eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

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

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



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for All License Classes:

from ARRL on July 20, 2005
Website: http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/07/20/100/?nc=1
View comments about this article!

FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for All License Classes:

NEWINGTON, CT, July 20, 2005--The FCC has proposed dropping the 5 WPM Morse code element as a requirement to obtain an Amateur Radio license of any class. The Commission recommended the change to its Part 97 Amateur Service rules in a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) in WT Docket 05-235. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-143A1.pdf

Any rule changes proposed in the NPRM would not become final until the FCC gathers additional public comments, formally adopts any changes to its rules and concludes the proceeding by issuing a Report and Order (R&O) spelling out the changes and specifying an effective date. That's not likely to happen for several months. The FCC declined in its NPRM to go forward with any other suggested changes to Amateur Service licensing rules or operating privileges beyond elimination of the Morse requirement.

"Based upon the petitions and comments, we propose to amend our amateur service rules to eliminate the requirement that individuals pass a telegraphy examination in order to qualify for any amateur radio operator license," the FCC said in its NPRM, released July 19. This week's NPRM consolidated 18 petitions for rule making from the amateur community--including one from the ARRL--that proposed a wide range of additional changes to the amateur rules. The FCC said the various petitions had attracted 6200 comments from the amateur community, which soon will have the opportunity to comment again--this time on the FCC's proposals in response to those petitions.

The Commission said it believes dropping Element 1--the 5 WPM Morse examination--would "encourage individuals who are interested in communications technology, or who are able to contribute to the advancement of the radio art, to become amateur radio operators." The FCC said it also would eliminate a requirement it believes "is now unnecessary and that may discourage" current licensees from advancing their skills, and that it would "promote more efficient use" of current Amateur Radio spectrum.

The FCC cited changes in Article 25 of the international Radio Regulations adopted at World Radiocommunication Conference 2003 as the primary reason to go forward with eliminating Morse code as an Amateur Radio licensing requirement in the future. Among other changes, WRC-03 deleted the Morse testing requirement for amateur applicants seeking HF privileges, leaving it up to individual countries to determine whether or not they want to mandate Morse testing. Several countries already have dropped their Morse requirements.

ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ, said he was not surprised that the FCC proposed altogether scrapping the Morse code requirement. The League and others had called for retaining the 5 WPM requirement only for Amateur Extra class applicants. Sumner expressed dismay, however, that the FCC turned away proposals from the League and other petitioners to create a new entry-level Amateur Radio license class.

"We're disappointed that the Commission prefers to deny an opportunity to give Amateur Radio the restructuring it needs for the 21st century," he said. "It appears that the Commission is taking the easy road, but the easy road is seldom the right road."

Sumner said ARRL officials and the Board of Directors would closely study the 30-page NPRM and plan to comment further after they've had the opportunity to consider the Commission's stated rationales for its proposals.

In 2004, the ARRL filed a Petition for Rule Making asking the FCC to amend Part 97 to complete the Amateur Service restructuring begun in 1999 but "left unfinished." The League called on the FCC to create a new entry-level license, reduce the number of actual license classes to three and drop the Morse code testing requirement for all classes except for Amateur Extra. Among other recommendations, the League asked the FCC to automatically upgrade Technician licensees to General and Advanced licensees to Amateur Extra. In this week's NPRM, the FCC said it was not persuaded such automatic upgrades were in the public interest.

The FCC said it did not believe a new entry-level license class was warranted because current Novice and Tech Plus licensees already can easily upgrade to General. "We also note that, if our proposal to eliminate telegraphy testing in the amateur service is adopted," the FCC continued, "a person who is not a licensee will be able to qualify for a General Class operator license by passing two written examinations, and that a person who is a Technician Class licensee will be able to qualify for a General Class operator license by passing one written examination." The FCC said it does not believe either path to be unreasonable.

The FCC also said that it's already addressed some of the other issues petitioners raised in its "Phone Band Expansion" (or "Omnibus") NPRM in WT Docket 04-140. In that proceeding, the Commission proposed to go along with the ARRL's Novice refarming proposal aimed at reallocating the current Novice/Tech Plus subbands to provide additional phone spectrum. Under the plan, Novice/Tech Plus licensees would be granted CW privileges in the current General CW subbands.

A 60-day period for members of the public to comment on the FCC's NPRM in WT 05-235 will begin once the NPRM appears in the Federal Register. Reply comments will be due within 75 days of the NPRM's publication in the Federal Register.


Here is a plain-text link of the proposal, for anyone who does not have Adobe Acrobat Reader. -- ed.

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-143A1.txt

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K8JX on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Well, I kind of thought it would come to this, but it's still feels like a slap in the face. I think this is the wrong way to go and effect of this will be far reaching, especially with emergency communications.

Richie R K8JX
Michigan Amateur Radio telegraphers society
 
no help at all  
by KZ1X on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This still doesn't help getting kids on the air.

The Tech class written test is too hard for youngsters (under 12).

I have a terrible time trying to teach young kids the theory and regulations. They just can't get it. They have *zero* problems learning 5 WPM Morse though!

We should never have cut out the old Novice license. That was a truly BAD idea.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W8VOM on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Sounds like the price of admission is going down! I knew this would happen so I am not at all shocked by this annoncement.Many of us will continue to use Morse code as it is our preferred mode.The sad thing about this change is that many amateurs will never discover the joy of using the code! They convinced themselves that they could not learn it when in all truth..they refused to learn it.I would have prefered keeping the 5 wpm code at the General level. At least the FCC in it's wisdom cut the requirment across the board! They decided not to protect (any) class from what is now the destiny of our hobby and service.Morse will live on..at least for a while but the joy of using Morse will reach fewer amateurs for not many will choose to learn a mode that they are not compelled to learn. I am thankful that I had to learn it! It's a great mode..all is not lost. Many will use Morse even if they do not understand it..they will use keyboards and translaters (readers) while the Jedi do not need these tools. The skill of a good Morse Op will never die.Cha Cha Cha Changes...are a part of life. I compliment the FCC for not ( protecting ) any one class of license...W8VOM
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KL7FH on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Three Dits, Four Dits, Two Dits, Dah. radio radio RAH RAH RAH!!!! This is truly SAD.
73
--... ...--
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KL7FH on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Oh by the way..those of you that are FISTS members...look at the picture issue just released..see all the YOUNG members? NOT! We are all old...well most of us..
73
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE2IV on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
It's a great day for HR.

Now we can move on to future!

I've been a ham for 40 years and hold an Extra. I am so glad that finally I can welcome newbies to HR.

CW is nice if you like it - so go enjoy it without the requirement!

--... ...--
-.- . ..--- .. ...-
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by NL7W on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I agree with David Sumner's remarks. This is truely a sad day in the history of amateur radio. With utmost certainty, this NPRM will meet with stiff resistance by long-standing hams.

I predict the FCC will be flooded with comments -- mostly negative. Watch out FCC!

73 de Steve, NL7W

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N6VQQ on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This will make Morse Code "fun" to learn instead of "mandatory".
We all know that it will always be a form of communicating, and I bet there are a lot of up and coming Hams that will always keep Morse alive, it is not a death sentence for it.
I just hope the FCC doesn't drop the allocated bands just because "they" no longer require it for getting a license.
I don't do 20-40 wpm, but as long as I can do five, I'll keep it alive in my arsenal.
Just my opinion 73
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC5FOG on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I highly doubt it, the old school couldn't even muster a reasonable effort to fight BPL.

The FCC said that when the Morse code was dropped as an international requirement that it would look to the ham community as a whole to tell them what they want. After that the ARRL and the NCVEC both filed petitions to request that the code be removed. So the FCC has already heard what it wants to hear. Look back when the proposal of the No-code Tech licenses was put out there, all the old timers said the same thing, they would fight to keep ham radio from turning into CB but the no code tech went threw and look where we are now and in all honesty are we really that bad off.

Most of the users of the repeaters in my area are no code techs, and their operating practices are much better than what I monitor on HF.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KZ5I on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I must agree with the comments made by KZ1X. It does not help with getting youngsters on the air.

Some of the exam elements still baffle some EXTRA Class amateurs.

'73 KZ5I

 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
That is wonderful. The FCC has finally seen reason regarding this archaic requirement.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5DFM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
i just cant wait to use my Palomar 2000 and my echo mike with the duke boys theme on 20 meters yeeeeee haaaaaaaaaaaa , sally mae git me another beer . we all need someone to bleed on , you can bleed on me , all ovah .
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5DFM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>look at the picture issue just released..see all the >YOUNG members? NOT! We are all old...well most of >us..

well let them broadcast Brittany spears , that will get the youngster's in ;-)
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5DFM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>That is wonderful. The FCC has finally seen reason >regarding this archaic requirement.

and push ups and camping should be dropped form basic training . how about ending toilet training to get the youngsters into growing up ;-)
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5DFM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> The skill of a good Morse Op will never die.Cha Cha >Cha Changes...are a part of life. I compliment the >FCC for not ( protecting ) any one class of >license...W8VOM

hey i got an ideal , lets get rid of all licenses and call it citizens band . then we all could be bad boys and free band ;-) lets legalize pirate radio operation on all bands ;-) what ya think huh ????? m this is the stupidest thing the FCC has thought of doing . why have a license at all
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC5FOG on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"y i got an ideal , lets get rid of all licenses and call it citizens band"


WILL ALL THE OLD SCHOOL STOP USING THE "ITS GOING TO TURN HAM RADIO INTO CB RADIO" SCARE TACTIC. No one fell for it back when the old timers tried that when the FCC made the no code tech license, and no one is buying it when you try it now about the removal of code, so get a better line, because no one is buying it.


JUST SAY WHAT IT REALLY IS, YOUR MAD BECAUSE YOU HAD TO DO THE CODE AND NOW PEOPLE WON'T AND YOU FEEL IT ISN'T FAIR. So just remeber what you always tell your childern when they tell you something isn't fair.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KI4GYT on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
With all due respect to KD4DFM, there is no compelling reason to require people to learn morse code. It is a handy means of getting through when conditions are not so good as compared to voice, but that doesn't make it required.

What will be a compelling reason for no-code general class licensees? I hold a Tech license, and was operating on 15m this past Field Day just fine, enjoying a part of the ham bands I don't normally get to use. While scanning thru the band looking for activity (before it really opened up in the early evening), I could hear voices, but just barely. Whilst scanning thru the morse code portion of the band, I could make out the morse clearly, even though the background noise hadn't dropped. THAT'S a compelling reason to learn morse.

NOT KD4DFM's childish 5 or 6 post long ranting. Grow up please.

Sincerely,
KI4GYT
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KI4GYT on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
And as proof that everyone makes mistakes, I meant to condemn KD5DFM, not KD4DFM, who does not appear in the database.

Sincerely,
KI4GYT
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD4AC on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"i just cant wait to use my Palomar 2000 and my echo mike with the duke boys theme on 20 meters yeeeeee haaaaaaaaaaaa , sally mae git me another beer . we all need someone to bleed on , you can bleed on me , all ovah"

Typical doomsayer response. I remember when a lot of amateurs were foretelling of amateur radio's death when the CW requirement was lowered. There was even a HAM who said he was going to throw all his equipment away. Hmmm, five years later and amateur radio is still here.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4RAF on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Ding Dong, the witch is dead...

Part II: FCC simplifies licenses to a single class...

There can be no class warfare if there is nothing to seperate the "classes". The tests have become nothing more than a pool of rules & regulations. If we all know the rules, where are these self imposed partitions going to be supported?

I passed 13WPM, before the FCC. I didn't get anything for free but have no problem with this whatsoever.

Just Git'er done...
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4RAF on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

With all the PROGRESS in communications: 175,000,000 cell phones (US), satellite radio, internet and instant messaging - is there really still a need for amateur radio to continue to "filter" interested people with a 100 year old mode?

I say "NO"...
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KB4QLZ on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Now accepting memberships in the Affirmative Action Amateur Radio League.....


KB4QLZ


Amateur Radio aka Ham Radio...A device that puts RF energy into a real antenna and transmits this RF energy on a real amateur radio band, not over some phone wire, or over the Internet.

Without CW, it's just CB.

Echolink (ek-O lingk) n. 1. Another form of AOL chatroom. 2. A "pretend radio".
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KU4UV on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Gimme, Gimmee, Gimmee, Gimmee, the hell with actually having to work or study and actually earn something. Isn't that what the American dream is all about?

KU4UV
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by NT9M on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Given recent history at the FCC it's no surprise they took the path requiring the least effort on their part. While I didn't support the automatic upgrades, I do believe it's unfortunate they didn't use this opportunity to create a new entry level license that includes limited HF privileges. It seems to me that would have done more to encourage "new" hams.

As for the CW debate, no, I'm not angry because I had to learn it and someone else didn't. I'm glad I had to learn code because I really do enjoy it and I'm able to make contacts that phoners-only cannot make.

I'm sad for the newcomers because they'll never know how much fun they are missing. Oh well. I'm spending more of my time using VHF-UHF weak signal modes these days rather than HF anyway. I enjoy a challenge.

Tim
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by DD3EO on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I say: Good idea.
The deterioration of the HF-bands predicted by some 'Pro-Code' folks didn't happen, when Germany dropped the code requirement two years ago,
so I say, the result is very positive so far.
The only difference: More chances to actually find an active ham on the frequencies.

