[CW] Interesting Exchange About Keying of SKCC email list & Video

[D.J.J. Ring, Jr.]

I asked most of the authors if I could repost this, they said OK. It was
very interesting.

Paul, G0OER  said :

I love sending with my Junker s/k. However, I’ve found that my speed tops
out at about 15/16wpm, after which spacing etc deteriorates. Yet I hear of
other s/k senders getting up to the 20s.

I am practising using a recently acquired Vibroplex bug, but they are
clearly designed to kick in at about 25wpm, so there must have been senders
operating at that speed on s/ks before their invention.

So, what about the “gap”? What hints can folk give me about getting beyond
15wpm?

I use the “British” sending position (arm off desk and 90 degree bend) as I
was taught this way.

Just more and more practice, or are there other hints?

Vy 73, Paul. G0OER

Hi Paul.

I'm very fast on a straight key. I learned the technique for a radiosport
sending contest - which I won (5 years ago during the last Summer Olympics
- I remain very proud of my gold medal :-) But sadly, no big sponsorship
deals were forthcoming. Sigh...).

I started trying to document how I learned to do it a while back at the
behest of Dave, N1EA. The good news is that I've made great progress and
should be able to post some materials on it very soon. I know a lot more
about what I did now than when I was doing it!

But here's the philosophical base: "You can't learn to run by walking,"

Just as your feet and legs move differently when running or walking, so
your hand moves differently when sending fast or slow. The max for the slow
technique IS somewhere in the vicinity of 20 WPM. It took me lots of effort
to get to 22 WPM using that technique. Now, with the fast technique, I can
cruise and ragchew at 23, and maxed (when I was training) around 30.

The biggest fallacy I hear is "accuracy or speed." If you do it right, you
won't worry about accuracy. I won the contest by going fast, but had to be
100% accurate.

The shortest possible explanation of the technique is that you don't flex
the fingers or wrist, although they are very relaxed, and do bend - but YOU
don't bend them or knowingly flex them - the physics of the technique does
it. And the hand should be at about a 60-degree angle, NOT flat as per
common methods. This forces the power up into the upper arm - the biceps
and triceps - instead of the forearm. The hand is made to "vibrate" at the
end of the arm, like the weight of a Vibroplex swinging on the mainspring.
This vibration, like any other, is periodic, and thus makes this style
inherently regular. There's a link where you can see it at cruise speed on
my QRZ page. By analogy (not a bad one I realize) the hand is the weight
and the rest of you is the spring. In fact, I've pretty well convinced
myself that observing that in himself - Horace Martin was a master on the
straight key - may have been the inspiration for the Vibroplex design.

The technique of high-speed straight keying was lost after the bug came out
because sending fast - 25+ WPM - is MUCH easier on a bug, and pros never
work hard for the fun of it (unlike hams). Bugs made mere mortals able to
send as fast as the Gods with no risk (the stampede to the bug was not
unlike today's stampede to FT8, and for similar reasons). Meanwhile, as
radio emerged and WW1 erupted, the military needed guys who with just
months of training could send 5-digit groups endlessly, so accuracy
ABSOLUTELY outweighed speed - one character wrong in a coded group would
render it useless, so getting everything right, every time, was the
priority. In comparison, to paraphrase Thomas Edison (also a master
telegrapher) earlier telegraphers relied as much on imagination and
intuition as on perfect copy. Backfilling letters, guessing words, and
figuring out what something SHOULD be, was part of the job - at which
Edison excelled - it paved his road to fame.

Anyway, for that contest, I had to rediscover the techniques of HS straight
keying. And I'm committed to at least writing down what I found while I'm
still alive to do it. God only knows, but some other fool may want to pass
this way again :-)

73 Chris NW6V

Chris, thanks for bringing the physics of harmonic motion, with words like
"periodic", into the discussion of straight keying. It's nice that somebody
else seriously considers and discusses the science behind it. I've tried
twice, and been met with crickets both times :-)
The posture and resonant structure of the lower arm for high speed
certainly is different for high vs low speed, in the same way that our gait
is different between running and walking.
Of course it's one thing to talk about it and quite another to do it, and
it'll be a while before I get anywhere near 25WPM, but understanding the
science is like a flashlight to illuminate the path ahead.
-- 
Julian N4JO

Well, I think it is very interesting to read about. I might even like to
try some of the techniques, if they are spelled out, to get above 20 wpm on
a straight key. But I'm not going to put a lot of effort into it.

I guess sending fast is like copying fast in this regard: it's not just
more of the same thing, only faster; it's different.

73,
Drew
AF2Z

Hi Drew.

Hopefully you'll find some of the techniques and drills interesting. But
just like learning code, it takes a commitment - "deliberate practice" as
it's called.

"I guess sending fast is like copying fast in this regard: it's not just
more of the same thing, only faster; it's different."

Exactly right - and I preach something called "ICF" - Instant Character
Formation - an analog to Instant Character Recognition.

73 Chirs NW6V

ICF is an excellent way to put it Chris! You cannot think about forming a
character. You cannot think about spelling a word if speed is your goal.
Some with gifted ability can do it easily. Some must practice and practice
to get there. Some, like me, will probably never get there.

If Chris mentioned it, I missed it so here is the link to him sending at 23
wpm using fingers, one finger, his palm and even his forearm! Using no
script while holding the camera in his other hand! Watch it here
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7_kEsq8l5PU

I have a bug with extended weights that I can send on. But, like the
beginner advice of learning letters sent at 20 wpm I feel it would be
better for me to take the extension off. But you know, 15-18 wpm is fine
with me! )) My tin ears couldn't copy faster anyway.

Good luck on your journey, Paul!

Allen N4NN

The bug was designed to go faster than a straight key op could go. If
straight key ops at the time could only go 10 wpm, the speed of the first
bug might very well have been designed for 15 wpm or greater instead. It's
a trivial change in the design.

The bug mechanism can be designed to go any speed you want. It's just a
pendulum. The Foucault pendulums you see a observatories have a period of
several seconds and might take a minute or two to tap out the letter H if
adapted to a giant bug. It wouldn't even be a difficult thing to do.
Stupid, but not difficult.

There's nothing complicated about the design of a bug. Ingenious, but not
complicated. So there's nothing wrong that I can see about modifying the
length of the pendulum or increasing the weight an an existing bug. Some
bugs may behave a little differently, but only an experienced bug user is
going to notice the difference, and they will simply adapt to it.

Eric KE6US Scott

Watch "The Straight Key Chronicles - Chapter 1 - Talking to Myself in Morse
Code" on YouTube

https://youtu.be/7_kEsq8l5PU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/attachments/20210808/460c20af/attachment.html>