eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

Morse Code The Universal Language

jeff (N3JBH) on March 10, 2005
View comments about this article!

Morse code the universal language. Well I decided to research this interesting idea.

Well, I discovered that Morse code as we amateur radio operators know it is based on the English language, using the 26 letters, the ten simple numbers, and some punctuation marks.

And wow it is accepted as the universal language for this use. It hardly is that at all. There are more than 90 different alphabets in use in the world some with less than 9 letters others with over 40. And that's just letters alone.

So it seems to me that many of our foreign friends must learn the English language first to use Morse code. So is it universal I ask?

We talk of having the FCC drop the code requirement. Maybe we should consider the alternative and require all amateurs be proficient in all languages. That way we would be fair to rest of the known world and be able to spread our goodwill and joyous news in the native tongue. After all, if we are going to be fair and argue the merits of the code/no code argument. Then I believe telling the whole truth and merits of the origin and basics of what the code was based upon and that was our own language not one of the many other known languages.

So what do you say folks? Has the time come to drop the code and learn their language and share their tongue? Or should we retain the code and in such depend on others to learn the English language to communicate with us?

Thank you all, n3jbh

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N3HKN on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I did not know that Morse Code was an English language only code set?? No wonder the DX is so difficult to snag!
N3HKN
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by LA6UIA on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The Norwegian characters æ, ø and å are represented with morse codes:
æ = .-.-
ø = ---.
å = .--.-
So Norwegians happily use their native language in CW. I guess the same can be said about any language.

The author of the article would benefit from a little more research on this matter.

de LA6UIA, Anders
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by NI0C on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Research" ?

Here is yet another utterance published by eHam that demonstrates the site has no standards whatsoever for publication and will display virtually anything under the "articles" category. Until this improves, I won't re-subscribe, and I won't submit any more articles.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by NE1RD on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The highly structured nature of a CW QSO benefits the non-English speaker. A free-form voice transmission, by comparison, is much more difficult due to the complicatoin of accents, regional dialects, the nearly pervasive use of idioms, and generally drawing from a richer vocabulary than one would typically use in a CW QSO.

LU1DX de NE1RD -bk- UR RST 599 -bk-
QTH Acton, MA Acton, MA -bk-
NAME HR IS Scott Scott -bk-
BK TO U -bk- ...

This correspondence is highly-structured, nearly fixed format, and provides "restarting makers" (through the breaks) that allow a listener who had lost track of things to resynchronize with the sender and begin picking up information again. This is much more difficult in free-form voice communication.

As a new ham, the effectiveness of this system was something of a surprise to me, though, upon reflection, I can see that decades of use probably served to iron out the kinks.

Just my 2-cents. Refunds upon request.

-- Scott
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AA4PB on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I submit that it is not the Morse code that is universal. It is the standard format, appreviations, and Q-signals often used on CW that are more or less universal.

For this same reason there is often some benefit to the use of standard signal on voice. However, some hams today look down on anyone who doesn't talk like he was speaking with the next door neighbor. I suspect this results from the use of repeaters.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K5DVW on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
It always confuses me when someone who seems to dislike CW uses a lot of "Hi Hi" in their written profile and some even say "hi hi" when they talk on the radio? Why is that? Perhaps you should "research" it and get back to us.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by NA4IT on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Morse code rides again!

DITTY DUM DUM DITTY
 
hoo boy ... not again!  
by KZ1X on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Jeff, if you spent as much time learning Morse as you did making posts about it, you'd have been a General long ago. Also, Anders has corrected you about Morse; the English Morse alphabet isn't the only one!

For a homebound guy with time on his hands, and who has done many fascinating things in life including having multiple careers, I really don't understand why you drag this out. If you can recognize a favorite song on the radio when the DJ starts playing it, you can learn Morse at the recognition speed that is the whole test today.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
As side research, I would like to find out if callsigns worldwide are issued using only the english language alphabet, or if the callsigns are issued in the issuing countrys native alphabet. For example, are Russian callsigns issued using the cyrillic alphabet? Are Israeli callsigns issued using the Hebrew alphabet? How about German callsigns, or even callsigns in the Middle Eastern countries? Somehow, I don't think so, but I don't know for sure.

I think it's the way the author stated. It seems that those people are forced to learn the english alphabet and to a lesser extent a limited part of the english language in order to use morse code. I also agree with the other posters that the standardized format and abbreviations that make morse code a "universal language" recognized worldwide among ham operators.

I realize that a good part of the world uses the english language with regional variations, but if we stopped and realized that english is not everybodys language instead of demanding to have everything our way, just maybe people in other parts of the world would have a better opinion of us.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Wow, an "article" from a No Code Technician who wants to do away with CW. Gee, there's a shock! I haven't seen one of these in at least 2 or 3 weeks!

I used to be one of you way back when. After I got my Tech Plus license, I wasted a lot of time thinking of excuses as to why the code should be eliminated. Please pay attention to two very carefully chosen words in the last sentence: WASTED and EXCUSES. While I thought I was SPENDING time thinking of REASONS to eliminate the code, my friends who had already learned the code, whether they were using it or not, were having a blast on the air making contacts! What a concept!

Who are you trying to convince that the code is a waste of time? The wheels are already in motion for the FCC to receive comments on another round of restructuring.

You have two choices:

1) Continue wasting your time concocting excuses not to learn CW at the painfully slow speed of 5 words per minute.

2) Take a few weeks out of your busy schedule and learn it. Part 97 does not say you have to use CW or even like it. All you have to do is copy 5 words, 25 characters, in the span of one minute.

NØIU
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KG6AMW on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
French was once the language of diplomats. English is the international language of aviation, engineering and science. Learning a second language like Chinese besides Engish would be helpful, since it more likely spoken than cw. Morse code is a mode and not a "universal language". Your point is not well taken.

KG6AMW
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W0UHF on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
My 1991 ARRL handbook shows several languages and their morse code equivalents. I don't have it here with me right now, but from memory I think it gave characters in Russian, Arabic, Japanese and several other languages. Obviously the author did no research at all.

Many DX stations only send your call, 5NN, and TU if many are calling them, so there is not much English needed to learn there. Others that have the time, but don't know English will exchange RST, name, and QTH. The characters for RST and QTH are universally understood by amateurs world wide, so that leaves the one English word, name, and maybe add rig too.

But of course there are a very large number, for whom English isn't their first language, that know English very well and there are many who know serveral languages very well.

For those who wish do learn different languages in addition to their native, Amateur Radio provides a unique way in which one may might be able to practice (either with morse, or voice.) In college, I had a friend who was studying Russian and got on 20 meters to practice his Russian with Russian hams who were more than happy to converse with him, both in Russian and English.

Obviously the original poster here, just wishes the fan the flames of the code or no code debate again. While I am all for trying to attract more potential hams by removing a barrier (as some see it) to becoming one,
ALL hams, once licensed (wether there continues to be a code requirement or not for HF and unless disabled), would do themselves a favor to learn the morse code. Not only is it still a very useful mode in manys ways, it is also a whole lot of FUN. If you never tryit , you are really missing out.

I've been away for too long now; I think I'm going to go look for my straight key and tune down to the low end...

Very 73 to all,
Dan
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W5HTW on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Not only a waste of the author's time, but the rest of us who read that as well. So full of lack of knowledge about international communications (not just ham radio) it may as well have come from Porky Pig.

Ed
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WD0M on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
If you can't take the time to learn morse code, how in the world do you think you can take the time to learn another language? What a specious argument.

WDØM
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W0UHF on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I the first line in my privious post, I meant alphabets, obviously, there isn't room in the handbook to teach languages.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W0FM on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
So do we all invest in 90 different computer keyboards in order to operate PSK and RTTY in a manner that all our brother hams can understand?

73,

Terry, WØFM
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W1BAK on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I swear if it were not for the cw issue, that you people would have nothing to bitch about at all. If the FCC drops it as a requirement, it will be moot. If they don't drop it, it will still be moot. Get a life...accept change or whatever...but just shut up about something you have absolutely no control over. That includes everyone...for and against.
Let's see some posts on a positive note for a change.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K0BG on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
A while back I was conversing with another amateur on 20 CW, and he told me he could speak any language except Greek. I sent him a phrase in Swahili, and he send back, "...huh, Greek to me." So I guess Morse code isn't universal.

Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.com
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N1EA on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The morse code is universal.

I was a radio officer on a ship. If I sent a message to a foreign station to an operator who did not know English (and likewise I sometimes received messages written in foreign language), they could be put on the international telegraph network for delivery to their destination.

Thus a ship near Hong Kong could call the local station there, send their message, have it relayed by Cable and Wireless by undersea cable to any destination in the world.

I have also received and sent messages in Greek, Japanese and Russian - in International Rules - messages passing international bounderies must be reduced to the 26 roman letters, 10 numerals, and certain punctuation.

But even without some extended characters - such as exist in Turkish, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, French, Spanish, Russian - most information can be conveyed by "Roman characters" - Japan has such a translitteration.

However there are many national "morse codes" which consist not only of the 26 Roman letters and 10 arabic numerals, but have the entire morse code for every character in the language.

The writer of this original post should have done his homework prior to submitting this.

73

David J. Ring, Jr.
Radio Electronics Officer
U.S. Merchant Marine



 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K8DIT on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I understand that Jeff is NOT in favor of losing the mosrse code, but that we should all be required to learn ALL foreign languages as an adjunct to being allowed to communicate on the ham bands. After all, if one nation of people could require all their people to speak all tongues to qualify for a radio liscense, then that would put a crimp on the number of liscensees.
Or, that nation's hams would be the smartest in the universe and they would naturally do away with the morse code, since learning all the languages is way harder to do. You see, then all the multi-multi linguists could look down their noses at the advocates of the morse code and feel superior. This is Jeff's way of showing us who we really are by way of mirroring our attitudes in satire.
Jeff will learn the code. But not until he has rebelled in a reasonable way to show that he is unhappy about it. But growing up is hard to do. Learning the ways of the world and being a contributing part of it is hard to do. Learning the morse code is a good way to show respect and take a positive step in that direction.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K7NNG on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I disagree with KG6AMW. CW IS A LANGUAGE AND VERY UNIVERSAL. YOUR CALL SIGN SEZ IT ALL....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K3ESE on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
CW is incredibly fun and relaxing...and exciting, all at the same time. People use it because they like it, not because they have to. I've always been a 100% CW op, and I don't care, one way or the other, whether the requirement is dropped...the level of usage won't be affected, IMHO...it lives on because it's naturally attractive...to some.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W6TH on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!


Morse Code The Universal Language?

Yes, Now and Forever.

QRU, QSX, QRT.

73 DE W6TH.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WB2WIK on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Code is a universal language as much as English is the universal language of commerce. Bankers in all countries speak English, as the U.S. Dollar is accepted everywhere. From Bangalore to Bangkok, to Manila to Oslo, I've never had anybody turn away my payment for merchandise when I offered U.S. dollars. Never been to Timbuktu, but I'll bet they work there, also.

WB2WIK/6
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W4EWJ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
W1BAK

Pal you aint man enough to tell me to shut up (and be
able to back it up) about any GD subject I choose to
comment on anywhere. Its the weaklings like you that
crawl in your hole and let silence be your guide regardless of how it affects others pro or con.

That the cretin that lacks the mental ability to do
effective research on this so called article is worthy
of anytype of comment is obvious since not knowing
what the hell he is talking about is obvious as well.

So...you want to debat the relative pros and
cons of CW...lets have at it, I know a little bit about the subject.

W4EWJ USMM ret.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by NOLICENSEASOFYET on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hey guys/gals if any.. My elmer is now in the process of teaching me code to take my amatuer extra test. I have already passed the written several times and look forward to QSO in code soon.

Its all about the elmer and the student as far as I can see.

I have raised 11 children, still have a young daughter at home and after years of searching for a local elmer, found one by scanning 40 meter on a receiver.

The wealth of knowledge he has, I will learn and pass on to someone else.

No matter if code gets dropped by the FCC in testing, it will live on through elmering and encouragement by experienced operators with the proper approach and tactful persistence.

73
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N3JBH on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
((I understand that Jeff is NOT in favor of losing the mosrse code,))

((This is Jeff's way of showing us who we really are by way of mirroring our attitudes in satire. ))

THANK YOU K8DIT.
The purpose of my article was never to suggest dropping the code requirement at all.
Am I a no code tech? Yes according to my license class . But please don’t tell that to the fellow in Paraguay I tried working last night on cw on the 6-meter band,

I wasn’t trying to start a flame war here but rather. Discuss the universal language everyone tells me about. I enjoy vhf/uhf bands a lot and seldom use FM as a mode at all.
So my article here on eham was never meant to suggest I was anti code. But merely a question on is Morse code so universal?
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB3KAQ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
first - cw is not a language, it is a mode. Morse Code is not a language - it is a coding of letters used to represent a specific langauge - in our case English. some would argue that language is exactly that, but that is without merit. Morse Code represents a host language.

it is rather arrogant to expect all the hams of the world to converse in English just because you do. i often hear German, Spanish, French, and Russian languages on the air. should i break into their conversations and demand they speak in English so i can listen in?

i have learned Morse Code and occassionally operate using it on the HF and VHF bands. i had to learn it to upgrade. that's just the way it is until it is not.

-steve
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W3DCG on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I think, Morse Cose can be as "universal" as English.

The idea of learning Chinese? Sure seems like a good idea to me, were it no so intricate and difficult- I would. Oh never mind, no excuses- I should. I think it will prove handy in time. I sure wish my children could take Mandarin somewhere. I think it makes economic, if not social, sense. For the immediate NOW, seems like we all would be able to use Espanol more than any other, Other language.

But, CW is a language I say. It has style, and at speed- it is a language as much as Sign "language" is a language.

SSB, AM, FM, are modes. A continuous wave carrier going on and off need not be Morse, we could send gibberish non-sense, and it would still be CW, just like that irritating Latino gets on 40m almost every night and just obliterates 4Kc of spectrum by going, "Aye-Ayeh-AHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhh-yh, OhhhhhhHHHHHh-OOOO-aaaayeeeeeeeeooooooooh," over and over and over again. Saying absolutely nothing but it's SSB.

CW in any language is- a language, via A1A emission.
I have heard CW in French, could copy but not understand, I have heard CW in Spanish.

Talking is so widely performed in our daily routines, that everyone is using that "mode" but no-one else calls it a mode.

Anyway- I'm gonna bail from here and not come back- everyone Pro and Con knows how I feel about current requirements and proposed amendments.
We truly do not need another flame war on this, everyone has opinions and are entitled to them, and they are all valid for whomever wishes to have them.

I like phone too. I'd like digital, too. I just seem to confine my digital time to this sort of communication instead. I prefer to spend my air time doing what I enjoy, like everyone does- and since I can type anywhere, speak anywhere, there is only one place I can do CW- so that's what I do with most of my limited air time. I think Voice is a real kick too, though. SSB is still my second favorite mode.

It is HAM RADIO- IT'S ALL GOOD.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W1BAK on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I've waded in shallow water..but chose to do my 20 in a man's navy. With all do respect...screw you chief.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KK7WN on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
In spite of a number of rude and just plain ignorant comments, this article does bring up a number of interesting issues. Of course CW is primarily a digital mode of communication that could be adapted to any language and thus require translation between people of different tongues. The use of standardized symbol words such as QRZ, etc. would seem to allow the creation of a type of "pidgin language" or trading language similar to "chinook". Thus one might also argue that it might resemble a language, although that might be pushing the point a bit. I'm sure that some Hams must be trained as linguists and it would be nice to hear their opinion on this matter.
 
MORE good reasons NOT to write articles for eham!  
by GOODBUDDY on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Jeff, if you spent as much time learning Morse as you did making posts about it, you'd have been a General long ago. Also, Anders has corrected you about Morse; the English Morse alphabet isn't the only one! "

"For a homebound guy with time on his hands, and who has done many fascinating things in life including having multiple careers, I really don't understand why you drag this out. If you can recognize a favorite song on the radio when the DJ starts playing it, you can learn Morse at the recognition speed that is the whole test today."

"Wow, an "article" from a No Code Technician who wants to do away with CW. Gee, there's a shock! I haven't seen one of these in at least 2 or 3 weeks!"

"Not only a waste of the author's time, but the rest of us who read that as well. So full of lack of knowledge about international communications (not just ham radio) it may as well have come from Porky Pig. "

"If you can't take the time to learn morse code, how in the world do you think you can take the time to learn another language? What a specious argument."

"Pal you aint man enough to tell me to shut up (and be
able to back it up) about any GD subject I choose to
comment on anywhere. Its the weaklings like you that
crawl in your hole and let silence be your guide regardless of how it affects others pro or con.

That the cretin that lacks the mental ability to do
effective research on this so called article is worthy
of anytype of comment is obvious since not knowing
what the hell he is talking about is obvious as well."

Why anybody would want to write any article for eham is beyond me. These idiots just wait in the woodwork waiting to pounce so we can hear their "wisdom".

"Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt"?




 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by M0CUQ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
True Morse code is not a 'code' but a cypher, replacing each letter with a short digital signature. It is a cypher to which the key is well known.

To be a 'code' one must replace whole words with symbols and this is exactly what we do when we communicate a typical rubber stamp QSO in cw. However, this does not make it a language, merely a very useful way of communicating. Granted, many of the abbreviations derive from English, but it doesn't have to be an 'english' code.

To successfully bridge the language barrier all you need is an agreed set of 'code words', for Morse we have things like Q-codes and Interco (International code of signals). Both of these codes can be used on phone and it seems that phone operators love to use them even when they speak the same language, QSL?...
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W4EWJ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
W1BAK

Any dumb son of a bitch can sail a ship in
deep water....ass hole (or is it chief ass hole?)

ewj
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA9SVD on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Certainly, there is some commonality in CW contacts: The use of common "Q" codes allow this. And that is fine for simple exchanges, IF all you want to exchange are the proverbial "HI, UR 599, 73" elements such as used for contests. But CW is NOT a universal "language," merely a mode. If another station only "speaks" (or wishes to converse in) German, French, Spanish, Tagalog, Klingon, etc., they can do so quite well in CW, but that doesn't make it any more understandable to someone who doesn't speak the same language.
And while some languages have special "Morse" characters, unless a person is fluent in Morse of that particular language, dialect, or flavor, they will be meaningless at best, and probably VERY confusing to most.

This has nothing to do with the merits (or if you wish, lack thereof) of CW being kept as a licensing requirement, 0r even retaining CW only frequeny allocations. CW (as we know it) is a mode of transmission, not an international "language." It may allow some rudimentary communication because of commonly used concepts such as "Q" codes, but that is only rudimentary communication.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Jeff, I am glad to see that you are at least trying to use CW. Did your attempted QSO to Paraguay fail because of poor propagation or did he not understand English??? HIHI

Since you are showing an interest in CW, why not go take the code test and become a Tech Plus? The closest VE testing session I could find is about 50 miles away from you in Pittsburgh. Here is the listing from the ARRL website:

12-Mar-2005
Sponsor: BREEZE SHOOTERS/NORTH HILLS ARC
Time: 12 NOON (Walk-ins allowed)
Contact: ROBERT W BENNA
(412)366-0488
VEC: ARRL/VEC
Location: NORTHLAND PUBLIC LIBRARY-ROOM 148
300 CUMBERLAND RD (LOWERLEVEL)
CALL AHEAD FOR ACCOMMODATIONS!
PITTSBURGH, PA 15237

It says walk-ins are allowed so why not give it a shot? If that one doesn't work for you, just go to http://www.arrl.org/arrlvec/examsearch.phtml and find another one.

I think if you continue using CW and find that you enjoy it, these nagging little questions about the future of CW will become less and less important to you. I have had a few thousand CW QSOs and I don't think the topic of conversation has even been the viability of CW!

NØIU
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA9SVD on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N0IU makes a hidden point. Not only do you NOT have to use the code once you pass the Code Element, you NEVER have to even look at it again!

Back in the "old days" (when T. Rex was young, I believe) when your license came up for renewal after FIVE (not ten!) years, along with the renewal fee, you also had to SIGN the renewal form that stated you were STILL proficient at code at the speed required for your class of license. (I wonder how many operators, Extra, Advanced, General, and even Tech [Novice was non-renewable, and only for one year, so it didn't matter] actually kept up their code speed... when they renewed?)
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W4EWJ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
W1BAK

How quaint...you said "screw you chief" guess that
leaves little doubt about your sexual orientation

There are those that stand up to piss and those that
sit down...I'll send you a roll of toilet paper

You want a pissing contest? I'll sure as hell give
you one.

ewj
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N3JBH on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
NO1U HELLO
well i will assume that the propagation god's didnt like my signal. but hey at least it was fun trying.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by EXWA2SWA on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"I'm sure that some Hams must be trained as linguists and it would be nice to hear their opinion on this matter."

Oddly enough, the Marine Corps first made sure I was somewhat competent in Morse (with more than 26 letters and 10 numbers) before sending me off to Language School (Finnish).

So, an opinion: I think that, in order to be classified as a language, a system of communication must include a system of thought as well as words. By that I mean that, if you must constantly translate from the heard language to another, you may "speak" the tongue, but not truly "understand it". Example, if I hear the English word "Thanks" and must translate it to the Finnish "Kiitos", I'm an English-speaker with some knowledge of the Finnish language. If, however, I hear the word in conversation and have no need to translate, I'm "thinking" in that language and much more liable to have a grasp of it than the 'translator' does. Every language has words that do not translate perfectly into all others, and that not only compounds the 'problem', it makes it imperative to "think" in that language. (Look up "pimu" in your Finnish-English dictionary).

When operating CW (my preferred, 100% mode) and I hear "RST" I know that it means I'm about to hear a report on my Readability, Signal Strength and Purity of Tone. I don't have to think about that. When I hear numbers 3 6 8x, though, I do need to translate them into a quality-of-signal report that is not yet automatic.

When I hear the sound "didah" (or, to coin a phrase, dididadahdidit, or even ditty-dum-dum-ditty) that registers automatically to a symbol to be put on paper or combined with others to express a thought.

So yes, Morse is both a language and an 'alphabet', a way of communicating and a 'culture'. Universal? Only to a point. Last night, I heard a station in Boston (Helzer, KB1LCK) in a Morse QSO with a Brazilian station, ragchewing in what I presume was Portuguese. I've had extended CW QSO's with both a German and a Swede, in perfect English. Which side of the argument do these support?

Morse, and CW operating, are what you make of them. For me, they comprise a language, a system of thought as well as communication. For others, they're just an anachronism with little useful purpose. For others, Morse is just another subject to put an "X" in the box toward a higher level of licensing. For some, it's just a meaningless string of sounds that make no sense. I pity the last group.

Regards,
Jim
KE5CXX





 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by X-WB1AUW on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Morse code as a language?! Silly.

Some believe that mathematics is THE universal language.