And to those, who want to inundate the FCC with protest mails:
It is not the ability to decode morse code, that makes you a good ham, it is you, your character and your behaviour that is important.

Btw. before someone jumps on me, I have decided to take up learning code, as it is still the best mode to work QRP, especially portable...

With best regards
DD3EO
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by NT9M on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KURUV WROTE: "Gimme, Gimmee, Gimmee, Gimmee, the hell with actually having to work or study and actually earn something. Isn't that what the American dream is all about?"

Welcome to the Modern Age...reminds me of how Indiana trashed one of the most successful single-class high school basketball tournaments in the country in favor of a multi-class system. Now everyone can be a champion ! Of course, the attendance has plummeted and no one can remember who last year's "champions" were.

Just call me a curmudgeon.

Tim
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by N8ZT on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Personally, I'm very glad to see the Morse requirement being dropped. I think it is a significant barrier and no other modes receive a specific test to prove you can send or receive on them. Understanding the rules and band allocation should be enough to get people started, and they can decide what modes they want to operate and learn more about them on their own. I think some other fairly recent changes, like adding RF Safety into the exams, are much more useful to most new hams than the element one requirement.

Don't get me wrong; CW is definitely the most efficient mode with it's ability to cut through interference and it's narrow use of spectrum. I think retaining CW only band segments makes perfect sense. However, that doesn't mean people should be required to learn it, just as someone who loves CW isn't forced to learn or use phone modes if they choose not to.

Some people have commented about this making things too easy and implied that Americans are lazy and don't want to work for anything. I'm not going to touch the later part of that, but what about this change giving people the freedom to choose what modes they want to learn and operate? Last I checked, personal freedom was considered a wholesome American value...

FYI, I hold an Extra class license and am an ARRL VE. I passed my Morse requirement and have administered the exams, and I've seen many people pass the written tests and fail element one. I'm also net control for one local radio club and president of another, so I'd say I am a fairly active ham, not just a casual licensee or bystander.

Anyway, regardless of your "side" on this issue, I hope (and believe) this helps keep HR alive into the future and opens the door for some fresh blood to get involved, so that our hobby doesn't die off and fade into oblivion.

73!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The trick is to buy as much HF equipment on ebay as you can now and make a killing selling it to the newbies later...
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by AI4JF on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Well, I'm probably an idiot for jumping into THE hot-button issue for amateur radio, but I can't resist! These are intended to be thoughtful comments, not flamebait; if you choose to reply, please keep this in mind.

I'm in favor of the proposed change. CW is an interesting mode, and it's unique (so far as I know) in that it's the only digital mode that can be copied without the use of any equipment beyond the radio. But at the end of the day, it's just a mode.

The two big arguments I've heard for retaining the requirement are (1) that Morse is uniquely useful in an emergency situation; and (2) that the Morse requirement has the side effect of requiring a certain level of commitment to the Amateur service, which in turn results in licensees who are better operators. While interesting, neither argument convinces me.

There's not a lot of dispute that Morse does have unique utility in an emergency situation. It's possible to get a message through in conditions that would completely preclude voice communications. This is a compelling argument for learning Morse, and I'm sure that many people do so just for this reason. But there are lot of other non-required things (sufficient emergency power, for instance) that are equally if not more important for emergency communications. Let's encourage people to learn Morse but realize that even those who don't know code still have value in an emergency: there's strength in numbers.

The second argument, that Morse knowledge demonstrates a certain seriousness about amateur radio, also has some truth to it. But it's certainly not the only way to be serious about the Amateur service, and I'd submit that there's really not that much correlation between being able to pass the Morse test and being a good operator on-air. We've all heard exemplary practice from newly-licensed Techs on 2M, and I think those who work HF can attest that there are plenty of jerks out there. The reverse is also true, of course. The exams, while not absurdly hard by any means, do impose enough of a skill requirement that I think there's still some commitment required to enter the Amateur service. I'd personally have a great influx of newcomers that include the occasional jerk than impose requirements that discourage participation and ultimately doom this participation-based service (and hobby) to complete irrelevance.

Thought, comments, and constructive criticism are welcome!

Phil
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K5ASL on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Well it is about time. My argument has always been that CW doesn't test radio knowledge, it is a learned skill. Sort of like requireing someone to write a program in the basic language before being able to get on the internet. Sounds silly doesn't it? Anyway I won't upgrade, enjoy weak signal Vhf dx and that challenge. If you want to complain about CB there is plenty on the HF bands when I listen that is about all that is going on over there. Not much public service like there should be. We need to figure out how to get more kids in Ham radio in the first place. Not complain about the loss of a archaic requirement.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KD7KSQ on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Archaic?? What about upholding a grand old tradition of radio? Do the British criticise their Beefeaters for their "Archaic" uniforms? The French for their Eiffel Tower? What is this superficial thinking that anything old should be disgarded in favor of the newest thing?
And as the years go by there will be fewer and fewer ops using cw, less and less chance to interact with different ops and styles. More and more will say "well, I'll learn it someday..." and never will.
Is the 5 wpm requirement so damned hard? For most it just takes the desire and attitude to learn. Doesn't that make the pot sweeter, that little extra work and study?
So are we, like sheep, just to follow the trend too? Why not go against the grain and hold on to that requirement, uphold a standard that many countries are giving up?
This is truly sad, if it goes through. We hams are practically the last defenders and users of Morse in the states. No, this wouldn't spell the end of ham radio per se...but it would be a damned sad day indeed.
We hams need to start organizing petitions NOW! We need to voice our displeasure at this most singularly pivitol decision. WE need to make this decision, NOT the ARRL, NOT the FCC!
I myself don't have web-page building skills, but I will volunteer in any way I can to organize a petition against this possible decision!
KD7KSQ
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K7FD on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

Last weak I cudn't even spel Amatuer Radio and now I are one!

 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K7FD on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K5ASL wrote:

<<Sort of like requireing someone to write a program in the basic language before being able to get on the internet. Sounds silly doesn't it?

Actually, this might have been a good idea, too!

73 John K7FD
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K0RGR on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Wayne Green said over 20 years ago that you could stand on a street corner and try to give away Extra Class licenses, and you'd get no takers, and I believe he was closer to right than you'd imagine. I don't expect this to result in a deluge of applicants. There will be a small wave of people upgrading from Tech to General, but don't expect a stampede. This is where we will find out how many Techs were really active, too - I bet it's less than 10%.

Every nocoder I've talked to so far has said that they intend to learn the code anyway, so the net effect of this in the short run is probably pretty minimal.

We've had several folks take our Tech classes and pass both the Tech and General exams at the same time, so the added effort to pass the General written isn't that great - if they learn the General frequencies and how to recognize a full wave rectifier, they have a good shot at passing. I would have preferred to see a restructuring of these two levels, to eliminate the redundancy, but maybe it isn't worth worrying about. The exams can be changed without changing the license structure.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N8NNE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I am against the idea of removing the code requirement for ALL license classes. I believe that CW is much too valuable of a mode to be dropped entirely. I thought that it was a foolish move by the Navy to drop morse code. I believe that dependence on modern digital modes that require a computer to decipher is a fool's errand.

I would support removal of the CW requirement for General Class so as to get new blood on the HF bands, but I would like to see the USA hold themselves to a higher standard and maintain the requirement for the Extra Class.

I remember another thing we tell our children : "Just because everyone else is doing it doesn't mean you have to".

Just my 2 cents
N8NNE
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K3UD on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
While I don't like the NPRM as it concerns the code I can live with it. We will have a comment period for whatever it is worth.

Unfortunately there are other issues that might have some longer term effects.

The FCC chose not to address the issue of a true beginners license and they also have left the Novice and Advanced as orphaned classed. The Tech+ is slowley being merged into the technician class as renewals come up but the technician class will be mixed with those who have additional privileges because they have passed element 1.

As far as the written tests becoming tougher, I think that would be up to the VECs as they really control the question pools.

It will be interesting to see how all of this shakes out over the next 5 years or so.

73
George
K3UD
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K7NNG on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
SAD, SAD, SAD DAY. THE NO GOODS, LAZY BASTARDS HAVE WON THE BATTLE, BUT NOT THE WAR.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W2BSA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I happen to agree with the NPRM and the discussion was until this post I'm responding to was civil. However, I think we can discuss this without using profanity.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N8CPA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Since they'll allow HF licensing to individuals' defintions of AR licensing, in the future, when I Elmer anyone, I'll Elmer to MY definition of Amateur Radio. And MY definition includes code proficiency. Wannabe hams can pound brass or pound sand, as far as I'm concerned.

And already there is talk of some HF phone ops ID'ing only in MCW. They've been called "elitists" for so long, now they're starting to act like it. It's just their way of avoiding disappointing the name callers by proving them wrong. How wonderfully sensitive to the feelings of the name callers!
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by N0XMZ on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is the best news I've heard from the FCC in a long time.

I look forward to hearing some new voices on the HF bands.

Can we now let this dead dog lie?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WA4DOU on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
" Wannabe hams can pound brass or pound sand , as far as I'm concerned".

Understandable sentiment but the horse is out of the gate now. This change with have far reaching consequences.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3EVL on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
A question or two for all those that do not support the NPRM:

If CW is such a resilient mode (which I think it is)
and if CW is such a useful mode (which I think it is)
and if CW is such a fun mode (which I think it is)

why do so many posting here equate this NPRM with the demise of that mode?

Or is the mode so unattractive that people will not gravitate towards it without the impetus of a test requirement?

The reality is that knowledge of CW as it applies to Amateur Radio has long been a choice, not a requirement - people use it because they want to, not because they are required to. If the attributes I mentioned above are indeed true, then, IMHO, removal of the testing requirement should be of no consequence.



 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KE5FJG on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is from a brand new guy perspective. For a very long time I thought about getting a license. The code kept me away. I finally got around to it and got my call sign last week. For now I'm enjoying my V/U privileges and the great group of people in my local club.

I'd like to get on HF and not only broaden my horizons but also talk past the horizon. I'm still studying and will gradually work toward the general written test. After that I'll gradually work toward CW if it's still mandatory.

CW should not go away but there should be HF privileges available without it. Between 1/5 to 1/4 of the general privileges should be available for passing the written test for general with the remainder becoming available upon passing the CW test.

Extra privileges should remain totally CW dependant and with maybe 10wpm instead of the 5wpm for general. There should be an upgrade of both the written and CW skill sets to upgrade to extra class.

By giving a portion of HF to all licensees the interest in CW will go up not down. Once that taste of working the world is sampled it will make most want the full course and not just the appetizer and you will see more learning CW and upgrading than you see now.

I'm sure some will not see this as the most sensible course of action. So be it. I'm sure the FCC will go on with their code elimination agenda. So be it. That will make it easier on me since I'll only have to pass the writtens. My plan is still superior.

Lastly, even with no CW we won't see this turn into CB unless there is no more policing of the bands. The CB morons aren't going to put in the effort to pass a tech written much less general or extra.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>>That is wonderful. The FCC has finally seen reason >>regarding this archaic requirement.
>
>and push ups and camping should be dropped form basic >training . how about ending toilet training to get the >youngsters into growing up ;-)

Believe what you will. All the old folks who believe that code is some necessary rite of passage are going to have to deal with it. The technical knowledge requirements remain the same. Code is old. The military gave up on it. There are better and more resilient digital modes, easier and faster voice modes. You want relevent, then add requirements for basic computer skills and digital modes. The horse and buggy have passed in to history and so will morse.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Ding Dong the Witch is dead---



and about time--



Now to make money on the FCC decision --



going to start buying up every HF radio on sell on ebay --



then sell it for double to the new HF idiots that dont know a thing but just wants to get on the air--


i'm going to make a killing --

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Archaic?? What about upholding a grand old tradition
> of radio?

That would be the Masons or the Elks. I'm not a big believer in tradition for the sake of tradition.

> And as the years go by there will be fewer and fewer
> ops using cw

I don't see that as any great loss. Radios will start incorporating more digital modes, some even more robust than (gasp!) morse.

>More and more will say "well, I'll learn it someday..."

Or not.

> Doesn't that make the pot sweeter, that little extra
> work and study?

Hey, we could add a marathon requirement! And maybe an MBA requirement? And how about walking over hot coals? That would make it really sweet. And they're almost a relevant.

>uphold a standard that many countries are giving up?

You mean lets stay ingrained in the past for no good reason instead of actually being relevant to the present and ready for the future? Just because everyone else isn't jumping off a bridge doesn't mean we shouldn't?

> We hams are practically the last defenders and users
> of Morse in the states

Some hams. Others have the foresight to see its irrelevance.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W4VR on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Good move! The FCC simply wants to comply with international law and be in sync with what other countries are doing with regard to CW, despite what ARRL says. Next proposal on the horizon is to deregulate ham radio altogether and license by rule as they did with CB and marine radios many years ago.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3EVL on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"...I am against the idea of removing the code requirement for ALL license classes. I believe that CW is much too valuable of a mode to be dropped entirely..."

I believe the FCC said they're in favor of dropping the test requirement, not the mode itself. Why do you equate the two things?

