A friend of mine who has just started the CWOps CW Academy Level 2 class emailed me the other day:
Our instructor asks that if you make an error sending that you send a ? followed by the failed word and the rest of the message.
I have never liked this operating practice personally. ITU-R M.1677-1 International Morse code (10/2009) specifies a prosign of (HH, or eight dits in a row) to denote that an operator has made an error. Not many hams use this prosign, but rather some variation of it. For example, some guys will send a slow series of three or four dits. That’s generally what I do.
Another reason that I don’t like using the question mark is that I heard that the question mark was used to indicate that an operator was going to repeat some important information. I put this out for comments on the CWOps mailing list and got the following responses:
For many years I’ve been using II (I-space-I) to indicate a sending error. I believe this is an abbreviated form of the eight dits. This is shorter, and therefore more efficient than the other error indications that have been mentioned.
In the military we learned to use a question mark to indicate you were going to repeat something whether it was due to a sending error or you just had to repeat something. In practical use, I think that the ? became the error indicator. I have also worked hams using the letter “I” sent twice as in “I I” to indicate an error but I don’t know where that came from. I hear plenty of hams using the ? as the error indicator on the air.
(IMI) was the prosign for “repeat”. It was used to get fills, as in “IMI WA UNCLAS” (“REPEAT WORD AFTER UNCLAS”). It was also used to aid in copy of a particularly unusual group such as “GT89L443XZ IMI GT89L443XZ”. (IMI) was NOT used to correct errors.
There are many acceptable ways to indicate an error in my book, including a bunch of dits, IMI, “dit dit, and even “oops,” and “nuts” for those times when your paddle just will not cooperate after an error.
I’ve been using (II) as an error character for quite a while now and I teach it to my Level 1 CWA students. Of course, I also show them the formal method as well as some other shortcuts.
I’ve heard the use of IMI to mean “I say again” e.g. an uncommon word. I’ve always used a string of dits to indicate an error.
In the early 80s, I was active and learned to use (II) for errors from NTS. Then I was inactive for nearly 30 years. When I started up again, I could still copy code fine, but it was the informal styles I couldn’t recall. I remember thinking “what is the shorthand for error?” and for some reason I used (IMI), the question mark. After some time of using that, I realized that meant ‘repeat’ and what I wanted was ‘II’. Sigh. Now I use the four spaced dits. I hope that no one lost any sleep over it (except me).
With no regard to tradition or protocol, my procedure is to send four “E’s” with extended spacing. The break in cadence is easily and immediately interpreted as an error. My hand keying has become so poor of late I seem to spend more time sending E’s than anything else. On the use of the question mark, I was taught to use it as an intended repeat. Current ragchew’s never include this anymore, but I recall using it often in my early novice/general era.
Maybe I’m different. If or when I make a mistake I usually pause then repeat and continue the conversation. Excessive use of dits just waste time and is usually not necessary. After all I’m not sending secret codes messages for the military and the OP on the other end knows I made a mistake anyway usually.
So, there you have it. Ask ten different guys and you get ten different answers. I guess what it boils down to is that there’s really no “correct” way to do it, or maybe it’s better to say that there are a bunch of correct ways to do it. Even so, you won’t catch me sending a question mark when I make an error.
John says
40 years ago when I got my novice license, we were taught to send a series of dits to show a mistake.
Dave New, N8SBE says
At the risk of stirring up a hornet’s nest, I would discourage anything that breaks cadence, because that usually messes up most CW decoding algorithms.
A string of eight dits sent at the same speed as the rest of the text should suffice.
I can hear folks howling but there a good many ops using CW decoders for various reasons, and it doesn’t make sense to make their life any more difficult
While I’m at it, I really wish ops wouldn’t send the ‘fixed’ portion of their exchange at a different speed than the variable part in contest exchanges – you know who you are. Again, that just makes a jumble of any decoding algorithm. I know that some ops are just trying to raise their run rate, but I bet that a few, when asked to calm it down a bit, will just say, “Tough toenails,” reasoning that anyone that is using such a device can’t be a “real ham”.
I can think of a counterpoint, ignoring the idea that anyone has the right to edict that no one deserves to use such a device. There is a very popular program, CW Skimmer, that is used by folks that run assisted, and by sending irregular timing, the speed jocks are just cutting off their own nose, by denying those that use assistance from being able to work them.
One contest organizer (I can’t remember who) has now decided that CW decoders cannot be used in CW contests. Seems like that will just drive away anyone that might want to try out a CW contest, and is a bit fuzzy on their code speed. Most everyone runs at 30-35 wpm, which sets a pretty high bar for a casual operator. I keep hearing folks say that the casual operators are the lifeblood of contests. Without them, there wouldn’t be nearly as many stations for the big guns to work.
David KK6JKC says
In the Coast Guard in the 1970s they taught us to send eight Es. Then I worked in Alaska and found all the pros used II, recognized by everyone regardless of nationality.
I like EEEEEEE because it’s unlike any other CW character, and because it’s easy to send just be leaning on the dit paddle.
Brennan Price N4QX says
Eight dits is the standard (ITU-R Recommendation M.1677).
Debates about whether the standard is the best possible standard or whether use of a non-standard that gets the point across is good or bad consume time better spent on almost anything else.
Dan KB6NU says
Possibly, but there is something to be said for using standard procedures. What if all of a sudden I decided I’m going to use “M” instead of “K” as a prosign. Wouldn’t that be confusing? When all is said and done, though, it seems there are several standards for noting an error, and as long as we all understand that, it’s fine. As they say, “The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them!”
Juergen DL4KE says
I think the use of some prosigns, q- and z-groups may be a litte different regarding the service they are used, maritime, avionic, hamradio, arrl-hamradio and so on. BUT an error was always indicated in all services as 8 dits. the mentioned didit didit i learned at cw service in GAF if we want to annouce a repetition of a word. so it may be a good idea lets follow a wrong given word the 8 dits, sending the
word correct and after didit didit a second time. This is the practice that i use…