73
Bob



 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE0Z on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This does demonstrate that the author does not understand how cw is used. You aren't sending words, which are in general limited to one language, but rather letters which are useful across multiple languages.

The choice of the English alphabet might be problematic for some, but cw is really the best compromise because:

1) you really only have to learn the alphabet and not the language because of abbreviations, prosigns, Q signals, etc. BK looks like "break" to me, but CQ doesn't look anything like "calling any operator". I know what both mean and so does any cw operator world wide. I don't have to understand English to know what is being said. If you really want to talk freely, you have to learn the language no matter what mode you use. It's too bad Morse wasn't Hawaiian, we'd have almost half as many letters to learn as well!

2) most people want to learn English anyway (in fact it is part of the stereotype of the American to know just one language, much of the world is already polyglot).

3) cw lets you practice without the impediment of accent or pronunciation, which is a nightmare in the case of English. Tough, cough, through. I'm glad I don't have to learn English!
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB3KAQ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KE5CXX -

RST and such are concepts - they transcend language because they are agreed upon universals - and happened to be in the English language - you understand them as R, S, and T. in Russian, these wold be different and if given the string in phonetic Russian, you would be lost.

Morse Code is not a cypher per se - it is an agreed upon means of representing a character via sound or light. there is no "coding" beyond the face value of the representation.

for Morse Code to be a universal language, it would be understand by anyone regardless of the native language. Morse in French is not Morse in English.

the fun comes in with languages that use phonetics so English speakers can play along, like Russian.

-steve
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by G3SEA on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

NE1RD has it in a nutshell. CW often get's through both bad condx and foreign language barriers ( albeit in a very abbreviated way )when other modes cannot.

One has only to monitor the CW contests to see that this mode is still very popular worldwide.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by NOLICENSEASOFYET on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
It is so much fun reading these post......

I can actually imagine some of the posters.....


Remember the muppet show........the two old grumpy ass guys in the balconey.....


I can see it now......them arguing beating the crap out of each other arguing about code, no code.


Really, after the years of reading these post, I find myself seeing the posters name and saying "Ut O, here goes Ghostrider, or here goes one of the other regular flamers......... I have acually laughed out loud at the predictability of who will flame first and how long it will take before someone pees on a tree.

Go get'em guys ....... the entertainment value is high.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA7NDD on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I was not going to post, but I could not resist!

I have never talked to another ham in any other country in the last 50 years
that could not give me a report in english, even when Russia was the USSR!
So what does this topic have to do with the price of rice in China?
English is the language used in all international bussiness transactions!

Jim, WA7NDD
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by NS6Y_ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Yep! English is the universal language, and yes, the structure of CW contacts overcomes a lot of hassles with accents, etc.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WN3VAW on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Jeff,

Congratulations for working on your code. There are quite a few V/UHF amateurs who seem satisfied with the status quo -- and if that's all that they need, that's fine, but for those who want more like you, keep up the good work!

I see from QRZ.COM that you're located in Latrobe. If you ever need information on a VEC test session coming up in the near future, drop me an email and I'll let you know what I know. The Foothills ARC in Greensburg, the Tri-County CWARC in the Mon Valley, the Somerset ARC, and the Skyview RS in New Kensington are all relatively close to you and hold periodic test sessions. Also, the North Hills ARC & the Breezeshooters hold a VE session monthly up in the Wexford area North of Pittsburgh, the WPA Hilltoppers have one bi-monthly over by the University of Pittsburgh campus in Oakland, the Steel City ARC has one quarterly out near Pittsburgh International Airport, my club (Wireless Association of South Hills) has one quarterly in Peters Township (Washington County just over the Allegheny County line) quarterly, next one in April... and that's just what comes to mind offhand, and we haven't even gotten into Fayette, Beaver, Butler, Washington, or Greene Counties yet! Trust me, when you're ready to take a test, we'll find a session you can get to!

And while I realize your mobility is very limited, do check out some of the area clubs. You'll find many V/UHF'ers involved in the Greater Pgh VHF Society, Steel City ARC, North Hills ARC, Skyview RS, and WASH, just to name a few. If you can make an occasional meeting at one or more of these groups, you'll meet up with a lot of people who can give you some good advice and lend a hand if you need it. Also, don't forget to check out some of the upcoming major WPA Hamfests -- Foothills ARC Hamfest in May, Breezeshooters Hamfest in June, North Hills ARC Hamfest in July, Uniontown ARC & Butler Co ARC in September, WACOM Hamfest in October.

GL & Gud DX!

73, ron wn3vaw
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by G0GQK on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The English language is a universal language. There are no countries in the world where you will not find anyone who does not speak English.

Last week the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, visited China, a country which is expanding at an amazing speed. During the visit he met students at a university, perhaps it was Beijing. He asked them whether they were learning any European languages, such as French, German, Spanish etc. The only language they wished to speak was English, as English was the international language and therefore the most important one for them in which to converse.

Incidentally, the Chinese have used a Chinese Morse code for many years, as have the Japanese. Would you propose that enthrusiastic Morse code users start learning oriental morse ? Perhaps for true blue Americans a club which only uses the American Morse code !
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K4JSR on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
BAK and EWJ, Go ahead and have your contest.
The rest of of us will just quietly stand up wind from
both of you while we watch! :-D
At least your bickering is not about partisan politics!
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W4EWJ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
hey Jeff....long as you're in the leeward you shud
be ok
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W8JJI on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I hope they drop the cw requirement.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W4EWJ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
JSR

U 2 Carroll
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K7VO on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
First off, English uses the Latin alphabet. The alphabet is hardly exclusive to English nor did it originate with English. Indeed, it predates English.

Israeli callsigns are in the Latin alphabet. I believe that is an ITU standard.

English is not universal in the least. Many people in many, many countries do not speak it at all. Nor is it the most spoken language in the world. That would be Chinese. However, since the dominant military and economic power in the world today is an English speaking country, yes, many people the world over choose to learn English. The majority of the well educated and elites in the world do speak English.

I used to trave a lot on business. In business meetings in Madrid I could speak English. After work if I went out in the city most people did NOT speak English and my very poor, broken Spanish is what got me by.

If you visit Paris and insist that the Parisians speak English to you well... it's resented. Americans think Parisians are rude. Parisians think Americans who insist that people in France must understand their English are incredibly arrogant and rude. Who is right? I speak French and I am treated very well in Paris, thankyouverymuch. Oh, the people there know I'm American. My accent gives that away the moment I open my mouth. The fact that I make the effort to speak their language makes all the difference in the world.

Many Americans resent when foreigners come here and don't speak English. Why can't the rest of the world feel the same way in their own country?

The point: English is anything but universal. Morse code is anything but universal. It is a historical artifact, a hobbyist mode steeped in the traditions of the past, a relic from a time that has passed most everywhere except in amateur radio. The idea that it should be required to be licensed communicate by modes other than CW is a ludicrous anachronism. Oh, and I hold an Extra class license and could pass the *old* 20WPM CW test at this moment, something many Extra class hams who argue to retain the CW licensing requirement could not do. Heck, if CW testing is so important how about we retest all existing licensees to make sure they are still proficient? What percentage of General class and higher hams today, including oldtimers, would pass?

The idea that the only people who want to see CW exams abolished are no code techs who are too lazy to learn is even more ludicrous. Why should they learn something they may never, ever use again and which is totally irrelevant to their interests in the hobby and to 99.9% of modern communications? CW exams are little more than a hazing ritual to enter the ham fraternity.

It troubles me greatly that so much of ham radio seems to be on the trailing edge technologically and that so many hams live in the past in so very many ways. You either embrace the future or die with the past.

The author makes an excellent point even if he didn't get his facts completely straight.

73,
Caity
K7VO/8
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W4EWJ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K7VO

Tend to agree with most of your post...except with
one possible exception...your statement (my partial
extract) "most everywhere except amateur radio"

According to a graph I made recently there has been
an 11% increase in cw use of the various services
that still use CW...I cant tell if more stations...
within the past 6 mos...I cant tell if more stations
because so much is either numbers stas or 5 ltr
coded grps and the stations dont identify. BUT one
station that bcsts every week night on either 8009khz
or 8134/8135khz has been doing so for a long time and
frequently he comes up on 10126khz and less frequently
on 3523khz where he shares with another clandestine
station (numbers) most are random time/freq but many
fixed service stations...4XZ on 8102khz...UDK2 on
13050khz...and many others, FSG on 4940khz, RMP on
4078khz...all the stations mentioned are on other
freqs as well and I have logged about 155 cw stations
both manual and automated on more or less random times
and freqs. The Koreans have 2 large cw coast stations
for their huge world wide fishing fleet as dothe
Russians and others.

I realize that theres far less cw than 10 years ago...
my only point is that at least for the last 6 mos
there has been an apparant increase on the freqs I
scan automatically with COR to a recorder using
a WJ 8718A/MFP. I dont hear it all but simple tfc
analysis of the available ckts shows the mentioned
increase.

ewj
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K7VO on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I can't explain why there would be more CW than 6 months ago. Your statement used the qualifier "those services that still use CW". There are very few such services left. Digital communications has replaced 95% or more of what was once done on CW.

The more I play with PSK31 and other, even newer digital modes the more that I believe that ham radio is heading in the same direction.

CW will survive so long as hams enjoy it and share their love of CW with others. Heck, I think the CW advocates will have a much easier time of it once they stop trying to ram CW down people's throats by forcing them to learn it whether they see a reason to or not. Let's put it this way: in 2000 I had done little CW in the previous 15 years and what I had done was mainly to make some otherwise impossible VHF weak signal contacts possible. In 2001 my interest in CW was peaked by some really cute little Mizuho CW rigs and a desire to actually use them on the air. I did more CW in the next three years than in my previous 16 as a ham.

I am not anti-CW. I am also not for "dumbing down" ham radio, whatever that means. I am for relevant testing.

I feel where we need to improve our exams is in the areas of operating practices and etiquette, RF safety, digital communications, and there definitely should be more rules and regs questions. Our current testing system does a woeful job at preparing new hams to get on the air. It needs to change but I see no movement or motivation in the amateur community to change it in that way. Those who want more hams at any cost for their own profits just want to reduce testing requirements. The "CW forever" crowd is so myopic about CW that they can't consider any real alternatives.

73,
Caity
K7VO/8
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W5HTW on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Part of the problem here is we have a lot of relatively new hams who know nothing of the history of radio communications, (and certainly nothing of ham radio's history) and they have no desire to know. All too often these come across as sounding as though they believe ham radio was not invented until they got their license.

Morse code was used by non-hams, including government agencies (such as our own State Department) and a myriad of other services. In an attempt to standardize the way it was used, some international effort was made, but it is true that different languages have different CW characters (though not "Morse" as that is a specific 'brand" of the code.)

In the early days of aviation, code was the primary method of communication, as it was in the marine world. Throughout the Big War - World War II - CW was the mainstay of communications. The attempts to standardize resulted in recognition of certain international "signals" such as the Q-signals. These were published in a document called Allied Communications Procedures (ACP131B, I believe.)

Whether or not Morse is a language will remain debatable, but in at least one aspect, it qualifies. That is, it allows people of different primary languages to exchange some limited information. Perhaps it could better be called an "interface."

Switching topics: English has been the international language in not only the business world but the government world, as well as the aeronautical and maritime communities, for years. Certainly, for example, Norwegian ships communicating among themselves would use their own language. But in communicating with ships of other nations, there had to be a mutually-agreed-upon language, and that was English. (That I think it will soon be Spanish is beside the point of this threat.) Almost every world leader speaks some English, and many of them speak it quite well. If they don't, or aren't certain of themsevles, they will have an interpreter on hand, but most can get the basics.

Even in non-radio, the international semaphore flags carried the same meaning, regardless of the language spoken on the ship. They were (and remain today) a recognized method of communicating certain phrases from vessel to vessel, and native language does not enter into it. A certain progression of flags may, for example, mean "hurricane approaching" and it means that in any language on our planet. That is what CW accomplished, with limited signals, prosigns, and phrases.

But back to English! It isn't just because America is "the sole super power" so we force it upon them. That's total bull. In fact, it is bull that we are the sole superpower, but that, too, is for another thread. (China would have a strong argument against that!) The British, the Australians, the South Africans and others, would not be pleased to learn that the world speaks English because the US says they are required to do so. That, too, reflects a total lack of knowledge of world history, international politics, and civics. I suspect none of those subjects are taught in schools anymore.

For many people, not just here on the ham radio forums, they think the world started when they became an adult. (Or whatever age they are now.) They do not choose to know what took place 50 or 75 years ago on the international scene. Maybe their main need is to be able to download another MP3, I don't know.

Back on ham radio, there is a very growing move to dispense with the history as well as the traditions of the hobby, and to recreate it as though it was invented in 1992. (Actually I think it WAS re-invented then, to the joy of many, the dismay of many others.) I think that will actually happen, that all of what went before, as it other aspects of life, will be destroyed or lost.

That really isn't about the code. It's about those who pioneered this hobby, and gosh, even a few of them did so before 1992.

It is true that none of the major countries of the world now use CW in their routine communications, neither their political entities nor their military ones. From time to time one will hear some maritime CW from third world countries, but it's pretty rare. And I would guess CW will disappear from the ham bands within ten years, except, perhaps, for a few die-hards to try to keep it going, maybe limited to six meters.

Today many of us choose to define CW as a digital mode. That's because, I guess, the language we speak is "digital." That is, we live by digital design, and every electronics device we own or operate, from our TV and our coffee pot to our cars and our computers, are digital. But it was a "communications" mode long before the word "digital" became as common as bacon and eggs in our lives. It may be that simply lumping it with digital modes removes from our senses that it was more than a mode; it was/is a skill. That, too, will fade away, and sooner rather than later.

CW, though, was not the language; it was the utility by which the language was conveyed. Often the language was limited to international (not ham) Q and Z signals. Often to just a few short phrases, and usually in English. It was, therefore, the interface, the interpreter. In that capacity, it still works very well. I have had CW QSOs with those who speak virtually no English. But the basics get across.

As we reinvent the hobby, I guess destruction of the roots is inevitable.

Ed
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W4EWJ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Yes...the qualifier was that I could not identify
an increase in the number of stations only in the
volumn of tfc on freqs known to be used for cw,
either manual or auto keyed.

It could also be said that the "anti cw" crowd is
also myopic in their "down with cw" rants. Likewise
I dont like anyone trying to slam anything down my
throat...it just causes me to stiffen even more.

PSK31 I understand is just as effective as cw under
weak signal condx...would like to give it a try.

Agree that testing should reflect the real world...
how many hams use a smith chart? Home brewing is
by and large a thing of the past...doesnt matter if
we like it or not...its the nature of things.

ewj
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K7VO on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
W5HTW: Ed, there were some gentle snipes at me. It might shock you to know that I was licensed well before 1992 and that I have a fairly extensive knowledge of history.

One could argue that the horse and buggy were a traditional mode of transportation and one could argue successfully that the Conestoga wagon had an essential role in the settling of the American west and in American history as a whole. However few would argue that we should learn horsemanship to get our driver's license. I also think few would argue that our past has been destroyed even though the buggy whip business isn't what it used to be. The horse and carriage survive in a limited way, as a romantic anachronism, but it survives despite being largely displaced by the motorcar.

The idea that this is new hams vs. old isn't accurate. I know plenty of hams who were licensed much earlier than I was who feel as I do. However, I find it odd that some consider me, after 20 years as a licensed ham, to be a relative newcomer.

There are few relatively young hams yet young people use two way radio much more than you or I did as kids. They call those radios "cell phones" without realizing that they even are radios. Ham radio can and should be as appealing and as fascinating to them as it was to you or me when we were younger but we, the older generations of hams, don't even know how to communicate with those young people or to present ham radio in a way that makes it seem like something they want to be part of. Of course, G-d forbid they listen to some of what passes for ham radio on 75 meters and I wouldn't blame them for wanting to steer clear. I hope what I am referring to on 75 meters, which has been around for all 20 years I've been a ham, isn't what you want to preserve.

It is one thing to insist we honor our traditions and history and learn from them. It is quite another to insist we continue to test for horsemanship to drive or for CW to communicate via radio. Nobody is disputing the past importance of CW.

It might shock you to know that I have done business all over the world and have not lived in the States my entire life. Most of my family is not in the U.S. I would argue forcefully that the reason English is as much of an international language as it is has everything to do with the United States position in the world after two world wars, no disrespect to the British or Australians or anyone else intended. However, I think that would be straying too far from the point of the article or this thread. I'd be happy to have that debate and discuss the historical parallels I draw via e-mail.

CW is a digital mode by any definition of what digital means. The concept of digital (as opposed to analog) encoding of information dates from the 18th century. What makes it different from other digital modes, whether they be older ones like RTTY or newer ones is that it can be easily decoded by ear and easily manually transmitted. That does not make it any less of a digital mode. That also does not make it any less of an anachronism.

For me the magic of ham radio is the ability to communicate, to meet people, to interact with people in a way that other modes of communication simply do not offer. That was true before I was born and is still true today. What ham radio has to offer is timeless. The technology may change but the beauty of human communication between people who would otherwise not communicate remains the same.

I suspect similar heated discussion were going on 50 years ago in the great AM vs. SSB debate.

73,
Caity
K7VO/8
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K7VO on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
EWJ: Very interesting point about the Smith Chart and homebrewing. I would argue that those are advanced skills and are appropriate for the Extra Class license exam. Most hams who don't want to learn the necessary skills can be content with a General Class license which does give access to at least part of every possible ham band.

Similarly, I would not argue against retaining a CW exam for Extra only although I really fail to see the point of doing so. I think the ARRL offered it as a compromise. Like most compromises it satisfied absolutely nobody.

Oh, and yes, people on both sides of any argument are capable of becoming myopic :)

Good discussion. I'll be quite a while and let others voice their opinions. I'm amazing I haven't been roundly flamed yet.

73,
Caity
K7VO/8
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by LNXAUTHOR on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
- hmm, cw?

- n f u cn rd ths u cn b a cmptr pgmr!

72!
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KN8AW on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Everybody is basing their responses on the premise that the English and non-English hams communicate exclusively with each other. Now what if a Finnish and a Thai station wish to communicate with each other? Which language do you suppose they will use on CW or phone? More than likely it will be English unless each of them knows another widely spoken language, such as Spanish or French.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K0VJ on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"CW is incredibly fun and relaxing...and exciting, all at the same time. People use it because they like it, not because they have to."

Spot-on.

I use PSK-31 from time to time and have in the past tinkered with SSTV, but the vast majority of my HF operating is CW. Why? Because it is fun and satisfying.

The FCC may well eliminate CW as a license requirement, but the mode will live on. That includes new ops, too. A shooting analogy - how long has it been since smokeless powder and brass cartridges have been on the market? Longer than the lifetimes of virtually anyone alive today, yet black powder shooters and archers abound in 2005. They enjoy the challenge, tradition, and fun of "vintage" shooting sports.

So it is with CW, and will always be.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I'm sure that some Hams must be trained as linguists
> and it would be nice to hear their opinion on this
> matter.

Morse code is a way of encoding an alphabet. No more, no less. In that, it is no more of a language than the ASCII character set is.

The Q-codes are a set of shorthand for a handfull of common statements and questions, the answers to which, for the most part are language neutral.

Morse code lacks almost all of the characteristics that a linguist associates with a language, even if you throw in the Q codes.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> English is the language used in all international
> bussiness transactions!

I'm not sure where this myth got started, but it's not true. It is not at all unusual for regional but still international business to be accomplished in a local prefered language. In much of asia it is Mandarin, in parts of the middle east, Arabic, and so forth.

By the way, not in the near future, but within the life time of young people, expect Mandarin to replace English as the language of business for much the same reasons as English replaced German and French.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> English is the language used in all international
> bussiness transactions!

I'm not sure where this myth got started, but it's not true. It is not at all unusual for regional but still international business to be accomplished in a local prefered language. In much of asia it is Mandarin, in parts of the middle east, Arabic, and so forth.

By the way, not in the near future, but within the life time of young people, expect Mandarin to replace English as the language of business for much the same reasons as English replaced German and French.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N9AVY on March 10, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Somewhere I heard that either the Chinese or Japanese version of Morse Code has over 400 characters. Now that would REALLY give the no-coders something to whine about !
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by NS6Y_ on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hahaha today a neighbor was saying back in his Navy days, he worked at some base where they were teaching people morse code, and the students used to come to him to get stuff, or something, maybe he worked in supply, and they'd talk, verbally, dit-dah-dit etc to each other, which used to drive my neighbor up the wall!
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Well now that we have finally once and for all answered all of the questions regarding the value and future of CW as it relates to amateur radio, what shall we tackle next, abortion or gun control??
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W5ESE on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I think retention of CW testing is important.

Acquiring that skill to a great extent enables
Radio Amateurs to get started building their
own gear. The simple transceiver projects are
all CW based. Who'd want to build a K2 as their
first RF construction project? One of the
purposes of the Amateur Radio service is to
expand the reservoir of trained electronics
experts, and knowledge of CW helps to make
that happen in a tangible way.

CW also provides unique capability to outdoor
entusiasts. If you examine the specifications of
all the QRP transceivers on the market, you'll
find that, by and large, the QRP transceivers
with SSB capability have significantly higher
current consumption than the CW only units.

The receive mode current is a particularly
important spec, since even during a QSO, you
spend more time receiving than transmitting.

Although the FT817 and Icom IC 703 are often
promoted as dream rigs for backpackers, they
draw far too much current while receiving
to be useful for anything much longer than
an overnight trip. They draw 300-400 mA.
Compare that to the Wilderness Radio Norcal
40A, Wilderness Radio SST, and Small Wonder
Labs SW+, with receive mode currents of
15-16 mA.

It's not a mystery to me why all of the
Adventure Radio Society operating events are
all 100% CW, and their events seem to me to be
increasing in popularity.

CW lives!
73
Scott
W5ESE
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W5ESE on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K7VO
----

> EWJ: Very interesting point about the Smith Chart
> and homebrewing. I would argue that those are
> advanced skills and are appropriate for the Extra
> Class license exam.

My first transmitter, I built as a Novice licensee,
was homebrew, from an old ARRL Handbook design. I
knew of several other Novices at the same time
(~1975-76) who also homebrewed their first
transmitters. As Novices.

That seems to where amateur radio has gone. What
used to be considered "entry-level", has today
become considered "advanced skills for the Extra
Class license".

Anyone who is curious, I recommend getting a copy
of the ARRL book 'Understanding Amateur Radio'.
Second-hand copies can be found at Powells.com
or Amazon. As you look through it, keep in mind
the target audience for this book: the newly
minted *NOVICE* class licensee.

