Re: QCX future?


Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

Vince,
 
These are RECEIVE only sessions but are a good place to start. They have both fast and slow sessions.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

I didn't realize they had practice sessions.  I will check that out.  Thank you Bob.
73 Vince N1VIN


On 12/18/2018 1:56 PM, Bob Macklin wrote:
Vince,
 
Can you hear W1AW? Have you tried listening to the W1AW CW practice sessions?
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

Hans and Jack,

I am a new ham, only 5 years licensed.  And 70 years of age.  I would love to learn CW again (learned in Scouts back in the 1950's) and I am sure there are many others out there struggling as well.  I have tried Gordon West CDs and the Zilak Method CDs.  There has to be a better way.  Once these guys get going I can't even tell the difference between dits and dahs.  I have even tried my own method of assigning a different letter to learn every day.  If anyone has any suggestions I am all ears.

73 Vince  N1VIN


On 12/18/2018 10:37 AM, jjpurdum via Groups.Io wrote:
Hi Hans:

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, nor am I down-playing the success of the QCX...indeed, I said just the opposite. What I really want, however, is for someone to tell me how we get others to invest the effort in learning and using CW. Daniel's post about young people learning CW is great and perhaps coattailing the Merit Badge is one avenue to pursue. The digital modes don't seem to be the answer I'm looking for, since it does little to augment interest in CW. SSB rules and it's where most hams sit in the spectrum. Your wave of sales of the QCX are impressive, but I think you're going to see a tsunami when the QSX is released. You think the Turkish postal authorities were curious before...

We all realize where the bulk of the market is...you wouldn't have spent the time and effort on the QSX if you weren't aware of the potential and I think all of us out here hope it's twice as successful as you expect. Still, I do want to expand the non-CW hams' horizon so they, too, can enjoy it. I just don't know how...

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 10:15:16 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Jack

Yes, I know - that many QCX's is a small proportion of the overall ham population, still. But my point is this - only a small proportion of the ham population are CW operators. Within that, a small proportion are QRPers. Within that, a small proportion are kit builders. Even then, look at QCX, a mono-band CW-only QRP rig. It's a really small niche market. There have been other single-band CW transceiver kits before. Has any single-band CW transceiver kit ever sold 6,269 copies? If so, I bet it hasn't happened often. So it seems to indicate a healthy level of interest, even if it's a small proportion of the total ham population. 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:04 PM jjpurdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hans:

I hear ya'. As you know, in my mind (Feb., 2018, CQ), you have produced the best QRP CW rig to come down the pike in...well, forever. A lot of other people agree, as evidenced by your sales of the QCX. Still, despite the wild success of the QCX, only 0.00208 of the ham population are using one. Why aren't more people using one? It sure can't be the price. I guess this is partly a good-news, bad-news story. Multiply that number by a factor of 1000x and you still have a fairly small percentage of the total. The good news (??) is that fewer CW operators means less QRM. The bad news is what Braden alluded to.

My gnashing of teeth on this topic solves nothing and I honestly do wish someone had a viable solution that, somehow, would convey the enjoyment that is derived from operating CW.

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 9:39:55 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Braden

Given that QRP Labs has shipped 6,269 QCX kits in the last 16 months since launch (21-Aug-2017), I would say that indicates there is still quite a healthy interest in CW. Or perhaps even a resurgent interest. 

Furthermore - people have been saying that ham radio is dying out, for decades. As well as CW dying out. But neither have come true. I got my first license (G0UPL) aged 23 in 1994. I know 1994 is nothing, compared to some of the people here. But even then, everyone was saying "CW is dead", "all amateurs have grey or white hair and it's dying out". In any historic ham magazine you can read for the last 50 years or more, you can find the occasional concerned editorials about the aging ham population. Doom and gloom. Hasn't happened... 

Anyway even if it does... I'll be one of those 6 for you to QSO with Ok? 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:33 PM Braden Glett <bradenglett@...> wrote:
Slightly off-topic, but as I work CW using the QCX or other rig, I can't help but notice that nearly everyone I QSO with is older than I am, and I'm no spring chicken (59). Most are in their 70s and a fair number in their 80s, a few are in their 60s still.
I'm really wondering if in a few years I'm going to have to QSO with the same 6 people over and over again, assuming I'm still alive and kicking. So will a CW-only rig even be relevant except in a contest or on Field Day, or the occasional SOTA op? 
Please, none of the "they never should have given out no-code licenses" powerless griping - that ship has sailed and it's not coming back to port.
Rhetorical question. Any original or encouraging thoughts on the subject much appreciated!


Join QRPLabs@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.