Morse code

Why learn the Code ?
By LA5EKA, Gisle J. Bjoerneseth

This article is also posted on EHam, in the Norwegian "Amatoerradio" magazine April 2003 edition and in the MVARC April 2003 newsletter, Ye Olde RF Output.
Articles in norwegian as published in "Amatoerradio" downloadable as PDF here: Hvorfor laere morse ? and Hvordan laere morse ?

The answer is quite simple. A while ago I realized that morse code is the heart and soul of amateur radio . There are plenty of disussions on how obsolete/inefficient/difficult morse code is, and quite soon it will not be required by the ITU to learn morse code to gain access to the HF bands. For me, all this is irrelevant. Why ? Well, I was earlier a "no code tech". Got my tech licence so that I could play with radios and whatever. I soon got quite bored, however, by old geezers on the repeaters, the odd satellite QSO now and then, and some packet radio experiments every blue moon. I then started with FM ATV experiments, trying to whip up some local activity, but still no thrill. One day however, I was lucky enough to get my hands on a multimode 70cm rig. After working the repeaters on FM with it, I wanted to try out the "multimode" capabilities.

I found out there was some kind of "test" going on every once in a while on 70cm's. I didn't know what a test was, or what they were testing, but I joined using SSB, and soon found out about the monthly 70cm NAC tests (Nordic Activity Contest). It was fun for a while, but kind of "cool but no sigar". I heard a lot of morse code on these 70cm tests, and to me it was all gibberish. After a while I got my hands on a multimode 2m rig, and could now participate in the 144Mhz NAC tests as well. On 144MHz the activity was tenfold of that on 70cm's. More stations to work, more fun. Both these rigs had a jack on the rear panel for connecting a morse code key. I started playing with the thought that perhaps I too could connect something to that hole in the back and get more test points and QSO's by hammering on a key ?

Graphics by PA3ALM

I found SSB contacts really hard sometimes, when band conditions were bad, but still I could in fact hear them, but not well enough for a contact. And aurora, quite impossible on 2m SSB. Perhaps if I could... The CW ops seemed to work them, perhaps I could ... I decided to "look into" the matter. I searched the Internet for software and clues on how people usually learned the code. I read a lot of articles on how and why, don't and why not etc... So all in all I found quite a bit info, and thought I had what I needed. However, I had a nagging feeling that something was wrong with the methods I found, so I did nothing. It wasn't until I read about the Koch experiments I understood what was it was. By reading the Koch paper, all the pieces fell into place.

Six weeks later I was using morse code efficiently in the 144MHz and 432Mhz NAC tests. Working aurora late nights, enjoying the casual CW QSO with some station in Denmark or far east Sweden when conditions were adequate. Since I only had to take a morse code test to get an A licence, of course I did it. LA5EKA emerged from LC4PAT the 8th of June 2000. I was working both SSB and morse code day and night. With new HF priviledges there was a world of opportunities out there. There seemed to be no end to the excitement. I realized that I was having great fun, and that this was what amateur radio was about.

Now, almost three years after I started learning the code, I'm still as excited as ever when working HF. Though now I mainly do CW. In 2002 I had 95% CW, 0.3% PSK and 4.7% SSB. There is something magic about the morse code. It's much easier to use than SSB, by far. Even when conditions are good, I think. No mumbling, no language problems, no constant phonetic repeating of LIMA ALPHA FIVE ECHO KILO ALPA to an operator with no ears, no ZOO like pileups, no need for kilowatt amplifiers etc...

If I hadn't started out learning the code and using it, I would still be sitting there, listening to the repeaters, whining about my techincian priviledges, talking down the CW ops etc... But as I said, I've gotten in touch with the heart and soul of amateur radio, and I am enjoying every minute of it. I feel sorry for all the "radio amateurs to be" in the future, feeling that they don't have to learn the code. Some of them will realize what they are missing, and learn it, but I fear that most will not.

Ok, now a comment to you digital mode people, writhing with frustration about my opinions of the "obsolete" morse code. I'm sorry guys, but I find no challenge whatsoever in typing on a keyboard, and using a computer to decode the incoming data. It's ok for casual ragchewing I guess, and every once in a while it can be fun. I work daily with computers, and have plenty of people I can chat with using IRC and the like on the Internet. There's no more challenge in that than running PSK from my shack at home. It works fine, and is efficient in many ways, but alas, very boring. I find it a bit like flying on a commercial plane from one place to another, your'e just sitting there, not actually flying the thing. Not much of an achievement is it. And at last, I can communicate with others by banging two sticks together, blinking a lamp, blowing a whistle, or even using smoke signals. Can you do that with your computers ...?

Learning the code - my experience

When learning morse code, rhythm and "sound images" are most important. You do not learn the characters as "Dots and Dashes", but as mental "sound images". Throw away your code charts, they will only slow you down. Of course, the rhythm and feel of a character changes with the speed of the transmission, and at some point it becomes all garbage. Where, depends on where you are in the learning process. I'd say, for me, when I was training for my 60 cpm code test, I had real trouble with 40 cpm and slower, 80 cpm was OK, 100 cpm real hard, and 120 AND 25 cpm were complete garbage. 25 cpm had no rhythm, just long whining tones, and 120 cpm was just rattling beeps. Now it's more like 75 cpm is getting hard to read and 250 is rattling. 25 cpm is now almost impossible to read. I have to translate the long wailing tones to code for each dot and dash. So if you call me on the air with 25 cpm, I probably wont answer. Not because I'm arrogant, but simply because it's too slow for me to understand. It sounds to me as if you are tuning your antenna. Just the same as if you call me with a speed of 250 cpm, then I hear just rattling.

I was using MorseCat, when I was learning the code, set at a speed of 70 cpm all the time. Never slower. Started with 5 characters, listened to them one by one and wrote them down. When I felt I knew them I started with generated code groups containg only these characters, and copied for 6 minutes at a time until I had then 99% correct all the time. I then advanced with a few new characters. This went on for 6 weeks, 30 minutes every second day. I could of course have done it faster, but then again, why hurry. If I was to learn the code today, I would have used G4FON's Koch Method CW Trainer, it is very good, in my opinion much better than Morsecat, and works well in Windows. Read about it on the Morse Code Software page.

Graphics by PA3ALM

At the end I also started copying plain text. This is VERY important, as the rhythm of the words is quite a bit different with plain text, compared to code groups. In addition you start anticipating the next character, as your brain starts guessing what the complete word is. If the brain guesses wrong, you fall flat on your face and loose the last part of the word, and probably the next two ! So trying not to let the brain wander off and start guessing, is an important part of learning proper reception of plain text. I find myself training with plain text reversed or text in some language I can't read or understand a single word of. Plain text reversed has more or less the same rhythm and feel as the non-reversed text, but is very difficult to understand until the complete word is copied. I made a piece of software that reverses text from a file or the keyboard. Download it here: Jumbler.zip. Try it when you feel proficient with plain text. You will sweat a bit in the beginning, at least I did.

Some example code. First some code groups of five characters, then the text you just read above. The files are midi generated by Morse Midi, available on the software page.

25 Cpm code - Way to slow, cant get a feel of the rhythm. This is not efficient code.
60 Cpm code - As I see it, the lowest recommendable speed.
80 Cpm code - You'll find many amateurs running around this speed.
100 Cpm code - This is probably the average speed on the air
120 Cpm code - Many run this speed, especially americans and russians, but far from everyone.
180 Cpm code - Rattling for the experts and high speeders.

LA5EKA - Amateur Radio Blog

Pages

Morse code

Other articles

6 comments: