eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Speak Out
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


QSL Managers
     

Ham Links
     



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio

David Wilburn (K4DGW) on September 23, 2003
View comments about this article!


A Win - Win Situation for Amateur Radio and CW

Ok, this is an age old debate, but with the changes at the 2003 WRC lets look at some of the options. The rules can be left as they are, which would probably please as many people as it would upset. I would like to share my opinion. I am new ham, having been in the hobby about 2 years. I would not have developed my current enjoyment of CW if I had not been forced to learn it so that I could pass my General. Once I was a General, I realized I was missing out on a significant portion of my allocated frequencies, because I could not "speak the language." Now I enjoy the whole frequency spectrum that came with my license.

I am aware that, to paraphrase an old military expression, a "complaining ham, is a happy ham;" and we have many happy hams. Regardless of the solution that is put in place, there will be those who do not like it. Just as those who think that testing now, is too easy. But that could generate an article all by itself.

Some say CW is just another mode, but this is only true in a sense. CW is a major part of the tradition of amateur radio. It sets us apart. It allows us to communicate across huge barriers, whether they are physical, geographical, political, or cultural. I truly feel, that to be considered a ham, you should have at least a working knowledge of CW. I agree with many, that if the requirements for CW are removed, the mode will still survive. Whether the allocated spectrum will, is another discussion.

One thing that frustrates many folks learning CW, is that they are forced to learn a new language, without being allowed to speak it. With the privileges that come with the Technician license, and the cost of a rig that would allow CW operation within those privileges, it is difficult for a newcomer to get on the air using CW. This moves away from our roots of experimentation and learning by doing. I propose giving Technicians access to the HF bands, in what is currently considered the Novice areas with the same privileges. This gives them a small phone allocation and a large CW allocation. If they choose to invest in an HF rig, it would be worth their while to learn enough CW so they can use all of the spectrum they are allocated. All Technicians would have these privileges.

Currently, the General license is the gateway to the HF world. Many feel the CW requirement has been used as a roadblock, to keep folks out. Others feel that it should be a fence, to keep those who do not want to put the effort forward to learn, out off of the bands. Ones opinion often varies; depending on which side of the "fence" they are on. But few can argue with the fact that removing the requirement would add to the size of the General class and bring more folks into the hobby. So with the idea of what is best for the hobby in mind, we will concede this round, until the next paragraph. So, I propose that we remove the CW requirement from the testing requirement for a General class operator.

By now, a similar number of you are elated, as others are seething in anger at the fact that the phone bands are going to be inundated with the arrival of so many new hams, with poor operating habits. Any influx of new folks will generate problems. But if the folks that have been around a bit exercise patience, and the true spirit of elmering, the new folks too will learn properly. But for those who want a bastion from the general populace (pun intended), there is the Amateur Extra class.

I propose that the 5 wpm test, that was removed from the General class license requirement be put in place for the Amateur Extra class requirement. This provides the refuge for those that feel a extra level of learning should be in place to access all of the bands. All the folks that are currently Amateur Extras have passed a Morse code test, so the requirements would be as fairly distributed as would currently seem possible.

CW is not just a mode. Our bands are setup that a portion of the spectrum is set aside so that narrow bandwidth signals can operate in an congenial environment, without having to fight against signals several orders of magnitude larger in bandwidth. With the exception of 60M, CW is the only mode that can be operated anywhere, on any band. All of this makes CW more than a mode, it makes it a philosophy of doing more, with less. A philosophy that is at the heart of the amateur radio service.

73

David Wilburn

-=K4DGW=-

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N0MLR on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
David

Hats off to you for a well writen article. I must say this is the first I have seen that actually puts forth reasons for the learning and use of CW. You stayed away from the cliche reasons often used. Most of what I have heard is "I had to do it so you do to" and "Its the Rules" and then the bashing of those who are not General and above.
You made some valid points. Your sugestion that Code be kept for Extra is one I could live with. All and All it sounds like sound arguments and a good plan.
I might even be tempted to go ahead and learn the code based on your reasoning. And trust me that is a very big accomplishment on your part alone. I have been a devout No Code person for 28 years.
- .... .- -. -.- ...
Greg Dunn / N0MLR / NCI# 1756 and I may just study the code who knows.
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W6OPINION on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
AAARRRRGGGHHHHH!!!! Oh boy....even MORE on code/no code, cw/no cw. My day just wouldn't be complete without a new article on this thread. Well, at least there is a silver lining to this. I used to think that this web site offered some interesting views and information. I have been wondering lately why I keep looking at it, since there appears to be, as the old saying goes "nothing new under the sun", at least in so far as what goes on here is concerned. Well, I'm finally over the edge. No reason to look at this site anymore! Rant on, fellow drivellers! I'll be using my time for more enjoyable pursuits.
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by MY_OPINION on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Morse as a language? Has anyone satisfied a university language degree requirement with morse?

At least, Latin was a language. Morse can not be dead since it never was a "live" language.

English without Latin is just letters.

The tradition of English will die without Latin.

We had to learn Latin, so should you.

Just because the official agencies don't speak Latin does not mean that we should stop.

Latin gets through in a crowded room when no other language will.

Long live Latin.

Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N0MLR on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Bye
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N0MLR on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
ooops I dont know what happened to the rest of what was suppose to be in that last post LOL. Here it is in full.

Bye W6OPINION come back soon LOL.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
The following question was asked by another author, in another thread, and received virtually no response;

>>>>"Find me *one* instance in the United States in the last 50 years, of a communications emergency, in which HF communication was required out of the emergency area, and code was used because conditions didn't allow voice propagation."<<<<<

I thought it was a valid point of inquiry, and I would really like to hear some responses to this!

We all know the theoretical “Long Range - Low Power” virtues of CW, but are these advantages actually being used regularly in actual emergency situations?

I’m always ready to alter my hypothesis when new data is presented…….so, to paraphrase a line from a movie; “Show me the Data!”

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KC2LSU on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Geeze, come to thing of it, we have to go back to the sinking of the Titanic, or the crash of andrea doria to find any CW, used to send a call, for emergency help; Am I right to say that both marine events occured before before the 1920's?
Now that i think about it, I wonder if the titanic had a spark gap? lol.

If ya think about it, when a real emergency requireing CW comes along, i.e. some country dropping a nuclear weapon on us, all the solid state equipment within 1000 miles is going to be destroyed by the EMP. So it dosent really matter whether us solid state hams's know code or not, since its only going to be the ham's with tube equipment who will be on the air cutting thru, all the after blast static with CW.

Now I just wonder what kind of messages will they be sending in CW? Theres certinally not much in the way of health and welfare traffic, these days. Theres also not much in the way of emergency communication, besides checking into the nets with "no traffic". The only kind of emergency communication i see these days is the sending of messages, to hams's whose license is about to expire.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W5AU on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
We dont need to drop any requirements.... They have
been reduced to almost nothing as it is. A trained
Monkey can get a license like things are. If
anything, we need to up the Morse and the Theory
requirements. Lets get Real Hams back in the ranks.

As was said in a previous quote

"We don't need or want "common folk" in Amateur Radio, we want folks with a burning orgasmic love of radio. We want people who still see magic in wireless communication. We want people with RF flowing in their veins. Amateur Radio has captured maybe 30% of these uncommon folk.

Common folk have FRS and Citizens Band."

Dont destroy what you do not understand !!!!!!!!!

 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by K3UD on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Hey.... I had to take 4 years of Latin and while it is beautiful to listen to in religious chant or a traditional Latin mass, it is, for all practical purposes, a dead language now in the domain of religious scholars, lawyers, archeologists, and those who wish to spend years learning it.

Good code is a beautiful thing to listen to also.

The code is not dead and will not be so in the forseeable future.
The beginning of the slow death of the code as a popular means of communication on ham bands will come about when and if the FCC stops the code testing requirement.

While a few will continue to learn it themselves and use it, there will become a time when the vast majority of active hams will be those who never had to learn it. CW activity on the bands will decline and much of the spectrum where almost all present CW is used will most likely be given over to voice modes.

In the end, code will be used by relatively few hams who will keep it alive, much as those on AM keep the mode alive today.

This endless debate about the code goes nowhere. As much as I personally hate to see it, the FCC will most likely drop the code requirement for HF access and then the clock starts. Since amateur radio is only growing at less than 1/2 of 1% per year since 2000, I expect that the code as we know it and use it will still be a major operating mode on the bands for the next 15 - 20 years,

73
George
K3UD
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N0NYA on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
ARRRRGH

they are not BANNING the friggin code for petes sake.. even if they remove it from the testing process, you people act like the FCC will show up with a giant trash bag and confiscate your CW keys and Bugs.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by K0RFD on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
KC2LSU wrote:

>Geeze, come to thing of it, we have to go back to the
>sinking of the Titanic, or the crash of andrea doria
>to find any CW, used to send a call, for emergency
>help; Am I right to say that both marine events
>occured before before the 1920's?

No, the Andrea Doria collided with the Stockholm on July 25, 1956.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KA4KOE on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
W6OPINION:

Wait and see the article I've got coming up, if Cliff puts it up on front. Its designed to tweak EVERYONE!!!

Philip
 
Just enjoy the hobby  
by KX2S on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
These comments are a bunch of BS. When is eHam going to stop NON registered amateurs posts. EHam get your act together.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W5UX on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I am inclined to agree with k4dgw. Leave extra class alone. General class has access to all ham bands. Extra class is for the most part a status symbol. I ask this question again. . . How many countries have not done away with the code??????
 
RE: Just enjoy the hobby  
by W6OPINION on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
But....I **am** registered. I just don't use my callsign, to cut down on the spurious email. I see by your post that what you really mean is: "The comments are BS, because I don't agree with them". A sentiment that seems to float through much of the eHam forums. What a great place this will be when everyone who is here has the same view.
 
RE: Just enjoy the hobby  
by KG5EW on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
No matter how well written the article is,it still translates to:
Gimme something for nothing.
You people are truly pathetic!!!
C'mon BPL,put us out of our misery!
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by WB9GKZ on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Good grief.

For years we all heard of the hoards of 5WPM Generals that were gonna clog our precious hambands. Where are they? No where to be found.

Now I'm hearing about the fear of throngs of no-code
Generals ready to pounce on the bands. Friends, that ain't gonna happen either.

Reality check: Ham radio, for that matter...radio in general, has little meaning in today's society.

Ham radio is based on ancient, outdated technology: Analogue voice transmission (SSB), dots and dashes switching an RF carrier on and off (CW). Any young person remotely interested in ham radio would laugh at our old practices and equipment.

Any ten-year-old kid can go to the Mall and buy a prepaid cellphone, then start to use it right away to chat to friends or watch MTV.

The pipeline to ham radio used to be CB radio for the past few decades. CB radio is dead save for the truckers and a few drug-runners. Another ham pipeline was ShortWave Listening. How many WPE certificates has Popular Electronics issued in the last two decades? Even Pop' Electronics is gone!

Bottom line: We live in a society that is no longer radio-intensive. There is no interest in radio communication among the young. Our ham population will continue to age and die-off. We could give away ham licenses in cereal boxes and we'd still never hear a newcomer call CQ on 75-meters looking for his first contact. All this stupid code debate means nothing.

Pat WB9GKZ
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by K0EWS on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Same S#!t, different thread.........
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KT0MM on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Kent/KB9YZL wrote:

>>>>"Find me *one* instance in the United States in the last 50 years, of a communications emergency, in which HF communication was required out of the emergency area, and code was used because conditions didn't allow voice propagation."...I thought it was a valid point of inquiry, and I would really like to hear some responses to this!<<<<<

Ok two small examples...not recent, but definitely within the scope of the question.

1) Back in the early 1980's I responded to and relayed an SOS from a maritime ham with damaged radio equipment. Morse Code was his only option.

2) In the past, I have also relayed health and welfare traffic from 3rd world stations, who could only be heard above the noise via CW. Withoutr that option, traffic would have been delayed until conditions cleared.

While I agree that CW should not be used as a shield to keep others out, we do ourselves and our country a disservice to be so lazy that we do not require ourselves to have minimal comprehension. [And it *is* laziness...my 8 year old does 5wpm!] David/K4DGW offers a creative suggestion that's worth considering.

de kt0mm (Michael)
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N7AAO on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Someone PLEASE drag this entire thread off to the EXPIRED EQUINE FLAGELLATION DEPARTMENT!
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
WB9GKZ;

You’re quite right, …………..the sky isn’t falling, and the overall popularity of Ham Radio seems to be generally down.

I do not, however, believe that the whole “popularity” picture is one of gloom. The College program I work for uses 2 meter equipment for mobile communications, and the students in that program are very interested in the communications aspect of our group’s activities. We see that people become interested in Amateur Radio when it has some relevance to them. This belief is supported by the fact that in under two years we have had over a dozen people acquire their licenses. This was entirely voluntary on their part; it was not part of the course requirements.

I suspect that this will become more and more typical in the years to come. The people who are going to get involved with Amateur Radio are those people who have a need that Amateur Radio addresses.

A good analogy would be SCUBA diving. Most people get into SCUBA because it allows them to go places and see things they wouldn’t otherwise have access to…….Not because they think the hardware is inherently “cool”.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL



 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by WB2WIK on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I really like CW and use it all the time, but agree the licensing requirement which includes code should be dropped.

I'd recommend revamping the amateur exams entirely, since half the silly stuff that can be memorized doesn't make anyone a qualified operator. To he who says, "Why should I have to know code when I never plan to use it?" I would reply, "Why must I know the fifteen meter band edge frequencies, if I never plan to use this band?" There's no end to this stream of logic.

Being an active operator on many bands, my assessment is that 80% of all "new" operators are horrible, but about 20% of all old-time operators are, also. The amateur examination process obviously doesn't screen out an operator who wouldn't know how to handle a radio if one fell from the sky and hit him in the head. It hasn't for many years, at least not in the U.S.

Wouldn't it be nice if the examination included a hands-on demonstration of operating skill? That would imply a highly subjective test, with no multiple choice answers. Kind of like a behind-the-wheel driving test. The examiner can fail you simply because he doesn't feel comfortable with the way you drive. I used to fail anyone who had his or her foot on the brake around a curve or corner. There's no regulation stipulating you can't do this, but it's very dangerous, and until a new driver breaks this habit, I sure don't want him on the same road with me.

WB2WIK/6
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by DOODAH on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
ENOUGH ALREADY!!

It seems that eham is happy to post these troll articles just to get more hits on their advertising...

we know the FCC doesn't believe testing is necessary... we know the IARU don't believe in it.. we know WRC-2003 decided to change it... WHAT MORE DO YOU NEED?! Come on USA, join us in the 21st century!!

 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
KT0MM:

Michael, thank you for your reply! This has been a question that has been bothering me since I first read it. (Hence my re-print of it.)

I have been reading all of these threads with interest, (sometimes disgust) and it seems to me that the real question here is whether or not the theoretical advantages of CW are still regularly used in practice, for emergency related communication.

If it turns out that cases like the ones you cited are commonplace, then it is obvious that some sort of minimal code proficiency should be required. I work in an environment where the data determines whether your theory stands or falls, not dogma. I will happily join the “Pro-Code” side of this issue, if the data supports it.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL

 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AG4RQ on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
DOODAH, just because the UK decides to do something doesn't mean the US has to play monkey-see, monkey-do. Although the US and the UK agree on many issues, there are still some where we will never see eye-to-eye. One such example is capital punishment. Another, hopefully will be Morse profociency testing.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AG4RQ on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
The author makes some good points. However, I’m not in agreement with all of it. I have stated on other threads here on eHam and QRZ that a no-code HF license would be a good idea, but it should be limited. I feel that allowing no-coders a taste of HF would serve a useful purpose in that it might stimulate incentive on their part to learn CW and upgrade to General, and possibly beyond. Removing the code requirement from the General class would remove most (if not all) incentive to learn code, and most incentive to attain the Extra. After all, the General allows generous access to all HF bands. If you look at the bandplan, you will notice that Generals are allowed typically 1/2 to 2/3 of what Extras are allowed. Removing the code requirement from the General class would also result in a flood of new operators causing much overcrowding on the General portions of the bands. Much QRM would result.

The limited no-code HF license I have in mind is allowing Technician class operators expanded Tech Plus privileges. This would amount to all current CW and phone privileges already allowed to Tech Plus operators. In addition, open up the digital sub bands for their use so they can enjoy PSK31 among other digital modes.

I feel that the Novice CW sub bands should not be re-farmed. They serve a purpose. The Novice CW sub bands traditionally are the place to go to use slow code on the air. They are the place where slow-coders can practice their skills and increase their speed. Unlike during the days of the old Novice class license, use of these sub bands today is now purely voluntary for slow-code Generals and Extras. Due to the elimination of 13 and 20 wpm CW testing for General and Extra, there are slow-code Generals and Extras that need a place to hone their CW skills. They need those Novice CW sub bands for that purpose. The no-code Techs could also use these Novice CW sub bands to learn code and hone their skills.
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AJ5F on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Yes! Yes! By all means, let's eliminate the code requirement from the General Class license. Then, after a time when we are used to to this, we can eliminate the CW requirement for the Extra.

Then, down the road, we can eliminate the written exam for Technician. After we're accustomed to this, we can eliminate the written exam for General, and then after a period of time we can eliminate the written exam for the Extra.

Then to top it all off, we can open ALL bands to ALL modes and then eliminate callsigns.

And what do we have then? Voila! FRS and CB!!

It was noted in a previous post that our service (hobby) is growing at a single-digit rate. Thank goodness for that! It's not declining. And even it were, with attrition it would still be around for years to come. BUT, if we continue to lower standards and requirements it will be gone before we can say "SK"!!

I supppose it depends on what we want. It seems to me the ultimate end of all of this will still be radio, but it won't be HAM radio. This whole thing started with incentive licensing and the handing over of the 11 meter band to the Children's Banders. I remember when there was no "code credit." To get the Extra you had to pass 20 wpm code and the written exam at the same time. Even that was compromised (albeit a very small compromise). Then came no-code. Now we're talking about eliminating the CW requirement for General Class. More concessions are coming. Mark my words!

Those of us who are older have watched certain rights and privileges in our country taken from us over the years ONE SMALL STEP AT A TIME. The same thing is slowly happening in Amateur Radio. Everyone knows you can't boil a bullfrog unless you put him in cold water and slowly turn up the heat.

Will someone please wake up before everything we have is evaporated to nothing!!!

AJ5F
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Seen Previously;

>>>>”Everyone knows you can't boil a bullfrog unless you put him in cold water and slowly turn up the heat.”<<<<<

I’m confused………….why would I want to “Boil a Bullfrog??? Are we talking about “Cooking with intent to eat”?........ Wouldn’t you gut and clean him first?...............and if you had gutted and cleaned him first, why would the rate of heating be an issue?...........and besides, wouldn’t broiling or deep frying be better???................


Kent Carroll
KB9YZL


 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB5SXH on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>>>>"Find me *one* instance in the United States in the last 50 years, of a communications emergency, in which HF communication was required out of the emergency area, and code was used because conditions didn't allow voice propagation."<<<<<

Okay, this didn't happen in the continental US, but was rather an experience of mine while I was a US Marine deployed to Okinawa, Japan.

During routine training in the jungles of Okinawa, I was leading a five man recon element. We had been inserted about 24 hours prior to the main body (the rest of our company). Our job was to observe our objective and report to the company commander.

For communications equipmend we had: A/N PRC-104B HF man-portable radio. A/N PRC-119F VHF Single Channel Ground/Airborn Radio System for talking to the company once they were on the ground. A/N PRC-113 UHF for talking to the air support.

About four hours into the patroll, half-way to our observation point, my corpsman was bitten by a himme habu snake. The himme habu is the least agressive of the two venemous snakes on the island, but he is more potent. (And still plenty aggressive)

I immediately placed a constricting band on the corpsman's leg in order to slow the dispersion of the venom to the rest of the body, and attempted to establish COMM with the rear. Our last comm check was about 45 minutes ago and was broken but readable. I tried on HF SSB secure. Nothing. I tried on HF SSB in the clear. Nothing. I changed location, sought higher ground, et cetera... Nothing. At this point my corpsman was losing consciousness and I was looking at my options. Before I pulled my antenna in and came down off the hill, I decided to give one last try. I pulled the "knee key" out of my pack. When I went to check the radio out, I had to argue to get the key. The kid said that there wasn't anyone else in the Marine Corps who knew morse, but I knew better than that. I plugged in the key and began to send.
SOS SOS SOS SOS DE G25 G25 G25
Mind you, I was sending at a speed of about two words a minute, and my fist was a bit on the sloppy side (I hadn't worked CW in years).

I got no immediate response. I sent at one minute intervals for what seemed quite some time (about five minutes). Suddenly, I got a response.
G25 DE G8 G8 (Golf 8 was my company 1stSgt, an old recon Marine who knew CW about as well as I did, which was a lot better than everyone else.)

G8 DE G25 SNAKE BIT DOC. AIR MEDIVAC ASAP. LZ PETRIL. AR

and in response:

G25 DE G8 ROGER ALL. AIR ETA 25 MIN. AR SK

The CW signal itself was pretty weak, but I could copy it. We carried my doc to the specified landing zone which was about 800 meters away, and a few minutes later the bird was inbound. My corpsman ended up makeing a full recovery. (The snake did not :)

The Marine Corps never tought me CW. I learned CW so that I could get my Novice license when I was about 10 years old. I had worked CW on occaision, but never used it much.

I was never school trained in radio comms in the Marine Corps, either. As it was, I knew more about radio than almost every "school trained" radio operator that I ever met.

I know, it doesn't quite fit your requirements per se, but it comes pretty close.

73
John
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
John:

Thank you for your reply. The data is appreciated!

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
 
Giving General HF access w/o Morse is not a win  
by KD7KGX on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Dumping the entire Tech population on the General HF bands with a stroke of the pen is not a win-win situation. I can speak from personal experience that most new Generals are prone to make mistakes for the first few months that can inadvertantly cause interference. Giving people access to the General HF bands without passing the 5 wpm code test is a mistake. CW by its very nature REQUIRES you to slow down and think about what you are doing.

I support keeping Element 1A for General and above license classes. I support giving no-code Techs access to the Novice HF subbands, with the same privileges and restrictions that are currently placed on Technicians-with-Code (Tech Plus). This way, Techs can work HF and DX without code, and have a little bit of spectrum (on 10m) that they can use SSB on. The power, mode, and spectrum limitations will prevent them from bothering the current population of HF-privileged hams. If they STILL refuse to learn code, then they can get off their wallets, buy the necessary software, i.e., CWGet/CWType or MixW, to decode and send Morse, and now they have access to one digital mode (CW) on HF. If they just USE the program for a few months talking to all of the other newly-privileged Techs they will gain valuable experience in QSO procedures on HF, they will have no problems passing the 5 wpm test because they will absorb enough Morse to do so, and then they can join the rest of us.

I'm so fed up with people who aren't willing to exert themselves even a little bit denigrating the current licensing system (not the author but others in this and other threads). The 5 wpm test is not a problem... the FCC's own figures show that since the Morse requirement was reduced in 2000 two out of every three hams who got their license PASSED Element 1A and obtained General or above privileges. Element 1A isn't keeping anyone with even a MODICUM of motivation out of ham radio. It isn't broken... so why are you trying to fix it??!!

Removing Element 1A for Generals will be the end of ham radio as we know it.

Re whether CW has proven valuable in emergencies when SSB hasn't... CW has proven valuable in emergencies when for technical reasons (low power, no microphone) SSB hasn't been an alternative. Everything else being equal, SSB/voice allows for faster transfer of information. But sometimes everything else isn't equal. There have been several situations in the past decade where CW was the only feasible means of communication, and it saved lives. What is the problem with knowing as much as you can? Here's a question for all of you CW-doubters: if two people (twins?) have otherwise-identical skill sets and knowledge but one person knows CW and the other doesn't... who is the more well-rounded ham? Specialization is for insects!
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB5SXH on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
"Seen Previously;

>>>>”Everyone knows you can't boil a bullfrog unless you put him in cold water and slowly turn up the heat.”<<<<<

I’m confused………….why would I want to “Boil a Bullfrog??? Are we talking about “Cooking with intent to eat”?........ Wouldn’t you gut and clean him first?...............and if you had gutted and cleaned him first, why would the rate of heating be an issue?...........and besides, wouldn’t broiling or deep frying be better???................


Kent Carroll
KB9YZL "

Kent, I agree that broiling or frying would be better. I have heard, though, that when you throw frog legs in the pan they jump around a bit... I think, then, that if you did increase the heat more slowly, they would not jump quite so spastically. And as far as I know, the only edible part of a frog is it's legs. Of course, I don't like fish eye soup, nor do I suck the heads out on my crawfish...

-John
 
RE: Giving General HF access w/o Morse is not a wi  
by KB5SXH on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I think that giving the techs the novic sub-bands on HF is the most constructive idea yet. I think, also, that we need to keep element 1A for general, as previously mentioned.

I might even go so far as to giving up, say, 50kHz of 20 meters to the "Technician" sub-band so that they can experience a band that I believe to be much more active and reliable then 10 meters. Give them just enough to get a taste, and give them a little more incentive to upgrade. I'm in no way married to this idea, but I am saying that I, as an individual, would be willing to give up a small peice of 20 meters for the lower class licenses.

CW is a good thing. It's part of the art of radio. I don't see people condemning playing such an antiquated instrument as the piano, or complaining about the antiquated and crude form of art called painting.

You no longer have to know anything about vacum tubes to get your ticket. Now, you have to know what an opto-isolator is. You also have to know about maximum RF exposure levels, and so on. The hobby has changed plenty, but we still need something to keep us in touch with the basics. Ohm's law is still on the test. It is one of the most basic parts of electrical theory. CW is the most basic form of radio communications. It is both a good learning/teaching tool, and a piece of our history. It would be a shame for the requirement to be completely done away with. In some situations it can even be pretty handy (see my previous post).

Just my thoughts,
73
John
 
RE: Giving General HF access w/o Morse is not a wi  
by KB9YZL on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Seen Previously:

>>>>”Removing Element 1A for Generals will be the end of ham radio as we know it.”<<<<

In following the threads on this subject I have seen this comment, in one form or another, dozens and dozens of times………And it still astonishes me!

Do you honestly believe that a silly 5 wpm Code Test is all that is keeping you from being over-run by the “Unwashed Hordes”?

