have used that word in three posts. Go easy on it, will you, remember things that are not so for you may be very true for other people.

With regard to the waltz comment, you got the wrong end of the stick, it was CW spacing that I was referring to!

[GI4ONL]

@M1EYP

Nonsense

I bow to your inferior knowledge.

I thought this thread was about learning CW properly not just the ability to conduct contest style exchanges, anyhow like others have said whatever floats your boat is good for you and not everyone en masse !

[M1EYP]

Indeed. But this is a SOTA message board, and as such, the context is using CW for SOTA.

In that context, I strongly believe that developing the necessary proficiency in CW is not that demanding, and as such in this context there is no need to put people off by stressing the hard work and determination required to achieve fluent conversational morse.

Activating or chasing SOTA with CW is a lot easier than that.

[HB9EKO]

@HB9BCB

… You with that knowledge of Morse code? That’s out of the question, he said, and classified me as a Morse pioneer (now electronic warfare).

When I had to do my assessment for the military service in the German army, I failed the morse test… We had to decode text in 2-3 WPM, while my comfort zone back then was rather around 23 or 24 WPM. So I did not end up with the guys that monitored high speed code and all qualified for the HSC. The fact that they would save several months of training effort to get me up to speed was completely irrelevant to them, while a friend of mine ended up there who would have preferred to join the mountaineering troops…

[G6PJZ]

Of course it fits Jens!

In response to the original query: yes I probably would make more of an effort to master CW to retain my access to the HF bands. As Victor said, mastering CW (or indeed anything) takes time and effort. I’m not sure it would ever become a favoured mode for me personally to use though (just as FT8, for example, doesn’t particularly float my boat).

That said, what would be the desired outcome of such a proposal? There are many facets to this hobby and I doubt if anyone fully explores all that is on offer (SSTV, satellites, micro-waves, CW, digital modes, contesting, rag chewing…). Why pick on CW as the required skill?