73
Scott
W5ESE
ex WN5RMQ
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W5LSD on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
And what is the universal language for CB types too
lazy to learn a useful radio operators skill ?
WHINING .... the universal language of the codeless.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KK7WN on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
For a long time there was scientific discussion as to whether it was possible to think logically without benefit of a formal language.From the number of bizarre ad hominum replies to this article it seems apparent that logical thought is not benefitted by language when the topic of CW is involved.Why? I sugggest that it is a typical example of how the degree of inappropriate and nasty behavior increases as the significance (value) of the outcome decreases.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KG4VYK on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Ho Hum. Another chance for the elderly hams to rally around their God Morse. They learned CW as teenagers in 1960 and they think everyone should be just like them. The truth of the matter is that Morse code is slowly going away as our geriatric members fade into the sunset. Instead of CW as an elimination tool for licensing, my suggestion is that we really increase the licensing requirements for Hams, tests with plenty of math and theory. And you must retest every 5 years.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA4DOU on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KG4VYK hasn't been around long enough to know anything about the subject. His strong suite isn't knowing when to and when not to open his mouth. His opinion is of no consequence. Bring on retesting. I've got mine and I can keep it too! He has have yet to do the same.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YGD on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Im of the opinion that if you dont do CW or keep a logbook or qsl 100% your not a ``REAL HAM``! 73,``THE REAL HAM``
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by X-WB1AUW on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Even sillier!
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KF3EG on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Yup just what I thought, 20 years as a Tech, and still crying on here about CW. Get off your butt and learn it or write to the FCC about it, your wasting valuable kilo bites crying about it hear.
The ones with the small crackers always want the most soup.
You learned to type this dribble you posted, learn CW


 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K0EX on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

I can see why you don't have time for Morse Code... you don't yet have a command of the ENGLISH language!

-Mark K0EX
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N5XM on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I don't get this one...if someone doesn't want to use CW, fine, but the author seems to want to make this an all or nothing issue. Why? Using that "logic" the same thing could be said for the phone bands. There's no law anywhere I know of that says you can't use whatever language on any band you want to in any mode you want, as long as it isn't obscene or business on the air.

I've made over 15K CW contacts in just over 7 years since I starting using this mode, and I don't begrudge a phone op a single thing. I even get on phone sometimes, but it would be like the rarest DX to work me there. I hate to say it, but I agree with the previous post about learning the English language first before talking about ANY other languages.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KG6AMW on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Quote, " disagree with KG6AMW. CW IS A LANGUAGE AND VERY UNIVERSAL. YOUR CALL SIGN SEZ IT ALL.... Interesting response Larry. I understand disagreement over ideas, but call sign discrimination is a new one for me. I wouldn't even know what to call it. Let's see how about "call signism"? Was there an incident in your past with a novice or tech? Did one move in next door which caused your radios to loose value? Perhaps your sister was mistreated by a tech at a dance.

KG6AMW
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K7NNG on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
kg4vyk said: my suggestion is that we really increase the licensing requirements for Hams, tests with plenty of math and theory. And you must retest every 5 years.

I agree 100 % with the exception that ALL hams should be required to retest at 20 wpm CW at 5 years, in addition to the math and theory.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by NN6EE on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
NAH!!!

Drop the Intl. morse code requirement for all General ticket applicants, and PUT BACK the 20wpm code requirement for the Amateur Extra license then IT TOO will have value unlike what it is today at the joke-speed of 5wpm!!!

Jim/ee
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K0EWS on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<<<I don't get this one...if someone doesn't want to use CW, fine, but the author seems to want to make this an all or nothing issue.>>>
Agreed. The one thing I've noticed about the NCI crowd is that they not only have strong disdain for the REQUIREMENT, they also have strong DISDAIN FOR CW, PERIOD. Funny thing, I don't care if they let more phone ops on the air. I run about 95 percent CW here, and it won't affect me a bit, so as for the licensing requirement, I'm in the minority, but I think ARRL got it right this time. I can see the use for a no-code HF ticket. However, that won't be enough for the no-code crowd until morse testing is totally eliminated, and it's use drastically reduced, and then you will see cries for changing the band plans. They may not say this, but one gets the feeling this is what they want in reading some of the posts in these threads.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W5ESE on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Funny thing, I don't care if they let more
> phone ops on the air. I run about 95 percent
> CW here, and it won't affect me a bit,

at least, not now

> so as
> for the licensing requirement, I'm in the
> minority, but I think ARRL got it right this
> time. I can see the use for a no-code HF ticket.
> However, that won't be enough for the no-code
> crowd until morse testing is totally eliminated,
> and it's use drastically reduced, and then you
> will see cries for changing the band plans.

aha! and then it will affect you.

Having large numbers of HF-enabled operators with
a paucity of skills in using spectrum-efficient
modes will definitely affect you. There is already
pressure on the ARRL to petition for widening the
congested phone bands. The phone bands wouldn't be
as congested if the licensing system encouraged
licensees to increase their skill in using spectrum
efficient CW (as it once did).

It's somewhat analogous to the affect drivers of
gas-guzzling SUVs have on what you pay for gas.
You pay a higher price for gas because of what
they elected to drive.

73
Scott
W5ESE
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KG6UEQ on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I'm a tech learning morse code and feel it does have its place in amateur radio. I understand it can be used to make contacts where voice cannot be understood.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
About Chinese Morse code: The internet is your friend:

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~reedsj/ctc.html

is an interesting discussion on the topic.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
About Chinese Morse code: The internet is your friend:

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~reedsj/ctc.html

is an interesting discussion on the topic.

 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC7FKW on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I would STRONGLY recommend learning Morse code. The english language is more and more, becoming a second language. {quite often resulting from English speaking military personnel being assigned to foreign coun-tries. In secure areas, the younger generation are very curious, also quite often high school/college age youths will serve as tour guides/interpretors {free, just to learn our language.} With that said, communi-cating under adverse conditions presents challenges which are overcome if you are versed in Morse code. You never know when it will come in handy -
1. Ask any prisoner of war who ever needed to pass messages to to other isolated inmates. {This is just one reason why the military pilots and other selected personnel train to utilize Morse code.}
2. You're in Search & Rescue - Try sending/receiving messages to a stranded climber on the opposite side of a chasm, when their radio's battery has died, but they /you know Morse code and you have flashlights or cylalume lights to signal with.
3. You're camping at night and you see the INTER-NATIONAL Morse code SOS being flashed, from across the valley- lives may hinge upon you understanding immed-iate medical attention is required.
4. Ask any Boy/Girl Scout with a signalling merit badge how well they are able to use Morse code. Or how about later in life, when they joined the military and received accelerated promotions because of their skill.
5. The fact that you're on a ship in worsening seas and you find the microphone element has failed. You can still send messages with Morse code by bypassing the mike entirely.

My personal opinion [along with several other skills that should be mandatory} is teaching Morse code in all grade levels. Make it a fun class and chal-lenge the students. Morse code is far from being
obsolete. {review 1 thru 5 above}
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KD7ZOX on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
" The Norwegian characters æ, ø and å are represented with morse codes:
æ = .-.-
ø = ---.
å = .--.-
So Norwegians happily use their native language in CW. I guess the same can be said about any language. "

Well what about languages, such as chinese, with thousands of characters... Can you expect them to learn that many combinations of dits and dahs? Or Russian, they have a cyrillic alphabet. An example of this: &#1071; &#1075;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1088;&#1102; &#1055;&#1086;-&#1088;&#1091;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1081;. Assuming eham.net will show it, you can see the alphabet is a lot different. And some of the characters resemble english letters such as the R sound which is represented by the P, or the "vuh"-B. I think that there should be a better standard "International Language" that could be sent the same way morse code is, just not only for english speakers.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KD7ZOX on March 11, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Ok so maybe it won't.... anyway check out http://www.pravda.ru for an example
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA2JJH on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
sORTA
you will an RS(T), NAME,QTH,WX,RF PWR, and antenna.
As far as I can remember on CW and SSB. In SSB, it can be fluent english to just-getting the words out.

That is good enough for the contestors, and I when chasing rare DX.

Who remembers this......Your in a cw QSO with the old
Soviet Union. "My Rig Has 10 tubes". DID the OM REALLY DID BUILD HIS OWN RIG.

The Russians had a tube technology(survive EMP)
much better than ours. They had tubes that had 4,5,or more triodes in them. So a 10 tube rig could be a very high end rig.

In 1976 some dude asked for assylym. He broke off from his MIG-15 wing.
When we analysed the jet fighter, it had all tubes!!!! However each tube was like an IC. Perhaps an entire receiver could be built from one tube. They also had redundant systems.

If you worked some UV with 25 tubes, you could be working a KGB analyst brushing up on his perfect english.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0JZQ on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I did ask a POW about using morse code and they used the tap code.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/honor/sfeature/sf_tap.html
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KI4FIA on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Total crap!

It is clear you don't operate any CW nor CW with
non-English speaking stations.

I've only been a ham for about 11 months, I'm only 40
years old. Have racked up over 1000 CW qso's and find
CW easy to learn and more enjoyable and rewarding than
phone.

What upsets me is all the energy put forth by people
such as yourself who's only agenda is to drag CW
through the mud. If you would put 1/2 that amount of
engergy into learning CW you would have had your
General ticket (or higher) by now.

George - KI4FIA
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
George KI4FIA,

Don't waste your time or energy trying to get these CW bashers to see the errors of their ways. Look at it this way, while they are wasting their time and energy focusing on the elimination of CW, you and I are actually on the air, having fun and making contacts without having to worry about people like that causing QRM on the CW sub-bands! I say stop encouraging them to learn CW! Let them pollute the top half of the bands with their rhetoric as long as they stay off the bottom half of the bands.

And to Scott W5ESE who wrote, "It's somewhat analogous to the affect drivers of gas-guzzling SUVs have on what you pay for gas. You pay a higher price for gas because of what they elected to drive."

Actually I think your logic is 180 degrees out of phase. The petroleum industry loves SUVs since they generally have larger gas tanks and get pretty poor mileage. If everyone drove Lincoln Navigators and Cadillac Escalades, gas prices would go down because the demand would be so high and they could afford to charge less because they would make it up on the volume. The real cause of high gas prices are these hybrids that get 50 MPG. Because they use so little gas, the petroleum industry has been forced to raise prices to make up for the fact they don't use as much gasoline!

NØIU
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
God, …………I love this!

There’s just nothing like a “Code” article to produce a literal flood of frenzied tirades, pompous lectures, and moronic flames!

“NOLICENSEASYET” has it right: ……..The entertainment value of these threads is incredible!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KE7CMU on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I get a kick out of how fired up everybody gets on here. I thought that it was just one big brotherhood of hams. It seems like people take these articles on here as written in stone truth forgetting that it is just an opinion. Cant we all just get along????
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA4DOU on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Thanks to NCI and the rabid outspoken among the newcomers of the past few years who have been critical of amateur radio as it had been previously known, those who felt that they should not have to comply with licensing criterion of the past, amateur radio has become a two tier divided fraterity. No, we can not all "just get along" any longer. That was prior to modern times. The wonderful world you new comers are inheriting is politically divided and will never come back together. Its now an "us and them" world.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hmmmm………Nice attitude Roy!

Perhaps you should volunteer to use your political savvy in the search for Mid-East peace!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by NN6EE on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
A couple of "Posters" out here have made an EXTREMELY good point I have to admit. In that if the "Anti-CW" boys spent the exact amount of time learning MORSE instead of bashing it everybody would win including themselves. But alas they're too damn lazy!!!


Jim/nn6ee
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KE7CMU on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Here how about this, Lets round up all of the hams here in the US. We will put all of us in a big building and fight it out. Count up everybody at the end and if there is more anti code hams left then no more code. If there is more pro code hams well then code stays.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by NN6EE on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
CMU,

Do both "PARTIES" have a choice of weapons???

:-)))

Jim/ee
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WX3K on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I passed my 20 WPM extra class code test before the code requirement was dropped. I am very proud of that and continue to be ! I am impressed that I took the time and learned this language that others seem to have an issue with. It is mind over matter. Those that complain incessently about dropping the code requirement are obviously frustrated with their lack of discipline in life.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA4DOU on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Code stays regardless. Code outperforms!
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
After reading dozens of article like this, the TRUTH has finally dawned on me: …….”Code” is the deciding factor, ……the philosophical “Holy Grail”!!

Those that “Know Code” are deserving of those Human Rights that we all hold dear: and those that don’t, …….Well, into the ovens with them!

I can’t believe that I spent so many years missing this basic point! Knowledge of “Code” is clearly a basic “Litmus Test” of human worth!

In today’s world, with the “Department of Homeland Security” firmly in charge, we can take this to it’s logical end! Let’s set up roadblocks to see who among the general public really “knows Code”! Anyone who can’t reply to the basic interrogation at 5 wpm will be simply shot and dumped in the roadside ditch.

What a better world it will be!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

P.S. I know I’ll be OK! I learned “Code” 45 years ago as a Boy Scout. I just don’t give an “Obese Rodent’s Posterior” about it now!

KLC
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 12, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
That's right Junior...

A long time ago..., around the year 2005, there used to be a group of people that communicated to one another using a combination of strange high pitch sounds created by pressing two pieces of metal together.

Then one day, they tried to decide if this form of communication should remain or be required anymore. This decision started so much contoversy around the subject matter that eventually some of the people in the group just stopped communicating to one another all together.

A new broadband internet service and other commercial interests saw this as an opportunity and eventually moved in to take over thier communication bands. This eventually forced the few who were left remaining, off the air.


Now I ask, "Who is the real threat to our bands?"


...Ourselves


73 de Charles KC8VWM
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I am curious about something. What was one of the first questions you asked when decided you might be interested in becoming an amateur radio operator? Most likely it was something like, "So what does it take to get a ham radio license?" Of course that answer involved taking a written test for each class and if you wanted to talk on the HF bands, one or more Morse code proficiency tests. Since HF is what I was interested in, I had to decide whether or not I was willing to learn the code before making the comittment to get into the hobby. Back then, in order to make Extra, you needed to take 5 written tests and 3 code tests. I did not differentiate between them. As far as I was concerned, I had to take 8 tests.

From reading the comments, there seems to be people who consider Morse code proficiency to be some sort of method of keeping people out. To all of those people, you knew this was a requirement but yet you still chose to get into this hobby. You talk as if no one told you about it and you were caught by surprise. What I am curious about is if you are so opposed to learning it, why on earth did you get into ham radio knowing you were going to have to face it?
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Scott;

While I can’t speak for others, I can certainly clarify my position for you.

I first acquired an ARS License because I needed access to better mobile, vehicle-to-vehicle communications than could be had with either CB or GMRS.

I am getting exactly what I want from the ARS with my “lowly” NCT license, and I have no reason to consider “upgrading”.

I am, however, really sick of hearing from others that I am “Lazy”, “Unmotivated”, or “One of those deadbeats who want something-for-nothing”!

When I see these pompous, condescending sentiments expressed in these threads, I find it impossible to resist “firing a return shot”. Someday the jerks who author some of these statements will have to face up to the fact that there are people out there with interests different than theirs, and that those people deserve some respect too!

……….Until that happens, I will continue my “sniping”, in the hope that the concept will eventually sink in through repetition.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KE7CMU on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Only homebrewed weapons allowed.
Just so everyone knows I have no problem with the code or the current code requirement. I am slowly trying to learn it. I just get a kick out of the outpouring of raw emotion over this subject.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W6SBE on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Kudos' to KC7FKW Great reply. I remember the POW who blinked the word 'torture' on communist TV being broadcast to the U.S. during the Viet Nam war. I remember having a flashlight QSO with another teenager in about 1960 from the 'firefalls' to the Yosemite Valley using only a flashlight.

Just the other day I was just headed back to my car in the parking lot of our local mall when I noticed a pickup with a large 'screwdriver type' antenna on top secured by 6 large 5 inch magnets. Just for the heck of it, I walked over and asked the guy what kind of antenna it was (no ham plates, I looked.) and he told me it was a 'HAM' antenna. He proceeded to show me his 'converted' Icom IC-706 transceiver and his 500 watt 'footwarmer' behind the seat. He told me he was planning to put another battery in his truck so he could get a bigger amplifier. I finally asked him what his ham call was and he told me he didn't have one yet but that he was waiting for the FCC to drop the 'stupid code test'. I didn't bother to tell him that they had already dropped it for the initial entry license. He told me he operates mostly in the 26Mhz range below CB but also liked to operate just below 28Mhz.

Until he showed me his illegal equipment, I was prepared to be his 'Elmer' and help him to get his ham license but I changed my mind. I decided that we don't need another 'flagrant violator' in our midst. I have helped many hams get started but hearing a guy like this talking about the 'stupid code test' was like listening to an arguement from a 16-year-old hamburger flipper at McDonalds arguing about the 'stupid' necessity of getting a high school diploma to get a decent job.

Now it's going back quite a long way but it seems to me that when the FCC first started partitioning the bands, people didn't mind working their way up the ladder.

We are communicators first and I personally think all (read ALL) kids should be taught the code in kindergarden. I don't think it is all that important to have a code speed requirement to get your license. Heck, they could just print it out in periods and dashes and incorporate it into the written test but I think the knowledge of the code is still important.

Many NC's didn't mind spending hours memorizing 500 FCC pool questions to pass their test but balk when it comes to memorizing 26 letters of the alphabet. It's like learning Ohms law. In years past, when hams built their own equipment (I did) it was important to know Ohms law and LC formulas. Most hams these days just buy their Kenwoods, Icoms and Yaesu's and if it quits, they send it back to the factory. Yes, I'm guilty of the same thing sometimes. Don't get all huffy and tell me how Ohms law knowledge is important to todays appliance operators. They will say, What do I need to learn Ohms law for because I will never use it? Do you see the same logic?

As that great American, POGO (To those who don't remember POGO, look him up.) once said, "We have found the enemy and he is us."

What have we become? OK, NC's I said my two cents worth. Flame away!! W6SBE
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Kent, thank you for your reply. If you are a VHF/UHF kinda guy, then there really is no reason to learn it. I get that.

I think this phenomenon of thinking of Morse code as being some sort of evil tool by which we separate the "wheat from the chaff" is fairly recent. I am not sure, but I think it has something to do with the effortless worldwide communications possible through the Internet. I blame Al Gore for that since he is the one who claims to have invented it.

W6SBE hit the nail on the head in terms of why I think a lot of pre-April 15, 2000 Extras consider those who are so vehemently opposed to learning Morse code as being "less than motivated". You don't actually have to know anything in order to pass the written tests. All you have to do is memorize the stuff. With CW, on the other hand, you really have to know it. There is no published test pool complete with the answers. You don't know what is going to be on the test so it is really the only true test of knowledge in the ham radio testing scheme. If the Morse code proficiency testing requirement does go away, I agree with those who want to replace Morse code with some other type of test that demonstrates the application of knowledge; something you can not memorize.

Yes, I was one of those, "I did it so you should have to do it too" Extras after April 15, 2000. I was angry over the fact that now you could become an Extra by taking 3 written tests and 1 code test but I had to take 5 written tests and 3 code tests. Same end result with half as many tests. Can you see where this whole "lazy" thing comes into being? I earned my Extra ticket 5 years before this last round of restructuring and I am glad I didn't wait. In those 5 years, I was fattening up my logbook while others were wasting their time thinking of excuses.

NØIU
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA4DOU on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Actually cw is just as valuable as a superior performance mode on vhf/uhf as on hf. Estimates of 6-13 db of performance enhancement over ssb make a cw station running 100 watts output, the equal of an ssb station running somewhere between 400 and 2000 watts output. There is no accent to contend with, and cw is capable of a high degree of accuracy depending on the skill of the 2 ops in contact. Cw has much going for it, even if it is our oldest mode. Those who make remarks about it as to being antiquated, old fashioned, obsolete, etc. reveal a complete lack of knowledge about what they're talking about. This makes them fair game for attack.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
What is this big thing about memorizing and not memorizing. No matter what the test, you have to memorize, either the concepts and ideas, the answers, or the individual letters of the code. Everything is committed to memory, therefore memorized.

I think the emphasis should be shifted to those who aren't willing to learn the WHY, that is to memorize the concepts, as opposed to those who only try to commit the end result to memory, meaning memorizing only the answers.

Finally--if you don't memorize the individual elements of morse code, how do you learn it? By writing it on the insides of your eyelids???
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KG6TEW on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Heck, I am just happy I passed the code requirement to upgrade my license!!! LOL.

73, Barb
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
What is this big thing about memorizing and not memorizing? The difference is that one is learning and the other is just memorizing. What have you learned if someone just gives you the answers to the questions? Using the Ohm's Law example, once you have learned it, I should be able to draw a circuit giving you the voltage and current and you should be able to tell me the value of the resistor.

Learning is like money. If someone just gives it to you, it doesn't have much value. But when you earn it yourself, it has a much greater value. It is also like the proverb that goes something like, "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime."
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Oh Jeez! ………………I just can’t resist playing the “Devil‘s Advocate“! (I guess my willpower is low today!)

Ok , ………..let’s just suppose that we convince the FCC to keep the “Code Requirement“: Not only that, but we have them add a mandatory element to the testing that covers High Speed Digital Modes.

Now, in order to either receive or keep a “Higher License” the ARS licensee must pass both additional elements!

None of you guys would have a problem with that, …would you?

After all: ……………..

Learning and Knowledge are good! ……….Right?

A “Privilege” earned is more valued than one just given! …….Right?

And above all, NO ONE on your side of the fence is TOO LAZY to do a little bit of work to earn or keep those “Privileges”! ………RIGHT?????



Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

P.S. I really don’t care one way or the other ………..I’m just enjoying this circus!

KLC

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA4DOU on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Its a circus of your own choosing since you're the principal clown. I can and will rise to whatever occasion necessary to retain my amateur privileges.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA4DOU on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
And do it without complaint. I once had all amateur privileges and then lost some due to incentive licensing. I did what was necessary.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> As that great American, POGO (To those who don't
> remember POGO, look him up.) once said, "We have
> found the enemy and he is us."

"We have met the enemey and he is us" -- Walt Kelly.

I suspect that that rather gentle creature, Pogo Possum, in whose swamp I once spent a week canoeing, would be rather taken aback by the pro-code attitude, which is far more likely to be held by the likes of Albert Alligator.

Pogo was pretty tolerant of folks foibles and not much of a fan of initiation rights.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> As that great American, POGO (To those who don't
> remember POGO, look him up.) once said, "We have
> found the enemy and he is us."

"We have met the enemey and he is us" -- Walt Kelly.

I suspect that that rather gentle creature, Pogo Possum, in whose swamp I once spent a week canoeing, would be rather taken aback by the pro-code attitude, which is far more likely to be held by the likes of Albert Alligator.

Pogo was pretty tolerant of folks foibles and not much of a fan of initiation rights.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> You don't actually have to know anything in order to
> pass the written tests. All you have to do is
> memorize the stuff. With CW, on the other hand, you
> really have to know it. There is no published test
> pool complete with the answers.

And the way you get to "know" CW? You memorize it. In fact, if you do a tiny bit of research, and pay a tiny bit of attention, you memorize the numbers and punctuation cold, and try to get a few letters right.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Those who make remarks about it as to being
> antiquated, old fashioned, obsolete, etc. reveal a
> complete lack of knowledge about what they're
> talking about.

Nonsense. If CW were the most efficient mode (it's not, spread spectrum digital modes are more spectrum efficient, have better noise rejection, and don't suffer from the errors introduced by operator transcription,) that still wouldn't guarentee it a lack of obsolescense.

The most efficient means of human transportation, for example, is the bicycle, but there are plenty of reasons for it not to be the prefered means. Efficiency is not the most significant, let alone only reason for evaluating a mode.

But what both sides tend to forget is that the mode is not the issue. The issue is the utility to the FCC in testing for proficiency in the mode. There is no utility. The FCC pointed this out over ten years ago.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Using the Ohm's Law example, once you have learned
> it, I should be able to draw a circuit giving you
> the voltage and current and you should be able to
> tell me the value of the resistor.

The Ohm's law argument always cracks me up, since Ohm's law, especially as taught to amatuers, isn't of much use in most interesting applications in RF design. In fact, once you get into the frequency domain, you need math beyond that which 90+% of amateurs have the training to use.

Why do hams make a big deal out of learing Morse code? It's to hide how little electronics proficiency the hobby has ever really required.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I like the reference W6SBE made to POGO and the "enemy within."

If the enemy is us, as Pogo said, then the task of leadership is to turn the enemy into an ally. We are the problem, but we are also the solution.

Learning CW or not learning CW is really not the issue. We already have a licensing structure in place that doesn't require CW as a requirement to obtain an Amateur Radio license. Yet, the proverbial "push" by some people is to get a CW endorsement as some sort of mandatory requirement to be a ham .. period.

My argument would be that if this was truly the case, then why does the FCC issue licenses based on no CW endorsement? Shouldn't this also be eliminated and a requirement that all hams regardless of license class should require CW to operate?

The real issue is not about an individuals ability to demonstrate CW. It's about the anxiety and fear about eliminating CW as a licensing requirement and what effect this may or may not have on HF bands in the future.

Certain characteristics have been recently emerging that suggests we are taking on the "enemy within" for example:

When Y2K broke into our consciousness with a rash of alarming reports predicting the breakdown of society, we found ourselves in a similar doomsday or survivalist mode.

The fact is that there are many "alarmists" that exist in Amateur Radio today. These individuals are primarily categorized purveyors of past exploited CB radio days gone awry 20 years ago. They seem to suggest that this event will happen again 20 years later, in a completely different radio service, in a service licensed by the FCC, and state these facts without any supporting documents.

They exploit signature fear mongering techniques to gain support of their various digital flocks on electronic bulletin boards such as this one demonstrate.

The goal is to gain additional support from their "higher" colleagues on the subject to conquer and divide the classes.

In effect, some are deciding to take up and divide on the issue. The objective is to socially separate and disassociate themselves from the remainder of the lower class license crowd.

This has been expressed in certain comments such as the following seems to indicate:

"-Deleted Comment To Prevent A Flame War-"

Seems this comment (and others) are stated as the first line of collective defense, a case of denial, minimization, rationalization of the inevitable. To reluctantly give way, fight-or-flight response. etc.. etc..

But the question is, fight what?

Like we have all seen demonstrated with Y2K, One must actually have the problem already at hand in order to plan, execute and fight a problem which has yet to exist?

This is precisely where the predictability of Pogo is very accurate. We seem to be fighting the enemy within.


73 Charles - KC8VWM
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA4DOU on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I think we've had this discussion before Martin. You're still an idiot!
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Gee Roy; ……….I have to hand it to you: When you throw in those little personal attacks it really makes your position unassailable from a logical point of view!

You certainly are a skilled debater! (One might even go so far as to call you a Master Debater: ……..or something very much like that.)

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"I think we've had this discussion before Martin. You're still an idiot!"

That is why Martin the Martian was plopped here on earth; to create confusion and discord. Martin never agrees with anyone or anything; never did and never will. Martin was programmed that way before being plopped here from the Red Planet.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP wrote (in response to one of my postings):

> You don't actually have to know anything in order to
> pass the written tests. All you have to do is
> memorize the stuff. With CW, on the other hand, you
> really have to know it. There is no published test
> pool complete with the answers.

"And the way you get to "know" CW? You memorize it. In fact, if you do a tiny bit of research, and pay a tiny bit of attention, you memorize the numbers and punctuation cold, and try to get a few letters right."

When we learn to drive a car, one of the things we learn is that when you see a stop sign, this should cause you to remove your right foot from the accelerator pedal and place it on the brake pedal. While memory is crucial to the learning process, there comes a point when something that has been learned becomes automatic. When you see a stop sign, you don't have to go through the process of asking yourself what word the four letters on the stop sign spell. Once you realize the word is STOP, you don't have to search your mental dictionary for the definition then decide what to do about it. You see the sign and hopefully you will bring the car safely to a stop. This is not the result of processing memorized information. This is learned behavior.

Morse code works the same way and that is why the 5 WPM test is really no test at all. It has long since been shown that there is a plateau at around 10 WPM. Up to this point, most people can hear a series of dits and dahs, scan their memory for a match then write that character on paper. Past this point, it is nearly impossible to count dits and dahs. By the time you figure out what one character is, you have missed the next 2 or 3 characters. With time and practice, copying Morse code can also become as automatic as what you do when you see a stop sign. It takes time and does not come easily for most people. It is something you have to learn. You can not memorize CW at speeds above 10 WPM.

NØIU
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA4DOU on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Its a well known fact that when you propose to accomplish an end that cannot be sold in its entirity, you slice the bologna thin and abscond with a few slices. You can return over and over for a few more slices. Eventually you'll have the whole bologna. This is how unpopular political ideas decend on the American people, one slice at a time. The anti cw forces are not just interested in the abolishment of cw as a testing requirement. They have a greater purpose in mind, the abolishment of the cw subbands, the abolishment of any meaningful technical testing requirement, and the opening of the floodgates to anyone. These people actually are anarchists and intend to abolish anything that remotely resembles the past order, thus filling it with chaos and disorder. There will come a time when there will be no stone standing upon another. I wish I could be here to poke around in the rubble and see if I could find someone alive, just to ask a question. My question would be "was it worth it".
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I think we've had this discussion before Martin.
> You're still an idiot!

And yet, I'm so much brighter than you.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> The anti cw forces are not just interested in the
> abolishment of cw as a testing requirement. They
> have a greater purpose in mind, the abolishment of
> the cw subbands, the abolishment of any meaningful
> technical testing requirement, and the opening of
> the floodgates to anyone.

This is simply not true. Many of the people who have come out in favor of abolishing the CW test have also clearly stated that they have no interest in doing away with the subbands. The pro-cw crowd raises this strawman whenever they wish to cover their lack of valid arguments for preserving the test.

As far as abolishment of any "meaningful technical testing requirement", there has never been a meaningful technical testing requirement for the hobby, as it has never required much in the way of technical skill to participate.

> These people actually are anarchists and intend to
> abolish anything that remotely resembles the past
> order, thus filling it with chaos and disorder.

Wanting to change something is not the same as wanting chaos. CW testing should be done away with for the simple reason that it serves no useful regulatory purpose.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"thus filling it with chaos and disorder. There will come a time when there will be no stone standing upon another. I wish I could be here to poke around in the rubble and see if I could find someone alive"


Sounds a bit like Y2k if you ask me.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA2JJH on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
English is also used for commercial aviation and nuclear power.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"The anti cw forces"

Perhaps, "anti cw terroists" would reflect a more appropriate analogy for an "alarmist" to use in retrospect.



 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA2JJH on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
It seem likethis is just yet another code/anti code debatacle
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> It takes time and does not come easily for most
> people. It is something you have to learn. You can
> not memorize CW at speeds above 10 WPM.

Sorry, but this simply isn't true. The method of learning something like Morse code is exactly that of rote memorization. First you learn it at a slow speed. Once you've got it down, you practice it at increasing speeds, until you're proficient at those speeds.

The so-called 10wpm plateau isn't because you can't memorize at a higher speed, but rather that because there are easy ways to memorize the slow speed stuff that don't scale. If you learn each letter as a sound pattern at 5wpm, rather than counting dits and dahs, then you will hit no 10wpm plateau. Rather, you will hit the plateau at which you simply can't tell one sound pattern from the next quickly enough.

Morse is nearly trivial to learn, merely requiring enough time to accomplish the rote. Actually learning electronics, on the other hand, is something that amateurs tend not to do, because it means acquiring skills, mostly mathematical skills, that they have no interest in learning.

Fortunately, the minimal amount of electronics that the hobby has ever needed to 'get by' has been pretty trivial, since most amateurs, even supposedly knowledgable ones, don't learn the electronics, but rather, they learn a handful of cookbook formulae, like the equation for the length of a dipole, without ever really understanding any of the field theory behind that equation.

It's part of why hams so often fixate on ohm's law when they discuss electronics: they've never really gotten beyond that level of superficial empirical relationship.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Martin never agrees with anyone or anything; never
> did and never will.

I agree.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
lol Marty
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W6SBE on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N0IU, I couldn't have said it better. You know what? I have trouble with 5 words per minute....it drives me nuts but I CAN copy cw at 45 wpm on a MIL typewriter and 60 wpm in my head and I will QRS for a new ham and struggle with the 5 wpm so he can get the practice. I'm not trying to cram CW down anybody's throat but I resent the efforts to eliminate the CW end of the band and make the whole band SSB when CW is no longer a requirement. I enjoy CW but you don't have to. Just don't take it away from me. W6SBE Charter member of the CFO (Chicken Fat Operators)(Started by Jim W9TO, Big Bird)...Total CW nut ball, that's me and I'm damned proud of it. . . . . .___
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"And yet, I'm so much brighter than you."

Yes Martin. You're so much brighter than everyone. Why don't you re-invent the bomb? While you're at it, why don't you re-invent the wheel so we can keep going around in circles with you on everything?

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"why don't you re-invent the wheel so we can keep going around in circles with you on everything? "


At the very least, this thread is providing me with a source of entertainment - if anything...
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N0IU, I couldn't have said it better. You know what? I have trouble with 5 words per minute...

Daniel (w6sbe),

5 WPM drives me nuts too. What's the point of requiring a 5wpm code test, when it's waaayyyyy easier to understand code at 12 wpm?

Hey, I'm serious.. :)


73 de Charles - KC8VWM

dit dit
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Fortunately, the minimal amount of electronics that the hobby has ever needed to 'get by' has been pretty trivial, since most amateurs, even supposedly knowledgable ones, don't learn the electronics, but rather, they learn a handful of cookbook formulae, like the equation for the length of a dipole, without ever really understanding any of the field theory behind that equation."

The length of a dipole is 1/2 wavelength.

wavelength = 300 / f (MHz) meters

This comes from wavelength = c / f (Hz) where c = 300,000.

"c" is the velocity of light.

We more commonly use 1/2 wavelength = 468 / f (MHz) feet.

So, Martin, you were saying?

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"5 WPM drives me nuts too. What's the point of requiring a 5wpm code test, when it's waaayyyyy easier to understand code at 12 wpm?"

Good point. It would make sense to increase the code testing speed to 12 wpm.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
So what happens when the velocity of light changes with the dynamics of time?

There is new data that shows the measured value of the velocity of light has decreased over the past 250 years.

http://www.ldolphin.org/constc.shtml

So, how does this affect our calculations exactly?


73 KC8VWM


 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"So what happens when the velocity of light changes with the dynamics of time? There is new data that shows the measured value of the velocity of light has decreased over the past 250 years. So, how does this affect our calculations exactly?"

When the velocity of light slows down enough to affect our antenna calculations, please let me know. I wouldn't want to be left out in the dark. We should all be a couple of billion years old by then. By then, maybe I will have lost my interest in ham radio. Either that, or maybe by then I'll join forces with those who still want the code requirement dropped.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Perhaps an open mind on the subject might serve to be a beneficial attribute in the area of radio advancement.

Radio Amateurs are traditionally experimenters who always question the obvious and wonder about the validity of such variables and measurements.

This is the kind of criteria required as to what constitutes what an experimenter in radio is all about.

CW alone is not that attribute or requirement.


73 Charles - KC8VWM
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
When light ceases to move, I guess the universe will be in total darkness and all life will cease to exist. By then, all code testing will also cease. So will all code use.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Radio Amateurs are traditionally experimenters who always question the obvious and wonder about the validity of such variables and measurements. This is the kind of criteria required as to what constitutes what an experimenter in radio is all about. CW alone is not that attribute or requirement."

An experimenter in radio experiments with all that has to do with radio, CW included.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Gee, what happened to Martin? Is his super intelligent brain on overload?

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Martin, Martin! Where art thou Martin?

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Would somebody at least entertain this monkey?

Marty?

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
All this heavy intellectual talk wore Martin out. He went to bed. I just had a bananna. Now I'm going to go for a walk in the jungle. Before I shut down the radioputer, remember that CW is the Correct Way.

--... ...--
..- --.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> The length of a dipole is 1/2 wavelength.

Thanks for making my point, by starting from the cookbook, rather than the electronics.

Hope you don't mind I left the rest of the cookbook out of my quote.

Now explain *why* "the lenght of a dipole is 1/2 wavelength" or, more precisely, why a 1/2 wave dipole is an effective radiator. Also, while you're at it, derive from the radiation equations the equation for impedence of a fixed length dipole as a function of the input frequency.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> The length of a dipole is 1/2 wavelength.

Thanks for making my point, by starting from the cookbook, rather than the electronics.

Hope you don't mind I left the rest of the cookbook out of my quote.

Now explain *why* "the lenght of a dipole is 1/2 wavelength" or, more precisely, why a 1/2 wave dipole is an effective radiator. Also, while you're at it, derive from the radiation equations the equation for impedence of a fixed length dipole as a function of the input frequency.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Martin, Martin! Where art thou Martin?

3.902

and you?
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 13, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Would somebody at least entertain this monkey?

> Marty?

OK. The problem with the Montgomery/Dolphin paper is their method. They show that *measurement* of C has produced successively lower values, but they don't account for *why* this is true. Has C been getting smaller, or have measurements of it been getting better in a way that is systemically improving the upper bound on the measurement error? Montgomery and Dolphin make no attempt to distinguish.

They also committ a cardinal sin of statistical analysis: they don't take into account all available data. In particular, they make no reference at all to the body of research aimed at testing whether C has remained constant. This research is independent of the measured value of C.

There's a third mistake in the paper, but I'll leave it as an exercise for the very curious to look for an alternative explanation of Van Flandern's results.

(By the way, UG missed, among other things, the effect of the medium on calculating the wavelength of light at a given frequency...)
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP wrote:

"Morse is nearly trivial to learn, merely requiring enough time to accomplish the rote."

Then how come there is this big push to eliminate demonstrating Morse code proficiency if it so easy? Please enlighten us as to how the Fouts method works and how long it took you to learn CW to pass your 20 WPM code test?

NØIU
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I continue to be amazed that there are those in the ARS that have raised the act of tapping two pieces of metal together to the status of a “True Faith”!

……….And that they pursue this “Faith” with an inflexible religious fervor that would make an Islamic Zealot jealous!

Face it guys, …..It’s time for a “Reality Check”: Code and CW is just a way (one of many) that one can transmit information via radio waves: ………Nothing more – Nothing less!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
By AE6IP:
"> You don't actually have to know anything in order
> to pass the written tests. All you have to do is
> memorize the stuff. With CW, on the other hand, you
> really have to know it. There is no published test
> pool complete with the answers.

And the way you get to "know" CW? You memorize it."

Oh sh*t, I'm in trouble now....Marty is agreeing with me.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
By N0IU:
"What is this big thing about memorizing and not memorizing? The difference is that one is learning and the other is just memorizing."

OK pal, how do you learn if you don't commit the concepts you are learning to memory. Look up 'learn' in the dictionary. One of the definitions is "To commit to memory, memorize."

One way or the other, everything you learn is committed to memory, therefore memorized. Your argument makes no sense.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
[AE6IP wrote:

"Morse is nearly trivial to learn, merely requiring enough time to accomplish the rote."

Then how come there is this big push to eliminate demonstrating Morse code proficiency if it so easy? Please enlighten us as to how the Fouts method works and how long it took you to learn CW to pass your 20 WPM code test?

NØIU]

NØIU, the Fouts method doesn't work. Martin had to take the 5 wpm test twice. His XYL didn't use the Fouts method and passed it the first time. Martin never took a 20 wpm test.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
[I continue to be amazed that there are those in the ARS that have raised the act of tapping two pieces of metal together to the status of a “True Faith”!

……….And that they pursue this “Faith” with an inflexible religious fervor that would make an Islamic Zealot jealous!

Face it guys, …..It’s time for a “Reality Check”: Code and CW is just a way (one of many) that one can transmit information via radio waves: ………Nothing more – Nothing less!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”]

An Islamic Zealot? Don't you mean "Iambic Zealot"?

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
BTW, there is only one true radio god- the one who knows all, Martin. Martin is a true Zealot of the Fouts faith. He never ceases to worship self.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
URBANGORILLA:

You wrote: >”….An Islamic Zealot? Don't you mean "Iambic Zealot"?”<

Good point!

KLC

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Oh great radio god Martin, I offer up to you on the altar for a sacrifice my yo-yo, my squirt gun and my teddy bear. I humbly pray that you will grant us sunspots for the next contest. Amen.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hey, UG,

You better be careful, Marty may agree with you too--then where will you be, other than standing in front of the sacrificial altar. After that, the next place is ON the altar........
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I'll even throw in a baseball card autographed by Felix Heredia.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Throw in a rancid hamfest hotdog and I bet you will have yourself a deal!

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS wrote:

By N0IU:
"What is this big thing about memorizing and not memorizing? The difference is that one is learning and the other is just memorizing."

OK pal, how do you learn if you don't commit the concepts you are learning to memory. Look up 'learn' in the dictionary. One of the definitions is "To commit to memory, memorize."

One way or the other, everything you learn is committed to memory, therefore memorized. Your argument makes no sense.

Dear Mr. Smith:

You do not know me well enough to call me your pal.

Let me ask you two questions:

1) What is your Social Security Number?

2) What is 2 + 2 ?

Obviously I don't really want to know your SSN, but I am fairly confident you were able to just rattle it off without thinking about it. You were able to do this because it is something you memorized. While the second question is a gross oversimplification of cognitive skills, the fact that you knew the answer is because you learned how to add and were able to take the two numbers I gave you and were able to calculate the sum.

Yes, it takes memory in both cases to answer the questions, but they come from completely different parts of the brain.

This is a true story. Many years ago as a VE, an unlicensed teenage boy came in to our session with his father. In the course of 90 minutes, he took the Novice, Technician, General, Advanced and Extra tests and passed them all with a score of 98% or better. I asked his father how long he had been studying to which he replied, "I gave him the 5 Gordon West books last night." He also took the 5 WPM code test. He copied 25 characters in a row. He did not get 26. He also had a medical waiver on the back of his application. He had been trying to study the code for over two months and this was the best he could do. He was a Savant, like Rainman. My point is that the part of his brain that handles memories was working far better than yours or mine ever will, but the part of his brain that handles learning and processing information was barely working at all.

So you see Mr. Smith, it is possible to memorize something and NOT learn anything!
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N1OU, you said

"My point is that the part of his brain that handles memories was working far better than yours or mine ever will, but the part of his brain that handles learning and processing information was barely working at all."

I will agree with one thing you said, I don't know you well enough--neither do you know me well enough.

With that said, I disagree with your quoted statement because the part of his brain that handles the learning and processing of information had to be working in order for him to memorize the information. That part of your argument won't hold water for just that reason. There is one of your points that is proven, however. If you are exposed to the same information day after day you will come to the point that repeating it is automatic. It does take many, many repetitions for that to happen, but that is still memorization. Which ever way you look at it, memorization is memorization.....is memorization.

A difference that makes no difference IS no difference.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP said "Morse is nearly trivial to learn, merely requiring enough time to accomplish the rote"

Hmmmm, so Marty, if you are as smart as YOU think you are, why did it take you 2 tries to pass this "trivial" test ??? ....and by your own admission, you have claimed that you would have NEVER been a ham if the test were still at 20wpm....could it be that Morse is not as easy and as "trivial" as you say it is ??? or are you not as smart as YOU say you are ???? So Marty, which one is it ???

The FACT still remains, MOST of the die hard CBers are unwilling to take the Morse test, even at 5wpm....that's more than a good enough reason to keep it in place.....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS wrote:

N1OU, you said

"My point is that the part of his brain that handles memories was working far better than yours or mine ever will, but the part of his brain that handles learning and processing information was barely working at all."

First of all, N1OU is Floyd Hubbell of West Jefferson, North Carolina and he has not contributed to this discussion. If you are going to quote me, at least have the common courtesy to get my call sign correct. I can understand why you don't use CW since you can't even remember 3 letters and 1 number from the time you read it on the screen to the time you posted your comments.

In an earlier posting you say, "Look up 'learn' in the dictionary. One of the definitions is "To commit to memory, memorize."" True, that is just one of the definitions and it happens to be the one that suits your purpose, but learning and memorization are not synonymous terms that can be used interchangably at will. The first definition of 'learn' in the Merriam Webster Online Dictionary is, "to gain knowledge or understanding of or skill in by study, instruction, or experience".

Theoretically, I could memorize the names of all the muscles, bones and blood vessels, etc. in your chest but I seriously doubt you would want me doing open heart surgery on you just because I was able to memorize the parts of the anatomy.

You seem to know an awful lot about how the human brain functions and I was wondering what your qualifications are in this area that you can say with a great deal of confidence that there is no difference between learning and memorizing?
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
RADIO123USA;

You wrote; >>“The FACT still remains, MOST of the die hard CBers are unwilling to take the Morse test, even at 5wpm....that's more than a good enough reason to keep it in place..... “<<

Excuse me, ……but WHAT “Die Hard Cbers” are we talking about? I’m not sure I know what you’re talking about.

Our group is based out of the Chicago area, and all of our vehicles have “Children’s Band” sets in addition to multiple VHF and UHF units. Since I take care of all the electronics, I have ample opportunities to listen to the CB channels:

Do you know what I hear when I click through the CB channels?? ………..in most cases NOTHING! ………JUST STATIC!!! If I really want to make sure that radio is working, I have to tune to Ch19, (that’s 27.185 for those of you who won’t admit ever using a CB) and listen for a truck on the Interstate!

Personally, I don’t think that the “Die Hard CB Hordes” that terrify you (and those of similar mind) even exist anymore. If they did, I would certainly expect to hear a high volume of radio traffic in a crowded area like Northeast Illinois.

It looks to me like most of that group have followed many prospective Hams into the world of Cell Phones and the Internet, and forgotten all about their radios.