"...I would like to see the USA hold themselves to a higher standard and maintain the requirement for the Extra Class..."

For what purpose? Busy work? So pick a standard that's relevant if you think extra class should be differentiated more that it currently is - why is code 'proficiency' the only way to do this?

"...I remember another thing we tell our children : 'Just because everyone else is doing it doesn't mean you have to'... "

Yes, and the implications are that you look at your own situation and factor in all the reasons for doing or not doing something and maybe even look at the reasons why the other entity made the decision the made [they may in fact have made a wise decision] and you come to a decision. IMHO, the FCC have done just that and made a good decision based on the information available. You seem to imply that we should NOT do something precisely because others have done it - which, IMHO, is irrational.


 
calm down, the world is not ending!  
by KC0RDG on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
First off, everything will be ok! This is a great way to get more people into ham radio. Just because they have removed the CW req doesn't mean the bands will be flooded with "morons"...keep reading.

Secondly, I think this is great for the post-911 climate. Having more people on the bands is good for all of us. Having more people on the bands will help all of ham radio for QSO's, Net's, MARS, etc.

Thirdly, being able to learn a mode does not make one a "better operator" or "smarter" in the understandings and/or technical aspect of ham radio! Theory is theory and modes are modes. FORCING someone to learn a mode will prevent them from being a LID.

Fourthly, the people saying that dropping CW is because people are now stupid, lazy or we are dumbing things down is without merit. Making CW a requirement to talk to people world-wide on the HF bands doesn't mean your not lazy or smarter than those who choose not to learn CW. Forcing someone to learn a mode just to gain access to the HF bands doesn't prove anything. Change happens in every aspect of our lives. Many things are changed and it's not because we are dumbing things down or are lazy. Sometimes it just makes sense. Forcing people to learn 1 mode just to talk to people world-wide doesn't make sense! Why isn't it PSK31? Or maybe SSTV? Silly.

Lastly, I see this as an incentive to learn morse code! I am currently studying CW because as it stands, you MUST to upgrade. Now the FCC is going to change that. Now I can experience SSB on HF along side my CW learning. Do you think I will stop learning code now because it is not mandatory? YOUR CRAZY! CW is the mode that will get through. People upgrading from Tech to General learn very quickly that voice doesn't work all the time. Not only that but you hear CW all over the bands. I listen frequently to HF and I can tell you, the ratio of what I hear is probably 8 CW QSO's for every 1 voice. CW is alive and well and will continue to be alive and well, so CALM DOWN! :)

So to summarize: More people, learning CW doesn't make your smarter, forcing someone to learn 1 mode doesn't prove anything, and people will find CW is a very popular mode and will have the internal drive to learn it once they hop on HF.

KC0RDG
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by AC3P on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Don't know why the FCC is waiting for responses to their NRPM. They have already made the decision. This is just pro forma.

No point in responding when they shoot down all the arguments in the NPRM itself.

No point in giving any more code tests. Just wait for the Report and Order to come out.
 
edit:  
by KC0RDG on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Theory is theory and modes are modes. FORCING someone to learn a mode will prevent them from being a LID.

should have been:

Theory is theory and modes are modes. FORCING someone to learn a mode will NOT prevent them from being a LID.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AC9HE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I find it somewhat amusing that people are still giving opinoins of what should be done.... Its done, all that is left is taking it out of the oven. I am sure that there will be minor modifications to the changes, but nothing drastic. It is ....done.

As far as making money on selling equipment to new to ham radio folks. If you are schooled in the ways of sales and marketing, products become more expensive when they are not mass produced, hence there becomes a demand for them. When a manufacturing company can produce a large number of one product, that product becomes less expensive to produce, hence less expensive to sell. The major producers of ham equipment, Yaseu, Ten Tec, Icom, Kenwood without a doubt have been watching this restructuring very carefully and no doubt have the inside scoop on the decision, who knows maybe alittle say so in it as well. I would imagine the assembly line is cranking up right now for the influx of new to the hobby operators. Just like DVD players were expensive when they were first produced and now you can purchase them for a fraction of the cost now. HF radios will be produced at a much larger volume now by companies that are looking to profit from this FCC action. So instead of making money from your radios you own now, you might be watching new operators purchasing more advanced radios at a fraction of the cost of radios of last year. Ain't that a kicker. This could be a good things all around for everyone in the hobby and the companies that support it as well. New technology and new radios that were not produced before due to the high cost of producing only a limited amount of produce with a great deal of research and development. Now there will be new and maybe even more product out there for ham operators to purchase. New antenna design, new radios, more radios offering all mode instead of just 2m or 6m....... Hang on boys.......things are ah changin.

And yes I am in favor of dropping the code just like I was when they discontinued sales of regular gas at stations. Its called progress, get on the train or stay at the station and whine like old men who need their medication.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by WQ6F on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I know a youngster who would like to have an Amateur Radio License. The problem is, he only wants to operate CW and is not interested in SSB or any of the digital modes and can't understand why he has to take a test concerned with all of these other modes. Well, I guess there's another youngster we've failed to enlist to the Service....ooops, I mean Hobby.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3EVL on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"...I know a youngster who would like to have an Amateur Radio License. The problem is, he only wants to operate CW and is not interested in SSB or any of the digital modes and can't understand why he has to take a test concerned with all of these other modes. Well, I guess there's another youngster we've failed to enlist to the Service....ooops, I mean Hobby..."

This is a silly comparison because...

It is perfectly reasonable to permit use of SSB, digital, etc without any prior knowledge of or proficiency in CW because knowing how to send and receive morse code does not imply any skill in the operation of a radio transmitter...

However, it would be most unwise to permit someone to operate an amateur radio transmitter in ANY mode without that person having demonstrated some basic knowlege of electronics, rf propagation, rf and electrical safety, and rules and regulations as we currently do in the written exams. In this sense, the written exams are not mode-specific but are in fact quite general and broad in scope.

This could have been explained to the hypothetical youngster who could then have made an informed decision on whether or not to proceed with his or her ham radio endeavors, CW-specifc or otherwise.

 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by WA6BFH on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

This may not be as bad an occurrence as it at first seems. We know, and some have already commented, that any injurious nature to Ham radio is due to lack of proper inculcation -- with no Novice type license.

If the FCC proceeds with this it just means the onus is upon older more seasoned Hams to provide the inculcation and background for new comers. We need to teach them of the spirit of Hams who built this avocation -- even a decade or more before the inception of the ARRL. We need to stem the die-out that we have seen with those that started as Technicians -- never to renew.

Cant we do that? If Ham radio is so great and fascinating, cant we communicate this?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AC0H on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Well.....It looks like the cry baby, lazy, gimme everything now, and don't make me work for it crowd got their way.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AC0H on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<<"because knowing how to send and receive morse code does not imply any skill in the operation of a radio transmitter...">>

ROAD APPLES!!!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3EVL on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"...Well.....It looks like the cry baby, lazy, gimme everything now, and don't make me work for it crowd got their way..."

...Whereas some of us might interpret the FCC's intention as having nothing to do with whining or lack of appropriate work ethic, etc., and everything to do with common sense as applied to the current state of the Radio Art and the relevance and importance of morse code proficiency to that art!



 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K9NYO on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I was at the gas station the other day and one of the attendants was emptying garbage cans. He looked at my car and said, "Man, look at all of those CB antennas". I told him that they weren't for CB but for ham radio. He said "What's that?" I asked him if he knew what shortwave radio is and he said no. So I explained how ham radio is different and how we have licenses and how the big ham stick lets me talk to people around the country on shortwave (stuck with "shortwave" instead of calling it "HF") or around the world.

Three days later I was in the drive-thru at an Italian beef joint (Portillo's) here in Chicagoland and the runner outside looked at my car and said "Geez, I bet you can get HBO will all of those antennas!" I told him they were for ham radio and he said "What's that?" I proceeded to give him a similar explanation as I did above to the guy at the gas station. Both of these guys were probably 16 or 17 years old.

It seems to me that the problem gaining new people to the hobby has very little to do with whether or not there is a telegraphy requirement but with a basic understanding of what the hobby is. When I was a kid, shortwave radio was your portal to the world, and most people at least knew what it was. Today with the Internet, it seems that most people don't even have a clear understanding of what radio once was to people and what it still is to our hobby.

All of the Don Quixote's who've been thrusting their pikes at the FCC windmill about the telegraphy element would be better served spending their time explaining the hobby to people.

Ways to promote ham radio: have a ham radio license plate, have some antennas on the car and answer questions about them, operate QRP/pedestrian mobile in a park, operate special event stations & promote the event in local media, get involved in emergency communication with your local EMA or in SKYWARN with the nearest NWS office.

I doubt we're going to have people breaking down the doors to become hams just because the telegraphy element is being eliminated. We may suffer on HF from some uneducated operators for awhile, but that will pass. Telegraphy or not, the hobby is just not attracting people anymore. That's the problem that needs solving--not this continual mindless banter back and forth about Morse vs. no-code and "dumbing" things down. Stop complaining and do something about it.

73 DE ROB K9NYO
FISTS #11684
"There's dust on my key, but I've got one"
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3EVL on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"...<<"because knowing how to send and receive morse code does not imply any skill in the operation of a radio transmitter...">>

ROAD APPLES!!!..."

I sense that you disagree with my statement - perhaps you could indicate where I may be in error so that I can re-evaluate my position; your initial response seems lacking in factual evidence and, as it stands, leaves me unconvinced that you do in fact have a valid counter argument.

 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W8VOM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Someone wrote..:.."Well.....It looks like the cry baby, lazy, gimme everything now, and don't make me work for it crowd got their way."
______________________________________

Well..look at it this way..Morse code was once required due to International law. Today..there is [no] international law requiring Morse code proficiency!!!

I love the code and passed at 13 wpm many years ago.The Navy no longer uses it,it is no longer an international requirement. Is Morse a useful mode? You bet it is!!! Should Morse proficiancy be [required] when it is no longer required by international law and ships at sea almost never use it? That is the QUESTION! The FCC says NO..it should no longer be REQUIRED. It should be and is an OPTION..I have been active in this debate for many years supporting the retention of Morse testing but when Morse proficiancy is no longer an international law should it still be [required]??? I would have been happy retaining the 5 wpm for HF access but my argument for retaining Morse proficiancy grows weaker each year!

Maintaining the Morse requirement is like holding a Wolf by the ears...some don't like it much but the old timers are afraid to let it go......W8VOM
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W4ABX on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This issue drew a little comment out of the ham community, huh?
If we could just get as many people to get out and vote by the same method, maybe we could really move ahead!
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by WQ6F on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N3EVL

"...I know a youngster who would like to have an Amateur Radio License. The problem is, he only wants to operate CW and is not interested in SSB or any of the digital modes and can't understand why he has to take a test concerned with all of these other modes. Well, I guess there's another youngster we've failed to enlist to the Service....ooops, I mean Hobby..."

>>>This is a silly comparison because...

It is perfectly reasonable to permit use of SSB, digital, etc without any prior knowledge of or proficiency in CW because knowing how to send and receive morse code does not imply any skill in the operation of a radio transmitter...

However, it would be most unwise to permit someone to operate an amateur radio transmitter in ANY mode without that person having demonstrated some basic knowlege of electronics, rf propagation, rf and electrical safety, and rules and regulations as we currently do in the written exams. In this sense, the written exams are not mode-specific but are in fact quite general and broad in scope.

This could have been explained to the hypothetical youngster who could then have made an informed decision on whether or not to proceed with his or her ham radio endeavors, CW-specifc or otherwise. <<<

You failed to capture the humorous sarcasm in my posting. You also failed to notice that I said the youngster saw no reason to be tested in any of the OTHER MODES. No inference was made that knowledge in Radio Operating practices, theory and familiarity with the rules and regulations was to be abandoned.

WQ6F

 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W7AIT on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
GREAT IDEA! Time has come to END CW requirements. Don't get me wrong, I operate about 90% CW and its a wonderful mode for dx, low noise, weak signal etc, but it is now a mode that is for **hobbists** only and has zero commercial need or use; the world has moved beyond CW and its obsolete. The requirement to know the code should be eliminated, it's time has come.

For those who say we need it as a filter to keep CB'ers off ham radio, I say to you "Stick in the Mud Old Farts", why not replace the CW requirement with the requirement for ALL operators to learn all BPSK code sets of a PSK31 sgnal and be proficeint at sending that by hand at testing time. Now how obsurd would that be?

Drop CW and lets move on!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AC0H on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<<"No inference was made that knowledge in Radio Operating practices, theory and familiarity with the rules and regulations was to be abandoned.">>

You didn't infer it but I'd be willing to bet there are more than a few slackers who'd like to get rid of or dumb down the theory tests also.

A poster further up the pile suggested it beacuse some 8-12 year olds we're having trouble with the Tech theory.

Mark my words.
This will not stop at CW proficiency, it's just the tip of the iceburg.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3EVL on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"...You failed to capture the humorous sarcasm in my posting. You also failed to notice that I said the youngster saw no reason to be tested in any of the OTHER MODES. No inference was made that knowledge in Radio Operating practices, theory and familiarity with the rules and regulations was to be abandoned..."