If there really was a huge mass of operators who wanted onto the HF bands, they’d already be there. The fact that they’re not cannot be credited to the Code Requirement. Any idiot can teach themselves Code at the 5 wpm level.

Isn’t it much more likely that they are held back by the cost of modern HF equipment, the size of a proper antenna system, the legalities of putting up a real antenna, and some of the limitations that HF has? (Let’s face it, HF is not the logical first choice for vehicle-to-vehicle communication, or for some of the newer interest areas, like Fast Scan Amateur TV.)

More to the point, HF isn’t everyone’s cup of tea! There’s nothing happening on the HF Bands that I am personally interested in. If the FCC granted full General privileges to everyone tomorrow, it wouldn’t affect me in the slightest.

If you’re worried that removing the Code Requirement will eventually result in the disuse of Code as a mode of communication, you may have a point;………….but don’t talk yourselves into believing that the Code Requirement is all that’s keeping the CB crowd away. (If you take the time to listen, you’ll discover that many of them don’t want anything to do with you, either!)


Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by K7FD on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
WB2WIK sez:

"Being an active operator on many bands, my assessment is that 80% of all "new" operators are horrible, but about 20% of all old-time operators are, also"...

Hey, this really nails it on the head. I hadn't thought about the percentages, but I'd have to agree with this statement.

As far as 5wpm Extra's and dropping it for the rest, it may be the 'best of the all the poorest' possible solutions available. I think it has some merit...especially if the other alternative is dropping code testing completely. The two sides will have to meet in the middle somewhere...

73 John K7FD

 
No Glass Ceiling!  
by W8VOM on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Retaining the Morse code test requirement only at the Extra class level would be arbitrary and capricious.The "No Code" type groups would quickly claim that Extras were creating a "Glass Ceiling" and cause an even "greater" battle down the road! Lets get this over with one way or the other NOW! Retain Morse testing for all HF access or drop it totally as a requirement.I just dont want to see yet another Morse battle down the road when they want it dropped for the Extra class. People who want it dropped may hush up for a few years until they hit the glass ceiling. Then the great debate will be over dropping it for the Extra and you know this is true! Retaining the Morse requirment only for the Extra class will not bring peace for very long.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by K4FAU on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Wow - a thread on Code vs No Code -- haven't seen one of those for at least 5 hours....
 
RE: No Glass Ceiling!  
by KZ9G on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
W8VOM:

Glass ceiling - yes. An Extra Class should show proficiency in all aspects of ham radio, to include the ancient mode of CW. The requirement should stand for the Extra - sort of what the name of this class of license indicates - above and beyond. Also, no-coders shouldn't be allowed to operate CW on the bands due to their lack of proficiency. It's only fair. 5 wpm isn't difficult to learn, and can be done without on-the-air operation.

I vote for a restricted no-code license on HF, somewhat equal to the General Class. It's time.

73.
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by K0RGR on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Overall, I generally agree your proposal, Dave.

There are two places where we differ.

First, I think we should revisit ARRL's proposal of a few years back. Like you, they would grant HF CW priveleges to Technicians. However, they also proposed to eliminate the existing Novice/Tech bands and redeploy them to provide more spectrum, while granting Techs essentially all HF CW priveleges, except those reserved for Extra Class.

Let's look at the realities here. The 80 meter CW segment seems to be seriously underutilized, even in most contests these days. It seems absurd to dedicate another 50 Khz. on this band to low-speed CW, when the
phone band is much more crowded.

The 40-meter Novice/Tech band is a wasteland at night, and likely will be until 2009, when we get rid of the foreign broadcast stations in that segment. Once this becomes worldwide amateur, hopefully we can coax the foreign SSB ops to move up above 7100, leaving the bottom 100 Khz. for CW and digital modes.

Why not give the newbies priveleges on 30 meters? This band is also seriously underutilized, though it has some of the best HF propagation available at night. I'd also give them digital modes on 30 meters.

There is no Novice band on 20 and I would have no problem excluding the Techs from this precious real estate. Since this is the one ham band that is really fully utilized, I can't make much argument for adding more people.

On the other hand, all the bands from 17 meters on up could use more activity.

Just for fun, how about returning to ancient tradition. Give them 160 meter 'phone just like the 'Class B' ops had here prior to WWII?

I would encourage the newbies to use computers to operate CW. MIXW and other inexpensive software actually does a fantastic job of copying CW that is sent by other computers. I don't mind using a computer to send, and if they keep the speed below 25 WPM, they're probably easier for me to copy than slower hand-sent stuff with a 'banana boat swing'. I recommend a standard speed of 18WPM like ARRL bulletins.

The result would be meaningful HF priveleges for the Techs, and they get some exposure to the CW mode - hopefully, they would soon determine that it would be better if they could copy it by ear. If they just don't want anything to do with it, they can go take the General and get on SSB and digital modes.
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by THEWISEONE on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Quick someone call a Doctor, the whiney nocodes are going to die from dehydration from all the crying and blubbering they are doing. This s--t is getting old fast one endless stream of crying and wishful thinking after another. I agree hurry up BPL and put us out of our misery
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W8VOM on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
KZ9G wrote: "The requirement should stand for the Extra - sort of what the name of this class of license indicates - above and beyond"

I have no problem with this BUT how long would the No Code Crowd accept this Glass Ceiling? One perhaps two years? Get it over with NOW..either require Morse testing for HF or drop it totaly!!!

I dont want to see this battle go on forever just to protect Extra class turf for perhaps a couple more years. To require Morse for Extra only would only buy a little more time. Get real...I dont like any of these changes but an Extra Class Glass Ceiling will only add a sand bag to the flood. It would never last for long change is on it's way.NCI would never accept this glass ceiling and if they did it would not be for long. W8VOM
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Seen previously;

>>>>".....This s--t is getting old fast...."<<<<<

Yes some of it is......And what really helps the whole thing along are those Trolls who come out from underneath their bridges to throw a little mud! (But are incapable of a serious, adult comment!)

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N6AJR on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Gee I think I too shall make a code/no code article. again, and again, and again, and again..ad infum
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W8JJI on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Dump the code requirement.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by RobertKoernerExAE7G on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
"Extra class is for the most part a status symbol"

Do tell. Or, maybe, speak for your self?

I know people who became Extras, simply because it was there, and they wanted to challenge themselves to achieve a goal.

Some Extras wanted the extra sub band space; there was less qrm there.

Some Extras wanted access to more DX. At one time, DX hung out in the Extra portions, the pile ups were smaller there.

At one time, your call didn't change from Novice through Extra, no overt status symbol at all.

Now that one, can once again, get a 1x2 or 2x1 call, there are reasons to change one's call that have nothing to do with status: less to send on CW; better chances of your complete call being copied correctly in QRM or QSB; on phone, a lot faster to say your entire call; better chances of your full call being copied under adverse conditions.

Prior to the era around the Bash books time, to me, it was really a remarkable accomplishment to become an extra. But, one's call didn't change.

I hung onto my original call after I became an Extra for quite a while. I hung onto my original call when I became Advanced; the same for becoming a General (I skipped Tech).

I finally decided to change my call after spending some time sending WB1AUW/V47. It was sorta loooooong on CW.

Getting a 2X1 made life a lot easier on CW and phone.

Status didn’t enter the picture. Might be because I looked at all hams as fellow hams. I never wondered why anyone else didn’t upgrade. Much of the time, we never knew what class license anyone had. We just assumed if you were in the Advanced, or Extra sub bands, you had earned the privilege to be there.

If you had a 1X3 call, you were a REAL old timer; same for anyone with a 1X2; they all got instant respect from me.

Even thought I do, occasionally, like to poke fun at the reasons offered as to why a ham shouldn't have to spend the time practicing to learn 5WPM code (so far, no one has come up with a better reason than the one I had: "It was too difficult-no one should have to learn CW if they never planned to use it!"), the battlefield isn’t on eHam.

The battle will be fought with the FCC.

I choose to send my comments to The LEAGUE.

I think the League’s current outlook, the rules and regulations probably need a re-write to bring them up to date, along with looking at if there should be any changes for NO-Code! Hams on HF, a reasonable outlook.

Besides, The LEAGUE doesn’t want to ban the electron from ham radio in the 21st century.

Save "E.M.F.=AmpOhms" from extinction.

You don’t float ground by dumping earth on a barge and sending it out to sea.

; - ))

Have some FUN today (name calling doesn't count)
Bob
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N9AVY on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
This would be a great discussion at a hamfest ... we could show British Soccer Fans what bad behavior really is....
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by WILLY on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
by W5AU on September 23, 2003
We dont need to drop any requirements.... They have
been reduced to almost nothing as it is.
......

True.

.......
A trained Monkey can get a license like things are.
.....


Close. <g>



..........
If anything, we need to up the Morse and the Theory
requirements. Lets get Real Hams back in the ranks.
..........

The hard part is: How?
We are, and have been, as a nation of people, moving towards wanting everything now, with little or no effort.




..........
As was said in a previous quote

"We don't need or want "common folk" in Amateur Radio, we want folks with a burning orgasmic love of radio. We want people who still see magic in wireless communication. We want people with RF flowing in their veins. Amateur Radio has captured maybe 30% of these uncommon folk.
.............

Are you saying that there is another 70% out there somewhere, right now , that we are not reaching?
Wouldn't that be something if there you meant that, and you are correct? :) That would be a nice sized pool of potential new hams to see .... wouldn't it? :)



........
Common folk have FRS and Citizens Band."
..........

True.
Since these already exist, there is no need to make Amateur Radio more available to folks that can just as well be served by the spectrum already allocated to these services.





.......
Dont destroy what you do not understand !!!!!!!!!
........

Agreed.




Let me ask you:
Do you welcome to the ranks of Amateur Radio, anyone that legitimately passes the tests and earns their ticket?
And:
Would they, upon earning that ticket, have proven they are 'uncommon'? :)


I think I already know the answers to the above... but let's see what you say.



73
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by RF_BURNS on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Mother of God.

Please make it stop.
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by NI0C on September 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
To those on both sides of the code/no-code debate who make destructive remarks such as "bring on BPL," and "put us out of our misery":

You are not advancing your cause or making your case. If you can inform this debate with a reasoned argument, then let's hear it. There are good people who care about amateur radio on both sides of the debate. No matter how the FCC rulemaking turns out, we will live with their decision and get along with each other on the amateur spectrum that we enjoy.

73 to all,
Chuck NI0C
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by WR8D on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Well...its like this. There's no use in all of us going at each others throats. We can sit here infront of our computers and "what if" ourselves to death. The bottom line is the fcc is gonna do what its gonna do. All this talk about keeping code for extras and not having code for other classes is just blowing smoke at each other...as is the talk of changing band plans or what ever. Yeah i've got all fired up a few times here myself but its useless. It serves no point other than to get a bunch of us pissed at each other. The FCC doesnt care what we say or do here. Yeah there's a big split about the code and nocode. Depending on where you live you might understand why so many of us want to keep the code...but just get on the bands and have fun radioing. This is all a waste of all of our time.

From up the thread..i remember those old bash books. I remember that fcc examiner too that looked like a darn marine drill instructer. I remember when you could do a little homebrewing and keep your old rigs up and running and tweak a little on these newer ones and you were looked upon with a little respect. Now we're called elites or extra snobs or old farts because we know how to do these things. I'm not old but i can do all that i've mentioned. Its really a shame the piss assed attitudes that are everywhere now. I cant do that and you can so its just not right and you think you're better than me so you just watch and see i'll be as good as you and i wont have to do a damn thing at all to be that way. That pretty much sums up the code nocode debate. Get a life guys and gals...leave this crap to the weirdo's ...maybe they'll leave the rest of us alone on the bands...get "into" radio.

73 WR8D
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W5UX on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Over 186 countries have not decided to drop the morse code.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KZ9G on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
WR8D:

I, too, earned all my licenses the using the old systems, as well as enduring the Chicago FCC Field Office for my General Class (my folks drove me from Iowa to Chicago just for the test - passed first time). In my teen years, my preoccupation with Amateur Radio spurred my interest and career in Radio and Telecommunications. I, too, learned and repaired radio electronics at an early age, and also professionally as a Ground Radio Technician in the USAF. I've progressed to the engineering and consulting level in the cellular and wireline telecom industries since then, but I don't believe I'm looked upon as an elitist or an old fart (only 37 years old). Now that I think about it, I'll be able to join the QCWA at the ripe old age of 40.

I like and enjoy operating CW on occasion. I converse at around 24 to 26 wpm, and contest much faster. Does this make a ham radio elite? No. Actually, I'm in awe of those at the 40+ wpm level, and of those who can hold verbal and CW conversations at the same time. Unfortunately, those Gents are dying fast, and CW just isn't as desired in today's modern world. The world's changing and code just isn't needed as a entry level HF licensing requirement.

Really, I hope these pro-code versus no-code debates end soon. Unfortunately, the debates will rage on until the FCC tweaks the CW licensing requirements within a few years. 73.
 
RE: This is some stupid shit  
by KE4RWS on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Someone wrote:

"Over 186 countries have not decided to drop the morse code"

That's because they have more pressing issues to concentrate on . . . .

This thread, like all the others, is a bunch of crap. Same old shit, different day.

I'm sure eHam only allows these threads to continue on is because they really only want the masses it brings to their website for their advertisers.
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by DOODAH on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
> by AG4RQ
> Although the US and the UK agree on many issues,
> there are still some where we will never see eye-to-
> eye. One such example is capital punishment.

That just about sums it up... let us know when you're ready to catch up with the civilised world.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by DOODAH on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
re :
"We don't need or want "common folk" in Amateur Radio, we want folks with a burning orgasmic love of radio. We want people who still see magic in wireless communication. We want people with RF flowing in their veins. Amateur Radio has captured maybe 30% of these uncommon folk. Common folk have FRS and Citizens Band."

Do you really believe ANYONE would want to get involved in Amateur Radio unless they DO have 'RF in their veins'? Wake up and compare the number of Amateurs v. the total population. This is a tiny minority sport! We should welcome anyone who is interested enough to pass the written test.

And anyway, it's NOT ABOUT what 'we' want, or what YOU want... it's a HOBBY... it's about what the INDIVIDUAL wants. No-one can spoil YOUR hobby for you unless you let them get to you. Any other amateur cannot stop you learning, self-training or experimenting. They cannot stop you operating unless they break their licence conditions, and THAT can be dealt with. How about a little bit (or a whole lot) of LIVE AND LET LIVE!?
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AE9B on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I personally had an emergency situation which I needed to get a message to my loved ones. I had NO radio (3 family members are licensed hams) but I had a cell phone. However, having been nearly submerged in water for a prolonged period of time I could not speak into the cell phone mike (it was inoperative). I could hear and dial but could not Speak! I selected 2 tones on the keypad #1,#2 and sent morse code to my 13 year old daughter (KB9RWB) who relayed the message to her mom. Everything turned out well. Code knowledge does have use. I'm not a "must have guy", but I do see benefits.
Maybe you will too. I wish you well in your amateur radio hobby and would like to encourage you to learn everything you can..

Tom
AE9B
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KA4KOE on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I THINK WE ALL SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO LEARN CODE JUST BECAUSE I HAD TO BUST MY CHOPS TO LEARN IT.

BURN BABY, BURN.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Phil;

I think your "Shift" key is stuck.....

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by K2IY on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Ham Facts

1) The three countries with the highest proportional Ham populations are USA, Japan and Germany. These are also three of the world's most affluent countries and educated societies. Technology also played a major role in these nation's economic development.

2) The VEC program eliminated a major impediment to many in terms of travel restrictions to take Amateur Licensing exams. Unless you're poor, the nominal fee to take exams on a regular basis til you pass is very non-prohibitive.

3) Due to internet, 200 cable channels and cell phones; interpersonal communications is no longer a unique thrill for most Americans, especially young people. Amateur Radio does not rise above the "noise" to make it the unique interest it was in the past, when your friend's dad had a ham station in their house as opposed to rotary phones and B&W TV's only in everyone else's. In today's world people feel barraged and violated by "communications clutter".

4) American technology in the past closely paralleled radio homebrewing. Today's technology of gate arrays w/embedded sw does not parallel home electronics.

I believe Amateur Radio will still attract the interest of those who are fascinated by and want to understand the technology of rf communications and electronics. However many who have this interest, especially teenagers, do not get the time to pursue Amateur Radio due to other societal requirements.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KKQ8960 on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
gosh you guys really dont know the program cb is alive and well!!!!!!!!!this is exactly why i will not get my ticket because of all the ranting and raving!!!!!!!this is the 21st century for get the code..........
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W3JJH on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Let me start of by saying that I believe that knowledge of the International Morse code is a good and useful skill for anyone to know. I learned it as a Boy Scout, and I wish it were still required for First Class Scout. It's a survival skill, like knowing first aid or how to build a fire or how to butcher a deer.

However, I believe that that telegraphy is an obsolete means of communications. Only hams still use it on a day-to-day basis, and not all of us do that! (Well, yes, a few of the spook "numbers stations" like 4XZ are on the air with Morse code, but they are making one-way transmissions.) There are no longer any commercial, military, or maritime stations using telegraphy for regular two-way communications.

I sail. I don't particularly like cruising under power. I prefer to use the archaic means of wind power when I go boating for recreation. I'm free to do so. However, there are not many commercial sailing vessels left. If I want to get my Master's papers from the Coast Guard, I'll be examined on seamanship related to modern vessels and only tested on sailing if I'm apply for a special endorsement.

There are some of us who enjoy the archaic mode of Morse telegraphy. They should be free to do it for recreation. However, they should not insist that every ham be tested for proficiency in that obsolete mode any more than I should insist that a tanker captain be qualified to trim the sails on a schooner.

Morse telegraphy is just another mode of data transmission. It has the longest history of any of the modes of electrical communication, a rich history, but, like sailing, it has moved from the mainstream.

Our emotional attachments to the history of our hobby do not change the facts of reality.

Of course, someone always brings up the idea that by eliminating telegraphy testing the FCC will be setting ham radio on a course to become an expanded Citizens Band. The "reasoning" behind such posts is invariably based on the logical fallacy or the slippery slope wherein a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn with no factual basis of support. Why would someone think that way? Do they believe that passing a telegraphy test makes one more likely to obey the law. Is a 20-wpm Extra more moral than a 13-wpm Advanced who is ethically superior to a 5-wpm Extra?

Someone else will bring up the nonsensical proposition that since the Commission should drop telegraphy testing, they should eliminate all testing and turn the bands into an expanded CB or FRS. The number and types of fallacies in this line of thinking are too numerous to catalog.

The facts of the situation are that the FCC is on record as rejecting the idea that Morse telegraphy produces operators who are more compliant with the Commission rules, that the FCC views Morse telegraphy as just another mode (and an obsolete on at that), and that they only retained telegraphy testing because they had to under ITU Rule S25. It's also a fact that the ITU Rule has changed.

If you really wish to force all new hams using HF to have to pass a telegraphy test, then you need to file comments against the current petitions (especially the NCI and NCVEC ones) pointing out to the Commission how they erred in their findings in their Codeless Technician Decision and in their R&O 99-412 that restructured licensing.

On the other hand, if you believe that your fellow hams who don't want to use telegraphy should be free to pursue their interests without being proficient in yours, get on the air with a key in your hand and leave the rest of us to our keyboards, mikes, cameras, etc.

"But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation, even among people who should and do know better."
--George Orwell, "Politics and the English Language"
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KA4KOE on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
If the cw requirement is dropped, I'd be happy with the following typical exam questions(I'm requoting a previous post of mine, so I beg forgivess from the persnickety):

Proposed Sample Questions for Extra Exam in lieu of Code Requirement-

1. See attached voltage divider biased common emitter NPN transistor (silicon) amplifier circuit. Given the beta, Vcc, and resistor values, calculate the following:

a. Vb, Vc, Ve, Vce
b. Ib, Ic, Ie
c. Circuit gain and phase relationship between vi and vo.
d. Given the interelectrode capacitances indicated, at which critical frequency will the voltage gain of this circuit be unity?

2. For this same circuit, calcuate Av without emitter bypassing via capacitor.

3. Calculate the phasor impedance of the sample feedline shown below, for the input voltage given. The feedline length is x, distributed capacitance of the feedline is xc. We are assuming that the line is 1.3 wavelengths long.

4. Note the indicated log periodic. Calculate 2:1 SWR bandwidth Bw and gain in Dbi for the frequency range shown.

5. For the complex circuit shown below with values of L, C, and R, indicate all nodes. Using Laplace transforms, calculate the equivalent circuit at 2 time constants

6. Draw a block diagram for a complete SSB-Sc transmitter utilizing the third method for sideband generation. For extra credit, generate diagrams for both phasing and filter methods.

7. Derive the formulas defining both frequency and angle modulation.

8. Upgrade the service drop to your house for the parameters shown, assuming you already have a 100a 120/240v, 1 phase, three wire service (at 80 amperes maximum demand load (total), and you plan on adding an illegal 10 kw amplifier @ 240v, assuming 50% efficiency. Question: How red will your service conductors glow (prior to tripping of the mains) if you do not upgrade the AWG sizing prior to calling CQ on 20m for 15 minutes, assuming a duty cycle of 35%.

9. Why do you want to be an extra class ham. Thesis shall be no less than 1000 words. Misspellings, sentence fragments, and comma splices will count against you.

10. Billy is working on a homemade amplifier. His power supply B+ is approximately 3000 volts, no load. If Billy is barefoot, standing on wet concrete, and assuming a "good grip" to the plate of the final tubes, and also said Billy has an effective resistance to ground of only 10 ohms, how long long will it take Billy to be cooked into a pool of bubbling lard? Billy is 5'8", 175 lbs, and runs regularly.

Good luck. Note, license testing fee of $500 is nonrefundable.

OK, I'm only kidding......

:)

Philip
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W3JJH on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Phil,

Billy must be kinda dense if he's operating barefoot when he has an amp.

73 de W3JJH
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Seen Previously;

>>>>”9. Why do you want to be an extra class ham. Thesis shall be no less than 1000 words. Misspellings, sentence fragments, and comma splices will count against you.”<<<<<

I would fail this hypothetical test specifically because of this question.

Based on what I have read in these forums, I really don’t think that you “Real Hams” sound like the kind of people I would enjoy socializing with. Consequently, my answer to “Question 9” would be left blank.

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KC8VWM on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!

Sooooooooooo. This is what Amateur Radio is all about eh?

Now, I understand the "Amateur" part in radio.


KC8VWM



 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KG4RZH on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Hey Dave...

I would modify your Modest Proposal with the following:

Technician: All VHF privileges, plus the Novice HF bands. No code test.

General: All current General privileges. 5 wpm code test.

Extra: All current Extra privileges. 13 wpm code test.

I think the hardest part of our effort to take the code was the lack of an on-air environment in which to practice. Sure, we used 2m FM simplex and sidetone or practice oscillator, which was interesting but very cumbersome. Our sessions on 10m once we got our licenses were much more interesting, and ran the risk of a genuine QSO starting up!

And yes, I know that this scheme would require me to increase my code speed drastically unless I was "grandfathered". Perhaps I could retain my Extra class until license renewal, and keep it if I passed the 13 wpm test.

I think the Extra class privileges are too narrow an upgrade from General to inspire folks to learn code from scratch, but could provide a useful incentive for folks to improve speed.

To the poster who commented that "what-if"-ing was worthless... it's not. The U.S. Government is *our* government and does respond to population pressure... especially from a motivated group when the change is relevent *only* to that motivated group. Consider how high a percentage of U.S. hams are AARP or would qualify for that group, and remember what kind of clout that group wields.

73
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KC0ODY on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
W3JJH sez:

"Of course, someone always brings up the idea that by eliminating telegraphy testing the FCC will be setting ham radio on a course to become an expanded Citizens Band. The "reasoning" behind such posts is invariably based on the logical fallacy or the slippery slope wherein a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn with no factual basis of support. [...]

"Someone else will bring up the nonsensical proposition that since the Commission should drop telegraphy testing, they should eliminate all testing and turn the bands into an expanded CB or FRS. The number and types of fallacies in this line of thinking are too numerous to catalog."

Nice to know that there are other sharp-eyed folks following these threads that can spot logical fallacies when they pop up-- which is very often.

73, Jackie
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB3JKB on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
This might be off topic, but I'm sick of this carping about code speed. Learning morse code is difficult for most people. Once you can copy 5 wpm solidly the most difficult part is over, you've done it. If you intend to use cw, well you are just naturally going to improve your code speed. If you're not then it doesn't matter. For those who care about such things, you've at least paid your dues. So lets stop this distraction about code speed somehow being a meaningful determinator of worthiness. It was silly to have code speed a factor in the first place. My bet is that most of those 20wpm extras out there couldn't copy 13wpm solidly if their license depended on it.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by WA9SVD on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Another modest proposal:

After reviewing a lot of material, I'm sorry to say that the FCC will probably do away with the code requirement. (NOT my preference, but a realistic prediction.) When the code requirement was lowered to 5 WPM, the FCC strongly indicated that they were making 5WPM the requirement as they felt that was the minimum code speed to satisfy International Treaty requirements, and the International requirements were the only reason they retained a code requirement at all.
Now that those requirements have been removed, I'm sure the FCC will remove the code requirement as part of their "streamlining" of Amateur Radio Service licensing.

I know it will not be a popular decision for many. But remember, when the original regulations were formed, CW WAS the major means of Amateur Communication. And that fact has changed, as we have progressed into the 21st Century.

SO, I propose to give Tech operators the Novice band privileges that Tech Plus operators have. (OK, I realize it's a "gimme," but it's not much different from the grandfathering of "old Tech's" who passed code and the old written exam to be Generals. (Allowing code credit for Novices and old Techs was probably a way for the FCC to easy into the full "no-code" era.)

KEEP the current "CW only" allocations on all bands, and only allow CW and other narrow-band modes;

Do NOT automatically make Techs "No Code Generals." There is STILL a difference in the written test requirements between Tech and General; it wouldn't be fair to upgrade those people without their having to pass the same Exam Element as New General applicants. (At one time, Tech and General written exams were identical; the only difference between the two was code speed!)

I'd like to see the Written exams totally revised. While basic electronics never changes, the emphasis on the current technology should be emphasized. When the exams were first developed, tubes (valves for those operators "across the Pond") were the only technology available. Now, (except for high power amplifiers) they are the exception in Amateur equipment, rather than the rule. So yes, I'd like to see more emphasis on solid state theory and operation, and ESPECIALLY proper operating techniques and knowledge of the rules.

Times change, and Amateur Radio has changed. If we are willing to accept the change, Amateur Radio will continue to exist and flourish. If we refuse to accept change, Amateur Radio will die out.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by NI0C on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
To KB3JKB:
If you feel code speed isn't that important and maybe even "off-topic," then why did you bring it up? I wouldn't place much money on your bet, either. I think you would lose. Although it is true that CW speed will atrophy with disuse and that there are some extras whose code skills are rusty, it is also true that many of us upgraded to extra because we wanted the "extra" privileges that came with the license, including the use of the lower 25 Khz of the 80m, 40m, 20m, 15m, and 10m bands. I passed my first extra class exam in 1968, but had to QRT because of family and job responsibilities. After I had been completely away from ham radio for 13 years, I tuned in W1AW during a code proficiency "qualifying run" and earned a 30 wpm certificate as a non-ham, with zero practice in those 13 years.

As a bit of licensing history, in the not too distant past hams were required to renew their licenses every five years, and to certify that they could still copy code at the speed required by their license, and certify some minimum number of hours of operation on the air during the last year in order to qualify for renewal.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AG4RQ on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
> by AG4RQ
> Although the US and the UK agree on many issues,
> there are still some where we will never see eye-to-
> eye. One such example is capital punishment.

"That just about sums it up... let us know when you're ready to catch up with the civilised world."

Words of "wisdom" from DOODAH. All I can say, DOODAH, is that I hope the US nails Bin Laden, not the UK. If the UK gets him, he will live to a ripe old age. If the US gets him, he's history.
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KD5YDC on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
If the FCC were to apply the standard offered by the author of this thread tomorrow morning, I guarantee you that next year, when those Generals want to upgrade, the whole argument will start all over again.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KD5YDC on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
WB2WIK says:


"I really like CW and use it all the time, but agree the licensing requirement which includes code should be dropped.

I'd recommend revamping the amateur exams entirely, since half the silly stuff that can be memorized doesn't make anyone a qualified operator. To he who says, "Why should I have to know code when I never plan to use it?" I would reply, "Why must I know the fifteen meter band edge frequencies, if I never plan to use this band?" There's no end to this stream of logic. "

NOW we get to the REAL crux of the matter. They really do want "free" licensing.
I'm sorry, but I think Cracker Jack went out of business.
Give me a break. (And I DON'T mean Kit Kat, either).
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AG4RQ on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
When the countries of the world voted to eliminate mandatory Morse proficiency testing by international treaty, and decided to leave the option to each individual country, I don't think they knew the kind of Pandora's box they would be opening. If the proposal would have been all or none (either all countries keep Morse proficiency testing, or all countries drop it), I think keeping it would have won by a landslide. Once enough time passes, I think we will all see that most countries will have decided to keep their Morse proficiency testing.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AE6IP on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Cracker Jack is alive and well at

http://www.crackerjack.com/home.htm

 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N4QA on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
"I got a Bencher paddle,
I love to send a telegraph,
so mama, don't take my code-a-chrome away...


Mama, don't take my code-a-chrome,
mama, don't take my code-a chrome,
mama, don't take my code-a-chrome away"

Mama, don't take my code-a-chrome,
leave your boy so far from home,
mama, don't take my code-a-chrome away..."


-Paul Simon (formerly of Simon and Garfunkel}

73.
Bill, N4QA
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KF9VA on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Wow now that was a good well written artical. I would like to keep this message upbeat and positive so that means that i will not be able to express myself without upsitting someone. I would just like to remind everyone that we all passed exams to get our licsenses. We put forth an effort to accomplish a goal in life. Lets stop the name calling and intimidation and show the world why we became amatuer,s
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KA4KOE on September 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I do agree with my friend Mike WA2JJH that this subject has been BEAT TO DEATH. AND since this topic has been brought up once again ad nauseum, I hereby restate the ultimate proposal to make CW THE MODE OF CHOICE, and discussions like this one will be MOOT forever......

Here it is guys...you asked for it:

A UNIQUE PROPOSAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF CW AS THE KING OF OPERATING MODES -

I propose the following to make CW more popular, by extending operating priviledges, contingent on passing a 50 WPM code receiving and transmitting test (I've got to get cracking here guys, since I'm only good up to about 35 wpm myself). Sending test can only be done on a genuine Vibroplex bug, with a serial number indicating manufacture no more recent than 1946. Paddles, Keyers, and keyboards are verboten. Nicht!!!

1. The FCC shall increase maximum power output from 1,500 watts to 150,000 watts, contingent only to restrictions placed by the local power utility. Looks like I'll have to get a 480 volt, three phase service run to the house.

2. Allocate spectrum continuous from 1.8 to 50 Mhz, no breaks. Lets give the broadcasters on 40m a run for their money.

3. Remove all restrictions on antennas and their maximum heights (propose 1500' foot to be realistic). Really give PRB-1 some bite. Anyone objecting to ham antenna erection will be sentenced to 20 years in the Federal Penn, at hard labor.

4. Anyone presenting the certificate of successful completion of 50 WPM code test shall be eligible to purchase 91 octane (or 100 octane av-gas) at a rate not to exceed 50 cents per gallon, 55 cents on weekends.

5. Open season rights, with no bag limit, on freebanders who dare to intrude on our precious, holy spectrum. 30-06 ammo free with every Garande M1 purchase.

6. One year free membership to those with CW certificate to on-line dating service (I'm married, so I'm ineligible) of their choice. We need to get more of these single types married off so the passing on of CW enhanced genes is assured for posterity.

I guarantee the above incentives will make CW the predominate mode of preference for the forseeable future."

There. End of discussion. Let's talk about constructive ways to stop BPL dead in its tracks! Thats the only thing that is important right now.

Philip
The CW Machine
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W3DCG on September 25, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
5 wpm is such a barrier.
Get rid of all barriers.
The Extra theory is a barrier to the bottom 25 KHz of the classic bands for me. Not to mention phone- I like phone, it's just that I get plenty of it constantly.
I'm not whining about it.
Being forced to learn the theory or be out of those frequencies will enhance me.
For people like me, it takes a lot longer to actually UNDERSTAND the theory, than it does to learn 5 whole entire, as the NVEC said in their petition, 5 whole BURDENSOME words per minute.

26 letters, and 10 numerals. Memorize them to be able to recall them at a rate of 5 burdensome words per minute.

Hundreds of children have demonstrated the ACCOMPLISHMENT of 5 OH-SO-burdensome words per minute sending and receiving.

Shame on the adults. Children would see it as, I want that, learn 5 wpm, okay. No learn 5 wpm, ok, just did not desire it strongly enough to break the 5 wpm SPEED barrier. Found interest elsewhere.

There is plenty enough intrigue at the No Code Tech level. IRLP is pretty nifty. The current REAL world of RF where all the money is being made sure is not on HF as much as the higher frequencies.

So what would draw the current computer generation to Ham radio? Digital mode? Why ever for- Instant Messaging does the same thing. So does Email with a fast connection.

The intrigue is the independent wireless aspect of long distance communication. If one is intrigued enough or fascinated enough, 5 wpm poses no major barrier, but rather, something to be accomplished. Like riding a bicycle.

If 5 wpm kept someone faintly interested from becoming active on HF, then perhaps they weren't interested enough in the first place.

If the idea of dropping Code requirements is to gain more hams from those currently into playing computer games, why would they have been interested with or without Code requirements? They would not?

You say digital modes will appeal? Why should they, the internet is more reliable on any given day, any given TIME of day.

Giving the primarily digital operators or potential not yet licensed digital operators the benefit of the doubt, fine.

All No Code Techs get full General frequencies, LIMITED to under 20W but over 5W output. That is much more than enough for plenty of digital action, particularly PSK-31. I've been hearing a few overdriven PSK signals lately too.

If people wanna whine about THAT being NOT ENOUGH of a GIVEAWAY, then it would seem undeniable, that the real want is for wanting it all, for free. Wanting the most for the LEAST amount of work possible.

Giving in to such demands, will surely do wonders for the respectability factor, of a traditionally very respected and respectable hobby and service.

It is similar to a petition for the abolishment of PE Class in school. Many could argue, that many people have no design whatsoever of becoming professional athletes, or athletes at all. So why should PE be required? For some, PE requirements may be the only Physical "Education" they will have ever received in their lives. Such people could argue that therefore, REQUIREMENTS and base-line standards for Physical ability should be ABOLISHED as embarrassing, offensive, and causing undue BURDEN and emotionally TRAUMATIC stress in the lives of our children- our future.
Wussies. A future of wussies. Create a future full of wussies.

Let us aspire to such greatness.
Let us send precisely that kind of message, let us promote, not only the lessening of a standard down to it's lowest possible level, LET US TOP THAT OFF BY ABOLISHING THAT STANDARD COMPLETELY.

wE sHUD DO dat pronto. An was wid da capitol big lettuz in front da cen-tans afta dah dot. why we gotta make one BIG letta on dat firs werd. Cuz DA DIT, I mean dat DOT meens da end of da sendtance, so why fo' we gotta make one big letta on dat fers werd, everybody can NO, das da begginen of nex senddtance.
MORE STUPID RULES WE SHOULD GET RID OF, THERE IS NO SOUND REASON NOR JUSTIFICATION, FOR WHY, WE MUST BEGIN, EACH NEW SENTENCE WITH A CAPITALIZED WORD. THE PERIOD ACCOMPLISHES SAID MEANING. ABOLISH THE CAPITALIZATION OF THE FIRST WORD IN A SENTENCE IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING A PREVIOUS SENTENCE THAT ENDS IN A PERIOD.

PREPOSTEROUS? IN THE WORLD OF HF HAM RADIO, SO IS THE COMPLETE ABOLISHMENT OF ANY AND ALL MORSE REQUIREMENTS.
5 WPM CANNOT POSSIBLY BE LOWERED FURTHER WITHOUT INSULT. Period.

I'm sure some passionate person will want to point out, that, capitalizing the first word of a sentence enhances readability.

I'm sure I've heard all the "no one is saying do away with the sub band allocations..." sure, first create an ignorant culture, and over the next two generations what remains is a dominant population of complete Morse illiterates, and of course then, the sub bands will be no more, because one thing is sure, even before Samuel Morse was conceived, people were simply TALKING, and hundreds of years from now, people will still be TALKING. And I have nothing against talking, I talk constantly all day long.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KC8VWM on September 25, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
WA9SVD Said,

<<<<SO, I propose to give Tech operators the Novice band privileges that Tech Plus operators have. (OK, I realize it's a "gimme," but it's not much different from the grandfathering of "old Tech's" who passed code and the old written exam to be Generals. (Allowing code credit for Novices and old Techs was probably a way for the FCC to easy into the full "no-code" era.)

KEEP the current "CW only" allocations on all bands, and only allow CW and other narrow-band modes;

Do NOT automatically make Techs "No Code Generals>>>>


First I would like to indicate that this is more progressive thinking than most of the posts I have seen on here lately.

Secondly, while your proposal is interesting, I have two comments,

Firstly, you propose that you give "no code" techs part of the "novice" bands. Let me understand this correctly:

1)you want to propose that people that dont know morse code at all, be allocated a spectrum of band that is restricted to morse code operation only?

Secondly, you reinforced this in your comment:
KEEP the current "CW only" allocations on all bands"

Excuse me if I am confused but are you not suggesting that we put no code operators on code only designated bands?

KC8VWM
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 25, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Phillip;

So............let me see if I understand your tongue-in-cheek proposal:

Since threats, arbitrary regulations and ridicule haven't forced the "newbies" to accept and learn Code,.....you propose to bribe them?

Brilliant!.....That's the true American Way in action! (You're not running for Congress, by any chance, are you?)

Kent Carroll (waiting for his Garrand)
KB9YZL
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KA4KOE on September 25, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Not at all....just an underpaid engineer with letters after my name and lots of gray hair.

Just a method of ridiculing the absurd by being absurd. Enjoy!!!

That 50 WPM is going to be tough. I've already contracted with a local outfit to run two parallel sets of 500 MCM underground to the new electrical gear in the garage to accommodate my 150KW LEGAL amplifier.

P

:)

LIGHTEN UP BOYS AND GIRLS, ITS ONLY RADIO
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KE4KVW on September 25, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
First I would like to say, "GOOD" job with the article! I am a NO code Tech and have been for going on 10 years in March 2004.It should not be a BIG deal which either way the FCC rules on the CW matter.If they rule that No Coders get HF privilages then I and most No Coders who either have or can afford an HF rig will operate the HF bands were permitted and we all will just get aong.If they do not allow No Coders HF privilages then so what,we do NOT have them now and I do not know of anyone who's life is in danger because they can NOT use the HF bands.Not having them"IS NOT"the end of the world.I have met some GREAT hams on the VHF bands in the almost 10 years of all(Extra, Advanced,General,Tech Plus,& Tech)It makes no difference what Class they hold as long as they follow the rules as they should on the bands,what ever band it may be(HF,VHF,or UHF)and I listen to the HF bands and hear lots of trash which should NOT be on ANY band as well as some I have heard on the VHF bands(always some BAD apples) This is America and you have the RIGHT to speak your mind at the correct time and place.No matter what the final outcome we will ALL live with it so someone should get ready and swallow your pride because it either will or will not happen and NOTHING can be done to stop the FINAL outcome.Just one more thing, my opinion is I hope they "LEAVE IT ALONE"it is NOT broke but if they change the rules and open the HF bands up for No Coders I WILL use all they GIVE me as soon as it happens!Be GLAD we have the bands we have and USE THEM ALL if you can!May God bless you all and do NOT let it stress you out,it is after all JUST RADIO,NOT LIFE and DEATH!ClaytonKE4KVW
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 25, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Phillip;

So..........does this mean I don't get the Garand??

Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KA4KOE on September 25, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Only if my compatriots in the League and FCC fail in their Holy Quest for Total CW Dominion.

Be of stout heart, brave lad...it may come to pass just yet. When it does, you'll get serial number 1 of the Special Edition Garands off the first run, this you can take at my word.....



....whatever that's worth.

For 20 bucks extra on your license fee, we'll throw in a high power accurized scope with Infra Red sights.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB9YZL on September 25, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Phillip;

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


Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by FJGH on September 25, 2003 Mail this to a friend!

Another cw thread?
Back to cable tv.
 
Who's Civilized??  
by KD7KGX on September 25, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
DOODAH sez:
> by AG4RQ
> Although the US and the UK agree on many issues,
> there are still some where we will never see eye-to-
> eye. One such example is capital punishment.

That just about sums it up... let us know when you're ready to catch up with the civilised world

I sez:

Hmmm... while I have great respect for the UK, it ISN'T more civilized than America. When's the last time you heard of a fight breaking out in an American football stadium where dozens of people get killed? When's the last time you heard of our government putting a homeowner in jail for shooting a burgler... and then funding the burglar's legal fees while he sues the homeowner? People die because they're too far down the list to receive healthcare, and they can get in trouble for trying to pay for a doctor's care regardless of how sick they are. There is no freedom of speech in the UK... and their constitution has no more importance than any other law passed by Parliament. And, you have to pay a tax to own a TV or radio.

Britain was great, but its zenith as a culture and an empire ended before WWI. It's been all downhill since then.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by K1CJS on September 26, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
From a previous post:

>>The following question was asked by another author, in another thread, and received virtually no response;
>>>>"Find me *one* instance in the United States in the last 50 years, of a communications emergency, in which HF communication was required out of the emergency area, and code was used because conditions didn't allow voice propagation."<<<<<
I thought it was a valid point of inquiry, and I would really like to hear some responses to this!<<

You'd have a very hard time finding one because there hasn't been one for 80+ years!

From another post:

>>Geeze, come to thing of it, we have to go back to the sinking of the Titanic, or the crash of andrea doria to find any CW, used to send a call, for emergency help; Am I right to say that both marine events occured before before the 1920's?
Now that i think about it, I wonder if the titanic had a spark gap? lol.<<

There are the last two disasters that actually required morse to be used, and both were on ships at sea! And yes, the Titanic had a spark gap transmitter, it was even out of commission on the voyage before the sinking and had to be repaired.

Morse's only advantage is the fact that it will get through bad, noisy band conditions. Even that advantage is now fading into evenness with the digital modes now coming into being.

Morse code is now around just for the pleasure some operators get from using it. PERIOD. During 9-11, band conditions were bad on the 2 meter band all around Manhattan. ARES people had to move around to get to a point where they could be heard at the communications command center--yet morse WAS NOT USED on the 2 meter band (there is a CW allocation there too!) at all. NOT ONE MESSAGE WAS PASSED BY MORSE, NOT ONE!

Morse code is a pleasurable and useful mode, but its importance is being blown way out of proportion. If testing for morse proficiency remains mandated, it is only proper that equivalent testing on ALL other modes be instituted also.

And remember, these days everything MUST be politically correct. If you slip and say "good buddy" on ham radio, you will be subject to punishment with and by the dreaded Wouff Hong!! :-))
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB0WR on September 26, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>You'd have a very hard time finding one because there hasn't been one for 80+ years! >

Please, if you had bothered to go back and read the threads you would have found several instances where cw was used in in either emergency situations or in support of disaster situations in recent years. There ARE still emergency nets that meet in the CW sub-bands using Morse code. I checked into one just last Tuesday nite.

When BPL puts S9 noise levels on all of our bands, CW will still remain a useful mode while PSK and FSK will not for most people. You can use 800-1000 watt output ICAS rated linear amps on CW to put out a signal that can be copied through S9 noise. PSK/FSK require amps rated for key-down usage - you would melt the tubes in a FL-1000 or SB200 running PSK/FSK. 50-200 watts keydown is the best you can do with most. So PSK/FSK is going to start out with a 6-12db handicap over CW. Good luck on using PSK/FSK on a consistent basis on HF!

Tim AB0WR
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N0NYA on September 26, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
hey i like CW, it identifes my repeater every 10 minutes!

 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W3JJH on September 26, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
An old amplifier designed for ICAS use won't provide full rated output on continuous key down. So what? A Model A Ford isn't able to keep up with the speed limit on most Interstate highways either.

If, in the unlikely event that BPL is deployed, PSK31 will cut though the electromagnetic smog more effectively is than CW Morse telegraphy. Why? Well, for equal data throughput PSK31 has about 12 dB better power-spectral density than Morse telegraphy. Thus, if you have that old amp, PSK31 will give you equivalent performance to telegraphy--but if you have modern equipment, you'll be better able to cut through. BTW, there are other digital modes even more robust than PSK31.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AE6IP on September 26, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>> You'd have a very hard time finding one because there hasn't been
>> one for 80+ years!

> Please, if you had bothered to go back and read the threads you would
> have found several instances where cw was used in in either emergency
> situations or in support of disaster situations in recent years. There
> ARE still emergency nets that meet in the CW sub-bands using Morse
> code. I checked into one just last Tuesday nite.

It seems that you're the person who needs to go back and read the
thread. None of the examples given, including your check in, answer
the question asked. Let me quote it for you again:

>>> Find me *one* instance in the United States in the last 50 years,
>>> of a communications emergency, in which HF communication was
>>> required out of the emergency area, and code was used because
>>> conditions didn't allow voice propagation.

Checking in to hurricaine watch or other similar nets doesn't meet the
critiera.

What several people have done is shown examples of Morse code being
useful. No one has shown examples of it be the only usable mode in an
communications emergency.

There are a lot of tools that are useful in an emergency, that hams
aren't required to have, like generators and the ability to quickly
erect replacement antenna. Of all these tools, why should Morse be
singled out as the only one tested?
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by WA9SVD on September 26, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I fear the FCC will decide what's easiest for the FCC, rather than the "desires" of the Amateur Radio community. (Good or bad; your decision.)
With the last reorginization, when the FCC made the Morse requirement 5 WPM for all class licenses, they (at least seemed to imply) that 5 WPM was the minimum that would be acceptable to satisfy the requirements of the International Treaty from 1934, and that was the only reason they reined ANY Morse testing.
WRC-'03 removed that REQUIREMENT, leaving it up to individual conntries to decide if such Morse proficiency (in ANY way, shape, or form) was to be a factor in Amateur operation below 30 MHz.

With the requirement removed from International Treaty, the FCC will most likely remove all Morse requirements. (NOT MY WISH, but a realstic prediction.)

So, to be realistic, rather than arguing back and forth, why not put energy into revamping the written exan to more reflect current technology, operating procedures, and rules and regulations.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB0WR on September 26, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
W3JJH,

> An old amplifier designed for ICAS use won't provide full rated output on continuous key down. So what? A Model A Ford isn't able to keep up with the speed limit on most Interstate highways either.

And I have been accused of errors in logic? Most hams have ICAS rated amps. Most don't have Model A's. It makes a big difference in what they can do with their amps. It doesn't have much to do with what they can do with their Model A's because most don't have Model A's.


>If, in the unlikely event that BPL is deployed, PSK31 will cut though the electromagnetic smog more effectively is than CW Morse telegraphy. Why? Well, for equal data throughput PSK31 has about 12 dB better power-spectral density than Morse telegraphy. Thus, if you have that old amp, PSK31 will give you equivalent performance to telegraphy--but if you have modern equipment, you'll be better able to cut through. BTW, there are other digital modes even more robust than PSK31.

12db is a maximum advantage based on a 500Hz versus 31hz bandwidth. Most serious CW people I know use 250hz or less filter bandwidths when noise is bad. That cuts the advantage to 9db or less. I think you will also find that the actual bandwidth of the sound card filters used with psk31 more closely approach 60 hz because of propagation delays associated with narrower bandwidths. That makes the advantage closer to 6db or less.

The other digital modes I have read about actually have worse performance than psk31 in the presence of white noise, primarily because they depend upon increasing the bandwidth or splitting transmitter power among more tones or phases. Even bpsk suffers when propagation conditions affect the phase of the received signal, such as during mulitpath propagation, auroral conditions, and such.

Based on my reading, the actual perceived advantage of psk31 in noisy conditions with bad propagation is closer to 3db than 12db. That means you will have to be able to run about 400-500 watts of power to match a cw signal of 800-1000 watts. Most linears that hams have today won't do anywhere near that with a key-down mode.

I don't know what "modern" equipment you are speaking of that will run 400-500watts key down but I think you are really talking about *expensive* equipment that will run 400-500watts keydown. The Ameritron AL-811H won't. It is a fully modern, moderately priced ($800) linear amp. When you have to spend $1600 for a linear that will run psk31 at 500watts versus $300-$450 for a used 30L1/SB200 that will handle 800-1000 watt CW, you have just made the entry level into HF operation significantly higher.

Looks to me like cw is still ahead in the noisy conditions BPL will generate, especially considering the cost/performance ratio.

Tim AB0WR
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB0WR on September 26, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>It seems that you're the person who needs to go back >and read the thread. None of the examples given, including your check in, answer
the question asked. Let me quote it for you again:

>>> Find me *one* instance in the United States in the last 50 years,
>> of a communications emergency, in which HF communication was
>>> required out of the emergency area, and code was used because
>>> conditions didn't allow voice propagation.

>Checking in to hurricaine watch or other similar nets doesn't meet thecritiera.

>What several people have done is shown examples of >Morse code being >useful. No one has shown examples of it be the only >usable mode in an communications emergency.

I guess you missed the post about the Salvation Army canteen contact that could get out using CW but not voice. I guess you missed the post by the military person who could use CW to get an airlift for his badly hurt buddy but couldn't get through on any of the fancy satellite/digital equipment, couldn't get through on voice but could on CW with their HF transceiver. I guess you missed the State EOC's that couldn't communicate on voice but could on CW.

But then, why am I not surprised that you missed them?

Tim AB0WR
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KB1GZE on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
actually the Andrea Doria sank in 1956
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by K1CJS on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
From earlier posts:
___________________
>>> Find me *one* instance in the United States in the last 50 years,
>> of a communications emergency, in which HF communication was
>>> required out of the emergency area, and code was used because
>>> conditions didn't allow voice propagation.

>Checking in to hurricaine watch or other similar nets doesn't meet the critiera.

>What several people have done is shown examples of >Morse code being >useful. No one has shown examples of it be the only >usable mode in an communications emergency.

I guess you missed the post about the Salvation Army canteen contact that could get out using CW but not voice. I guess you missed the post by the military person who could use CW to get an airlift for his badly hurt buddy but couldn't get through on any of the fancy satellite/digital equipment, couldn't get through on voice but could on CW with their HF transceiver. I guess you missed the State EOC's that couldn't communicate on voice but could on CW.
___________________
End quote from post.

I guess it all depends on how you define "communications emergency". I was instructed that for a communications emergency to exist, it had to have been declared as such by officials of some government agency. I believe you are showing where an "emergency" situation existed that was not a declared communications emergency. Its all in the semantics, and the severity of the situation. If you believe every single contact is a communication emergency, you need to reread the rules and regs. Oh, and why single out HF? The VHF and UHF amateur bands have CW allocations too.

As far as the Andrea Doria, I was in error--I should have said in the last 45 years. I bow my head is shame. But I believe the only functional radio equipment on that ship at the time was a morse setup.

And I repeat, morse code still is a very useful and valid mode, but it is only one mode among many and shouldn't be singled out for special testing when other equally useful and valid modes aren't.

73 de Chris, K1CJS


 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB0WR on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>I guess it all depends on how you define "communications emergency". I was instructed that for a communications emergency to exist, it had to have been declared as such by officials of some government agency. I believe you are showing where an "emergency" situation existed that was not a declared communications emergency. Its all in the semantics, and the severity of the situation.

A communications emergency does NOT need to be declared by officials of some government agency.


>If you believe every single contact is a communication emergency, you need to reread the rules and regs.

I have read the rules and regs. Have you?

**************

Per Title 47, Part 97:

Sec. 97.403 Safety of life and protection of property.

No provision of these rules prevents the use by an amateur station of any means of radiocommunication at its disposal to provide essential communication needs in connection with the immediate safety of human
life and immediate protection of property when normal communication systems are not available.

**************

I don't see anything in here about a government declared emergency. I do see a statement about immediate safety of life and property. BTW, the RACES rules are more restrictive than this. Can you quote the applicable rule?

>Oh, and why single out HF? The VHF and UHF amateur bands have CW allocations too.

Because the discussion started out about Element 1 testing which is primarily for access to the HF bands.

>And I repeat, morse code still is a very useful and valid mode, but it is only one mode among many and shouldn't be singled out for special testing when other equally useful and valid modes aren't.

Then what do you have to offer in its place? The FCC still has a *requirement* under Title 47, Part 97 to propagate rules and regulations that will provide for advancing skills in the art of communicating. Do you have anything specific and implementable to offer in its place? Platitudes don't help much.

Or do you want Part 97 revised to remove that charge from the FCC? Is the requirement for the FCC to propagate rules and regulations that will provide for advancing skills in the art of communicating what you have a problem with?

Tim AB0WR
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N1KGH on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Heheh, I took the Radar Endorsement when I got my GROL and I always wanted to see questions like:

Q: Joe Bob wants to run 2.4GHz microwave with the magnetron from his oven. Assume Po= 500W CW into a horn antenna made from Reynolds Wrap and duct tape. Assume Joe is standing a distance D=10 feet in front of the feed coordinating his QSO with an 2 meter HT.

Will Joe Bob need a white cane? Discuss *all* effects. Extra credit for discussing the RF effects on his HT.

Take care,

Dave
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W3JJH on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
AB0WR:

Concerning PSK31 vs CW:

If the bandwidth ratio were 500 Hz to 31 Hz and the required S/N were the same, the ratio would be 10log(BW1/BW2), and that is roughly 12 dB. However, the bandwidth requirement for 30 wpm CW is actually on the order of about 120 Hz and the actual IF bandwidth required for PSK31 is 63 Hz. That would seem to reduce the advantage to only 3 dB. Where does the other 9 dB come from?

The S/N requirements of the two systems are not the same. A S/N of about 6 dB is required for reliable reception on Morse code by a human operator. Because it is an FM system, PSK31 can actually work with a negative S/N. The DSP in the system can recover signals below the noise. Anyone with much experience with the mode will tell you of copying signals that he could not hear.

Concerning the term "Communication Emergency":

There is a difference between emergency communication and a communication emergency. "Emergency communication" describes traffic passed during any sort of emergency. Under the FCC's Rules a "communication emergency" is a something declared by a competent government authority. For example, 97.401 states:

"(c) When a disaster disrupts normal communication systems in a
particular area, the FCC may declare a temporary state of communication emergency. The declaration will set forth any special conditions and special rules to be observed by stations during the communication emergency. A request for a declaration of a temporary state of emergency should be directed to the EIC in the area concerned."
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB0WR on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>Will Joe Bob need a white cane? Discuss *all* effects.

<grin> will Joe Bob need a sperm donor to have any more kids?
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB0WR on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>If the bandwidth ratio were 500 Hz to 31 Hz and the required S/N were the same, the ratio would be 10log(BW1/BW2), and that is roughly 12 dB. However, the bandwidth requirement for 30 wpm CW is actually on the order of about 120 Hz and the actual IF bandwidth required for PSK31 is 63 Hz. That would seem to reduce the advantage to only 3 dB. Where does the other 9 dB come from?

I gave you the figures. 500 to 31 is 12db. 250 to 31 is 9db. 250 to 60 is 6 db. That is the theoretical advantage based on bandwidth alone.

>The S/N requirements of the two systems are not the same. A S/N of about 6 dB is required for reliable reception on Morse code by a human operator. Because it is an FM system, PSK31 can actually work with a negative S/N. The DSP in the system can recover signals below the noise. Anyone with much experience with the mode will tell you of copying signals that he could not hear.

I'm not sure where you get the 6db S/N figure for CW. That is a full S-unit difference in order for reliable copy. I can assure you that lots of operators on 20m work weak-signal DX with much less than a full S-unit difference between the signal and noise. I do it quite often.

A negative S/N ratio? Only in the case of random noise such as shot noise and static. White noise such as you will get from BPL will be much harder to handle for the syncronous detectors. That is why the references I have found speak about a 3db advantage in S/N for psk31 versus CW in the presence of white noise. Digital modes relying on multiple phase signals fair even worse than psk31. Selective fading, multiple path reception, and shifting ionosphere effects will lessen the difference even more since they have more effect on a system based on psk than they do on a system like CW.

>There is a difference between emergency communication and a communication emergency. "Emergency communication" describes traffic passed during any sort of emergency. Under the FCC's Rules a "communication emergency" is a something declared by a competent government authority. For example, 97.401 states:

I'm not sure of the point here. Did you think the Salvation Army wasn't involved in a disaster where there was not a communication emergency? Did you think that State EOC's are not involved with competent governmental authorities? Did you think that an active duty military commander unable to communicate with his base is not a competent governemental authority capable of declaring a local communication emergency?

While emergency communications and communication emergencies may not be the same, all of the examples given fit both.

Tim AB0WR
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by N2WJW on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Here we go again...same thing, different day.
Another can of worms opened up!
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W3JJH on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
AB0WR:

The 6 dB S/N required for good Morse copy is based on psychoacoustic data relating to the ability of the human ear to detect pure tones in the presence of noise. That figure is based on the S/N in the 1/3-octave audio band containing the tone. For an 750-Hz tone that's an IF bandwidth of about 200 Hz.

Have you really measuted the actual S/N of the weak signals you have copied, or are you guesstimating from your S-meter? If you have good data, you should submit it to a journal for publication.

If you don't have data and would like to do some reading, I'd be pleased to give you some references in the literature.

73 de W3JJH
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by WA9SVD on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!

Firstly, you propose that you give "no code" techs part of the "novice" bands. Let me understand this correctly:

1)you want to propose that people that dont know morse code at all, be allocated a spectrum of band that is restricted to
morse code operation only?

Secondly, you reinforced this in your comment:
KEEP the current "CW only" allocations on all bands"

Excuse me if I am confused but are you not suggesting that we put no code operators on code only designated bands?

KC8VWM

==============================================

Well, perhaps I didn't make it as clear as I thought.

1. I proposed that current Techs get Novice privileges on HF. And I don't claim that as an original thought; the ARRL seems to have proposed something similar when restructuring occurred back in 1999. The FCC said the only reason they could NOT do that was because of the International Treaty requiring passage of a Morse exam for HF operation. The ARRL felt the best way to learn code was to actually USE it, such as on the Novice areas of HF. Remember, if the code IS dropped, current (no-code) Tech's will have passed a written exam more "difficult" than the Novice exam. Again, this seems much more fair than suggestions to make all Tech's "instant Generals" without passing the General Written exam. It really only gives the Tech's Novice CW privileges, along with 10 Meters(which in the current sunspot cycle is hardly a gift!) If the Tech's are interested in learning CW, they can get experience on the air.

2. CW is, and always has been, legal anywhere on any of our Amateur bands (except for 60 M now.) I just do not want the CW only portions of the bands be carved up or made smaller, at least not at this time.

Whatever the FCC decides, we will have to learn to live with it, whether we like it or not. IMHO, of course.

 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W3JJH on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
AB0WR:

You wrote: "A communications emergency does NOT need to be declared by officials of some government agency."

That's not correct. Any station my initiate emergency communications, but only competent legal authority can declare a communication emergency. Usually, the declaration is made by the local FCC office.

I'm sure that the SATERN net handles emergency communications; our RACES operation was monitoring SATERN on 20 m during the recent hurricane. While the Salvation Army does report to a higher authority than the FCC, it is not authorized to declare a communication emergency. There was no communication emergency declared during Isabel. The last time we had a hurricane come through Maryland (Floyd), the FCC did declare an emergency and set part of 80 m, 40 m, and 2 m (including our local repeater) aside for emergency operations only.

73 de W3JJH
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB0WR on September 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>The 6 dB S/N required for good Morse copy is based on psychoacoustic data relating to the ability of the human ear to detect pure tones in the presence of noise. That figure is based on the S/N in the 1/3-octave audio band containing the tone. For an 750-Hz tone that's an IF bandwidth of about 200 Hz.

And you are getting 6db by using 10log(750/200)?

You realize that the 750Hz is NOT a bandwidth? You are comparing a frequency to a bandwidth.I'll have to dig out my textbooks but I don't believe this is a valid equation.

I believe you will find that the bandwidth of a 10wpm signal using typical rise and fall times in most modern transmitters actually has a bandwidth of around 40-60 hz - not 200 hz. It is the bandwidth of the transmitted signal that needs to be considered because the noise is associated with the transmitted signal. If that can be filtered out in a narrow bandwidth filter then the noise filtering bandwidth of the ear need not be considered - unless you have a noisy shack, a terribly distorted speaker, or some other problem affecting the audio signal. Most receivers probably can't be cranked lower than about 150 hz bandwidth because of ringing and such. That is probably where the perceived 3db advantage of psk31 actually comes from. 10log(150/60). That's actually 4db but it's close.


>If you don't have data and would like to do some reading, I'd be pleased to give you some references in the literature.

You bet I would. According to the 2003 ARRL handbook, the "human vision and hearing approach the theoretical maximum for dynamic range and sensitivity". From the same book in the Morse code section: "slow speeds and extremely narrow filters make possible communication using signals well below the noise"

>Have you really measuted the actual S/N of the weak signals you have copied, or are you guesstimating from your S-meter? If you have good data, you should submit it to a journal for publication.

Guesstimates are still accurate enough to tell that a 6db figure is very questionable for a required S/N for CW. I can tell you that tonight I checked into our early NTS net with a solid S3 noise reading on the S-meter using the fast attack setting. Several of the stations that checked in did not register above the noise level on the S-meter. Yet they were good enough, although difficult, copy to check in and pass along their traffic. That's good enough data for me that I am sure you do not need a 6db S/N ratio for good copy on CW. I would be more than happy to collect readings and provide them to someone. Where do you suggest?

Tim AB0WR
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AE6IP on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>>> Find me *one* instance in the United States in the last 50 years,
>> of a communications emergency, in which HF communication was
>>> required out of the emergency area, and code was used because
>>> conditions didn't allow voice propagation.

> I guess you missed the post about the Salvation Army canteen contact
> that could get out using CW but not voice.

which part of "out of the emergency area" are you having trouble
understanding?

> I guess you missed the post by the military person who could use CW
> to get an airlift for his badly hurt buddy but couldn't get through
> on any of the fancy satellite/digital equipment, couldn't get
> through on voice but could on CW with their HF transceiver.

which part of "in the United States" are you having trouble
understanding?

> I guess you missed the State EOC's that couldn't communicate on
> voice but could on CW.

which part of "conditions didn't allow voice propagation" are you
having trouble understanding.

Your examples show that people use CW. A mathematician would say that
you have shown that CW is sufficient. But they don't show that CW was
the only way availble *in the emergency area* to get information *out
of the emergency area.* A mathematician would say that you have
failed to show that CW is necessary.

 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AE6IP on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
> A communications emergency does NOT need to be
> declared by officials of some government agency.

Yes it does. The term was used in the original query in the sense it is used in by emergency communications staff. In particular, the phrase was meant in the sense of 97.401(c)
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AE6IP on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
> You bet I would. According to the 2003 ARRL
> handbook, the "human vision and hearing approach the
> theoretical maximum for dynamic range and
> sensitivity".

Does the handbook really say that?

I wonder which editor missed that screwup.
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KC8VWM on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!

I'm still lost on the "no code" requirement issue that still requires techs to use "morse code" in the novice bands.

Isn't "no code" just that? no "code"?

huh?


KC8VWM
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by K1CJS on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Tim,

I didn't mean to start a slugfest here, but I did want to make clear that there hasn't been a "communication emergency" declared in the past 40 years by a government agency where morse code was used primarily and exclusively. There has been several instances of an emergency situation where morse may have been the only communications vehicle able to be used to get a message out, but those were not during a communication emergency. As I said, its all in the semantics!

I really don't think it worth arguing about, do you? Peace, brother. Its only a hobby. 73!

Chris K1CJS
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB0WR on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>> I guess you missed the post about the Salvation Army canteen contact
>> that could get out using CW but not voice.

>which part of "out of the emergency area" are you having trouble understanding?

It is obvious that you don't even know what a SA canteen does or where it does it. If I were you I would be embarrassed to ask the question you just did.

>which part of "in the United States" are you having trouble understanding?

Do you know what a non sequitur is? Trying to claim that a US ham in the US military uses his skills outside the country means the use of his skill was not part of an emergency is a non sequitur. It wouldn't matter if the emergency had been on Pluto. It would still have been an emergency and he stil would have been a government agent authorized to declare a local emergency. It's amazing the depths of fallacy the no-coders can go to try and justify their agenda.

>> I guess you missed the State EOC's that couldn't communicate on
>> voice but could on CW.

>which part of "conditions didn't allow voice propagation" are you having trouble understanding.

Woo Hoo! Now we have the no coders claiming that "couldn't communicate on voice" is not equivalent to "didn't allow voice propagation"?

The best testimonial I have seen yet demonstrating the depths of fallacy the no-coders will go to in order to push the agenda of

"I WANT IT NOW, I WANT IT ALL, AND I WANT IT WITH NO EFFORT EXPENDED"

>A mathematician would say that you have failed to show that CW is necessary.

And you have still failed to offer an alternative which meets the spirit and letter of the law as embodied in Title 47, Part 97, Section 97.1(c). In other words, you just want to espouse: "I want it now, I want it all, and I want it with no effort expended".

Tim AB0WR
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB0WR on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>> A communications emergency does NOT need to be
>> declared by officials of some government agency.

>Yes it does. The term was used in the original query in the sense it is used in by emergency communications staff. In particular, the phrase was meant in the sense of 97.401(c)

Please, Please get a copy of Title 47, Part 97 and study it. It's obvious you don't even know what Section 97.1(c) addresses. When you can quote the relevant pieces of Part 97 verbatim, please let me know. Otherwise, debating the issues with you is a waste of time, you are just pushing the agenda of "I want it all, I want it now, and I want it with no effort expended".

Tim AB0WR
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB0WR on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Chris,

>there hasn't been a "communication emergency" declared in the past 40 years by a government agency where morse code was used primarily and exclusively. There has been several instances of an emergency situation where morse may have been the only communications vehicle able to be used to get a message out, but those were not during a communication emergency. As I said, its all in the semantics!

I direct you to the Civil Preparedness guide:

*******************
1-6. Definitions.

1. RACES is a radio communications service, conducted by volunteer licensed amateur radio operators, for providing emergency communications support to State and local governments.

2-7. RACES Activation.

1. RACES may be activated by the appointed Director of an Emergency Management Office, or authorized representative, for a particular area. The activation is in accordance with an approved civil defense communications plan in any emergency concerning the following:

*******************

There was a small town in southwest Missouri just about wiped off the face of the earth this spring by a tornado. Took out cell phones, wireline, vhf repeaters, you name it. Do you somehow believe the local officials did not declare a communications emergency?

Hummers are not the only vehicles used primarily and exclusively during natural disasters to provide relief. Does that somehow lessen the usefulness of Hummers in providing relief during natural disasters? When the Hummer is the best vehicle to fit the needs it sure is nice to have them available.

The usefulness of Morse code is the same. When it works best it sure is nice to have it available.

>I really don't think it worth arguing
about, do you? Peace, brother. Its only a hobby. 73!

I appreciate the sentiment you offer but, for me, it's not a time for peace. Maybe in the future sometime.

That is part of the attitude I am trying to point out as being a danger to our continued existence. If the majority view of the Amateur Radio Service among non-hams, and especially among the FCC, ever deteriorates to where we are viewed as "only a hobby", you can bet we won't be around very long.

I can hear it now - a power utility executive in front of Congress: "Senator, here we have a bunch of primarily rich, white people indulging themselves in a self-proclaimed *hobby*, standing in the way of progress. Why, we could be providing valuable internet access to minorities and poor neighborhoods everywhere, advancing the cause of equal rights for all, if you would just allow us access to all this valuable spectrum tied up in providing a *hobby* for the rich. If you could just see fit to instruct the FCC to allow BPL, you would be doing a great service for the voters in your district!"

How would YOU answer such a charge if you had to testify in front of a Congressional committee justifying the continued existence of the Amateur Radio Service? Would you plead your case by saying "It is such a nice hobby? I'd really miss it if you took it away."?

Tim AB0WR
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AE6IP on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>>> A communications emergency does NOT need to be
>>> declared by officials of some government agency.

>> Yes it does. The term was used in the original query in the sense it
>> is used in by emergency communications staff. In particular, the
>> phrase was meant in the sense of 97.401(c)

> Please, Please get a copy of Title 47, Part 97 and study it. It's
> obvious you don't even know what Section 97.1(c) addresses. When you
> can quote the relevant pieces of Part 97 verbatim, please let me
> know. Otherwise, debating the issues with you is a waste of time,
> you are just pushing the agenda of "I want it all, I want it now,
> and I want it with no effort expended".

What debate? Others here point things out to you and then you rant a
bunch of non-sequiter. That's not a debate. In all your posts, you
have not once attempted to address the actual issue under discussion.

You seem to have confused 'generating smoke' with 'discussing issues.'

 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AE6IP on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
> That is part of the attitude I am trying to point out as being a
> danger to our continued existence. If the majority view of the Amateur
> Radio Service among non-hams, and especially among the FCC, ever
> deteriorates to where we are viewed as "only a hobby", you can bet we
> won't be around very long.

The majority view of ham radio is "Oh, that's still around?"

Even the ARRL recognizes that amateur radio is a hobby:
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2000/06/14/1/

 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by WA9SVD on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
by KC8VWM on September 28, 2003
I'm still lost on the "no code" requirement issue that still requires techs to use "morse code" in the novice bands. Isn't "no code" just that? no "code"?

================================================

Charles,

The "no code" Tech is just that: No Code, and only has Amateur privileges above 30 MHz. (In other words, 6 Meters and higher in frequency.) If a person has a Tech license originally issued before 1987, THEY had to pass a 5 WPM code exam, and were known as "Tech Plus." They currently have Novice privileges in addition to their privileges on VHF and above.
The term "Tech Plus" was eliminated by the FCC and all "Tech" licensees are listed simply as "Tech." But for any of the "old" Techs, or New Techs that pass a 5 WPM code exam, they are also allowed the Novice privileges, which are CW except on 10 Meters, where the privilege allows Phone operation from 28.300 - 28.500 MHz.
So a "No Code" Tech only has privileges on VHF and higher. If they pass the current Element 1 code exam, they get the Novice HF privileges thrown in.
That is in keeping with the former International Regulations of the ITU that required Morse proficiency
for operation below 30 MHz. Now that that requirement has been removed, it is up to each individual country to decide whether or not they wish to retain any form of Morse testing.
If (or when) the FCC eliminates Element 1 testing, the license structure will most likely have to changed again. And THAT will cost the FCC time and money, so I don't see them making a decision or change in a big hurry. And particularly since none of the current FCC Commissioners are Amateur Radio Operators, I don't see that it's going to be one of their highest priorities. (IMHO, we Amateurs take these issues to be almost "life and death" matters, but at the FCC's level, we are merely another "little" service, to be dealt with as time and budget allow, within the mandate of their own rules. I don't see them streamlining or rushing any rulemaking "because the Amateur's are demanding it." As has been said before, they DO have bigger fish to fry.)
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W3JJH on September 28, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
AB0WR:

Here's one last shot at trying to help you understand the laws and FCC Rules related to a "communication emergency."

That term has a specific legal meaning. There are only two ways for one to be legally in force. The first has not happened since WWII. A section of the Communications Act (47 USC 606) gives the President the authority to declare a wartime communication emergency and shut down everything that the DoD wants off the air. All radio services can be affected. The FCC manages a wartime emergency under DoD control (47 CFR 2.407). During such a wartime communication emergency, the Amateur Service goes off the air and RACE is activated nationally (47 CFR 97.407).

The second happens several times each year. The FCC will declare that some part of the radio spectrum is off limits to non-emergency related traffic. This is called a "temporary communications emergency" and, as far as hams are concerned, is authorized under 47 CFR 97.401(c). Note that the only services that are affected by an FCC-initiated communication emergency are AM, FM, and TV broadcasters and hams (47 CFR 2.405).

Local civil defense authorities can activate certain emergency communication networks such as the Emergency Alert System for broadcasters (47 CFR 11.55) or local RACES networks (47 CFR 97.407). These operations can pass emergency broadcasts or traffic, but are not operating under the protection of a communication emergency until the local authorities contact the FCC and the FCC declares that the emergency exists.

Individuals or NGOs, such as the Red Cross and Salvation Army, have no authority to declare or standing to ask for a communication emergency. Requests must be issued by a governmental entity.

73 de W3JJH
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KC8VWM on October 1, 2003 Mail this to a friend!

Gee, more "Amateur" interpretations of the law...

<<<<Individuals or NGOs, such as the Red Cross and Salvation Army, have no authority to declare or standing to ask for a communication emergency. Requests must be issued by a governmental entity.>>>>


Let me get this straight. The Red Cross is out picking up the human remains from a local disaster location, and you are indicating that they have no authority to "declare" a communications emergency?

You indicate:

NGOs,

"have no authority to declare or standing to ask for a communication emergency."


Point being, If they arrive at a disaster site and feel the area "warrants" action, they would most certainly have the authority to "ask" for additional assistance. This assistance is in many circumstances extends into providing additional communications into an area for increased disaster relief efficiency.

While it may be true that they are not the individuals that are directly "declaring" it as such, I have seen written protocals on this very issue in Civil Emergency Disaster Planning Manuals that you will find at most local hospitals. These Manuals also contain very specific information for "executing" ARES and other EMA communication protocals.

The Disaster Planning Manual provides the Red Cross and other agencies with direct contact information if they should require the "execution" of such "pre-planned" protocals during a civil emergency with some of the following agencies:

Military Reserves
Local EMA
FEMA
RACES
ARES
Nuclear Regulatory Agencies
Local EMS (police, Fire, Amb. etc.)
EMS Auxillary
State Government Officials
Other Relief Agencies (shelters etc.)
etc...

Each protocal is numbered under a "scenerio" classification heading number.

Each agency (including the Red Cross)is furnished with the same exact "Civil Emergency Plan." For obvious reasons they are identical to avoid potential protocal confusion.

Who makes the decision to actually "execute" this plan?

Well, actually the decision to employ such operations "starts" with the front line requiring the assistance. They look up the protocal (eg)"how to execute a communication emergency" section in the plan and this request works up to someone who is not actually at the Disaster Scene.

This gives one the impression that the Red Cross isn't the "authoritive executor" of emergency communication declarations, however in real life disasters.. nothing could be further from truth.


Charles Bushell,

1994-1995 Chairperson,
Community Emergency Disaster Planning Committee
Oshawa General Hospital Emergency Department


KC8VWM








 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W3JJH on October 2, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
KC8VWM:

You mistake the act of beginning to pass emergency traffic with the legal declaration of a communication emergency.

Of course, any station can begin to pass emergency traffic. It is also true that all other stations are obliged to either assist in passing the traffic or providing a clear channel for the traffic to pass. While emergency communication may be taking place, it does not create a communication emergency. Under law and the FCC's Rules, a communication emergency can only be declared by the President or the FCC.

I'm active in ARES and RACES and am familiar with our local and state plans. I was one of the county ARES NCS operators during Isabel. While we passed some emergency traffic, we never operated under a communication emergency because neither the cognizant county nor cognizant state officials requested such a declaration from the FCC.

If you read your disaster manual, you should find that it tells the NGOs which government official to route a request to the FCC through. We would make our requests through the state Emergency Management Agency.

73 de W3JJH
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by W8JJI on October 2, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
It is time to drop the code requirement. It has long outlived it's usefulness.
 
A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KD7KCP on December 12, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
My fellow Hams, now lets be honest about this whole "keep the code get rid of the code " thing. A lot has been written about the prose and cons of keeping the code some on both sides rather well written, and some not. I myself have been rather sharp tongued on the subject, and I have received a few interesting responses because of it. One ham KB9YVG in a obscene response writes "You think like an old timer.. I learned CW in a three hour seesion when I was around 12. I have no particular in interest in HF. You seem like on of those operators who like to have their daughter (obscene response) when they hit that key. I thought '73 met "please don't do my kid", whoops that must be CB talk." and another response by KG4YJR writes "What a moron". It is obvious to all that the defensive vitriolic responses of the "get rid of the code test "crowd is due to the fact that their argument ,no matter how will crafted, is intellectually dishonest. The truth is (and every one knows this ,both pro and con camps) that some are willing to earn their goal and others are not. You see some think that just because they want something they should get it even if it means cheating (changing the rules). Some of these lazy slothful types will argue in an intellectually dishonest manner that their concern is "saving Ham radio" when in fact they simply lack the desire to spend the energy to pass element one. To these lazy slothful types I ask: Why not be honest? And just say the truth ,come on and repeat after me: "I just don’t want to take the five words a minute CW test, so change the rules just for me!". Sincerely;
slow code general,
KD7KCP
73
 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by KC8VWM on December 31, 2003 Mail this to a friend!

>>>>If you read your disaster manual, you should find that it tells the NGOs which government official to route a request to the FCC through.<<<<<

Thats odd, they don't have an FCC in Canada...

 
RE: A Win-Win Situation for Amateur Radio  
by AB4YE on July 29, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Morse code is a symbol set for another character set. It's just like Braille or the international sign language for the deaf. It's just another way of speaking in whatever language you normally speak (unless you are Chinese :)....)

It's a great way of getting information over the airways. It's reliable, powerful in it's simplicity, and when used with standard abbreviations - pretty fast.

It's also a way of freeing yourself from the problems of electronic failures, signal fading, and other difficulties arising from highly technical devices made from microscopic components.

At one time I thought Morse would die. I don't anymore.
It's so ultimately functional in radio communications that there will be people using it hundreds of years from now (provided we're allowed to have radios...).

It's a good mode, it's not for everyone. I didn't think it was for me, but I was wrong.

There are many people for one reason or another who cannot use the code. That is fine, there are great modes for them in this terrific hobby. But bright people can take a box of junk and quickly build a cw transmitter and receiver and by simply touching 2 wires together, talk all over the world. A useful
property I would argue.
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Related News & Articles
That Elusive First Contact
Passing It On
The 10% Bad Actors – Now The Good Ones
Emergency Use of Hams in Massachusetts
Visiting (Chapter 2)


Other Editorial Articles
My First Memory
The SB Project
Hamming It Up, The Early Years
A Hobby from a Hobby
Managing Ham Radio Estate Sales