I think you need to find another, more believable, imaginary monster to be afraid of!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”


 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KB9YZL said "I think you need to find another, more believable, imaginary monster to be afraid of! "

Kent, I'm glad things are better where you live...around here, we have some die hard CBers who have their Tech licenses..they use 10 codes and CB slang on the local repeater...it gets so bad sometimes, the control operator shuts the repeater off until they go away....this is NOT some "imaginary monster"...and I would bet there are MANY more here on eham that have experienced the same thing...and yes, many of us have tried to elmer them, and they basically told us to leave them alone....
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N8IE on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I SAY WE OUTLAW THE DAMN CODE!

Anyone caught using it should have their hands cut off in full public view.

How dare someone show off by taking the time and effort to work for something. This is the new America where everyone is equal.

"We've taken care of everything
The words you hear, the songs you sing
The pictures that give pleasure to your eyes
It's one for all and all for one
We work together, common sons
Never need to wonder how or why"
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
RADIO123USA; (……..Is your name really John Smith??)

There have been many articles on the real and perceived sins committed by “The CB Crowd”.

If we’re talking about Discourteous Operating Procedures, Rude Behavior, and On-Air Obscenity, then I’m 100% behind you. The only problem I see is that the CB Crowd certainly doesn’t hold a patent on that sort of thing.

After reading some of the posts on this site, I did a little HF listening of my own, and some of what I heard going out on the air was pretty pathetic. Maybe the ARS should take a little time off from finger pointing at the Cbers and clean their own house.

The complaints I hear about “10 Codes” and “CB slang” give me a grin. I learned the NATO Prowords and procedures long before I ever considered an ARS license, and I have to tell you: ……….after all these years, you guys with your “Q Codes” still sound pretty corny in your own right.

Every special interest group has it’s own jargon (or slang): Don’t take it so personally!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N8IE wrote; “How dare someone show off by taking the time and effort to work for something. This is the new America where everyone is equal”

Hey Dan: …..Why don’t you do a big fat favor for those of us who truly care about this country: Stop trying to make your petty little debate into some kind of National Issue or a barometer for measuring human worth!

Too many people have died defending the American concepts of Liberty and Equality for you to twist the words in an effort to make them fit this pathetic little pissing contest over “Code”.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Then how come there is this big push to eliminate
> demonstrating Morse code proficiency if it so easy?

Because the regulatory utility of a test has no relationship to the difficulty of the subject manner.

> Please enlighten us as to how the Fouts method works
> and how long it took you to learn CW to pass your 20
> WPM code test?

There is no Fouts method. I used Joe Speroni's AH0A Morse Academy to reach 20 wpm. It took me 4 weeks of 15 minutes / day to reach the 5 wpm necessary to pass element 1, and another 4 weeks to reach the level where I can copy 20 wpm.

If I send using my iambic, I am limited to about 10 wpm because I have severe bilateral tendonitis, but if I use a computer keyboard, I can send at 60-70 wpm.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> While the second question is a gross
> oversimplification of cognitive skills, the fact
> that you knew the answer is because you learned how
> to add and were able to take the two numbers I gave
> you and were able to calculate the sum.

Do you, by any chance, remember how children learn to add and multiply?

That's right. They memorize tables, often through classroom rote repetition.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Personally, I don’t think that the “Die Hard CB
> Hordes” that terrify you (and those of similar mind)
> even exist anymore. If they did, I would certainly
> expect to hear a high volume of radio traffic in a
> crowded area like Northeast Illinois.

The die-hard "cber" is still out there, but in greatly diminished number and only limited areas of the country. I'm told that they are easy to find in the Baltimore area, and along I40. They don't appear to exist in the west in any numbers at all.

This is not surprising, as the total number of CBs sold every year has dropped dramatically. The best estimates i've been able to find put the number of CBers in the us at 100-200 thousand.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Personally, I don’t think that the “Die Hard CB
> Hordes” that terrify you (and those of similar mind)
> even exist anymore. If they did, I would certainly
> expect to hear a high volume of radio traffic in a
> crowded area like Northeast Illinois.

The die-hard "cber" is still out there, but in greatly diminished number and only limited areas of the country. I'm told that they are easy to find in the Baltimore area, and along I40. They don't appear to exist in the west in any numbers at all.

This is not surprising, as the total number of CBs sold every year has dropped dramatically. The best estimates i've been able to find put the number of CBers in the us at 100-200 thousand.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Someone wrote:

"The FACT still remains, MOST of the die hard CBers are unwilling to take the Morse test, even at 5wpm....that's more than a good enough reason to keep it in place....."

Sure is. It should be kept in place so the die hard CBers who passed it already and now occupy 75 meters can keep up their antics, swearing and rude behavior and not be bothered by anyone unwilling to try to pass it! How's that for twisted logic. ;-)
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N0IU:

First, Scott, I would like to apologize to you for getting your call wrong. It was careless of me not to proof that part of my reply to you. However, I believe you owe apologies for calling me down over code. I'm one of the many to which the code doesn't come easy--but I'm still determined to get it. So, if you don't mind lets end the know code-no code issue here.

Now, as to the discussion at hand, you are correct that the terms 'memorize' and 'learn' are not interchangeable. First, I never said they were, and second, I did not bring 'learning' into this discussion, you did. I did say that one of the definitions of learn was to commit information to memory--in my second reply to your post. And I did say ONE of the definitions, not THE definition.

My original point was one way or another committing information to memory is memorizing. It makes no difference whether the information is a paragraph of a book, questions and answers of a test, letters and the symbols used to denote the letters, or an identification number unique to someone, it is still memorization.

So, to follow, person A who commits questions and answers to memory without understanding the material is memorizing, and so is person B who also commits to memory the concepts and information behind the questions and answers as well as the questions and answers.

Now, to bring 'learning' into the picture, if you asked person A to apply the information he has memorized to a problem, he cannot. However person B, who has memorized concepts as well as information can probably solve the problem. Person A hasn't learned anything--he can't apply his knowledge to solve a problem while person B can solve the problem because he has learned the why and how behind the basic information.

Both have memorized but only one has learned. So, back to my original argument--one way or another committing information to memory, whether or not you understand the concepts behind the information is memorizing. Learning comes only when the person understands the information and can apply it in a practical situation. So, it follows that to learn you must commit information to memory (memorize), but when someone commits information to memory that person doesn't necessarily learn anything--just like the person in your story who passed all the tests by reading the manuals the night before.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Chris,

Thank you for your response. You are a gentleman and a scholar.. and there aren't many of us left! You are a resonable person and at least is open to seeing other people's point of view. Learning code is a personal preference and I would never berate or belittle someone who made a personal choice not to use it. After all, it is just one of many modes.

On the other hand, AE6IP wrote (in response to one of my postings):

"Do you, by any chance, remember how children learn to add and multiply?
That's right. They memorize tables, often through classroom rote repetition."

OK, so what is 4,927 x 614 ? I guarantee you the answer is not in any multiplication table you memorized in elementary school. What you did learn in elementary school is how to do arithmetic. You learned something conceptual that you could apply to a situation such as being given two numbers and knowing what to do with them in order to derive the answer. Knowing how to perform mathematical functions, while it does require memory, is handled in a completely different part of the brain than the part that handles simple memorization like when you memorize the answers to a test without really knowing what it is you are memorizing. The bottom line is that memorizing answers to written test questions and learning Morse code are NOT the same thing.

In another posting, in response to my question that if learning CW is so easy, why is there this big push to eliminate it, you say, "Because the regulatory utility of a test has no relationship to the difficulty of the subject manner." I interpret this to mean that even if it is easy to answer the question, if it has no relevance, then it should be eliminated, right? I scanned through the current Extra Class test pool and found the following:

Which of the following types of communications may space stations transmit?

What special provision must a space station incorporate in order to comply with space station requirements?

When must the licensee of a space station give the FCC International Bureau the first written pre-space notification?

Which amateur service HF bands have frequencies authorized to space stations?

Which VHF amateur service bands have frequencies available for space stations?

Which amateur service UHF bands have frequencies available for a space station?

Unless you are an engineer responsible for designing communications systems for a space station, why would any earth-bound ham radio operator need to know this??

There are 12 questions in the subelement regarding Amateur Satellites. You don't plan on operating CW so you don't think you should have to learn it. Well, I don't plan on working satellites, so why should I have to learn this?

There are 19 questions in the subelement regarding fast scan television (FSTV) standards; slow scan television (SSTV) standards; facsimile (fax) communications. Please refer to the above comment regarding satellites.

OK, I think you get the point. How come there is no one hollering and screaming to delete these questions from the test pool? I say it is because you don't care what is on the written test because all you have to do is memorize it. So why not memorize CW? After all, there is, as you say, no difference between learning CW and memorizing test questions. So why are you complaining about learning CW and not bent out of shape over having to learn about space stations or other modes you don't operate?
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Scott,

Please check the postings--you attributed this to me:

"In another posting, in response to my question that if learning CW is so easy, why is there this big push to eliminate it, you say, "Because the regulatory utility......""

It was not me but Marty, AE6IP that said that, please don't put words in my mouth. There are enough in there already fighting to get out! ;-)

You are right about the processes in the human brain as far as differences in memorization--however, the simple fact that memorization is involved is the crux of the matter, and the focus of my argument.

I'm no professor as far as the structure of the brain and how different areas do different things--as a matter of fact that is just about the total of my knowledge of the subject although I know where to go to find out more. The central point is, using my last statement as an example, I have committed to memory the fact I expressed just as I have committed to memory the process used concerning finding out more.

To go back to your statement, the process used to find out the sum of 4,927 and 614 must be committed to memory just as the simple sum of 2 and 2 is committed to memory.

Now, as far as the need to learn about the various modes of operation, do you know what 2 meter frequencies are allocated for satellite operation? You may not want to operate satellite signalling, but you want to stay out of the way of those that do. Do you know how close to the band edge (or more properly, allocation edges) you can go when operating various modes? You may not want to do PSK, but you want to stay away from interference from those who do use it, and you need to know how far away, don't you? Those are but two examples of why knowing the technical side is somewhat important.

There are reasons for learning the technical side of the hobby, just as there are reasons for learning the various modes. On the other hand, why is the code the only mode tested for? The others should be as well. I've often said the license should be one that has endorsements for the various modes, just like a drivers license has endorsements for various vehicles and combinations, but the feds have said that type license would be administratively unmanageable for them.
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YGD on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
aw man sure is a lot to read in here...U have to keep in mind some of these hams are PROFESSIONAL NO CODE TECH`S...for what ever reason be it their lazy or perhaps mentally challenged or just dumber than a box of rocks and people tend to shy away from stuff they dont and/or CANT understand somewhat like an old 8086 computer with wins 3.1 when they go to a webpage with all the goodies it gets confused ya know.. he he he.we got these kinds around here to you can spot `em a mile away,some make up the worst excuse`s for their inablity to learn CW but none of `em comes out and say the real reason they cant!ya i guess some of these guys should have stayed glorified cber`s huh...``THE REAL HAM
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS said "Sure is. It should be kept in place so the die hard CBers who passed it already and now occupy 75 meters can keep up their antics, swearing and rude behavior and not be bothered by anyone unwilling to try to pass it! How's that for twisted logic"

Sure, there are some misfits on 75 meters...are you suggesting that we make it easier for other misfits to get licensed ??? Chris, you are completely missing the point...please re-read N0IU's post, and explain what it is about the CW requirement that brings such anger from the No-Coders ??? I believe N0IU hit the nail on the head here... I believe the REAL issue that folks have with the CW requirement is it actually requires some EFFORT....are the HF bands worth that little bit of EFFORT to you ??? If they are not, then please be content to stay a Tech... Chris, I honestly hope you will take the effort to upgrade, because I believe you would be an asset to the HF bands...The FACT still remains here though, there are alot of CB misfits that are unwilling to take the CW test...if that's the only thing keeping them off the HF bands, then I say lets keep it in place....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Radio123us,

You missed my point--I was being sarcastic. The code test was not a barrier to those who passed it and are up on 75 and it won't be a barrier to those who want to join the ones already there. True, there may be less 'vulgarity' on 75 then there used to be. One thing is certain, a 'filtering test' won't stop people from being lids--but it may stop the few good operators that for one reason or the other can't pass the code test.

I would sometimes like to get on HF, but I lack a real reason to do so, added to the trouble I have when I try passing the code test leaves me content for the most part to stay where I am. One day I will pass the test--when that day will be I don't know. I do finally have something that may give me an incentive--a local general class operator who has offered his help. Maybe that day won't be as far away as I think!
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS said "a 'filtering test' won't stop people from being lids--but it may stop the few good operators that for one reason or the other can't pass the code test."

A "filtering test" WILL stop SOME of the CB misfits...and thats a good thing...the number of CB misfits it keeps off the HF bands are well worth it...you see, I DO NOT believe there are many folks who CAN'T pass the CW test at 5wpm...I DO believe there are folks that for whatever reason, WILL NOT, or CHOOSE NOT to apply themselves and make the effort....so why should their lack of motivation be rewarded ??? Chris, I have absolutely no doubt you can pass the CW exam, IF YOU CHOOSE TO...and it won't take you long to do it either....I'm glad to hear that you found someone to help you, please accept the offer of help, it makes it much easier when you can practice with somebody else...
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N8IE on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Capt. Kent spwed this tid-bit of wisdom:
"Hey Dan: …..Why don’t you do a big fat favor for those of us who truly care about this country: Stop trying to make your petty little debate into some kind of National Issue or a barometer for measuring human worth!

Too many people have died defending the American concepts of Liberty and Equality for you to twist the words in an effort to make them fit this pathetic little pissing contest over “Code”.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”"

Kent, I really tried to write a response to your post but I was not able to do it without using the phrases "Liberal Weenie" and "Socialist Scumbag" but I could not. I also did not want to let fly a string of obscenities, so let me just say PLEASE never learn code, there is enough garbage on the HF bands.

Dan Shepherd
N8IE
"Real Motherf****** Radio Operator"
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

Mr "Real Ham" KB9YGD says;

"U have to keep in mind some of these hams are PROFESSIONAL NO CODE TECH`S...for what ever reason be it their lazy or perhaps mentally challenged or just dumber than a box of rocks."


Might I ask what degree you hold and from what accredited institution of "real ham" learning is your CW vocation held?

I am curious because I too, am categorically one of these typical dumb as a box of rocks, lazy, slothful professional no code techs (NCT) as you are describing.

I am most interested in attaining this apparently higher level of philosophical study in CW such as you have clearly demonstrated.

It is noteworthy (a word often used in college) to indicate that as a categorized no code tech, I must be a dumb; but yet ambulating box of rocks who is mentally challenged and completely illiterate because of the fact that I am lacking any CW credentials on my FCC license.

As of late, I find myself struggling for any explanation describing how I possibly acquired at least one four year academic degree without any prior knowledge of CW studies in the past?

One could only guess how any such individual as a no code tech such as myself could possibly have become employed as an Executive in a national company without acquiring any honorable credentials in CW studies bestowed upon them by a federally accredited institution such as the FCC?

Retrospectively, I should have studied CW in my shack instead of spending all this time earning all these silly useless credentials. Only if I have aspired to have chosen the right path in my youth such as yourself - pursuing CW studies as my lifelong dream, I might have ended up to be a "real ham" like yourself.

Unequivocally, you are my academic preceptor and I am not worthy to call myself by any such "real ham" title.

In conclusion, I am yet another example of a dumber than your proverbial box of rocks - slothful, no code tech just taking up your most valuable time and bandwidth.

Please accept my most gracious apologies for my ignorance of CW.

73

Charles Bushell - KC8VWM /(NCT)

http://www.starseal.com/C_Bushell.htm
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> OK, so what is 4,927 x 614 ? I guarantee you the
> answer is not in any multiplication table you
> memorized in elementary school. What you did learn
> in elementary school is how to do arithmetic. You
> learned something conceptual that you could apply to
> a situation such as being given two numbers and
> knowing what to do with them in order to derive the
> answer.

actually, in grade school, an algorithm is learned, a very mechanical set of rote rules, by memorization and repetition. the conceptual stuff is hinted at in high school algebra, but not touched on seriously until an undergraduate 'modern algebra' class.

What is 4,927 x 614? As learned in grades school, it is 12 multiplications done from the memorized tables (4x7, 4x2, 4x9, 4x4, 1x7, 1x2, et cetera,) written down according to very simple rules, resulting in a 4 number addition, again done from the memoorized tables, resulting in a final total.

learning how to add and multiply is on the order of rote memory complexity with learning morse code. learning how to apply the Peano axioms to build a number theory takes that beyond rote into conceptual learning.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I interpret this to mean that even if it is easy to
> answer the question, if it has no relevance, then it
> should be eliminated, right?

Yes.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 15, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> How come there is no one hollering and screaming to
> delete these questions from the test pool?

There is.

> I say it is because you don't care what is on the
> written test because all you have to do is memorize
> it.

I've yet to see any convincing evidence for the argument that people memorize the question pool for the extra test in any number.

> So why not memorize CW?

I've got a better question:

A tech license gives you the ability to do _everything_ a ham can do, with one exception. It allows you the opportunity to experiment with any kind of radio transmitter and receiver, antenna, or mode. It allows you the opportunity to participate in every aspect of the hobby.

The only thing it doesn't do is give you access to certain HF spectrum.

So why do you have to take a test showing more technical proficiency to access that spectrum?

seems backwards. HF uses the less technical parts of amateur radio. shouldn't 'incentive licensing' start with limited HF access, and only allow access to the VHF and above, and to modes beyond CW/SSB, to those who've earned higher license classes?

Or, maybe, just maybe, the license structure isn't all that rational, after all?
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP said "Or, maybe, just maybe, the license structure isn't all that rational, after all?"

Or maybe REAL answer here is what WA4DOU so eloquently said.....

WA4DOU said "I think we've had this discussion before Martin. You're still an idiot!"

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K1CJS on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I think I'll end the watching of this thread here.....it has gone from discussion to rant, from the sublime to the rediculous......
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N8IE wrote:

>>”Kent, I really tried to write a response to your post but I was not able to do it without using the phrases "Liberal Weenie" and "Socialist Scumbag" but I could not. I also did not want to let fly a string of obscenities, so let me just say PLEASE never learn code, there is enough garbage on the HF bands.

Dan Shepherd
N8IE
"Real Motherf****** Radio Operator" “<<


Well Dan,….after a lifetime of voting Libertarian, I find your comments amusing in the extreme! You are apparently as politically clueless as you are clueless on other issues. (I suppose that makes sense; …..clueless people tend to apply that characteristic to their entire lives.)

You also missed on another point; (although I realize that I shouldn’t assume that you’ve actually read this entire thread) I learned “Code” 45 years ago! (Before you were born!).

You are absolutely correct on one point: If you are any indication, there certainly is more than enough garbage on the HF bands!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP wrote:

"I've yet to see any convincing evidence for the argument that people memorize the question pool for the extra test in any number."

I don't have any hard evidence of this, but I would say that probably only a very small percentage of the people taking the Extra test actually answer the questions, especially in the sections about electronic theory, from a true working knowledge of the subject. Most people just want to pass the test and get on the air and they could care less about which of the following factors has the greatest effect in helping determine the bandwidth and response shape of a crystal ladder filter or what type of frequency synthesizer circuit uses a stable voltage-controlled oscillator, programmable divider, phase detector, loop filter and a reference frequency source?

I am still in a quandry, however. One of the most frequent reasons for being opposed to CW is, "I am not interested in working CW, so why should I have to learn it?" Good point and I agree 100%. Why would anyone waste their time learning a mode they will never use? Well here's my problem. In going through the Extra Class test pool, there are questions about RACES, the amateur-satellite service, fast scan television (FSTV), slow scan television (SSTV), facsimile (fax) communications, spread-spectrum transmissions, automatic HF forwarding, HF packet communications, Packet Cluster Bulletin Boards, AMTOR operation, EME communications, meteor-scatter communications to name just a few.

AMTOR operation - HA! At least people still use CW, but AMTOR was on its way out when I got into ham radio 15 years ago! Now this truly qualifies as an antiquated mode. AMTOR appears in 12 questions in the pool either as an answer or detractor. PACTOR was going the way of AMTOR until programs like Winlink 2000 came along. PACTOR appears twice in the test pool; once as the answer to a questions and once as a detractor. I don't have any statistics to back this up, but unless it is a contest weekend, the most frequently heard digital mode is PSK31. There are 2 questions involving PSK31; once as the answer to a questions and once as a detractor. What's wrong with this picture?

Packet Bulletin Boards - if it wasn't for APRS, no one would have a reason to buy a TNC any more.

And without a doubt, the hands down winner of the stupidest question on any one of the 3 test pools has to be:

E1E08 When must the licensee of a space station give the FCC International Bureau the first written pre-space notification?

OK, let's see by a show of hands how many people here are responsible for overseeing the amateur communications station aboard the International Space Station? Besides NASA and Richard Branson, the "Rebel Billionaire" who bankrolled the team who recently won the X Prize, who needs to know this?

As I said in an earlier posting, most hams have absolutely no problem memorzing literally hundreds of test questions about truly antiquated and rarely used modes and electronic theory, but will pitch a ring tail hissy fit over learning Morse code! Why is this? Doesn't this pretty much prove that relevance to operating a station in this day and age has absolutely nothing to do with your willingness to learn the material? So to all you guys who think they shouldn't have to learn CW because they don't plan to use it, I say BS! Saying that CW is not relevant to the type of operating you want to do as a reason not to learn it is nothing but a poor, weak, flimsy, pitiful, pathetic EXCUSE!!!

If it was as easy to learn CW as it was to memorize the answers, then no one would complain. You can not memorize CW like you can test answers, period! It does take time and effort to learn code; apparently more effort than many hams are willing to put out!
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YGD on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Well Charles this was not meant to anger you in any way its just that im of the opinion that CW is and was ham radio and i wasnt intending to imply that i am a real smart guy, why hell im a dummy that just happens to like NO love CW & infact all aspects of amateur radio. i do suppose CW is not for everyone as to learn it takes a day or to BUT to learn it well is an ongoing thing that takes many many years.a lot of hams just listen one time and make up their mind that this mode stinks & dont explore it any further,its ashamed as they are cheating themselves out of something wonderfull.and i am sure that there are many guys that will read what i am writing here now and maby just maby this will inspire them to go on and be good cw ops one day.73 all,Norm. ``THE REAL HAM``
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KA9INV on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
It is apparently not possible to conduct a decent debate over one of amateur radio's "hot topics" without the incessant flinging of insults from both sides.

Frankly, some of us hold the opinion that there are better things to do than trying to make fellow hams look like utter brainless degenerates over the internet. Tell me, how many of you (you know who you are) would behave this way if you were face to face with your adversaries? I'd be appalled if anyone were to reply that they would.

Maybe time would be better spent on the air, or with family, or washing the car - anything besides rehashing this tired garbage over and over again. File your petitions, write to the ARRL, join organizations, but I don't see the necessity of ripping each other apart like this on a public (and well-known) amateur radio site like this. Imagine how many potential and new hams have read this and are wondering what the hell they've gotten themselves into.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is precious. I couldn't resist posting this here. It is a post from the Yahoo Solid Copy CW Group

URL- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SolidCpyCW/

-------------------------------------------------------

> > Is there anyone from HI that subscribes to the top band?
> > I am trying to make a sked with anyone from honolulu or any of the
> > other islands that might be available.
> >
>
> Yes I am in Hilo, on the big island (that is what we call the island of
> Hawaii here) I'll be glad to attempt a QSO with any mainland station. I
> usually operate below the DX window. Any time between my sunset and your
> sunrise might work. Send me an email and see if we can find a time that
> works for both of us.
>
> I have not learned the phone and have a license that only required me to
> learn morse code and answer some multiple choice questions, so I cannot
> provide a SSB contact.

-------------------------------------------------------

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W4JLE on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I can copy a message in French, Spanish, or any number of languages that I would be unable to read after copying on CW. The copy could be handed to a reader/speaker of the particular language and fully understood.

Try that on SSB
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N0IU said "If it was as easy to learn CW as it was to memorize the answers, then no one would complain. You can not memorize CW like you can test answers, period! It does take time and effort to learn code; apparently more effort than many hams are willing to put out! "

Very well said !!!! This is what I have been saying as well....this is why CW works so well in filtering out alot of the CB misfits....MOST (not all) of these misfits don't have any motivation, and just want to "shoot skip" with as much RF power as they can....this is why we need to retain a test that requires at least some dedication to pass, since the written tests are a joke....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Well Charles this was not meant to anger you in any way its just that im of the opinion that CW is and was ham radio and i wasnt intending to imply that i am a real smart guy, why hell im a dummy that just happens to like NO love CW "

Norm, (and others)

Firstly, let me apologies for my ranting and some people are very correct in stating the fact that we are not setting the right example for others reading these posts.

Norm, I know you like CW, but let's not get into an "real hams vs. box of rocks" scenario with respect to fellow license class. This really isn't necessary to do and we are all hams regardless of CW qualification or license class. We each bring our own unique quality as individuals into the ARS.

It is a complete contradiction for hams to throw down the gauntlet and make enemies with fellow hams over the subject of CW or license class.

We are all ambassadors and need to conduct ourselves accordingly. I think we can even extend this behavior to a certain extent to our postings here on the internet. One post is correct in stating that we are all an example for others and even potential hams to follow.

Norm, let's put this issue aside and let's move on with it. I just wish the FCC would make a decision on this matter either way very soon because the longer they drag this out, the more frequently we are going to have these CW catfights going on among our license ranks.

All my best Norm to you and your family and I hope to work CW with you someday.

73 de Charles - KC8VWM
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I can copy a message in French, Spanish, or any
> number of languages that I would be unable to read
> after copying on CW.

this will only be true if the sender limits themselves to not sending any characters from a national character set.

on the other hand, given 5x copy, i can copy *any* language on SSB so that a native speaker can understand the message. (It's called a tape recorder.)
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W7WIK on March 16, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I think a lot of people don't like CW because they don't know how to spell. For that reason they're afraid to use it on the air.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W1BAK on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Don't let anyone say "I'm too old to learn the code". I just passed two milestones. I turned 59 last week and just passed the cw exam last night! YA-HOOO!!! 13 years as a tech...Now...on to General!!!
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by WA4DOU on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Congratulations on learning and passing the code exam. Wait till you discover just how valuable it is as a mode. It blows the others out of the water.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
W7WIK WROTE:

"I think a lot of people don't like CW because they don't know how to spell. For that reason they're afraid to use it on the air."

I have never heard this excuse before. I am going to have to write it down and move it somewhere close to the top of the list. I can usually tell when someone is using a keyboard because they are the ones sending CW using whole words in complete sentences with punctuation. I have no problem with sending via keyboard especially when speeds top 35-40 WPM. One of the things the Good Lord has blessed me with is a touch af arthritis in my hands. (Maybe this is just punishment for being so mean to the people who don't like CW!) On the other hand, a more typical example of a CW QSO sent by hand might begin with something like "GUD CU AGN BT UR SIGS 5NN WID LIL QRN BT HOWS WX UR WAY?" Even at 40-50 WPM, this is still about 25% of the rate of normal conversational speech which I am told is somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 WPM so many CW ops will use abbreviations like this so they can put more words into the least amount of time and this is no reflection on their ability to spell or use proper grammar.

NØIU
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
RADIO123USA wrote:
>>”....this is why CW works so well in filtering out alot of the CB misfits....MOST (not all) of these misfits don't have any motivation, and just want to "shoot skip" with as much RF power as they can....this is why we need to retain a test that requires at least some dedication to pass, since the written tests are a joke....”<<

Ok; ………..I am forced once again to play “The Devil’s Advocate”, and ask a couple of questions:

First: Is this really your number one reason for keeping a Code Requirement? …..just because the test achieves a certain level of difficulty?? Using that logic, we would be just as well served by insisting that all “Upgrading” licensees have a basic working knowledge of spoken Swahili!

Your argument is an open admission to all the critics that the “Code Requirement” really is a “Rite of Passage” and nothing more!

Second Question: If the written tests are such jokes, and if we truly need a difficult “Rite of Passage” to cull out “undesirables”, wouldn’t the ARS be much better served in the long run if we made the technical testing requirements appropriately tough, rather than simply having everyone learn Swahili?

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
So what if CW is a rite of passage? Its a hobby! Deal with it. It is something to fill your idle hours after you take care of your family and work obligations. No one made you become a ham. You knew the licensing requirements BEFORE you became a ham but you went ahead and got into it any way. I have no sympathy for you.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Scott;

Your reply to my last post made no sense whatsoever!

If you had actually read any of my previous posts you would know the following:

A) I already know “Code”.
B) I don’t give a damn about “HF Privileges”.
C) I really could care less about your “sympathy”.

I asked those questions in my previous post because I believe that rules and regulations should be both logical and practical: ………….or isn‘t that sort of thing allowed in the ARS?

Next time try reading what others have written before you climb to the top of your lofty soapbox and start issuing pompous statements from on-high!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”


P.S. If anything I’ve said irritates you, just remember; …..”Its a hobby! Deal with it.”

KLC


 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W5ESE on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I agree with Kent on almost everything he wrote.
I do think, though, that the Telegraph requirement
is a rational component of the General and Extra
Class license exams.

I do not agree at all that "keeping the CBer's
out" is a reasonable argument for maintaining
a CW element. Frankly, I cringe everytime I
hear that. Someone hearing that might conclude
that there is no reasoned basis for continuing
to test for CW proficiency, if that's the only
reason that can be advanced!

We don't need "initiation rites" or "sincerety
tests" in the Amateur Radio examinations.

I think the license examinations for General
and Extra licenses should reflect the skills
that are most pertinent to operating on HF.
When you tune across an HF band, what do you
hear? What do you need to know to join into
the mainstream and participate?

My estimate is that about 59% of HF activity is
Phone, 39% is CW, and the remaining ~1.5% are
all the other data modes combined (based on 2004
Field Day results). Curiously, the data seem to
indicate that CW activity has increased slightly
over the last decade or so, perhaps a percentage
point or two.

This data is available on the web at:

http://www2.arrl.org/members-only/contests/results/2004/FD/stats.html

I think Field Day results are relevant, because
it is the largest on-the-air operating event in
North America, employs various modes, and attracts
a wide variety of participants beyond just those
who normally take part in contests.

For that reason, the Telegraph element is far more
relevant than written questions pertaining to
other data modes, space-based operation,
satellite operation, and so forth since they
comprise such a miniscule part of overall
activity.

73
Scott
W5ESE
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
W5ESE;

You make some good points, and I can agree with all of them.

Your data that CW constitutes 39% of HF activity is very relevant to this discussion. Given that data, most would have to agree that CW is certainly a more important part of the HF environment than some other modes, and probably should be part of the examination.

Thanks for “coming to the table” with facts and a well reasoned position, instead of mindless emotion and dogma!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KB9YZL said "First: Is this really your number one reason for keeping a Code Requirement? …..just because the test achieves a certain level of difficulty?? "

That's my whole point...the CURRENT exams WITHOUT the CW exam are a joke...anyone can practice online and memorize enough answers to pass the written exam in a few days...CW take dedication to learn (except in AE6IP's case, he memorized it)....

KB9YZL said "Second Question: If the written tests are such jokes, and if we truly need a difficult “Rite of Passage” to cull out “undesirables”, wouldn’t the ARS be much better served in the long run if we made the technical testing requirements appropriately tough, rather than simply having everyone learn Swahili?"

Kent, I actually agree...but this is NOT what the ANTI-code folks (NCI) want...they want a FREE ride...I have previously said in other post that I think eliminating the CW requirement would work when (and ONLY when) they:

1:) Make the test MUCH more difficult..maybe allow the VE's to create calculation questions where the applicant has to PROVE he didn't memorize an answer...maybe have fill in the blank questions.

2:) Quit publishing the answers

I would like to see a written exam so difficult that the anti-code folks would be crying for the CW requirement to be reinstated...

KB9YZL said
"A) I already know “Code”.
B) I don’t give a damn about “HF Privileges”."

A - Then why not go ahead and take the test, even if you don't want the privileges ?? It would give your arguments MUCH more relevance here if you did...

B - I've asked you this before...WHY do you always show up in the code/no code debates...if it doesn't make any difference to you, then WHY are you here ??? Seems to me if you didn't care about HF, you would ignore these debates...

Kent, I think are opinions are closer than what you think they are....I just don't want to see ham radio ruined by a bunch of misfits because they lower our standards to nothing....that's what the ANTI-code folks want...
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
RADIO123USA;

You’re quite right! ………..we do agree on a great many points: The integrity of the ARS being the central issue.

We both feel that maintaining the Quality of the ARS is essential…… More to the point, we both want the ARS to still be here in 25 years!

Poor operating practices and scofflaw operators degrade our public image, and threaten the privileges we enjoy, and the specter of declining interest also bodes no good. I don’t want to re-open the “Is Ham Radio Dying?” debate here: I’ll simply point out that if you’re familiar with statistics, and you look at the average age of the average Ham, little alarms should be going off in your head!

For me the ARS is far more than a “Hobby”! It is an incredibly valuable tool, that would be virtually irreplaceable, if lost. I am just as concerned about encroachment on “my” VHF/UHF bands as many others are about “their” HF Bands.

You asked: >>>“...WHY do you always show up in the code/no code debates...if it doesn't make any difference to you, then WHY are you here ??? Seems to me if you didn't care about HF, you would ignore these debates... “<<<

Well, ……..It has to do with the “Welcome” I received when I first got my license: I had the “pleasure” of running into a number of people (both here on the Internet, and in “real” life) who couldn’t wait to tell me how insignificant a NCT was.

When I commented that I had no immediate plans for “upgrading”, THEN the fun began! I was called “Lazy”, “Unmotivated”, “Stupid”, and finally “One of those deadbeats who want something for nothing”.

Please understand that I was raised by my Grandfather, who fought in WWI, and was definitely from the “Old School”. I learned at an early age, that you don’t accept a poke in the nose without giving a better one back! ……….Now that I’ve had a couple of years to figure out “the lay of the land”, I make it a point to NEVER listen to a pompous attitude or a bigoted remark without “making comment upon it”. (as Mark Twain would have said.)

These debates tend to be where most of these objectionable things are seen, so this is where you see many of my replies. I figure that if I make myself a big enough pain-in-the-ass, then maybe the Bigots will think twice before they flame the next poor “Newbie” that comes down the road.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”





 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KB9YZL said "Well, ……..It has to do with the “Welcome” I received when I first got my license: I had the “pleasure” of running into a number of people (both here on the Internet, and in “real” life) who couldn’t wait to tell me how insignificant a NCT was."

Sorry to hear you were treated badly....I guess I would have reacted a little different if I were in your shoes though, I would have seen this as a challenge and studied and upgraded to Extra as quickly as I could, just to prove to those morons that they were wrong....

KB9YZL said "When I commented that I had no immediate plans for “upgrading”, THEN the fun began! I was called “Lazy”, “Unmotivated”, “Stupid”, and finally “One of those deadbeats who want something for nothing”."

Again, I'm sorry to hear that...but why not just go and upgrade, then you can put all of those morons in their place....and it would be nice to meet you on the HF bands....


 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Kent,

Earlier in these postings I asked the question of anyone who cared to answer why they got into ham radio knowing they would have to face the Morse code issue?

You were the ONLY one who answered the question honestly and that was that you are not interested in the HF bands and your posting above restates that in no uncertain terms. BRAVO! That is the ONLY sensible reason I have seen so far in all of these postings for not learning CW! I applaud you! I am not patronizing you. I am completely serious about this. You did not give some sorry ass lame excuse about how it is an atiquated mode that is only used by old farts who were forced to learn it in the Army. I do belive it is possible to have a completely fulfilling and rewarding ham radio experience from 6 meters through daylight.

Via con Dios!

NØIU
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I would like to see a written exam so difficult that
> the anti-code folks would be crying for the CW
> requirement to be reinstated

derive from the field equations for a perfect radiator in free space the complex impedence of a dipole as a function of the carrier frequency.

derive from your results the relationship between the length of a dipole and its resonant frequency.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 17, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I think Field Day results are relevant, because
> it is the largest on-the-air operating event in
> North America, employs various modes, and attracts
> a wide variety of participants beyond just those
> who normally take part in contests.

I would think field day would be a bad choice for comparison precisely because it is unlike any other operating day of the year.

But I also think it doesn't particularly matter, since there's no reason why the majority, even by field day examples, who are SSB users, need to know anything special about how the others operate. It's not a particularly compelling reason for testing for CW proficiency.

 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by VE7ALQ on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
When I studied Russian at University, I asked for and received a copy of Russian Morse Code. I used to talk to the Russians on 20 meter and 40 meter CW, using Russian and Russian Morse Code.

I found out there is a Hebrew Morse Code. I guess that I will learn it when I get to go to Israel.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W5ESE on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Kent,

> When I commented that I had no immediate plans for
> “upgrading”, THEN the fun began! I was called “Lazy”,
> “Unmotivated”, “Stupid”, and finally “One of those
> deadbeats who want something for nothing”.

I'm sorry that you encountered this. I don't blame
you for not pursuing an HF license, as you probably
have assumed that you will encounter there more of
that ilk.

I suspect that, in practice, you would find it
an enjoyable adjunct to your VHF/UHF storm
spotting. I particularly recommend the QRP aspect,
like that which is being discussed in the
'On-The-Air Activities in QRP' article by K3ESE.

73
Scott
W5ESE
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W5ESE on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> 'On-The-Air Activities in QRP' article by K3ESE.

oops, I mean by AE5X.

Scott
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by VE3UFI on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
no esto otra vez

pas ceci encore

nicht dieses wieder

non questo ancora

niet dit opnieuw

não isto outra vez

-. --- - - .... .. ... .- --. .- .. -.

I mean ... Not this again
 
Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KE7AKS on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I say that maybe we should give hams the option of learning MORSE CODE 5WPM or finding a Sgt.Preston Secret Code Ring... they are both kinda cool and from the past.
I think CW was intended to make nearly un-readable radio signals more definate than trying understand voice modulated signals that sounded like they were carried on ocean waves (short waves). The International
SECRET CODE universal language aspect was a side issue.

Again, maybe we could learn HEIROGLYPHICS and send by packet or slow scan TV!

The fact is.. If we keep an exclusionist attitude, requiring people to learn code, q signals, cw signs - pro-signs, counter-signs, etc., then it may end up that people will just use NEXTELL TALKIES, and let the ham frequencies be used for garage door openers, and broad band over power lines....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KE7AKS said "If we keep an exclusionist attitude, requiring people to learn code, q signals, cw signs - pro-signs, counter-signs, etc., then it may end up that people will just use NEXTELL TALKIES"

If we give everyone access to our frequencies, then we have chaos...have you checked out CB (Criminal Band) lately ???...it's a good example of what happens if you get rid of the "exclusionist" attitudes....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KE7AKS said "The fact is.. If we keep an exclusionist attitude, requiring people to learn code, q signals, cw signs - pro-signs, counter-signs, etc., then it may end up that people will just use NEXTELL TALKIES, and let the ham frequencies be used for garage door openers, and broad band over power lines.... ".

Gee, where have I heard this "ham radio is dying" crap from? Oh yes! NCI and the ARRL. The ARRL wants to stand on the street corner and hand out licenses. Why don't we just ask a few simple questions like:

1. What color is the sky?

2. What is the capitol of the United States?

3. what happens when you stick your finger in a light socket?

For those who get all 3 correct, an Extra class license is awarded along with a cash incentive in the form of a $100 check to put toward an HF radio. For those who get only 2 correct, a General class license with a $50 check to use toward the purchase of an HF radio. For those who get only 1 answer correct, a General class license but no cash incentive. For those who get none correct, a plea on bended knee to try the test over again with the promise that no matter what the results, a General class ticket will be issued with a pat on the back and an "A" for effort.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
For CBERs one question would be asked:

How long have you been on CB?

If the answer is over 3 years, the person will be awarded an Extra class ticket and will be allowed to trade in the illegal Galaxy CB for a new Icom 746.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KE7AKS wrote:

"I say that maybe we should give hams the option of learning MORSE CODE 5WPM..."

Harvey, you do have the option of whether or not to learn Morse code. Since you are a No Code Tech, you have obviously exercised your option not to learn it. Some people are not interested in working the HF bands and that is probably one of the best reasons I have heard not to learn it. If, however, you do want to work the HF bands, then you no longer have an option. It is not exclusionist at all. Like it or not, those are the rules as they exist today and I will make a bold assumption that you knew about the code requirement before you became a ham but it didn't stop you from getting your license.

You went on to write, "I think CW was intended to make nearly un-readable radio signals more definate than trying understand voice modulated signals that sounded like they were carried on ocean waves (short waves)."

Statements like that prove that you really don't know anything about the history of CW. You really should check your facts before making comments that make you look foolish. The "continuous wave" officially replaced the spark gap as the method of transmitting Morse code in 1926. While hams were also experimenting with transmitting voice using amplitude modulation during this time, voice modulated signals, or SSB, did not enter the ham arena until 1948 some 22 years later. So you see, the development of CW and voice modulated signals have nothing to do with each other.

I absolutely agree that it is extremely rude to judge a person by the class of his license, but this is just another pitiful example of a NCT making up excuses why he shouldn't have to learn CW.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Earlier in these postings I asked the question of
> anyone who cared to answer why they got into ham
> radio knowing they would have to face the Morse code
> issue?

> You were the ONLY one who answered the question
> honestly

I missed the question, but here's my answer: I didn't. Back in the early 70s, when I became interested in radio electronics, I skipped ham radio and went directly to a commercial license.

I didn't bother with ham radio until well after the Morse code requirement was dropped for tech.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
" but this is just another pitiful example of a NCT making up excuses why he shouldn't have to learn CW."


I might point out that I am one of these so called NCT, and yet as strange as this might sound I know CW.

CW really isn't difficult to learn. 26 letters, some numbers, and a few prosigns that's all.

I remember a ham telling me way back in the 1970's that an easy way to learn CW, was to read license plates on cars that went by and then whistle the license plate numbers in CW. It wont take you long after that. It took me only a few weeks and it was stuck for good.

I have also been listening to CW on SW radio since 1975 - So why wouldn't I have a general or extra class license right now you might ask?

...Should I? Who says?

Firstly, when did the FCC make it a requirement for all hams to have a CW endorsement to use CW?

They don't.

So, why not practice or use CW on 2 & 6 meters? It seems to work fine for me. Whats this big "push" for HF access when a person can already enjoy the many modes available on some of the many other noise free bands.

Sometimes I think they have this whole licensing arrangement all backwards. HF is unreliable, noisy and should be the starting point and then you graduate up the bands to experience clearer and reduced noise.

Now, add to this fact that I can't put up a huge Yagi array on my roof in my antenna restricted neighborhood for HF operation. What about all the the interference problems with my neighbors that I have to live with everyday of the year? RFI is well known to occur when using HF bands.

What if my wife and I don't want to drive around town with an antenna resembling a schedule 80 PVC plumbing pipe sticking out of the back of my SUV?

So, Is there such thing as a CW Tech Class without a CW endorsement?

.. Absolutely and why not?

Now these are my "excuses" for being a NCT.

Now...,

What I really want to know is why is it that some hams today with higher class licenses than I, don't know the difference between an X axis and Y axis on an oscilliscope?

--... ...--

-.. . -.-. .... .- .-. .-.. . ...

-.- -.-. ---.. ...- .-- --
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Like it or not, those are the rules as they exist
> today

Well yes, but rules can be changed, and this one definitely should be.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KC8VWM said "I might point out that I am one of these so called NCT, and yet as strange as this might sound I know CW. "

Kent, I wish you would consider upgrading, it would be nice to work you on the HF bands. I have over 70 countries on an indoor attic dipole...no need for the BIG beam antennas here....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Sorry, Charles, I got the names mixed up...it's too late here..I need sleep....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Goodnight John. :)

I hope to work you too someday.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Personally, I’m fairly certain that the ARS and Ham Radio are not in immediate danger of “Dying Out”; ....but I am a bit concerned about our apparent age demographics. I think that dismissing the whole issue as “crap”, (as another poster phrased it) may not be wise.

I’ll admit right up front that I haven’t done a serious, documented study on the subject. I first started seriously wondering about this issue when I realized one day that the only "under 30" ARS licensees I knew were the people in our program at the College! .....The ones I had coached through their tests!

My concerns are based on the kind of empirical data one gets from sites like this on the Internet, and attending swap meets and Hamfests: We appear to be an “Older Crowd”.

If the median age of ARS licensees is really as high as the anecdotal evidence suggests, then I think that some serious studies are required to see if the new license issuances are keeping up with the mortality rate.

In the past, many on this site have expressed a “So What?!” attitude on this subject. They typically say something like “Quality is more important than quantity!”. While this is generally true, I do not feel that this attitude realistically addresses the issue: …We live in a country where “Political Clout” is based on numbers. We will have a tough time protecting our frequencies and privileges if we allow our numbers to dwindle to the point of political insignificance.

I am certainly NOT suggesting that we start “giving licenses away“! ………But face it people: …if “shrinkage” is really a problem, then ignoring it won’t work either!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”




 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Charles,

My comment about "another NCT" was not directed to you. You have shown throughout these posts and on other forums that you are quite knowledgeable in the field of radio communications. You write well and your comments are generally clearly stated and insightful. You stated at some time in the past in another article that you did not want to upgrade here in the U.S. because it was now too easy and you did not want to be lumped in the same category with the other "Extra Lites". To each their own I say.

The gentleman who made the comment about the CW requirement being exclusionary has been a ham only slightly less than a year and has not shown a great depth of radio knowlege like you. Quite the opposite. His facts were completely wrong about the development of CW being tied to voice modulated modes.

CW requirements aside, I do think the progession of band privileges is proper; starting with VHF/UHF then into the HF bands. Of course the HF bands don't have the clarity and reliability of VHF/UHF FM. The difference is (sorry if I am stating the obvious) that VHF/UHF is intended to be used for local point-to-point communications or regional communications through repeaters and intertie systems. HF, on the other hand, is global in scope. It may sound like a cliche, but whenever you carry on a QSO on the HF bands, even if you are in a domestic conversation, it can potentially be heard all over the face of the globe if conditions are right and we must act as ambassadors for the United States. I am sure the intention was that hams should demonstrate some sort of higher level of knowlege before being allowed to be such an ambassador, but we are pretty much a heartbeat away from giving away licenses now so it really doesn't matter.

There is an article in the April QST about how well these accelerated license classes are working. There is even a picture of a guy who became an Extra one week after learning about ham radio. These are the kind of people who get 'torn a new one' for operating in the DX window. But hey, it gives us something to write about!

NØIU
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> The difference is (sorry if I am stating the
> obvious) that VHF/UHF is intended to be used for
> local point-to-point communications or regional
> communications through repeaters and intertie
> systems.

That, however, is not the difference. VHF/UHF *are* used for global communication, although it is much more difficult to do with VHF/UHF than it is with HF.

In fact, going global by going HF is taking the easy way out by comparison to EME.

Marty
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
But can you really call EME global? Even under the most ideal conditions, no matter how much gain your antennae have and no matter how much power spews forth from your antennae, you can only talk to half the surface of the globe at any given time since both you and the other station must be able to see the moon. Remember, VHF is line of site. I am pretty sure this was something covered in the Technician test.

On the other hand, HF signals bounce back to earth once hitting the ionosphere which is how we are able to talk anywhere on the globe given the right circumstances.

NØIU
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Martin, no matter what anyone has to say, you will disagree with it. If I said that you're a nice man, you would say, "no I'm a jerk." If I said you're a jerk, you would say, "no, I'm a nice man." Why don't you just admit that you have a personal grudge against code and code testing because you couldn't pass a lousy 5 wpm code test on the first try?

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> But can you really call EME global?

Under proper circumstances, it can reach anywhere on the globe. It just can't do the entire globe at once. But in reality, neither can HF, unless propagation is favorable.

> Even under the most ideal conditions, no matter how
> much gain your antennae have and no matter how much
> power spews forth from your antennae, you can only
> talk to half the surface of the globe at any given
> time since both you and the other station must be
> able to see the moon.

It's a little more than half, but not enough to matter.

> Remember, VHF is line of site. I am pretty sure this
> was something covered in the Technician test.

Was it? That would be a pretty bad test, since VHF isn't just line of sight. It's subject to meteor scatter, tropospheric ducting and sporadic E refraction. You can even sometimes get lucky with transequatorial and aurora propagation.

You can't get long path propagation with VHF, but you can certainly do better than line of sight.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KC8VWM on March 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Well, for what it's worth, I think your a nice guy Vinny.

73
Charles - KC8VWM
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Martin, no matter what anyone has to say, you will
> disagree with it.

I agree. (Again.)

by the way, any chance that you'll demonstrate some electronics knowledge here and show why it is that dipoles resonate at a frequency whose wavelength is equal to the electrical length of the dipole?

No? I didn't think so.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
URBANGORILLA said "Martin, no matter what anyone has to say, you will disagree with it."

UG, as you have noticed, Marty is a troll...Marty gets alot his enjoyment by starting arguments in the eham forums....this is the same thing he used to do on QRZ.COM until Fred got tired of him and permanently banned him from that site. There are MANY of us on eham that hope that the moderators on this site will eventually get tired of his behavior and take the appropriate action here....

Pleeeeeeease, Mr Moderator, can you help us here ????
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
RADIO123USA;

I have to respectfully disagree with you on the subject of “banning” people from sites. I am generally opposed to censorship. (That darn Libertarian mindset again!)

I know that the “barrack-room Lawyers” in the crowd are ready to drag out all the old arguments about Eham being a private site, etcetera, etcetera, …..so I won’t try to make this a constitutional thing: I’ll simply say that from my point of view, banning someone from the site would seem to violate the spirit of a format that is supposed to encourage the free exchange of ideas.

Yes, …….Marty can be annoying; but I suspect that there are people out there who find you and I equally so.

If you are tired of Marty, I suggest that you do what I have done: ….Simply stop responding to him.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K0EWS on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I think that the reason that some form of the code requirement should be retained is that it is a skill. Copying of telegraphy is a skill, period. It's a human skill that is still in wide use today on the ham bands. It makes logical sense that it be tested for as long as it is in use. CW is still a cheap, very effective way to communicate, and one would think that the skill of recieving Morse would be something that operators should at least have rudimentary knowlege of. If one can read, they can run digital modes, and if one can talk and hear, they can run phone, but to run CW, you need a skill. Yes, there are keyboard keyers ( I use one myself for contesting) and there are CW decoders (which do an OK job on a non-crowded band with a good fist and a good signal) but for the bad conditions, nothing beats the decoder in one's brain. I've only been a ham myself for 4 1/2 years, but now pretty much run 90 percent CW and digital, and have enjoyed that as much as anything. I've shown this activity to kids. Their reaction to phone: "Oh, you mean like a CB?" Their reaction to PSK31 and RTTY: "Oh you mean like instant messenger with a radio?" Their reaction to CW: "Wow! You mean you actually UNDERSTAND that!?!?"
It really is one of the more impressive things that we can do to impress a non-ham. Voice and digital are the things that are passe` but CW is the one that is novel. Your mileage may vary. 73
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by G7HEU on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
'Marty can be annoying'.

Yes, rather.


'If you are tired of Marty, I suggest that you do what I have done: ….Simply stop responding to him'.


You, me and many others Kent. But when will it stop? I think he sees himself as a kind of wild west style forum gun-slinger. Instead of a Colt 45 he lives by an ammended motto - "have google, will argue".

One question remains - which is it more, sad or funny?

Steve.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Martin wants me to "demonstrate some electronics knowledge here" and "show why it is that dipoles resonate at a frequency whose wavelength is equal to the electrical length of the dipole".

What you are describing here is a full wave dipole, which would have an infinite impedance at its center (its feedpoint). The reason why dipoles are half-wave is so that the feedpoint will see an impedance (radiation resistance) that could be matched to the transmitter (50, 75, 300, 450 or 600 ohms). A resonant dipole will have no inductive or capacitive reactance at the feedpoint with the radiation resistance matching the impedance of the transmitter. Resonance is achieved when there is maximum current flow at the center and minimum voltage. OTOH, there is minimum current flow at the ends and maximum voltage. To achieve resonance, a dipole must be exactly 1/2 of the electrical length of the RF energy that is being transmitted. One wavelength is the length an AC wave must travel to complete one cycle. Hence, a 10-meter signal makes a complete cycle when it has traveled 10 meters. When an antenna is resonant, everything is perfectly matched, completely in phase with no standing waves. All power is radiated by the antenna, and none returns to the transmitter.

Martin, I know that I fed your ego by responding to your troll-like tendencies, but it is my hope that some people who don't know much about electronics have learned something.

Probably the best thing that could be done to the license testing structure would be to change all the question pools, quit publishing questions and answers, have fill-in-the-blank questions and essay questions on the exams and institute accredited courses with appropriate textbooks for each of the license classes and the exams. Then a ham license would get back the prestige it once had. A ham license once held much weight in the electronics field and opened doors for electronic jobs. Now, its not worth the paper its printed on.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K0EWS, you said a mouthful. You put it very eloquently. I wholeheartedly agree.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KB9YZL said "If you are tired of Marty, I suggest that you do what I have done: ….Simply stop responding to him."

This works sometimes, but Marty is kinda like a rash....eventually you need to take care of it, or it will continue to get worse...

KB9YZL said "I’ll simply say that from my point of view, banning someone from the site would seem to violate the spirit of a format that is supposed to encourage the free exchange of ideas. "

Kent, while I too believe in free speech, eHam and QRZ are PRIVATELY owned sites, and I support their right to do what is best for their site...Marty seems to feed on controversy, and enjoys starting arguments...Fred at QRZ found this to be a detriment to his site and banned him....I personally think Fred made the right decision...

G7HEU said "You, me and many others Kent. But when will it stop? "

Hopefully soon....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Re Martin Fouts:

If he's like this on eHam, can you imagine what its like to be involved in a QSO with him? I don't imagine Mr. Fouts has many ragchews. The typical QSO must be "AE6IP, you're 59, 73". If you want to stay clear of Martin, just operate 100% CW. He seems to hate CW. Hi Hi. :)

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Martin, I know that I fed your ego by responding to
> your troll-like tendencies, but it is my hope that
> some people who don't know much about electronics
> have learned something.

All I've learned is that you can parrot a text book, but that you didn't understand the question you were asked.

I didn't ask what the properties of a dipole are. Anyone can copy that out of a text book. I asked why they are what they are. To answer that properly is to demonstrate some actual knowledge of electronics.

So, care to derive from the field equations of a perfect radiator in free space the relationship between the electrical length of that radiator and it's resonant frequency? Also, from that, the impedence of a dipole as a funcion of the input frequency?

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Fred at QRZ found this to be a detriment to his site
> and banned him....I personally think Fred made the
> right decision...

d00d, if you're going to dredge up ancient history, get it right. Fred never banned me from qrz.

Glen banned me because I had the balls to point out to UEY that he was being rude.

Unlike you, when banned, I don't come back with a different account and troll.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> If he's like this on eHam, can you imagine what its
> like to be involved in a QSO with him?

Why imagine? Get on the air and find out. send me an email to ae6ip@arrl.net and set up a sched on 20, 40 or 80m ssb.

Or just show up for the century club 40m late net at 0500 zulu saturday, when I'm NCS. you can hang around after the net and chat.

offer's open to anyone who posts or lurks here.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP said "I don't come back with a different account and troll."

Marty, you TROLLED until you were banned from QRZ, and then you found eHam and started trolling here...I'm sure if you keep trolling here, enough complaints will result in the same action that QRZ took...What's is interesting though, is I'm almost lead to believe that you can't see your own actions for what they are...as G7HEU said, that's either "sad or funny"

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Martin, I should have known better than to fall into your troll trap with the dipole question. I keep forgetting that you have the chronic need to project yourself as some kind of supernatural god possessing a level of knowledge and intelligence far superior to anyone else. As for setting up a sched with you, no way! I'm not a masochist. I would do all possible to avoid any radio contact with you. Radio123us hit the nail on the head when he compared you to a rash. You get under the skin like a rash. Do us all a favor. Dunk your head in battery acid and see if you can light a lightbulb by balancing it on your nose. There's a real "bright" idea! If that doesn't work, drink some petrol and see if you can spit sparks. Oh, btw, why don't you enlighten us all with the answer to your dipole question. Then we can all bow down and worship you as our electronics god. Lets all pray to Martin to deliver us from BPL. Martin, maybe you can bring us Cycle 24 a little early. I lay down my coloring book, my squirt gun and my teddy bear on the alter and pray to Martin the radio god.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
URBANGORILLA said "I keep forgetting that you have the chronic need to project yourself as some kind of supernatural god possessing a level of knowledge and intelligence far superior to anyone else."

Don't forget, he learned EVERYTHING about ham radio in a little over 2 years of being licensed...and by his own admission, he wouldn't have even done that if they hadn't lowered the code requirement...isn't it sad that those of us that are QCWA don't have half the knowledge and experience that he does....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Martin, I should have known better than to fall into
> your troll trap with the dipole question.

In other words, you don't know the answer, but rather than simply admitting that, you'd rather continue to make personal attacks. I doubt this surprised anyone here.

It is ironic that the people who are the first to resort to personal attacks, and the most vocal in using them, are also the ones who most quickly demand that those who disagree with them be banned.

I disagree with some of the 'cherished beliefs' among the amateur community. I'm articulate in presenting well reasoned arguments that those beliefs are myths.

Those who don't have the skill to respond to those arguments, such as yourself, rather than review their beliefs prefer to attack those who expose the errors in those beliefs.

No one with any understanding of what constitutes a languag would consider Morse code, even agumented by Q codes to be a language. You don't want to know that, so you attack me instead. You'd rather preserve fantasies than recognize reality, and you'd go to the extent of personal insult to do so. Your loss.

The US amateur licensing structure is not rational. It reserves HF priviliges for those who have demonstrated greater expertise; yet HF priviliges require the exercise of less technical skill than many activities open to techician license holders.

The FCC has already dismissed the argument that element 1 serves as any sort of filter. The reality of making the tests easier was NOT an influx of horrible operators. There are now, in fact, fewer licensed hams in the US than there were before restructuring, and the overwhelming majority of the influx was people interested in EMCOMM.

The skills necessary to participate in amateur radio are not extensive, or difficult to come by. One can be a very good ham, even to the extent of home brewing equipment, and not know enough electronics to pass an undergraduate introductory class in electronics.

Hams have not been innovators in communications, or communication electronics to any degree. It is almost impossible to find any example of amateur innovation that has found use outside of the amatuer community.

Ham volunteers are not 'professional communicators'. The average ham EMCOMM volunteer will receive about the same amount of training and experience in his entire life as a professional dispatcher gets in a week.

You can insult me all you want, but it doesn't change the reality of any of the above statements.

It also, ironically, doesn't make the hobby any less relaxing, anachronistic, or fun. You might need a mythos that makes hams out to be some kind of super-communicators for the hobby to work for you. I do not, and most hams who actually get on the air do not either. It cheapens the hobby to continue to brag about stuff that's simply not true, and it drives good people away.

And, finally, there's just not that much skill required to be a ham. Other than the vagaries of propogation, which must be learned by experience, there's no single aspect of the hobby that someone with a decent background in electronics couldn't figure out in a month.

and that's just fine, because it is a hobby, not a religion.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Martin:

“Those who don't have the skill to respond to those arguments, such as yourself, rather than review their beliefs prefer to attack those who expose the errors in those beliefs.”

There are no errors in my beliefs. The licensing structure was fine before it was watered down. The watering down began in 1987 with Novice Enhancement.

“The US amateur licensing structure is not rational. It reserves HF priviliges for those who have demonstrated greater expertise; yet HF priviliges require the exercise of less technical skill than many activities open to techician license holders.”

You’re right. The US amateur licensing structure is not rational. It made much more sense before 1987. That was the first step in the plan to undermine code. Once Novice Enhancement went into effect, Novices no longer had to use code to make contacts on the bands. They were given phone privileges on a generous swath of the 10m band. Prior to that, if a Novice wanted to use his/her license, the only way to make a contact was with CW. The Novice license inherently by design resulted in new licensees honing their CW skills. It was not even necessary to practice code to get one’s speed up for the 13 wpm exam. One prepared for the 13 wpm test the natural way by simply making contacts on the Novice sub bands. The next erosion was removing the 5 wpm test from the Technician exam in 1991, and making the NCT the entry-level license. There was even less reason to learn code and hone one’s CW skills. What killed it altogether was the license restructuring of 4/2000. Once all code testing was reduced to 5 wpm, there was no reason to hone code skills at all unless one desired to use CW. The result is the wasteland that the Novice sub bands have become. How on earth can one who wants to use CW hone their skills when it is near impossible to find slow-code QSOs on the main CW sub bands. Never mind the Novice sub bands. It is extremely rare to find anyone on them anymore. The final end would come if code testing was dropped altogether. There would be zero incentive to learn CW with no testing requirement. What would result is far less hams learning code and less hams using it, until the CW sub bands are altogether eliminated. I’d hate to think of ham radio becoming SSB and digital only. CW is the most dependable, reliable and durable mode that we have. It provides incentive to homebrew simple CW rigs. This enables hams to learn by building and experimenting. Dumbing down and eliminating CW will serve to undermine a once great hobby. But, that’s fine with you, Mr. Know-it-all radio god.

“The FCC has already dismissed the argument that element 1 serves as any sort of filter. The reality of making the tests easier was NOT an influx of horrible operators. There are now, in fact, fewer licensed hams in the US than there were before restructuring, and the overwhelming majority of the influx was people interested in EMCOMM.”

See my statement above about dumbing down. Even if there were no influx of horrible operators, a ham radio of dumbed down appliance operators who wish to do nothing more than talk on the radio is not what this hobby started out as. There is a lot more to ham radio than being a communicator. Learning, building, designing and experimenting is what made ham radio great. All the watering down is removing the core from this hobby. And btw, the FCC seems to be willing to sacrifice and compromise just to make their jobs easier and more economical. That’s a pity.

“Hams have not been innovators in communications, or communication electronics to any degree. It is almost impossible to find any example of amateur innovation that has found use outside of the amatuer community.”

See again my paragraph about dumbing down.

“The skills necessary to participate in amateur radio are not extensive, or difficult to come by. One can be a very good ham, even to the extent of home brewing equipment, and not know enough electronics to pass an undergraduate introductory class in electronics.”

Of course. You’re correct. When you have a bunch of appliance operators who want nothing more than to be communicators with plug’n’play equipment, that’s exactly what happens.

“Ham volunteers are not 'professional communicators'. The average ham EMCOMM volunteer will receive about the same amount of training and experience in his entire life as a professional dispatcher gets in a week.”

I’m not arguing this point.

“You can insult me all you want, but it doesn't change the reality of any of the above statements.”

I will continue to do so. Pests who think they know everything about everything who insist on trolling and creating controversy where it doesn’t have to be should be shown up and exposed for what they are.

“It also, ironically, doesn't make the hobby any less relaxing, anachronistic, or fun. You might need a mythos that makes hams out to be some kind of super-communicators for the hobby to work for you. I do not, and most hams who actually get on the air do not either. It cheapens the hobby to continue to brag about stuff that's simply not true, and it drives good people away.”

I don’t claim to be any kind of super communicator. Ham radio is much more to me than jabber-jawing on the radio. Learning, experimenting, designing and building are the true reasons to be a ham. One gets on the radio and communicates with others around the country and the world to use the equipment that he designed and built, and also uses propagation to navigate the world as a skilled sailor uses his sailboat and the wind.

73
UG


 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Martin:

I forgot to address your claim that our ranks are shrinking. That is a lie that was started by NCI that ARRL and their followers have bought hook, line and sinker. Even if it was true, its better to have a few thousand quality people who want to learn, experiment, design and build in our ranks than a couple of million know-nothing CB/FRS/GMRS types. What do you know about ham radio? You've only been licensed for 2 1/2 years.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by K0EWS on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<<<No one with any understanding of what constitutes a languag would consider Morse code, even agumented by Q codes to be a language.>>>

Not really relevant. Whatever the language, when communicating in Morse, one still needs to posess the skill. However, it is not a language.

<<<The US amateur licensing structure is not rational. It reserves HF priviliges for those who have demonstrated greater expertise; yet HF priviliges require the exercise of less technical skill than many activities open to techician license holders. >>>

However, that wasn't true until the no-code tech license was introduced. The Novice license used to be the entry level license, and new hams got an immediate taste of HF. Also, the Morse requirement until 2 years ago was bound by international treaty. However, I would expect per the ARRL proposal that things will probably change and there will be a no-code HF license.

<<<The skills necessary to participate in amateur radio are not extensive, or difficult to come by. One can be a very good ham, even to the extent of home brewing equipment, and not know enough electronics to pass an undergraduate introductory class in electronics. >>>

Hence the old 5 tier system of incentive licensing. That being said, my uncle, who got his ticket at age 16 in 1940 was required to send and recieve Morse, and fill in the blank answers and draw schematics of certain oscillators, etc. He built his first rig from a cigar box. While it may not have been "cutting edge" it served him well to go on and eventually get his PHD in EE and he worked for several years with Art Collins.
For many like my uncle, ham radio served as a gateway to bigger and better things in the electronics industry. You still see an awful lot of people that are hams who were or still are in the communications industry.

<<<Hams have not been innovators in communications, or communication electronics to any degree. It is almost impossible to find any example of amateur innovation that has found use outside of the amatuer community. >>>
Yet many of those innovators got their start in ham radio or other activities like it, starting with an interest in electronics.

<<<Ham volunteers are not 'professional communicators'. The average ham EMCOMM volunteer will receive about the same amount of training and experience in his entire life as a professional dispatcher gets in a week. >>>

I think that you will find that the vast majority of hams that are active are not interested in EMCOMM. I'm not a cop, firefighter, nor EMT, nor do I play one on TV, nor do I have an interest to do such a thing, although I've given some consideration to taking up storm spotting. However, that being said, I'm sure the opportunities are rather limited. Most hams I know here don't do a lot of EMCOMM stuff anyway.

<<<And, finally, there's just not that much skill required to be a ham. Other than the vagaries of propogation, which must be learned by experience, there's no single aspect of the hobby that someone with a decent background in electronics couldn't figure out in a month. >>>

Then why, oh why do so many folks complain about the licensing requirements?

I agree that it is a fun activity and a hobby and a useful one. I'm an educator and know the value of it. New research is suggesting that brain development doesn't stop at age 13 as previously thought, but more like age 20. The more you feed that brain during the adolescent years, the more likely kids will go that way as adults. That's why I run into so many retired hams who were in electronics who got tickets at age 15 on the air. I'm all for making the requirements relevant. As previously stated in a very earlier post, we probably are ready for a new Novice license, and I think ARRL's current proposal would probably work, but the venom of some people, particularly the Anti-CW crowd gives off the feel that for some deep seeded reason, they not only hate the requirement, but the mode, and those who enjoy the mode. The sad thing is that in ham radio, there is room for everyone. From the contesters to the county hunters, to the ragchewers , the net types, the EMCOMM folks and yes, those who like to innovate.
What I fail to understand is how people cannot just get along?
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Radio123us said "Don't forget, he learned EVERYTHING about ham radio in a little over 2 years of being licensed...and by his own admission, he wouldn't have even done that if they hadn't lowered the code requirement...isn't it sad that those of us that are QCWA don't have half the knowledge and experience that he does....".

See, code does filter out undesireables. We wouldn't have Martin (The Pest) Fouts in our ranks if we still had the 5, 13 and 20 wpm tests. I don't think Martin would have learned 5 wpm code for a Novice or Technician license. He certainly wouldn't have learned 13 wpm for General/Advanced or 20 for Extra. But 5 for the whole ball of wax, eh! OK. I couldn't see him taking a test that he didn't already have the answers to either, leave alone drawing schematics or block diagrams from scratch for the test.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I forgot to address your claim that our ranks are
> shrinking. That is a lie that was started by NCI
> that ARRL and their followers have bought hook, line
> and sinker.

It's not a lie. It's a cold hard fact. And you can look it up in the FCC data base. Joe Speroni keeps tabs of this on his web site.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Even if there were no influx of horrible operators,
> a ham radio of dumbed down appliance operators who
> wish to do nothing more than talk on the radio is
> not what this hobby started out as.