The sarcasm was not lost on me, I assure you. However, I stand by my previous comment since, to the best of my knowlegde, we only have two current forms of testing - one, for CW, that is, by definition, mode specific, and another, in the form of written technical exams that, IMHO, are mode-neutral. One could argue that your hypothetical candidate never was being tested on "The Other Modes."
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KF4VGV on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is a start of ham radio with the outcome of no license whatsoever! Look back on the days of licensed CB radios. The application to fill out for a "license" came in a box. Then the FCC did not want to mess with it anymore. No license required! How about this for starters? A Walmart 2 meter radio with a smiley face attached in the same section with the FRS radios for $39.95 :(
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3EVL on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"...Mark my words.
This will not stop at CW proficiency, it's just the tip of the iceburg..."

Why is this necessarilly so? What evidence do you have that this will in fact happen?

IMHO, it is NOT inevitable that there will be an automatic lowering of standards simply because one testing element is about to be dropped - the debate has certainly been long and intense and the FCC has, IMHO, made a good decision based on the facts before them.

The fact that there may be some advocates for lower technical standards does not mean that they will get their wish; it is entirely possible to support the FCC in this code-related instance but be strongly in support of maintaining appropriatly strong technical standards for the hobby.

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AC0H on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<<"The fact that there may be some advocates for lower technical standards does not mean that they will get their wish.">>

This is what a lot of us thought when killing the CW requirement first raised it's ugly head. You can literally teach a CHIMP 5wpm CW. If a chimp can learn 5wpm CW there are very few humans who can't, only the lazy or truly inpaired.

I've never had a problem calling a spade a spade when it comes to the CW requirement. People shrink from keeping the CW requirement when other people suggest it's being used as a "filter" for HF privi's. I say good, we need a filter to separate the wheat from the chaff. Those willing to give back to Ham Radio, their communities, or make technical contributions, and those who want to take what they can get.

I think Ham Radio would be a lot better off and we will have better operators when people are required to put in SOME effort, show a little dedication and gumption, to EARN a license and HF privi's, rather than having it given to them.

Oh....by the way.......as an ARRL VE and one who took the "old" theory tests to get licensed....the techinical standards have already begun to drop. Apparently the goal is the 5th grade level.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3JBH on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Oh my God ! Then end is near. well i at least see a buyers and sellers market. youll see those wyo say i am leaving radio selling my gear blah blah blah. and those who grab the great deals. sadly after all the dust has settled and crap gets done being flung. we all be happy campers agian. Folks take a chill pill ok there is merits to both sides of this topic. No one really lost anything.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AB0WR on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AC0H>
"...Mark my words.
This will not stop at CW proficiency, it's just the tip of the iceburg..."

N3EVL:
"Why is this necessarilly so? What evidence do you have that this will in fact happen?

IMHO, it is NOT inevitable that there will be an automatic lowering of standards simply because one testing element is about to be dropped - the debate has certainly been long and intense and the FCC has, IMHO, made a good decision based on the facts before them.

The fact that there may be some advocates for lower technical standards does not mean that they will get their wish; it is entirely possible to support the FCC in this code-related instance but be strongly in support of maintaining appropriatly strong technical standards for the hobby."


Read the FCC document for your evidence:

FCC: "Requests that written examinations be revised to test "improved technical and operating skills" or increased "technical level" are vague because there is no objective means to measure technical and operating skills"

Remember, this is the FCC saying that there is no objective means to measure technical and operating skills.

It won't take them long (I guess about another year) to seque this into eliminating testing for an amateur license.

This will be accompanied by a move to requiring use of type-accepted equipment and to implementing channelized operation on HF. It will probably be timed to happen in response to the ARRL proposal to move to bandwidth regulation. What better way to implement bandwidth regulation than through the use of type-accepted equipment and channelized operation? What better way to minimize FCC involvement in amateur regulation and interference mediation?

If you don't believe this is going to happen you aren't paying attention. Get on the internet and start looking up things like software defined radio, cognitive radio, noise temperature, and intensity of spectrum use - all things the FCC is interested in moving toward through regulation.

Oh, BTW, it would also move implementation of BPL that much closer to being a reality - something I'm sure the FCC will be very interested in.

tim ab0wr
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W2BSA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
One thing that most everyone in this thread hasn't recognized is the fact that the FCC is a regulatory agency. Because of that fact they are themselves regulated under a law that congress passed during the Reagan Administration, which simply put, states that ALL Federal regulatory agencies must perform their functions with a minimum amount of regulations.
The ITU has now left it to the individual administrations to decide whether morse code profiency is required for amateur radio licensure.
With the above facts in hand the FCC (and they state so in the NPRM) has removed the requirement for morse code testing because there is no regulatory reason to keep the requirement.
I think this was planned all along since they stated in their previous report and order when restructuring occurred that they were reducing the morse requirement to the lowest that could be construed to meet the radio regulations in force at that time.
Folks, the FCC is doing nothing more than following the law of the land by eliminating the morse requirement.

W2BSA
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3EVL on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AC0H:

I share your desire for a sound basis on which to test for and issue licences. However, if we persist in the belief that maintenance of a CW proficiency test is a valid substitute for properly considered tecnical testing criteria then there is more that is wrong with the hobby than mere erosion of standards!

If we truly need revised standards for entry into and progression through the various license levels, then by all means let's debate what they should be.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KD7KSQ on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Right of passage. And what is so wrong with rites of passage? Something maybe you don't enjoy at the time or had to work hard for, but you look back with a little bit of pride later on...that yes, you did endure that right of passage. Most professions have them in some form, state or national boards, entry level tasks (mainly to see if you can stick it out), etc.
So some see CW as archaic, or irrelevent. That tradition for traditions sake is foolish. Maybe. Some see a rite of passage as unnecessary or old school. Could be.
Have you ever listened to someone who has obviously practised for years with a straight key on the air? Snappy letters, excellent spacing, an almost musical rhythm that's a pleasure to listen to. We take pride in that, in using that archaic mode.
But obviously a keyboard is easier, hence better eh?
I'm all for continued progress, newer modes, better ways of doing things.
I'm also for keeping a certain rite of passage. You don't want to bother with that right of passage? Then you're certainly welcome to stay on VHF. But don't DEMAND that you have a right to work HF without putting in that little extra bit of work.
It may be that the FCC has already decided the issue and that it's a done deal. Maybe. And maybe there are great numbers of hams who don't want to give up that right of passage...AND THEY NEED TO FILE THEIR OPINIONS when the docket is opened up for comment, not just sit back and let it happen!!!
The FCC backed down in the 1970's when enough ham outrage was voiced against their restrictive 2 meter repeater rulings, and they reversed many of them. It can happen again. VOICE YOUR OPINION AGAINST THE DOCKET!!
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by AUSSTEVENEW on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Im amazed at the coldness from the "old dogs".
I havent gotten my tech yet. And to be honest im not very educated as to all that is out there. One of the things that is keeping me from my general class is the code. I dont want to learn the code. But I'm amazed at the lack of lets help the new guys. Instead its were lazy and all that. You wonder why the new guys shy away from staying in the hobby. well heres a good exaple.

Anyway thanks and lets keep it civil shall we
Steve
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Mark my words. This will not stop at CW proficiency,
> it's just the tip of the iceburg.

And marijuana leads to harder drugs, and first it was Cuba, next Viet Nam, then it'll be Mexico!

"The dominoes will fall!!!" (-Eisenhower)

"The sky is falling!!!" (-Chicken Little)
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by N1ZPP on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I'm OK with this and I think it's a step in the right direction toward breathing new life and excitement into the hobby.

Look at it from a logical standpoint ... CW is just a mode. Why then is it the only mode for which we require testing? Why not test on all modes? It doesn't make sense from a "logical" standpoint.

After the last commercial CW transmission occurred several years ago, there is not a single real-world benefit to demonstrating one's CW proficiency in order to obtain a license. What's the point?? Especially if that mode is not of interest to the applicant!!

For example, I passed my code test upon obtaining my first license in 1997. I started in this hobby as a "tech plus" right from the beginning. BUT, i've never made a single CW QSO. I'm now a General class operator, but I'm not interested in CW... it's a boring mode. The only reason I grabbed the code was simply to earn the respect of other hams ... aka, the old guys in my local radio club that would only think of this low ranking technician class operator as a "real ham" if I had code.

I suspect that a lot of younger hams (I'm 28, "young" by ham standards) would be and are interested in more technically exciting modes such as PSK31, simply due to the fact that us younger folk have grown up around computers and more complex technology.

Now... for you hams that think the hobby will die because of this: I think you're wrong. Take a look around! What's the average age of ham operators? 80? The hobby is dying right now, literally, and eliminating the CW requirement is a step in the right direction to bring in some younger energy and excitement.

Just because the CW requirement will be dropped doesn't signal the end of the "know code" movement. In fact, I think it gives validity and strength to the "know code" movement as a good solid basis for promoting and encouraging CW knowledge, despite the lack of a testing requirement. My basis for believing in "know code" is that CW is embedded in the spirit and history of ham radio, and by knowing code, operators are therefore honoring the spirit and history of the hobby.

So that's why I believe in both "know code" and dropping the CW testing requirement at the same time. Believing in both sides is not as much of a juxtaposition as everyone thinks. Actually, it makes sense and if everyone would view the situation in this manner, we would all be united in the direction of our beloved passtime.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W2BSA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Actually EXPRESS YOUR OPINIONS FOR THE DOCKET there is no reason for additional regulation, and that's all it is. NOONE IS EVEN SUGGESTING THAT CW IS GOING AWAY. Anyone who CHOOSES to use morse may continue to do so. In fact that's probably the biggest issue here, choice. What will happen is that a mandatory examination will go away and in it's place everyone will be able to CHOOSE whether they wish to use morse or not. I say, that this will make it better because those who bother to sit for any of the tests will hear it and DECIDE on their own to learn it and try it. They will not have to test to try it and I would hope that all of you naysayers out there would support those who CHOOSE to try morse code. This now makes morse code something that one will truely attempt for the pure joy of it and nothing else and I think that's GREAT.

73,

W2BSA
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3EVL on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"...Have you ever listened to someone who has obviously practised for years with a straight key on the air? Snappy letters, excellent spacing, an almost musical rhythm that's a pleasure to listen to. We take pride in that, in using that archaic mode..."

And how, exactly does this FCC NPRM diminish this in any way or prevent it from occuring in the future in the context of brand new operators? They're proposing removing a testing requirement, not the mode, not the tradition, not the magic of acually using it to communicate! Perhaps you feel CW has only survived this long BECAUSE we've tested for it? I do not hold the mode and its attraction and utility in such low esteem.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE4MOB on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Let's see.

They dropped the code from 20 wpm to removing it all together.

Now they want to expand phone spectrum at the expense of CW spectrum.

So what the FCC is saying is this:

"Not only do you not need to know CW anymore for a license, if you do like to operate CW, we're going to take away some of your exclusive spectrum and give it to voice operators."

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...

For some reason or another, certain organizations, federal entities and corporations have decided that CW (and its users) are the enemy of ham radio. So they will try to squash CW like a bug (pardon the pun).

You know, I see hams protesting the ARRL and it's sponsorship of Winlink. If what is being done to CW happened to SSB, there would be serious consequences.

But it doesn't matter, just as long as it's somebody else's problem, right?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> And what is so wrong with rites of passage?

I guess nothing if you're in to that whole "proving you're a man" thing, but I'm looking through Part 97.1 regarding the purpose of the amateur radio service and for the life of me can't find anything about rites of passage or proving worthy of amateru manhood.

> So some see CW as archaic, or irrelevent. That
> tradition for traditions sake is foolish. Maybe. Some
> see a rite of passage as unnecessary or old school.
> Could be.

Rites and traditions, pomp and circumstance, foolish, old school, yup, that's how I feel.

> But obviously a keyboard is easier, hence better eh?

Yup.

> But don't DEMAND that you have a right to work HF
> without putting in that little extra bit of work.

Sorry, but you don't demand that a your archaic rites need to be a part of a TECHINCAL radio service where ceremony doesn't belong. If I wanted that I'd join a religion.

> there are great numbers of hams who don't want to give
> up that right of passage

Yes, those tied to the "old ways", sort of like the Amish, In fact I'll refer to them as the hAmish.

Amateur radio is about "advancement of the radio art" (part 97.1.b). I think the section about "preserving ancient custums and rites" was dropped as I cannot locate it. The hAmish ways are passing.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE4MOB on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Amateur radio is about "advancement of the radio art" (part 97.1.b)"

Fine.

Your SSB mode is over 50 years old....out it goes.

So are your tubes...way too old.

So here's your new solid state software defined radio and keyboard. And a microphone for digital voice.

Happy now?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by G3SEA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

AI4JF states :

"There's not a lot of dispute that Morse does have unique utility in an emergency situation. It's possible to get a message through in conditions that would completely preclude voice communications. This is a compelling argument for learning Morse, and I'm sure that many people do so just for this reason "

He hit the nail on the head ! :)

Bearing in mind that Amateur radio exists for it's Public Service, this vital capability of CW in Emergency situations is invaluable.

A good CW op can overcome the somewhat painfully slow ' Voice' process of reading and rereading emergency traffic sentences.

