[Boatanchors] historical question who many running CW compared to the 60s?

[w8au at sssnet.com]

At 03:14 AM 11/30/2015, Ed Sharpe via Boatanchors wrote:
>Thanks Glenn!  that is interesting!  Good  to hear  there is interest.  but
>  what  do you attribute an increase to  even when it is not  needed?

Curiosity - "Another mountain to climb" - Another language to learn -
Adding DXCC credits - QRP Backpackers - Those that want to be
versed in every mode available..................

Take your pick.

Perry   w8au








>In a message dated 11/29/2015 8:39:53 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,
>gzook at yahoo.com writes:
>
>Interestingly enough, the number of people  who are now actually learning
>the International Morse code is increasing even  though a working knowledge
>of the code is no longer required.  However,  at least when listening to the
>bands, the actual percentage of operators using  CW, as opposed to using
>SSB, is quite small.  Of course, on one of the  few weekends during the year,
>when there is a major CW contest, like this  weekend, the usage is
>considerable.  But, after 0000Z this evening, the  number of signals 
>dropped to almost
>zero!
>
>
>
>
>Remembering back to the 1960s, if I am  remembering correctly, the actual
>number of CW stations operating, at any 1  time, was considerably more than
>what it is today.
>
>
>
>
>Of course, in those "goode olde dayes",  considering the average wages of
>people, equipment was considerably more  expensive in terms of percentage of
>wages.  Back then, CW equipment was  often barely affordable, by most
>amateur radio operators, AM transmitters were  expensive, and, until at least
>around 1966, SSB equipment was, generally, VERY  expensive.
>
>
>
>
>Of course, low powered AM equipment, like  the Heath DX-40 and DX-60, were
>not that expensive.  But, especially on  80, 40, and 20-meters, after dark,
>when the "big boys" came on, those with the  low powered equipment went to
>CW or stopped operating completely.  Today,  when inflation is taken into
>consideration, and the effective purchasing power  of money is considered,
>equipment is dirt cheap!  One can get, today, a  100-watt SSB, AM, FM, CW HF
>transceiver for quite a bit less than what a  100-watt output AM / CW
>transmitter cost, in equivalent purchasing power, in  the 1960s and 
>that equipment is
>light years ahead in terms of  performance.
>
>
>
>
>Glen,  K9STH
>
>
>
>
>Website:  http://k9sth.net
>
>
>
>
>____________________________________
>  From: "COURYHOUSE at aol.com"  <COURYHOUSE at aol.com>
>To: gzook at yahoo.com; bcarling at cfl.rr.com
>Cc:  boatanchors at puck.nether.net; tetrode at googlegroups.com;
>Novice-Rigs at mailman.qth.net
>Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 8:54  PM
>Subject: historical  question who many running CW compared to the 60s?
>
>
>
>
>historical question :How many operators are running CW now compared  to the
>60s?  numbers? percentage?   I am curious.
>Ed Sharpe Archivist  for SMECC
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Boatanchors mailing list
>Boatanchors at puck.nether.net
>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors