Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

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

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

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Get rid of the code  (Read 3518 times)
Guest

« Reply #15 on: July 13, 2001, 11:06:46 AM »

I would really like to know why people take a negative attitude toward CW??? Why do you think code should disappear as a requirement??? Is it because you have a tough time learning it? CW is sometimes the only mode that works when others fail! Also, why kill off a mode that other people enjoy and has very practical uses???
Do you also believe in getting rid of people whom you do not like or disagree with?  CW is just another mode of operation for Amateurs to enjoy! It should be a requirement, so that an operator can bridge the language gap between other people and enjoy the company of folks from all over the world! Long live CW!!!
Logged
K0CBA
Member

Posts: 299




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: July 27, 2001, 08:50:20 PM »

Crying about 5 wpm....what a bunch of &%##&@* (read: young cats)
Logged
KE4SHC
Member

Posts: 10




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2001, 09:03:14 PM »

I think the code requirement will be dropped and should be dropped by every country by 2010 after the ITU does it in 2003.  I for one think I will like code, some don't and only learn it for the test.  I think that's fine if that's all they want to do it for.  I hope we don't ever see the license in the US at least become just a form to fill out and send in.  I do think there should be less theory and more practical questions on the tests in their place.  Possibly a few more regulations questions but not many.  The practical questions would be something similar to "if you see k5k (only used as an example)spotted on 14.195 and you've worked it before and are sure your information is correct in their log book  what should you do? a keep working them every day on 14.195, b. stay off their operating frequencies the rest the time they're there and not try to work them again c.  Cause interference the rest the time from after your contact till they leave to minimize the people able to hear them.  d. cause interference on their listening frequencies so they can't hear anyone?

I'm not saying this went on during the dxpedition or goes on all the time even or even most of it, but I have read posts on hear and other places that say they've heard it happen.  This would be an example of a type of question I'd like to see more of on the tests than the ones that deal with volts, ohms, henrys, microfarads, etc. These may have been useful say up through the 60's and maybe 70's but not since then really.  I also think there are some who would say everyone should try be the best operator possible that they probably aren't the best in some area but tell others to be.  

I again hope to use CW after I pass my 5wpm test on the air if I can get a radio prefferrably all solid state at that ASAP and get some kind of antenna even a G5RV probably the M model.  I do think the test is an outdate requirement and hopefully will be sk after 2003.  
Logged
N9KWW
Member

Posts: 86




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: August 11, 2001, 11:29:15 AM »

you are correct with one exception, the 11 meter band. it is within the 2-30 mhz rule but cb'ers do not know or have to know code, so the fcc droped the bubble on this one!! i will NOT compare ham's to cb'ers that is a slap in the face!! but we do need to say that operation below 30 mhz does not require a code certificate is fact. also there are many other countries that also have services including hams that operate in the bands below 30 mhz that do not have a code certificate or even have the basic idea of what code is!! At this time 5 wpm is the minimum standard and for testing requirements this is the rule. i would like to see the code requirement go away, but this is NOT to say that it sould not be used on the ham bands. it is a mther of each to his/her own.
Logged
VA3FCM
Member

Posts: 15


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #19 on: August 13, 2001, 08:36:36 AM »

CW is just a mode. So is PSK31. Why continue to use CW as a testing element and not require a test for PSK31 (and other modes)? Perhaps we should pass a voice test to be licensed on HF! I've heard unintelligible hams on the air. Wink

CW is a fine tradition in ham radio with many advantages. This does not mean it should remain the basis of admission to HF operating privleges. There is a stated need to develop among the public skilled radio technicians. By increasing the technical knowlege level as the principal admission element (and, yes, making testing relevant) we will promote this goal.

Let's have people learn CW for the right reason. That is, learn it because one wants to do so - not because one is made to. I know LOTS of senior operators who have long since forgotten their code. Should they be compelled to re-test for it?

International AGREEMENTS not LAWS require only a familiarity with code - not proficiency. The RSGB has proposed a novel scheme, one in which the entry-level ham be required to indicate familiarity with Morse Code. No speed test, just knowlege of the alphabet. The novice would then pair up with a proficient ham for a period of up to a year. During that time, he or she would build solid skills in operating practice, electronics, CW and other modes. During this interim period, the newby would have access to the HF bands. After the year, testing for an upgrade license would be mandatory.

We can lament the passing of CW or do something about it. These Elmers could use the year to fire up a genuine interest in CW in their charges. This might engender an interest which lasts!

73

Charles, VA3FCM
Logged
KD7KGX
Member

Posts: 92




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: August 17, 2001, 11:49:41 PM »

ALTHOUGH I consider myself a YF (young fellow, or whatever), I agree with the OFs... we need to keep knowledge of Morse as an essential part of getting on HF. FACE it... CW is what makes ham radio different from CB.  CW is a mode that, unlike the other digital modes, does NOT require a computer or other gadget (besides a speaker) for humans to understand. THE fastest-growing segment of the amateur radio community isn't satellite, or VHF.  It's QRP, guys building little homemade CW rigs like the Tuna Tin II, or the SMT, or the Pixie, or the Sierra, or the K1 and K2.  QRP, combined with homebrewing, has been the revitalization of ham radio during the last decade, when "everyone" just knew that the Internet would kill amateur radio. WHY is QRP so popular?  Because even the simplest kits require some self-discipline to accomplish a goal.  As does learning Morse.  Anyone who can operate a computer competently (hedging my bets here, ha!) can learn 5wpm Morse well enough to pass the test by spending just 30 minutes a day for 7 days. SURE, it takes effort.  Making your own antenna takes effort.  So what? Heck, we don't go fishing to eat, we go fishing to fish.  The same thing is true of amateur radio.  The journey is the reward, not the destination. THE Morse test isn't there as a "weeding out" test.  It's there for very practical reasons.  CW works when nothing else does.  CW rigs can be made for $30 and a couple of hour's work... and they can talk around the world on a 9v battery.  Even though the US Coast Guard no longer monitors for CW, you can bet that all of the amateur nets (like the Marine Maritime Net) can recognize, and respond to, Morse... so if a pirate smashes your mike you can still grab two wires and call for help (or you can understand if you hear someone else doing this from sheer neccessity).  We justify our use of the ham bands by offering a service... backup of the normal means of communications for when all else fails.  In order for you as an individual to be a part of this backup, you need to know Morse. IF all you want to do is talk into a box, buy a cellular phone, FRS radio, or CB... or stick to the Tech license.  If all you want to do is type on a computer as a form of conversation, find a chatroom somewhere.  If you want to push yourself and LEARN a little, and take understandable pride in the fact that, in an emergency you could probably cobble something up that would let you communicate to others in the next state or maybe even the next country _without_ relying on infrastructure like the telephone net, then maybe you should consider spending the 2.5 hours learning Morse at a sufficient level to pass the test, getting your General (or higher) and then joining the rest of us. ONE more thing... you may even find that you really like it!
Logged
AF5II
Member

Posts: 6


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #21 on: August 19, 2001, 05:00:37 AM »

If you want to get on HF and not learn code buy a CB.  Yeah Im a no code tech and I dont realy want to learn morse (I've been trying to learn it off and on for 13 years and still have'nt been able to master it)but I want to get on HF and the only way to do that is to learn the code. so kwitcherbitchin wipe that tear from your cheek change your diaper and learn the code.
Logged
HFHAM
Member

Posts: 1




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: August 24, 2001, 01:09:16 PM »

If you really want to learn morse code, buy "Code Quick 2000" at http://www.cq2k.com. Just read all those testimonials on their web site. It really does work and it took me from no-code to 20+ wpm Extra Class. The CD-ROM even has all the theory questions and answers on there too (for all license classes).

If you are prepared to spend a half-hour or so *every* single day for a few weeks, then you absolutely *will* learn the code with Code Quick; it's fun !

If you find you do not have the resolve to do this, then they will give you your money back within 90 days.

What do you have to lose, except your no-code technician license ?  Smiley

Go for it !!!

Logged
WD4SIY
Member

Posts: 1


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #23 on: August 28, 2001, 03:09:04 PM »

When they get rid of the code and the test.....they can have my equipment as well.   The reason I left CB radio over 23 years ago is that I wanted to be among more technical folks........we are dummying down our hobby until we will be nothing more than a glorified CB radio group with more bands and legal power.   To the fellow that said Hams don't build equipment anymore..............well...in my opinion he's not a true ham if he isn't tinkering around with some electronics.........pushing the envelope if you will............   If he's not doing that......then he might as well go back down to CB radio.    This hobby has always been technical....and it should continue to be so................if you can't pass the theory and the lowly 5WPM morse code............then stay in CB Radio or go play on the Internet.
Logged
W9QX
Member

Posts: 7




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: August 28, 2001, 11:01:08 PM »

TAKE THE CODE AWAY BRING MORE RIFTRAFT TO OUR WONDERFUL HAM BAMDS IF ONE CAN NOT LEARN THE CODE
ONE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED DANGEROUS THINK ABOUT IT



                                73 BACK TO CW
                                 PAUL W9QX
Logged
W9QX
Member

Posts: 7




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: August 28, 2001, 11:01:30 PM »

TAKE THE CODE AWAY BRING MORE RIFTRAFT TO OUR WONDERFUL HAM BAMDS IF ONE CAN NOT LEARN THE CODE
ONE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED DANGEROUS THINK ABOUT IT



                                73 BACK TO CW
                                 PAUL W9QX
Logged
W9QX
Member

Posts: 7




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: August 28, 2001, 11:01:37 PM »

TAKE THE CODE AWAY BRING MORE RIFTRAFT TO OUR WONDERFUL HAM BAMDS IF ONE CAN NOT LEARN THE CODE
ONE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED DANGEROUS THINK ABOUT IT



                                73 BACK TO CW
                                 PAUL W9QX
Logged
W9QX
Member

Posts: 7




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: August 28, 2001, 11:01:42 PM »

TAKE THE CODE AWAY BRING MORE RIFTRAFT TO OUR WONDERFUL HAM BAMDS IF ONE CAN NOT LEARN THE CODE
ONE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED DANGEROUS THINK ABOUT IT



                                73 BACK TO CW
                                 PAUL W9QX
Logged
W9QX
Member

Posts: 7




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: August 28, 2001, 11:01:44 PM »

TAKE THE CODE AWAY BRING MORE RIFTRAFT TO OUR WONDERFUL HAM BAMDS IF ONE CAN NOT LEARN THE CODE
ONE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED DANGEROUS THINK ABOUT IT



                                73 BACK TO CW
                                 PAUL W9QX
Logged
K1PML
Member

Posts: 14




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: September 25, 2001, 02:09:46 PM »

hello all


i really do have an opinion on this, i have been trying for years to learn the code.  and unfortunately due to a
mild case of attention deficit disorder ( or more kindly put executive disorder in adults)  i am unable to keep my attention focused long enough to learn the code,  its not that i am phobic of it..  honestly i'd love to be able to learn the code,  but i do think the test is unfair to those of us who are unable to pass it due to the fact that for extenuating circumstances we can't pay attention long enough to follow a qso...


i worked my ass off to pass my initial test and i was glad to be able to come in as a no code technician back in 1993..  but now i feel that i am, (as well as others)  are being discriminated by those in the hobby
that feel we are a blight (no codes) to the hobby..


i have the opinion that they should do away with the code exams, but keep certain portions of the bands code only as they are now.. that would please those of you who are not only proficient but passionate about code..    


as i said before, i would love to be able to learn code.. but i cannot..   why should i be limited to my reach if i can learn the theory from books or cd roms..  

we all have to come to the realization that there is a place for all of us in this HOBBY if it is to survive.  

if it were not for the no code, you'd have less hams   now than you had before the elimination..  i say to each their own, but do not force it upon people who are unable to learn it or unwilling (in some cases) (not mine though)...

i have all the respect in the world for the elmers who pioneered the hobby.   But Code should be something you want to learn,,  and not something you have to learn..
open up the bands to everyone,  if you can pass general and extra theory..  why can't people be allowed to bypass code altogether.  



its more than my 2 cents worth .. and i guess i might offend someone ,  if you feel offended feel free to email me directly...  i don't want this to become an open season for bashing one or another...


73's

k1pml

pete    
 

           
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!