And yet, since at least the early 30s, that's what it has been. Very few hams ever experimented. Even fewer ever knew any real electronics.

> There is a lot more to ham radio than being a
> communicator.

There can be. There doesn't have to be. And there never was a period when there had to be.

> Learning, building, designing and experimenting is
> what made ham radio great.

And yet, throughout the history of the hobby, very few hams designed or experimented, and most of those who built wouldn't have if they could have afforded to buy.

> All the watering down is removing the core from this
> hobby.

There's no real watering down. The tests were always easy. Back when the people interested in amateur radio *were* innovating there weren't even any tests.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>> The skills necessary to participate in amateur
>> radio are not extensive, or difficult to come by.
>> One can be a very good ham, even to the extent of
>> home brewing equipment, and not know enough
>> electronics to pass an undergraduate introductory
>> class in electronics.”

> Of course. You’re correct. When you have a bunch of
> appliance operators who want nothing more than to be
> communicators with plug’n’play equipment, that’s
> exactly what happens.

It was always true. It just does not take that much skill to copy some design out of a book or magazine article and construct a working product from it.

About the only skill that has atrophied in the ham community is that of running a soldering iron.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I’d hate to think of ham radio becoming SSB and
> digital only. CW is the most dependable, reliable
> and durable mode that we have.

If by 'we' you mean the ham community, you are almost right. Since spread spectrum is not allowed on the HF amateur bands, CW is, currently, the most reliable and efficient HF mode.

Of course, if amateurs were as innovative as they like to believe, someone would have fixed this by now, as it is fairly straight forward to design a digital mode that has superior properties to CW. PSK, after all comes close, and it's not a very sophisticated protocol.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I will continue to do so. Pests who think they know
> everything about everything who insist on trolling
> and creating controversy where it doesn’t have to be
> should be shown up and exposed for what they are.

I see. to disagree with you is too 'create controversy where it doesn't have to be'. And anyone who dares do so is a troll.

I guess I'm just supposed to let such glaring mistakes as your claim that the drop in amateurs was a 'lie invented by NCI' go unchalllenged; leaving all of the readers of the thread to be wildly misinformed, when the facts can be had from the FCC database.

That's not how public forums work. If you make a claim in public, you should be prepared to have it challenged. Particularly when it is so flagerantly and obviously wrong.

If you think that challenging erroneous claims made in public is 'creating controversy where it doesn't have to be', then you don't really belong on the internet. But I definitely suggest you stay around. You might find out something you want to know.

And no, I don't think I know 'everything about everything'. You will find that I have expressed no opinion on a wide range of amateur radio subjects, as well as an infinite range of other subjects.

I'm also one of the few people posting on this site who has publically acknowledged when I've been wrong.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> There would be zero incentive to learn CW with no
> testing requirement.

If this were true, it would be the most compelling reason to drop the test. Why test for a skill that no one would otherwise use?

But I don't believe it is true. There are now and have always been hams who love CW. They pass that love on to newer hams, and it is those hams, not testing, who will keep the mode alive.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I don’t claim to be any kind of super communicator.
> Ham radio is much more to me than jabber-jawing on
> the radio.

To you.

> Learning, experimenting, designing and building are
> the true reasons to be a ham.

For you.

It's a big hobby. the FCC recognizes *5* reasons why they think that it's good that hams get on the air.

> One gets on the radio and communicates with others
> around the country and the world to use the
> equipment that he designed and built, and also uses
> propagation to navigate the world as a skilled
> sailor uses his sailboat and the wind.

I'm sure that there have always been a few hams who built their own equipment. Of those, a small number have designed their own equipment.

But even before commercial rigs were widely affordable (and that was almost 50 years ago) most of the builders built to other people's plans and most of the rest found someone else to build for them.

There is nothing wrong with this, and those hams who didn't build, or built to other's designs, were just as much 'real' hams as the few who did.

I don't design and build my own equipment. I don't have access to the sort of tools necessary to build the sort of equipment that I design and build in my professional work, and I've done enough of that professionally.

Very few hams these days -- and most of those are EEs -- have the skills necessary to build modern transceivers, let alone design them; and if they did, the cost to them would be astronomical, compared to purchasing equivalent commercial equipment.

There's nothing wrong with that. And there's nothing wrong with the hams who are still building projects using technology from the '70s. Each one is enjoying an aspect of the hobby that is suitable to them.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I couldn't see him taking a test that he didn't
> already have the answers to either, leave alone
> drawing schematics or block diagrams from scratch
> for the test.

Why would anyone voluntarily take a test they didn't know the answers to?

I like the irony of your 'block diagram' comment. The first test in my graduate level computer architecture class required one to draw the block diagram of a modern CPU. It was fun. I think that was the last time I was required to draw a block diagram for a test. (Unless you count job interviews. They always seem to involve block diagrams.)

You forgot the bugaboo about 'before the FCC'. Don't bother. Been there, done that. All I can say is that anyone who thinks taking a test in front of the FCC is scary has never dealt with orals.

How's your effort on deriving the function for a dipole's impedence coming? Unlike tests before the FCC, it's like real life: open book, plenty of time, and the only one you can cheat is yourself.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I don't think Martin would have learned 5 wpm code
> for a Novice or Technician license. He certainly
> wouldn't have learned 13 wpm for General/Advanced or
> 20 for Extra.

See, here I go agreeing with you again. I wouldn't and I didn't. College noncommercial FM radio was a lot more fun, to me, required a lot more electronics skill, came with the bonus of audio engineering, and until recently I've always had more than enough hobbies to keep me busy
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> The sad thing is that in ham radio, there is room
> for everyone. From the contesters to the county
> hunters, to the ragchewers , the net types, the
> EMCOMM folks and yes, those who like to innovate.

Well said, and I couldn't agree more.

> What I fail to understand is how people cannot just
> get along?

There seem to be people on both sides of the argument who think that there is only one way: their way. They don't see the room in the hobby.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by N0IU on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP wrote:

"There are now and have always been hams who love CW. They pass that love on to newer hams, and it is those hams, not testing, who will keep the mode alive."

Oh jeez, now Martin has done something really terrible. He has made a statement that I agree with. In my case, it was a neighbor a few houses down from me who had confirmed over 300 countries on each of the 5 bands for DXCC all on CW. He was retired from the railroad where he was a telegrapher. He used a Vibroplex and could send and receive at 50+ WPM. He indeed passed along his love of CW on to me and for that I am eternally grateful.

How different things would be if this gentleman had been Martin's neighbor. By the same token, there are obviously people who loathe CW and will tell you it is the work of the devil himself. How sad it is when new hams meet this people and then have just the opposite effect as my neighbor had on me. Hatred of CW, like all things in life, is something you learn. Someone has to poison your mind to think in a certain manner. Unfortunately, someone else got to Martin before we did.

NØIU

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP said "There seem to be people on both sides of the argument who think that there is only one way: their way."

Please notice Marty's 10 posts in a row !!!

Marty, you really don't see it do you ???....are you really that BLIND to your own actions !!! You wouldn't be here trying to correct EVERYONE if you didn't think there was only one way...YOUR WAY....

Marty, it seems to me that you NEED to do some self evaluation before making your wild claims, you very MUCH resemble this claim....

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
URBANGORRILLA;

You spoke about; >>”…..a ham radio of dumbed down appliance operators who wish to do nothing more than talk on the radio …..”<<

Well; ………..I started out as one of those contemptible, low-life, “For-God’s-sake-stay-away-from-my-daughter” “Appliance Operators”. I came to the ARS because I needed a tool. It wasn’t until after I had my pathetic NCT license that I discovered some of the fascinating “Hobby” aspects of the ARS.

Now, in addition to maintaining all the school’s equipment, I design, build and tune all of our “Mobile Antenna Farms”. (In some cases, as many as 10 “sticks” per vehicle! ………THAT’S a tuning “issue”!)

I wonder when the elitists in the ARS will finally acknowledge that many of their future “Real Hams” first walk into this arena through the door labeled “Appliance Operator”?

When people ask me if I’m a “Ham Radio Operator”, I say “No,…..I’m an ARS licensee”. As long as I find myself the implied object of comments like yours, the title of “Ham” has no great appeal for me.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> How different things would be if this gentleman had
> been Martin's neighbor. By the same token, there are
> obviously people who loathe CW and will tell you it
> is the work of the devil himself. How sad it is when
> new hams meet this people and then have just the
> opposite effect as my neighbor had on me. Hatred of
> CW, like all things in life, is something you learn.
> Someone has to poison your mind to think in a
> certain manner. Unfortunately, someone else got to
> Martin before we did.

You ought not listen to my 'fan club'. They tend to distorty reality.

I don't hate CW, and I've even named in various eHam threads the name of the guy who acted for me as your neighbor did for you.

I like CW. I can copy 20wpm.

I just don't believe there's any regulatory reason for element 1.
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Martin says I don't belong on the internet. He's right. The internet has more morons and dysfunctional misfits on it than CB does. On the other side of the coin, Martin doesn't belong in ham radio. This anti-code crusader always pops up any time code is discussed. These seem to be the only threads that draw him out of the woodwork. Of course Martin knows everything there is to know about amateur radio after being licensed 2 1/2 years. Crawl back into the woodwork Martin. You have no credibility. You are an annoying troll, a pest that most folks either laugh at or have pity on.

As for Kent Carroll, KB9YZL, “Appliance Operator”:

you claim to set yourself apart from the typical anti-CW NCT camp, yet there's that typical label that the anti-code NCTs put on those of us who were around before the no-code days, who wish to preserve the integrity of amateur radio-- "elitist". Thank you Kent. You just proved to all of us where you really stand. You're a typical anti-code abolitionist diehard NCI type. The only "elitists" are those that are like you who want to reshape amateur radio into what you want it to be, and obtain free HF access with no work. You're another one like Martin who has no credibility. You talk out of both sides of your mouth. To quote you, "When people ask me if I’m a 'Ham Radio Operator', I say 'No,…..I’m an ARS licensee'. As long as I find myself the implied object of comments like yours, the title of 'Ham' has no great appeal for me." Kent, you got that right. You are an ARS licensee, but you're not a ham. There are also plenty of licensed medical people who bear the credentials of "MD", but are no doctors either. These are the mercenaries who are in it for the money. In my opinion, true hams do what is required of them for the privileges they aspire to obtain without questioning or protesting the status quo. The bottom line is that a true ham recognizes the importance of code in amateur radio and learns it for licensing and for practical use on the bands with a smile. The true ham is willing to learn and willing to work for privileges and asks for no free ride. The idea of being granted privileges without earning them is repulsive to the true ham, because freebies rob the true ham of his/her sense of accomplishment. Kent, I thank you for labelling me an "elitist". To be attacked for defending my traditional values regarding ham radio is an honor. I'm flattered. This is proof that I have conviction, that I just don't go along with the popular view and sway with the wind. Isn't this exatctly what ARRL did? They certainly did. Just because some countries dropped code testing doesn't mean it was the right thing to do. It certainly doesn't mean that the United States has to follow along and make the same mistake. In years to come, all you anti-code people will realize that the pro-code camp was right. When the bands resemble CB, all who wanted free HF will long for the days when one needed to show code proficiency to gain access to the HF bands.

Now that I've said what I needed to say, I bid you all 73. There is no further need for me to respond to anything more on this thread. The dead horse is beginning to smell. Its time to make dog food, hair brushes and glue out of her.

73

UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP said "I don't hate CW, and I've even named in various eHam threads the name of the guy who acted for me as your neighbor did for you.
I like CW. I can copy 20wpm. "

Marty, I don't see you offering to set up a schedule for a nice 20wpm QSO....why is that ???
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
URBANGORRILLA:

My posts have consistently stated my position, without modification or contradiction.

Yours have been similarly consistent, which is why I called you on it. I have never been able to stand silently by while bigoted speeches are made, and attitudes that embrace pre-judgment are endorsed.

You based a page long diatribe on my use of one word; ……..and in doing so validated my point. Only the worst sort of “Elitist” would be subject to the kind of ego-centric delusions required to produce such an unsupportable rant.

Vinny, …..I am embarrassed for you. I would be truly mortified if I woke up tomorrow and realized that I had posted something like that in a public forum!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by DUALGATEMOSFET on March 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Gee. This is par for a typical pro code/no code flame war. Happens everytime an article that has anything to do with code is posted. There's the typical fodder from Fouts, Inc. and the usual crap from the militant NCI NCTs. Sheer wisdom emanates from their keyboards. The militant NCT calling the pro coder an elitist and a bigot just because he wants him to work for his license and good ol' Marty still trying to convince us of all the evils of code proficiency testing. All this from one newbie who's been licensed for under 3 years and another newbie who's been licensed a little over 4 years. The both of you are a couple of rookies. Why don't both of you learn something about the hobby that you chose to be a part of. Then wake up and smell the roses. Get a life.

73 from DUALGATEMOSFET
aka
"The Epitaxial One"
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hey Charlie!

Try reading my posts before commencing the lecture!

I have nothing whatsoever to do with NCI, and in one of my posts on this thread I even stated that I thought that the Code testing requirement should be retained.

You are correct on one point: This is a typical “Code/No Code” thread:……..full of people who are so anxious to hear what THEY”RE going to say next that they can’t be bothered to read what the others have actually written!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

P.S.

Why is it that that the most outspoken “experts” here are the ones who never post a callsign?

KLC

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by W5ESE on March 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Why is it that that the most outspoken “experts”
> here are the ones who never post a callsign?

I couldn't agree more.

When I express an opinion, it is MINE, and unlike
these COWARDS, I'm not ashamed to affix my John
Hancock to it.

Scott
W5ESE
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KB9YZL said "Why is it that that the most outspoken “experts” here are the ones who never post a callsign?"

Kent, the most outspoken one here has used his callsign (AE6IP), and although he is NOT an "expert" on ANYTHING regarding ham radio, he is a legend in his own mind....

Kent, I used to post under my callsign, and in fact I could still do that anytime I wanted, but I choose not to due to having been threatened by several of the folks on this site that hold some VERY radical views (in my opinion)....
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by G7HEU on March 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Whilst I can't bothered to trawl the forum to confirm my thoughts I can't remember Radio123US being a fool on here - despite his anonymity.

There is one nut-job though who proudly posts all sorts of confrontational rubbish using his call-sign. The same looney has also made some comment about getting in to amateur radio so he could use a 2Mtr handie when hiking. He always adds that he stopped carrying the 2Mtr H.T. because it wasn't as good as his cell phone.


Ha ha ha ha - have you seen his picture? I reckon there hasn't been much hiking recently ( or any other exercise apart from forum jibes ) and that the weight of a H.T. is the least of his worries.

Good night all,

Steve ( smiling broadly).
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
RADIO123USA;

My comments about un-posted call signs were not meant to include you. I apologize if that is the way it was perceived. …….We have had many interesting exchanges, and I have come to respect your opinions.

I try to remain objective, but the tendency of some on this site to see what they want to see in other posts, rather than what was actually written is infuriating, and sometimes it gets the better of me. I apologize to any who were “Tarred with too broad a brush”!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Ah, isn't that a nice guerrilla? Plenty of ad hominem, but no substance.

Whatya think UG? Aren't you at least big enough to admit you were wrong when you claimed that the decline in amateurs was a lie made up by NCI?

Nah, of course not. You'd rather just tell more lies. I'm not anti-CW, as I've pointed out already.

But I was wondering if you could explain a small discrepency in your logic? If, as you claim, the only subject I post on is CW, then how is it that you'll find my posts in several currently active threads, with no CW comments in my post -- or the entire thread?

Er, I forgot. You don't actually care about facts, do you? Why discuss an issue when it's so much easier to throw insults around?

Meanwhile, I guess we can take it as read that you don't have any idea of how to derive the equation for the impedence of a radiator as a function of the carrier frequency.

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Martin:
YOU have no substance. Steve, G7HEU accurately described you. He pegged you correctly. And yes, I have seen your picture. You're ugly, man! He He! Martin, you have no credibility. Everyone laughs at you. Why don't you quit your nonsense? Its all beginning to get old and tired. Most everyone else doesn't even bother reading your foolish posts anymore. Hey, man. Its late here on the East Coast. Its time to stack some Z's. I have early call in the morning. I'm outta here. Go bark at the moon.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
URBANGORRILLA;

You’ve finally done something that makes me really angry: ……..you’ve forced me to agree with Marty! He certainly seems to have a good “read” on you!

Hey! …..I have an idea! Why don’t you prove that you really have the cahones that you pretend to have: Post a REAL callsign, and tell us all about your VERIFYABLE contributions to the ARS and the Public! That way, all of us lowly NCTs and “Rookies” can understand WHY we should be worshiping the very ground you walk on!

Fail to do that; and we have to assume the only other plausible explanation: …That you live an unfulfilled life, in a degrading job, and that you desperately need an artificial format to go to where you can abuse other people to sooth your pathetic ego!


Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

P.S.

There you go UG: ……..that should give you enough material for a two or three page rant full of personal attacks! Please don’t disappoint us!

KLC
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KD8BET on March 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
If I had say in the matter, which I don't, I would ask that the FCC keep the code requirement in place.

I am sure that in my late grandfather's day (W8IAO) there were those that toyed with the idea of doing away with the code all together, and I can just imagine what he would say about that. He loved his code.

My dad told me that he sent code so fast on his 1933 Go-Devil that it sounded like a blur to him. Dad also told me that when the family was out for a "Sunday drive," sometimes grandfather would see a fellow ham and they would send greetings to each other via the car horns.

I look forward to passing the code element and continuing the tradition. First the code, then one day soon, Amateur Extra.

73,
Bill
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KD8BET;

This thread has evolved over it’s life, and now really has more to do with “attitudes” than “Code/No Code”.

Just for the record. I don’t advocate the removal of the Code testing requirement. If Scott’s data is correct, (and I have no reason to doubt it) and Code really does comprise 37% of HF traffic, then it is obviously a significant part of the HF environment, and should be included in the testing.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Dear Appliance Operator:

I made you "really angry"? Wow! I wasn't even addressing you. Why don't you let Mr. Fouts speak for himself? Who died and made you God? Go back in your little hole and be quiet.

Don't you wish I'd rant for 3 pages. You're a worse troll than MJ Fouts. When you have the cojones (Spell the word right, dude. Its Espanol) to learn 5 wpm code and upgrade instead of waiting for a free ride while calling the real hams elitist bigots, then, and only then will I honor your wishes. You claim that you have no desire for HF, yet I know without a doubt that you'll be on HF once your welfare ticket to General (courtesy of ARRL) arrives. Looks like the term "parasitic element" is beginning to take on a new meaning.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Oh, and by the way Mr. Appliance Operator, I am a very happy and content person. I do everything the right way. Nothing is handed to me. That gives me a sense of accomplishment and self-worth. I have no need to attack anyone unless they come on as an arrogant obnoxious militant upstart who claims to know everything. Both Mr. Fouts and yourself fit that description. I don't go through the forums attacking everybody. To feel my wrath, one has to earn it. I don't ask anyone to worship the ground that I walk on. I only ask that those who wish to be hams earn their tickets and quit being obnoxious brats. Mr. Appliance Operator, I simply don't have the time to waste arguing with you on eHam. I gotta go. Cya!

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
URBANGORRILLA;

Well, ……If I was willing to descend to your level, I’d probably do some name-calling at this point. (God knows, some good ones pop to mind!) ……But I make it a point not to go that route.

I’m entirely sincere when I say I have no “HF Interest”, and guys like you are 90% of the reason I feel that way. If your mission was to make HF look so unattractive that none of the “Rookies” would be interested, then you have succeeded brilliantly.

The irony is that you’re probably one of those guys who “talk the big story”, and don’t even have a license. I’ve never heard a callsign from you, and I don’t recall any other posters on this forum ever saying that they encountered you on the air.

You talk about “doing everything right” and “having nothing handed to you”: OK …..exactly what do you do to earn your frequency privileges? What kind of public service do you contribute? Have you ever really “made a difference”?

This is your big chance! Show me and everyone else reading this what a “Super Ham” you are! Tell us about all your contributions to the ARS and your community! (But start with a REAL Callsign, otherwise anything you say will be just more hot air!)

I, for one, am not holding my breath. If I were a betting person, I’d bet that our group handles more public safety related traffic in one Spring Severe Weather Season than you have in your entire life. I feel sure of this because anyone who was actually involved in public service would never ridicule others similarly involved, as you have.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by URBANGORILLA on March 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"I don’t recall any other posters on this forum ever saying that they encountered you on the air."

Do you really expect to hear anyone in these forums say they have QSO'd with the Urban Gorilla?

"exactly what do you do to earn your frequency privileges?"

I took and passed all my amateur radio exams down at the FCC Field Office on Varrick St. in Manhattan.

"Show me and everyone else reading this what a “Super Ham” you are! Tell us about all your contributions to the ARS and your community!"

The 2 most significant were EMCOMM at Ground Zero in 9/01 and during the blackout in 03. Any more crises, and I'm readily available. I just hope the next time is not like 9/11. NYC can't stand much more of that.

"(But start with a REAL Callsign, otherwise anything you say will be just more hot air!)"

Forget it charlie!

"I, for one, am not holding my breath. If I were a betting person, I’d bet that our group handles more public safety related traffic in one Spring Severe Weather Season than you have in your entire life. I feel sure of this because anyone who was actually involved in public service would never ridicule others similarly involved, as you have."

See 2 questions up.

73
UG
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by KB9YZL on March 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
URBANGORRILLA;

I asked: “……Show me and everyone else reading this what a “Super Ham” you are! Tell us about all your contributions to the ARS and your community!"

….And you responded: “….The 2 most significant were EMCOMM at Ground Zero in 9/01 and during the blackout in 03. Any more crises, and I'm readily available.”

If that’s the case, you have my respect. I am fully prepared to acknowledge that I might be wrong about you.

How about if you cut other people the same slack??

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
“Appliance Operator”

 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by AE6IP on March 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> You're ugly, man!

Yup. Have been for 50 years. Probably get uglier as I get older. Fat these days too. That comes and goes, depending on how much activity I'm getting. Rain will be ending soon, here.

It is instructive to note how very infantile you behave rather than doing the simple adult thing and admiting you were wrong about NCI and the decline in the number of hams.

I'm not terribly worried about my credibility. You demonstrate, by the virulence of your attacks, that it is still very viable.

Had any luck in finding anyone who could explain the antenna question you can't answer?
 
RE: Morse Code The Universal Language  
by RADIO123US on March 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP said "I'm not terribly worried about my credibility."

It's because you have NONE !!!
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Other Recent Articles
Amateur Radio -- In Times of Trouble or Just for Fun:
Ham Radio Operator Objects To Anti-Texting RADAR:
Isabella Hosted Annual, 24-Hour Amateur Radio Field Day Event:
Radio Enthusiasts Put Tasmania's Lighthouses On an International Map:
Researchers Discover Wolverhampton Man's Secret Past: