I think your site is spectacular for improving ones code speed from 5 WPM up to any speed, once you know the code. there are lots of sites for teaching the basic code, but not much in the way for speed improvement. W1AW is not much good for improvement, btw.

In an effort to improve my cw speed, I have created a series of data files including various lengths of random numbers, 1000 of the most often used words in the english language, radio terms, weather terms, male first names, Ham manufacturers, etc. I have to paste the files into a cw program, which is clumsy at best.

I'd like to see a box that I could paste my text files into and have your cw engine play them back to me with the parameters that I put into your engine.

I'd be happy to share my text files so that you could expand your playback repertoir.

Thank you for providing the CW practice software on your web site and for iOS devices. I use it on my iPad, iPhone and MacBook frequently. I noticed a couple of things in the sample QSO tests on your web site that you may want to take a look at.
1. The grading won't accept two letter state abbreviations in answers, or even a one letter difference in the spelled out form. For example, both "MA" and "Massachussetts" are marked wrong for "Massachusetts". While this is literally correct, it doesn't give credit to someone who clearly understood what the state was.
2. In the QSO below (pasted from your web site) the grading claims the weather report was "damp and foggy" when the word damp was never sent:

vvv vvv vvv n3nug/0 n3nug/0 de ke1po ke1po = fb es tnx fer call kevin = my name is norma = ur rst 547 547 = rig here is a yaesu ft1000mp 100 watts = the ant is an inverted v = our qth is boston, massachusetts = weather hr is foggy, temp is 27 f = ham since 1976 = here im a biochemist = i have to shut down now kevin, 73 es gud dx = n3nug/0 de ke1po sk kn

...
9 How did the sender describe the weather?
Your Answer: foggy
Correct answer: damp and foggy
Result: Wrong

3. A similar problem happened with an antenna question. The QSO said "= im using a beam =" but the quiz expected "hy gain beam" for the answer, even though "hy gain" never appeared in the QSO text.

Thanks again for some great software.

73,
Jim AD4J

Hello there. I'm a ham who stumbled on your site quite by accident when I wanted to take the tech practice tests just to see if I remember anything after 4 years of not using my license. I love the site. it's way way easier to use then QRZ. I should also mention that I'm a blind ham. May I make a small suggestion? I love the way the test is layer out. Its very very easy to navigate and use. How ever at the end would it be possible for the software to calculate the percentage so that you can know with out looking at the results if you passed or failed the practice test? I might be a tech out of practice and refreshing my skills as a ham operator I will even recommend this wonderful site to the blind as this site is just wonderful to use.

I hope you are well.

Take care and 73.

ke7zum.