KH6/G3SEA
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KD5FJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is Brava Sierra. The FCC in cahoots with the ARRL are...I can not say it in a publci forum without getting banned.

One part in particular that I find troubling is:
"We propose to amend our amateur service rules to eliminate the requirement
that individuals pass a telegraphy examination in order to qualify for any
amateur radio operator license. We believe that this proposal, if adopted,
would ... promote more efficient use of the radio spectrum currently
allocated to the amateur radio service."

It sounds like if the requirement is gone, our CW-only frequencies will soon
be gone, too - to make way for "more efficient use of the spectrum"

What the hell is more efficient than CW???????

The ARRL and FCC can go where they need an asbestos suit. It's beyond the point of disagreement. It's just plain stupidity.

The reason ham radio is declining is not that it is too "hard" [bless their little hearts...heck my 12 year old did it and is ready to pass GEN and code!!] to get a license, it is that the underlying EE knowledge is no longer a viable economic vocation due to offshoring. Ham radio is dying because of POLITICAL reasons such as offshoring thanks to the globalists in the DRat and RRat parties...NOT because it is too "hard" to get a license. Those who major in EE would be lucky to ever find a job in today's climate of outsourced jobs and insourced green card holders from India working at half the normal EE salary.

I can not write anymore, I'm outside myself. I am a member of FISTS [NEVER the ARRL!] and will fight this with every fiber of my being..

KD5FJE
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Your SSB mode is over 50 years old....out it goes.
> So are your tubes...way too old.
> So here's your new solid state software defined radio
> and keyboard. And a microphone for digital voice.
> Happy now?

I don't think anyone is saying "burn the past", we're just saying don't FORCE us to live in it.

I saw a mention that there were like something like 1,300 different modes, but morse is the only one that folks who use HF are required to know. And why? because a bunch of old folks attribute some sort of religious symbology to their keys? Because "it's always been done that way"? Because "if I had to do it you should have to do it"? None of which is logical, rational, or technical.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by WQ6F on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Let's step away from the code/no-code issue for a moment and look at the broader picture. Without being a naysayer or a purveyor of doom, I think we need to search for the little hints and nuances already available to us. I believe, as others have stated here, that this is just the beginning of the process to eliminate all requirements for amateur licensing. It is easier to take a nibble first, before taking the big bite. So first, eliminate the CW proficiency test. That will make it easier for the next big bite. Bigger bites have already been taken in countries other than the U.S. I agree with some others that we are heading for no licensing requirements, type testing, channelization, etc. I believe the manufacturers are preparing themselves for this probability. I was just looking at my FT-857 and 897 manuals and you will notice on the last page that these devices comply with Part 15 and cannot cause harmful interference and must accept any interference. I believe some other of the newer radios even have the Part 15 sticker affixed to the outer case.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N1ZPP on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Your SSB mode is over 50 years old....out it goes. "

I see your point, but it's based on an incorrect assumption: Dropping a testing requirement for CW isn't the same as "getting rid" of that mode. Not even close, but that's what you imply. The CW mode isn't going out!

In fact, you might be surprised to find growth in CW as a result of dropping the testing requirement. You want growth in this hobby, right?

Imagine this: A bunch of new operators come into HF, and after having some real exposure to it, become interested in CW. I'm willing to bet you'll see some very positive growth and interest in the mode. That scenario is good for all that chose to operate that mode.

Remember, CW is a mode. If we're going to test on a certain operating mode, why *that* mode?
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by AG4RQ on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The FCC is a Federal agency. Government is government. We are all duped into believing that we live in a free democratic society and that we have a voice in our government. We dont. Our government just wants us to think that we do. They do whatever they want, the people be damned.

The FCC must act according to protocol. Petitions for rule changes are submitted. Then comes a round of comments. Then the FCC issues a NPRM, and then another round of comments, and then the FCC makes a ruling. In reality, the FCC knew what it wanted to do. It just needed to humor the public and go through the motions.

If they could have dropped the code requirement in 1999, they would have. International treaty still mandated 5 wpm code proficiency for HF access, so the US government had to comply. Face it, it was the easiest thing for the FCC to do no changes except for an across-the-board elimination of code testing. Instead of beating their heads against the wall revamping the licensing structure, a mere revision in Part 97 takes care of all. No muss, no fuss. They could have told us what they were going to do back in 2003, but like I said, they needed to go through the motions and follow protocol to humor the public. This is typical of the Federal Government.

In my opinion, it would be as much of a waste of time and effort to submit my comments to the NPRM as it was to submit my comments on the 18 proposals and beat my head against the wall to help create the Radio Amateur Foundation Proposal. We dont have any say. The FCC is just going to go ahead and implement the change, just as they did with BPL.

I am strongly opposed to this action to erode and degrade licensing standards in amateur radio, but what will be will be, and what will be good enough for everybody else in this hobby will be good enough for me.

If anyone wants to comment on this post, don't expect a response or a debate from me. I read a few of the first comments, but I don't intend to read them all, and I certainly don't intend to get caught up in the code war any further. I won't be back to read anything further on this thread.

73 de Mark
AG4RQ
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> In fact, you might be surprised to find growth in CW as
> a result of dropping the testing requirement.

It might happen, but I think that will depend on how welcome no-coders are to HF. An alternate future is that code HF'ers cold-shoulder non-coders. If that happens then I don't think that will instill a lot of desire in no-coders to learn morse.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by GILLIAM_LINEBERRY_EX_N4VOX on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
With the prohibition of using CW on military frequencies and with the elimination of the treaty requirements there is no justification for testing one mode of communications unless you are going to make all take tests for all modes ie. slow scan tv, digital and others.

The FCC has already heard all of negatives with the filings that led to the NPRM.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by WA1RNE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This Proposal should be called "Finally, Dawn Shines on Marblehead."


The petitions filed by the CW die-hards are just amazing, yet good writing for comic relief:



Starting with Section 11:


11. Two petitions advocate eliminating telegraphy proficiency as a licensing prerequisite, but maintaining a role for it in the examination process.


The Speroni Petition proposes that we retain the requirement only for licensees desiring to communicate using Morse code.


>>> Why should CW be a "requirement"? Is SSB, SSTV, Digital or PSK a "requirement"?? No, they are just modes.

Scratch this bad boy......


The Rightsell- Kholer Petition suggests that Morse code proficiency be integrated into amateur radio testing by allowing those who demonstrate Morse code proficiency to receive credit toward the minimum passing score for their license examinations.


>> Why should anyone receive credit towards their license score for being proficient at operating a particular mode? Same argument as above; should we award test credits for the best PSK or SSB operators?

NOT....scratch this bad boy too.


Next is section 12:

12. Other petitioners request that we amend our rules to require Morse code testing only for the Amateur Extra Class operator license.


The Reich Petition argues that this requirement is needed for the most advanced and highest class of amateur radio operator license to "protect the future of CW and other future digital modes used in amateur radio." Reich also notes that removing the telegraphy examination only from the General Class examination requirements would not require significant changes in current amateur radio written examinations or examination study guides, thereby protecting publishers of amateur radio- related study material and textbooks.


>> Now this one is a real doozy: "to protect the future of CW and other future digital modes used in amateur radio."



What does eliminating CW from the LICENSING process have to do with protecting a mode??



Two other petitioners request that we increase the Amateur Extra Class operator license requirement for Morse code proficiency. They also ask that we that we maintain the present Morse code examination requirement for the General Class operator license.


>>>This one is just pure comedy:



In support of these requests, FISTS states that communicating using Morse code is the second- most popular operating activity in amateur radio and that Morse code is used by many amateur stations in numerous operating activities.

FISTS also argues that possessing the skill to send and receive Morse code at a higher speed

*** is imperative if an operator is to communicate effectively during an emergency situation because Morse- code skilled amateur radio operators can communicate using the code even when voice modes of communications fail,****

....and that proficiency in Morse code assists in developing technical skills, (???) and encourages construction and design of communications equipment.



>>> WHAT??? Imperative during emergencies?? If you hop in your backyard time machine and turn the dial back to 1947, maybe this was true. I'd love to hear some examples where CW was used with local government agencies during an emergency in the last 60 years. Bet FISTS can't come up with a single example.

"Assists in developing technical skills and encourages construction.....", bla , bla, bla....



Wow, how does CW do that??? We should follow this example and apply it to other areas of the hobby.

How will FISTS do that when they can't justify or explain this BS??? Looks like CW really stands for the "Cheap Wonder".



Is there any forms of protection in place today that guarantees certain modes will not be obsoleted over time? No, of course not! This is amateur radio, not the television broadcasting business.

The petition does not say CW is being outlawed, just not required to prove your abilities to communicate as a radio amateur.


CW was once a means of measuring this ability. That means ceased to exist about circa 1975.


If someone should get trapped in a tunnel and they need to communicate in an emergency, CW will come in handy....by rapping on a wall with a piece of granite.


73's,

WA1RNE
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N1ZPP on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"It might happen, but I think that will depend on how welcome no-coders are to HF. An alternate future is that code HF'ers cold-shoulder non-coders. If that happens then I don't think that will instill a lot of desire in no-coders to learn morse."

I agree! Of course, acting this way on the air toward fellow hams would be poor operating practice ... the very thing these CW-or-Die types are afraid of. IMHO, the lack of a CW testing requirement is NOT going to bring poor operating habits ... poor operating habits exhibited by those already on the bands would be taught by example to our new operators.

I hope that despite the opinions, all operators maintain a positive outlook and friendly demeanor on the air. If we start acting like idiots, that's exactly what we can expiect from everyone else. The way to prevent poor operating habits from "ruining HF" is to operate by example.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N7UQA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The CB'ers are coming!!!

Sheesh! this dropping of the code requirement can sure raise a ruckus. Guys, I came into the service when the "no code" license was introduced, then later did the 5, 13 and 20 wpm code tests. Back then the cry of "The CBer's are coming!" was shouted on the packet BBSes back then. I didn't bring a Sadelta echo master plus, Texas Star linear and Super Galaxy channelized 10 meter rig to the ham bands. The CB'ers were already there, all you had to do was listen to the bigots on 75,40 and 20 meters.

What makes you a good amateur radio operator is following the rules and regulations of the service, not having CW or other mode proficiency rammed down your throat. I am sad to see the CW requirement go but life goes on. I think this rule making is better than the ARRLs since Technicians will not be grand fathered to a general. The old Novice and Tech+ HF slots will serve well for these folks to get their feet wet on HF, especially on the next cycle.

Craig - N7UQA
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"We are all duped into believing that we live in a free democratic society..."

"...I am strongly opposed to this action to erode and degrade licensing standards"

I do enjoy the way you use freedom to argue in favor of mandatory code requirements. I find it so very contradictory. It brings a smile to my face.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WI7B on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

FCC-05-143 is proposes eliminating the telegraphy component from the requirements for an amateur radio operator's license. It specifically states it is not about eliminating CW from the Amateur Service.

CW is a digital mode of radio communication, using more bandwidth that PSK31 and less bandwidth than RTTY. Like all modes enjoyed by hams, it will be in use for decades to come. No mode in the 93-year history of licensed amateur radio has been eliminated from use unless spark gap is considered a separate mode and not a technique.

The Radio Act and regulations of 1912 had no code speed rate requirement for hams to receive full privileges below 200 meters. Regulations on code speed, or wpm, rates were added a decade later for the sole purpose of limiting the population of hams - not to increase either their technical or operating skills. It is useful to read the regulatory history of radio, from the Ship Acts of 1905 onwards to appreciate this phenomena.

I have full faith that those of us who like CW will continue to use it and teach its utility to every other ham. Whether CW use grows has little to do with how the government regulates the Amateur Service. The majority of people according to some surveys now study the code only enough to pass the VE exams, then never use it again. Dropping the requirement will have little effect on these hams.

The Amateur Service is what we make it. It's future is ours. I do not see the Amateur Service in decline, but perhaps some amateurs are in decline. We should help them understand the full potential for radio communication, with all its modes, in the 21st Century.

"Courtesy At All Times" & 73,

---* Ken
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE4MOB on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"I don't think anyone is saying "burn the past", we're just saying don't FORCE us to live in it."

But hams DO live in the past. Ham radio is an anachronism. We use SSB. We use RTTY. We use CW. The average age of our ranks are closer to 65 than 25.

Doesn't it seem odd that for 80 years we have had code test and gotten along fine? Now everybody is up in arms and that mean ol' CW is to blame. Horse hockey. Everybody's to blame.

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N4HRA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Dropping the code is a good idea BUT keep the 5WPM for the Extra Class.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"The average age of our ranks are closer to 65 than 25"

You're probably correct, and it's probably even older on HF... and you don't see a problem with that?

I don't know about you but I don't want to see amateur radio just "survive" as a hobby for old folks. ideally for this to be a "live" hobby the average age should more likely reflect the average age of the poplulation as a whole.

"Doesn't it seem odd that for 80 years we have had code
test and gotten along fine? Now everybody is up in arms
and that mean ol' CW is to blame."

No, for about 60 of those years it may have been an important mode. For the last 20 or so it was the retirees forcing an anachronistic mode on others as a price of entry. We're finally getting to a point where there are a large enough amount of hams (and would-be hams) who realize the irrationality of a code requirement to force long overdue changes.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KG6TCV on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
GENERAL COMMENT..
you are probably the exception, and use cw more than any other mode, I have alot of ham friends and when asked if they even use cw 98 out of 100 general, extra & advanced class opperators DO NOT USE CW.
if all the CW nazi out there are so pro CW why don't they help others to learn CW. with a mentality because i did you should, I think you should as well, that is teach morse code, help when asked, encourge the ham wanting to learn, All I hear is a lot of hot air and resentment from the cw nazi's.
What I do not hear is "how can I help", "I'll teach you", "when do you want to start",
O'Yea, if you are not part of the Solution then Your part of the Problem, OK now smile and help someone, be part of the Solution
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by AA4TY on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Well it looks like if all of the U.S. Amateur radio operators don't get our act together we will have a "CB" cussin club all across this great country of ours. I think the FCC is trying to discourage the Few of us "CW" operators that is left to just sit back and leave the driving to the Federal Government. I WORKED HARD as well as a LOT of "CW" operators has in the past to earn our RIGHT to "CW" and a WELL Earned one at that. I wonder what type a communications we would have today if it hadn't been for our forefathers that founded this MODE of communications that has a group of ELITE people today that STILL use it today as a very Efficent and effective means of communications thru out our small Globe. I think "CW" gives a person a challenge to be the VERY BEST Amateur Radio Operator as a United States Citizen does to any American.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K7NNG on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
STEP BACK, TAKE A BREATH GUYS.....NOW, THINK....THIS IS WHAT THE ARRL MEMBERSHIP DID TO YOU. YOU GUYS NEED TO RESIGN FROM THAT OUTFIT RIGHT NOW.....
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K3WACKY on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KG6TCV.....you are soooo right! The CW hardliners are trying to shove CW down everyone's throat and I'm sick of it. Have some CW questions (like what are the characters for SOS?) on the tests like they do for FM, SSB and other modes, but don't put it up as a roadblock for people to get licenses. I've tried learning code every since I got my no-code the year it came out, and I still can't get past the harder characters. I've tried for over 10 years.....if they didn't come out with the no-code tech license I would have never followed my father into ham radio. He learned the code, but it was a struggle for him too in the 50's or 60's! When they made 5wpm across all licenses, that's when he upgraded his license to general. CW is just another mode like SSB or FM, or PSK...etc. Yeah, CW can get through when there is a lot of QRM...but those people that need CW in such extreme emergencies are trained for that already.

If I want to learn CW, I'll do it if I'm interested in it as if it were another mode, not because some stupid rule drags me kicking and screaming to learn it.

I've already spent enough money on tapes and CD's with different ways to learn the damn code!

The only reason at this point I'd learn CW is to find out what beacons I hear on 6 meters when the band is open!

I'd like to re-test some of those old timers on theory and operating procedures because when I listen on HF, those 20wpm guys sure sound like they forgot a lot about courtesy and moving more than 2KC away from another group!

~fuming at the stupidity of others~
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K3WACKY on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
And I agree on the other posts

Keep 5WPM for the Extra Class.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W8VOM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The ARRL opened Pandora's box buy proposing that the 5 wpm be eliminated for the General license! [That] got the FCC [thinking]! The FCC thought...well..if they are "willing" to no longer require code for the General ticket,would it not just be easier to eliminate the code requirement across the board???

Thank's ARRL...I wrote to you on this a long time ago and TOLD you this idea would backfire and it DID!

The ARRL tried to compromise out of [fear]and sent the FCC a clear message that the code reqirement could be trashed at the General level. Hey ARRL,your little gamble did not turn out the way you thought it would...The ARRL needs restructuring not the Amateur Service!....W8VOM

 
Today CW, Tomorrow Band Plan  
by K7LA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
With all respects to both sides of the question, I believe that when CW is removed as a requirement the next step will be a full frontal assault on the CW frequency allocation in the band plans. That would be sad, in my opinion.

7 3 de K7LA Jim
ARRL VE
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KG6AMW on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Much ado about nothing. If you like cw, use it. Didn't take long for the nut cases to come out and start raving about the ARRL.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KD5LDW on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
For the people in favor of keeping Morse code it will not be the end of the world as you might think! Consider this you do not have to know how to drive a standard transmission to obtain a drivers license , you do not have to understand computer programming to use a computer . There are many things analogies one could draw from . The bottom line it did not turn out like you wanted so lets all get mad & throw a big tantrum ! I am a NO-code tech & have been for more than 5 years will I get my General ticket ? Yes I will . Now will any of you OLD CODED GODS talk to me I doubt it . The Truth Is a tad bit hard to take at times . This debate will go on forever ,Yall fight it out in the end No Coders 1 , Coded 0 . end of game. LOL KD5LDW@yahoo.com
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KM4VR on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Once the code requirements are lifted, does that mean all tech licenses will have the "tech plus" HF privs (CW on 80, 40, and 15 and phone & CW on 10)?

Or are current tech plus licensees going to lose their HF allocation?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KV9R on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I just don't see why all the CW people have a
problem with dropping the code requirement
after all you will never see any of them in the
code segment of the band where you operate 100%
of the time RIGHT...
I've been a ham for almost 50 years...
Ham radio gave me a good start in life.
But it wasn't just CW it was all the other things
meeting people, the excitement of dxing,
experimenting, building, designing and most
of all learning something new every day..

CW won't go away although it may fade in the QSB
from time to time :)
Dyan...
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KB7ZFB on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
As one of the early No-Code Techs, I passed my exams after studying with friends the old fashioned way - learning the terminology and understanding the theory. I always respected the classes of licenses, and the need for CW for HF privileges. I felt like I was part of something, but knew I had to prove myself before running with the big dogs on the HF bands.

I got through this and made many friends and encouraged others into the hobby despite the people that moaned about those days as being the "end of the hobby" or the day the "CB'ers" would take over. I waited patiently for people to toss their equipment in the trash like they said they would, but I never found anything.

Years later, friends who had gone the original Novice/Tech/5WPM route were upgrading to Extra by taking only two written tests when the requirements changed. I was busy with other things in my life (military, school, work, etc.) and put off the upgrades. I have since found a renewed interest in 6M and HF, and even broke down and started working on a mobile HF setup, after struggling with several lousy QTH's for home stations. I have now planned to upgrade and will still do so before any requirements change again. It wouldn't feel right to upgrade without the code.

Ultimately, I did what was required at the time to get licensed, as my friends did.

I happen to believe that 5WPM is not a huge burden to getting licensed or upgrading, and that at least learning the characters being able to copy should be required - it is a part of the hobby. At the same time, I wish those that were proud of their CW and DX'ing abilities would show them off on the air rather than put down anyone who enters the hobby after the rules change. Talk about killing the hobby - why would anyone want to join in the hobby if they were automatically treated with so much disrespect? What happened to Elmers and welcoming new people and showing them the ropes?

Personally, I don't see a need to change the 5WPM requirement, but I really don't see it affecting things that much either. Those who find out about the hobby and are geniunely interested will do what it takes to get their ticket, and those that are of the CB mentality will get on the air with or without a license.

Good luck buying all that (already overpriced) equipment on eBay... I'm sure the dreaded newcomers will be buying their "10 Meter" rigs at truckstops anyway, complete with echo mics and roger beeps.


73's
Jim, KB7ZFB
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by N6JSX on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
When this happens:

Does this mean that NO one can ID using Morse code since no one will be required to be proficency tested?

The OO program no longer will monitor CW?

Does this mean NO more CW repeater ID's?
(actually the FCC corrupted this logic when they went to no-code allowing no-coder's to be repeater licesee's allowing them to use CW ID with proven Morse NO proficeny or knoweledge requirement and then when 5 WPM became the new law all ID'ing should have been restricted to max 5 WPM [as this is the max required for OO monitoring])

Does this mean no more SAT/SSTV/etc. CW ID'ing? How will the FCC handle SATs?

For some period CW will continue/grandfathered (in hopes all CW'ers soon croak) - but how will those operating CW know who is and who ain't allowed to CW - beyond the obvious sloppy/no fist?

This means that the CW bands will no longer needed - as there will be no CW to our license? PArt of this proposal is miising - the realocation of spectrum making all the CW bands into VOICE bands. Bot will this tick off the Canadains when all of 40m becomes VOICE - no more exclusive 40m area.

Beware of what you no-coder's want there are reprocutions that will make life miserable (as we know it today) - all these changes in such a short time period to HAMdom just for lazy HAMs and to increase the profits of the Big 3 and the ARRL HQ.

Any bets the FCC will eventually take our CW spectrum to auction off?

Hell lets just go to a single old fashion CB license - that you mail order. Yes, HAMdom is slowly dying and here is another cause.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KD5FJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I love the supposedly adult whiners on here complaining about how "hard" it is and what a "roadblaock" it is to require CW, and even resort to calling CW folks nazis and "old-timers."
Tell that to all the 10 and 12 year olds who have done it. What does that make you guys? Try professional crybabies.

I won't be back on this thread. I thought my fellow hams were more intelligent than this, and more interested in preserving CW, a viable and important part of ham radio and ham radio history.

Ham radio is dying alright, and hams and the ARRL are what is killing it, not the CW requirement.

The "roadblack" argument is all Bravo Sierra and has no basis in fact. It is just a convenient argument for those too stupid or too lazy or too unmotivated to want the privedge bad enough to work for it.

73

Have fun with what you've wrought upon us.

 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KE4ZHN on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
While it doesnt really surprise me that the FCC took the easy way out, its sad that they didnt even keep the 5wpm for an extra. How many would be willing to bet that as soon as the code goes away forever there will be a bunch of cry babies lobbying for total removal of all the written exams next? This is the new American way, if something is too hard to achieve, whine, cry and petition the government to death until they cave in to the lazy asses who arent willing to put any effort into getting something they want. Its happening in all phases of society including our schools. Here in Florida a bunch of whiners nagged the school system to death because their kids couldnt pass the FCAT exams. Perhaps if they would bother to make their children sit down and actually TRY to learn their test material, instead of watching idiotic sitcoms on TV, or standing on some street corner doing drugs with their "homies" they would be able to pass the tests?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by GILLIAM_LINEBERRY_EX_N4VOX on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
the worst violators on the ham bands have all passed 13 and most of them 20 wpm cw tests. The 40 and 80 meter bands are just as bad a 11 meter operators.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N1ZPP on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N6JSX ... I'm not sure if you were kidding or not, but CW isn't going anywhere.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by GILLIAM_LINEBERRY_EX_N4VOX on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
you ask about morse ID after element 1 is eliminated. CW ID is permitted on public safety and commercial stations where there has never been a CW requirment. You are trying to mix apples and oranges.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by THERAGE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
this is sad. tisk tisk.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W5EEX on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Probably should read the fine print in the NPRM.....the catch is CW is no longer required, but there will be a new requirement to decode BPL signals by human ear and brain power......The reason: That's what's going to be on the frequencies where we once heard CW and SSB QSO's......thanks to the FCC's brainpower.
73
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Looks like the ARRL restructuring scheme backfired on them....the FCC wants to completely eliminate the CW requirement...thus eliminating the HF bands as we know them....say goodbye to "73 my friend" and hello to "10-4 Good Buddy"...all thanks to the ARRL
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by GILLIAM_LINEBERRY_EX_N4VOX on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Lets see. The ARRL filed a petition in this matter asking that 5 WPM be kept as a requirment for Extra Class. So all of you anti-league people will now join up and pay your dues since they did not ask for elimination of CW test.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by X-WB1AUW on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Anyone else think that comments should go to the FCC?

What has endless nattery on eHam accomplished?

Bob
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WB8WKA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KD5DFM responded to:
>>That is wonderful. The FCC has finally seen reason
>>regarding this archaic requirement.

>and push ups and camping should be dropped form basic
>training .

Interesting analogy. Too bad it is not accurate. If we had true entry requirements, they would be relevent. Like for example, how to read a schematic, solder, design a circuit, program DSP algorithms, lay out PCB's, etc etc.

I think maybe the solution is to kill everyone that can't demonstrate 20+wpm proficiency
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W8VOM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Someone wrote:.."Lets see. The ARRL filed a petition in this matter asking that 5 WPM be kept as a requirment for Extra Class. So all of you anti-league people will now join up and pay your dues since they did not ask for elimination of CW test."

True..but they the ARRL [also]were willing to compromise and no longer require Morse testing for the General class! That willingness to compromise at the General level sent a message to the FCC! The ARRL was willing to eliminate Morse [except] at the Extra class level. The FCC is wise enough to see that this would create a "Glass Ceiling". People who [claim] they can't learn the code would be stuck forever at the Codeless General level! The FCC does not want to revisit this problem again 5 years from now. Thus they choose to eliminate Morse testing all together!

The ARRL should have faught to [retain] Morse testing at the General level. If one cannot learn 5 wpm for the General ticket,how can they learn 5 wpm for the Extra? All retention of 5 wpm at the Extra level would have done is hold back the crowds for 5 more years at best. The crybabies would complain about the Extra Class Glass Ceiling and in the end...Morse testing would be struk down anyway for the Extra class ticket! We cant see the future but the FCC is tired of this issue and they want us to move on....It would have been better for the ARRL to support Morse testing for [all] HF access,not just for the Extra class. Morse testing either has merit or it does not..the ARRL tried to have it both ways thus watering down their argument....W8VOM
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WB8WKA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
X-WB1AUW asked:

>What has endless nattery on eHam accomplished?

Give bitter old men without a life something to argue about?
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KF4VGV on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ, said it best...

"We're disappointed that the Commission prefers to deny an opportunity to give Amateur Radio the restructuring it needs for the 21st century," he said. "It appears that the Commission is taking the easy road, but the easy road is seldom the right road."

and my thought..."It's the long and winding road of deregulation for ham radio" Rick
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE4MOB on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I said: "The average age of our ranks are closer to 65 than 25"

KC2NJE replied: "You're probably correct, and it's probably even older on HF... and you don't see a problem with that?"

My response: Yes, that's a problem. But the removal of the CW requirement (and the continued assault on CW) is not going to make the problem go away. I suspect (and I think this will proven in the next 20 years) that even if you remove all forms of testing, ham radio won't be able to retain operators.

Why? Nobody uses radio anymore. Kids carry around their I-Pods to listen to music. They chat on their Instant Messenger or cellphone.

The continual shifting of the ham licensing structure is much like putting lipstick on a pig. No matter how much make up you use...you still have a pig.

Until we can foster a fundamental curiosity about radio in general...we're doomed, CW requirement or not.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"My response: Yes, that's a problem. But the removal of the CW requirement (and the continued assault on CW) is not going to make the problem go away."

Not by itself. I see the old timers hanging on to the archaic morse requirement more as a symptom of an attitude which keeps many young people away.

"Until we can foster a fundamental curiosity about radio in general...we're doomed"

I agree. And it should be about curiosity about radio, and learning, and technology, and possibilities, not about ancient rites of passage and irrelevant requirements

The attitude that code reflects is of elitism based on worship of the "old ways". THAT is not attractive to most young people, especially technology minded youth who are accustomed to the computer world where intelligence, knowledge and accomplishments are important not religion.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by URBANGORILLA on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
According to KC2NJE, "...I think that will depend on how welcome no-coders are to HF. An alternate future is that code HF'ers cold-shoulder non-coders."

Oh! You're so right! I've been compiling a list of arrogant obnoxious pseudo-hams that have pure contempt for CW. After reading your 9 posts to this thread, I added your call to the list. I will not only give you the cold shoulder on the bands, I will never acknowledge you when you call me or return a call to my CQ. That goes for every one of you on my list. You have your nerve to spout off like you do. You're not even licensed for 10 months, yet you know what's best for the future of ham radio. It is obvious that you jumped on the ham bandwagon after you saw that there was a good possibility that the code test would be thrown out. You're obviously a CBER that wants to legally "shoot skip" on HF while legally "pushing power". Now you can legally use that 2950 on 10. Don't forget to use the roger beep, good buddy.

Without CW, its only CB. You're no ham. Shame on the Friendly Candy Company for caving in to your ilk.

73
UG


 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WB5HZE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Nothing has been decided, nor will it be until the FCC issues a R&O following the NPRM. The line between code & no-code has been drawn for years, & the side that submits the most substantive and compelling comments will probably win the day.

I agree that this nattering accomplishes nothing at all.

73 . . . Ron WB5HZE (Pro-Code for Extra Class)
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KX2P on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is worse than sad. I started to write a long explanation about why I feel that way, but it all seems so self evident. What's motivating these proposed changes? Really, can someone help me out here? Maybe I've gotten too old. But why are they so determined to rip the guts out of ham radio? Why does the government give a hoot about his anyway? Why do they yet again want to lower the standards of admission into the ham ranks? To attract or gain what? I've been a ham for 45 years and it's something I've always been exceptionally proud of. Maybe that's my problem with this.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
W8VOM said "but they the ARRL [also]were willing to compromise and no longer require Morse testing for the General class! That willingness to compromise at the General level sent a message to the FCC!"

This is EXACTLY what happened...and this is EXACTLY why every pro-code ham should cancel their ARRL membership...

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W1RFI on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> say goodbye to "73 my friend" and hello to "10-4
> Good Buddy"...all thanks to the ARRL

Do you think that if the ARRL had not filed its restructuring petition the FCC would have ignored all of the other petitions for rulemaking asking that code testing be eliminated and not brougth this issue up on their own?

The FCC is doing what it said it was going to do. In the last restructuring, the FCC said that the only reason it was retaining the code test was because the international treaty required it.

I realize you look to blame ARRL for everything in life, Anon, but IMHO, this initiative comes from the FCC and once they set out to do something, they do it.

Ed Hare, W1RFI
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC8VWM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I would sooner work for my upgrade. What achievements have I accomplished in life if everything is merely handed over to me? I have yet to get anything in life of any value this way in the past and I don't intend on starting now.

I feel they should at least keep the CW requirement for the Extra portion. That is, if "Extra" is even going to exist.

Let me be clear, I am currently licensed as a No Code Tech. I have to respectfully stand on the side of the many who have "worked for their ticket" and are in favor of preserving some of these long standing traditions in Amateur Radio. Personally, I wouldn't want access to HF any other way.

It's their proverbial CW sandbox to play in. So, who am I to come along and change the rules in the middle of their game.

Keep your free ticket, I don't want one if I cant earn it. What real value does anything given away for "free" have anyways?

I would actually feel embarrassed to even use HF if it was based on the idea of freeloading a free ride.

--... ...--

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

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

"No Code Tech"
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W8VOM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hmmmm..who was the first to file a restructuring petition that [removed] Morse testing at the General level? Was it "all those other groups" or was it the ARRL? Again..either Morse testing for HF access has merit or it does not! The ARRL saw no merit in retaining Morse testing at the General level and the FCC saw no merit in retaining Morse testing at the Extra level other than to protect turf!!!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WB4QNG on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The death for learning CW was delt when the world radio conference said it was no longer needed. Did the ARRL have anything to do with it no. I don't even think the FCC has a lot to do with it. They are just catching up with the rest of the world. I didn't think code should have been droped from 13 to 5 and sure didn't think they should have droped the Extra to 5 but they did and that is life. Will things change I doubt it. You will have an inital increase of people upgrading and then it will be over. Will it increase the number of people getting into the hobby I doubt it. Most people come in as Tech's anyway and there was no code for that. It might keep a few more interested longer. I don't know. Like I said I don't like it but that is life. Accept it and learn to live with it because that is the way it is going to be. I just hope ham radio will be here another 30 years.
Terry
WB4QNG
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"I will not only give you the cold shoulder on the bands, I will never acknowledge you when you call me or return a call to my CQ. That goes for every one of you on my list."

and that my friends is so representative of the elitist, old-guard attitude that turns potential hams off. Suprisingly I don't think I'll miss you not talking to me.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K0RFD on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I sort of agree with Ed, but actually I think it's simpler than that. I think the FCC wasn't responding to much of anything other than the changes in Article 25. Not the ARRL petition, not the No code international petition, not the NCVEC petition, none of them. That's what they said, and I tend to believe them.

It's pretty hard for any agency to justify government regulations that have no driver in law or treaty. When Article 25 changed, there went the driver. To the bureaucracy, less is more.

Sort of sad to see it go, but as an Extra Lite, lt's not exactly like I crawled 20 miles on my hands and knees in the snow uphill both ways to take a test from Atilla the Hun at the FCC office.

I think anyone who wants to complain about the "dumbing down" of Ham Radio ought to submit questions for the exam pools. I really think the General theory exam needs work. Needs to be beefed up in the area of basic HF operating skills. At least the Canadian exam asks questions about things you encounter in normal operating like international phonetics, the US exam doesn't, except to acknowledge that they exist.

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WA1RNE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The escapee from the zoo says:


"I will not only give you the cold shoulder on the bands, I will never acknowledge you when you call me or return a call to my CQ."


>>>> You don't seem to have a call sign so we'll never know anyway.


"That goes for every one of you on my list. You have your nerve to spout off like you do. You're not even licensed for 10 months, yet you know what's best for the future of ham radio."


>>>> For all we know, you're not licensed at all. Care to "spout off" with a call sign??



"It is obvious that you jumped on the ham bandwagon after you saw that there was a good possibility that the code test would be thrown out. You're obviously a CBER......."



>>> At least the ex-CB'ers turned hams are man or woman enough to admit it - and for good reason. Many are very knowledgable hams who became interested in radio by getting involved in the CB radio boom in the 60's and 70's. Who cares how they got here, as long as they are making a contribution and helping others.


I've been on the air for over 32 years and attained 28 WPM running traffic nets during the 70's. So, big deal, that was 30 years ago. Things have changed and it's time to move on and advance the art.




KC2NJE may have only 10 months under his belt but he has it right. This "elitist CW nation or bust" crap is arrogant and is exactly the attitude that is turning young people off.


It's your choice: Be a die-hard CW-Elitist and watch the next generation of would-be amateurs flock to the Internet. In 10 years kids will be saying, "What the heck is a HAM-Operator?"


......or we can get with the program and get over this "CW makes a better ham" thing, and make HR more appealing without the "old-way or the highway mindset."


WA1RNE
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Guess the biggest blow is to the ARRL -- it has to be a pretty big slap in their face to have every one of its recommendations blown off...

Buts its as much the ARRLs fault as anyones -- they have tried to play all three sides of the fence for so long that everyone has lost respect for them...

Good organization for technical things but no longer a political player to be reckoned with...



 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Guess the biggest blow is to the ARRL -- it has to be a pretty big slap in their face to have every one of its recommendations blown off...

Buts its as much the ARRLs fault as anyones -- they have tried to play all three sides of the fence for so long that everyone has lost respect for them...

Good organization for technical things but no longer a political player to be reckoned with...



 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Guess the biggest blow is to the ARRL -- it has to be a pretty big slap in their face to have every one of its recommendations blown off...

Buts its as much the ARRLs fault as anyones -- they have tried to play all three sides of the fence for so long that everyone has lost respect for them...

Good organization for technical things but no longer a political player to be reckoned with...



 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W8VOM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"The death for learning CW was delt when the world radio conference said it was no longer needed."

Yup..that was the death nail and we all knew change would come. Do we have to follow the WRC? No..we could still require Morse testing for HF access but would that be fair to USA amateurs? Nope..when the majority of other nations do not requre Morse testing for HF access,it would be unfair for us to require it of our fellow Americans. The Die was cast long ago,I would have preferred Morse retention at the General level but I had my doubts that the FCC would retain it at any level. Sure the ARRL could have asked for full retention as opposed to retention only at the Extra level but in all truth...I believe the FCC just wants to turn a page in history. I can accept this change..so it is written so it shall be done.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W5AU on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Looks like the FCC is punishing the ARRL for being such a pain in their butt over the BPL Problems. It is a shame that we have to get caught in the cross fire. I feel very strongly that this is just the beginning of the end for Ham Radio as we know it. "The Old Man" probably turned over in his grave 4 or 5 times on this one. It is a real shame to see Amateur Radio desecrated this way. I will make my comments to retain CW, but the FCC will do what they "Damn well please", just as they have done on the BPL issue. CW is a tradition and skill that should not be allowed to die!

Best 73,
Troy
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE4MOB on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Be a die-hard CW-Elitist and watch the next generation of would-be amateurs flock to the Internet."

I got news for you. The last TWO generations have already flocked to the Internet.

Here's a question:

Which is more likely to happen: you tell a person you're a ham radio operator. Their response is:

A) "Ham radio? What's that?"

-or-

B) "You know, I always wanted to be a ham, but could never pass the code."

I'd bet A makes up the vast majority of responses, which makes the whole question of CW testing moot.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K8WTR on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Bravo! This is long overdue.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC2NJE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Which is more likely to happen: you tell a person you're a ham radio operator."

Iterstingly enough when I would tell my friends I got a ham license the response I received most was along the lines of "why would you do that? Isn't that just a bunch of old curmudgeons talking about the old days on the radio?"

I have to go on and tell them that it's just a small part of it and that there is cool technology and new and exiting developments, and you can use it to help with public service, and all the other things that amateur radio is really about.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by N3DRK on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The next thing to go, and it will happen, is the elimination of all examinations. Amateur Radio as we have known it has seen it's best days. The day is coming when anyone will fill out an application, pay twenty bucks, and wait for the license in the mail.

I can hear the 10-4 Good Buddy, what is your handle, I am destinated occasionally but it will become more common soon.

I am glad the FCC has decided to drop the 5wpm for the "extra class". What is so "extra" about it? The league wanted to retain that level of "code profiency" for that class which is just plain silly. Drop the code requirement altogether and get it over with. I do not understand why dave sumner is "dismayed" why the FCC would not retain that level of code requirement for the "extra class". If Sumner thinks that 5wpm is such a great idea for the most advanced and highest technical achievement the extra class is supposed to be, then Sumner needs to go to a clinic and receive electric shock treatment.

I guess the next thing the League will do is to have half of QST printed in Spanish.

Pull the plug on morse code, forget those examinations, give away ham radio licenses for 20 bucks each. The league would be happy to see an increase in their membership but those publications are not going to sell since they are way too technical for the new members that will be coming on board with this latest by the FCC and leadership of Sumner.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K3UD on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Since 1997 the ARRL has twice tried to interest the FCC concerning the modernizing of the basic license structure and privileges, but they have failed both times.

All of the problems associated with the license classes, privileges, the so called VHF wasteland from which few ever escape to HF, the dropout rate, the inactivity rate, and the slow decline in the numbers seems to have been ignored by the FCC. It is making the ARRL look a bit impotent. What does this mean the the ARRl's regulation by bandwidth proposal that the directors just voted on? Does it get sent to the FCC for a possible strike three or is it wiser to give it a rest for awhile?

So what should we do?
I hope that the Techs take the time to learn what is required to get the General and perhaps the Extra now that the expected grandfathering seems to be out of the question. One wonders why the FCC did not address the licensing issues except that it might be possible that they address it in another NPRM.

The big question:

Will eliminating the code requirement actually stop the erosion, foster more license upgrades and attract new people? Another question might be; will it help increase ARRL membership?

The playing field is changing, into what, we do not yet know.


73
George
K3UD
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WA1RNE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!


<<< Which is more likely to happen: you tell a person you're a ham radio operator. Their response is:

A) "Ham radio? What's that?"

-or-

B) "You know, I always wanted to be a ham, but could never pass the code."

I'd bet A makes up the vast majority of responses, which makes the whole question of CW testing moot.



>>>> I bet it depends on who you ask. If you ask a 12-17 year old I would answer "A".


Or it could be "C", for all age groups, "I always wanted to be a ham but became turned off by the old-way or no way attitude."


Steve, it's a damn shame that some within the Ham Radio community are willing to chance turning away people who may have great potential just to maintain the 98 year old status quo.

That doesn't mean the written tests should not be a challenge, just not necessarily with CW as part of the process.

This isn't professional baseball where you play hardball or else you don't play the game. We have the ability to make a choice that will likely result in innovation over the long term.

Ensuring CW is part of the licensing process at all costs until the year 2050 isn't going to drive innovation - except maybe into the ground........


WA1RNE


 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W8DPC on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"We hams need to start organizing petitions NOW! We need to voice our displeasure at this most singularly pivitol decision. WE need to make this decision, NOT the ARRL, NOT the FCC! "

Well, here's the deal: If enough amateurs come forward and complain, then it won't happen. We have what, over 600,000 amateurs in the U.S.? Let's see how many of them step forward and complain. My guess would be a few hundred. Let's go crazy and say that 60,000 hams voice their opinion and tell the FCC why the CW requirement should stay.

That would make about 10% of the ham community being against this. Is 10% of the ham community the majority? It would take over 300,000 hams to voice opposition against this for the FCC to even take notice.

Is that going to happen?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC8VWM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
July 20, 1969 the first man walked on the moon during the Apollo 11 mission.

Ironically, on that same exact date 35 years later the FCC releases it's proposal to drop CW as a testing requirement.

I conclude:

"One small step involving CW, one giant leap for no code techs"


--... ...--

-.- -.-. ---.. ...- .-- --
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K0MU on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
We are all hams. I invite all to join me on 14.020 MHz instead of discussing this on the internet.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W8VOM on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KX8N Wrote:"We hams need to start organizing petitions NOW! We need to voice our displeasure at this most singularly pivitol decision. WE need to make this decision, NOT the ARRL, NOT the FCC! "

Yeah..another petition! One question..if it is a petition to retain Morse testing and you want [all] amateurs to sign this petition..what level do you want to retain Morse testing at..the General or Extra?
We gotsta know..Generals may want to retain Morse at 5 wpm for their license too!!!

Never mind..The Extra's have more than enough people to show the FCC who the real boss is right?

Good Luck...I think I will pass on the petition idea.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K2LES on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
So long CW. About time you finally died!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N0TONE on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
To those who were waiting for this to happen before they tested: I personally welcome you to the ranks of ham radio. If you become a no-code Extra, then you have done what many of us have done - take the most demanding test available.

We all know that the license is only an entry ticket to ham radio. Almost all of us were pretty stupid that day we took the test. Only many years of practice on the bands later gave us any genuinely useful knowledge. You newcomers will go through the same process; you'll get licensed, and after that you'll start the real learning. Come on in, the water's fine and every ham who is worthy of the name will welcome you and treat you like a brother or sister. Those who shun you deserve to lose their license on the grounds that they are not behaving like worthy members of a fraternity.

AM
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AC0H on July 21, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<<"Not by itself. I see the old timers hanging on to the archaic morse requirement more as a symptom of an attitude which keeps many young people away.">>

WHAT AN UN-ADULTERATED PILE OF CRAP!!!

It's the young people who're interested in learning CW. The people who want to get rid of it seem to be the "reformed" CBers, or the 30 something computer geeks who're trying to turn Ham RADIO into some farcical approximation of the internet.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5DFM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>NOT KD4DFM's childish 5 or 6 post long ranting. Grow >up please. Sincerely,
>KI4GYT

to be perfectly frank ward cleaver , i not only accomplish my code and general but basic training and many other accomplishments and hope to do more . but I'm glad i did the hard way not Wait till it got easy , if i can do it you can also , you grow up . or just give me your ticket and ill give you your upgrade but I'm glad i EARNED MINE . john kd5dfm
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5DFM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>JUST SAY WHAT IT REALLY IS, YOUR MAD BECAUSE YOU HAD >TO DO THE CODE AND NOW PEOPLE WON'T AND YOU FEEL IT >ISN'T FAIR. kc5fog

let me shine a light house for ya foggy , ;-) , your right I'm mad that i earned what i got and all the other accomplishments i have . ;-) like repelling down a rope and climbing walls , BTW i use to be in CB also , i liked it and use to think just lie you till i tired to do Morse code cause i had to and found that i got a kick out of it . don't like it great theres other stuff in ham radio , i didn't care for repelling but i can say i did it and can do it and know how like the other stuff in basic training .Something you I'm sure cant say ;-) kd5dfm John
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5DFM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>I know a youngster who would like to have an Amateur >Radio License. The problem is, he only wants to >operate CW.

i know a youngster who is proficient in profanity and want to be a cber unfortunately he cant understand why all the cber's have gone to amature radio now that the code is gone ????
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5DFM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> A Walmart 2 meter radio with a smiley face attached >in the same section with the FRS radios for $39.95 :(

yes lol , and a sign that says look for the falling requirements ;-)
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5DFM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
wb8wak said kd5dfm siad
>and push ups and camping should be dropped form basic
>training .
Interesting analogy. Too bad it is not accurate. If we had true entry requirements, they would be relevent. Like for example, how to read a schematic, solder, design a circuit, program DSP algorithms, lay out PCB's, etc etc.

um maybe you should go back and re read your novice and teck and general , i think the study material went over these points and you could and maybe should of tested on them , i know all that you stated above do you , should you be a ham , i know you should be able to solder and read a schematic and know about electricity , maybe we should re test you ;-) or maybe you didn't really learn form your study , pity its you that lost out re read those test books ;-) kd5dfm
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC5FOG on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
To KD5DFM

John keep checking my listing in the books I upgraded to general on Tues. July 12, so I have done the code. I've already had a couple of people ask me if I feel cheated or feel it�s a slap in the face as soon as I pass the code they purpose to do away with it. My answer to them was no in all honesty it made no difference to me. The code isn't a lid filter is doesn't make a better operator out of you. As far as your comments about basic training and repelling. I've been a police officer for several years and before that I was a correctional officer so don't lecture me about basic training and what you have been threw. You want to talk about BS, what is BS is the old schoolers yelling the no code techs are going to turn HF into crap, well I think those ass clowns have done a nice job of that already, listen to 75 meters one night.


Eric Kc5Fog
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K6IHC on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I find it interesting in that most of the General, Advanced, and Extra class hams I know (and I know quite a few), don't use Morse code/CW mode on the air. Many of them rarely, if ever, use HF.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W1RFI on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> The day is coming when anyone will fill out an
> application, pay twenty bucks, and wait for the
> license in the mail.

Are you willing to bet $1000 on that statement, John? We could each put $1000 in an escrow account for 10 years, and if 10 years from now, that day doesn't come, I get your thousand dollars. :-)

Ed Hare, W1RFI
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3DRK on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
On a "Stray" W9WHE said it so well:

"If ARRL's proposal to "dumb down" the licensing standards is adopted, we will be one step closer to CB. After all, the only thing seperating us from CB is the standards. Take away the standards, and we will become CB.

W9WHE-II "

That could not have been said any better.


 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4RAF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Take away the standards, and we will become CB."

Uh, I would emphasize "technical standards" & that has already happened.

I guess not many who actually believe this line of crap operate HF regularly.

We are already there!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3DRK on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Ed, W1RFI said:

"Are you willing to bet $1000 on that statement, John? We could each put $1000 in an escrow account for 10 years, and if 10 years from now, that day doesn't come, I get your thousand dollars. :-) "

Ed, make it $5000 and 20 years from now and you have a bet. :)

john-n3drk
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
THE

SKY

IS

FALLING...

THE

SKY

IS

FALLING

...
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W5LSD on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The written tests are a joke since the questions and answers are published. So with he only skills test to be removed, why have licensing at all ? It's a joke.
What is happening is that they are stripping the
PRIDE out of an Amateur license. They may as well
issue them as prizes in boxes of cracker jax.
It's dumbdown runaway ....the dumber it gets the dumber it will get. Next step will be the NCVEC
will aim the question pool further downward into
dumbdown land. They are the ones to keep an eye on next as they have the ability to make the written
tests even more of a joke and take us yet another
notch down.
I am glad however to see no super simpleton "beginners" license
created and overjoyed that Techs wont get an
automatic upgrade to General.

 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K7FD on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K6IHC said:

<<I find it interesting in that most of the General, Advanced, and Extra class hams I know (and I know quite a few), don't use Morse code/CW mode on the air. Many of them rarely, if ever, use HF.

Same thing in my community. It's amazing, isn't it? In fact, most of the extras don't even know a PL-259 from a phono plug, but by god they got that 2-letter call!

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AC0H on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<<"In fact, most of the extras don't even know a PL-259 from a phono plug, but by god they got that 2-letter call!">>

Must be some newer Extra's.

I still pine for the day when the configuration of your call represented your license class. It was easier to tell what class of license a guy held.

I know one NCT who didn't even wait for the ink to dry on his license before snapping up a 1x3.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N8NNE on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"...I am against the idea of removing the code requirement for ALL license classes. I believe that CW is much too valuable of a mode to be dropped entirely..."

>I believe the FCC said they're in favor of dropping >the test requirement, not the mode itself. Why do you >equate the two things?

I did not equate the two. You did.

"...I would like to see the USA hold themselves to a higher standard and maintain the requirement for the Extra Class..."

>For what purpose? Busy work? So pick a standard that's >relevant if you think extra class should be >differentiated more that it currently is - why is code >'proficiency' the only way to do this?

To maintain a body of proficient telegraphers, easily recognizeable by their licence class or modifier. Perhaps a separate licence class or modifier. A code proficiency test is the only way to maintain code proficiency standards with regard to class licencing structures.

"...I remember another thing we tell our children : 'Just because everyone else is doing it doesn't mean you have to'... "

Yes, and the implications are that you look at your own situation and factor in all the reasons for doing or not doing something and maybe even look at the reasons why the other entity made the decision the made [they may in fact have made a wise decision] and you come to a decision. IMHO, the FCC have done just that and made a good decision based on the information available.

>You seem to imply that we should NOT do something >precisely because others have done it - which, IMHO, >is irrational.

Well then sir, you have some fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of rationality.

I do in fact imply that we should not do things SOLELY because "everyone else is doing it". That is wholly different than "precisely".

If you read my posted comments again, without your prejudiced blinders on, you will detect by the words and their arrangement, that I am not opposed to dropping the cw testing requirement as it applies to HF priveleges.

What I do oppose is the notion forwarded by myopic and narrow imaginations that seem to believe that cw is no longer as useful as it once was. CW's usefulness hasn't changed.

Hams have a proud tradition of being highly skilled communicators who can and will find a way to get the message through when other channels fail. CW is yet another tool for getting that job done.


Many seem to overlook FCC Part 97.1(a) :

(a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications.

No one with any considerable experience would refute that CW has been the tool that gets through when all other modes have failed.

I think CW is big part of our proud tradition. But, obviously it is time that we promote CW differently among HAMs, and I'm in favor of that.

If you disagree with my desire to maintain some license class or license class modifier in ham radio, then that's fine. I support your right to voice your opinion regardless of whether it agrees with mine or not.

But I too have a right to my opinions, and will kindly thank you not to call me "irrational" merely because you disagree or do not understand my opinion.

N8NNE
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<I am glad the FCC has decided to drop the 5wpm for the "extra class". What is so "extra" about it? The league wanted to retain that level of "code profiency" for that class which is just plain silly. >

Nothing silly about it. No one can argue against the FACT that CW is basic radio. Then how can you claim to be top of the heap when you don't even know the basics??????
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Nothing silly about it. No one can argue against the FACT that CW is basic radio"

Basic Radio ??!!!??? -- what the heck does that mean -- CW is a mode and has nothing to do with the ability of a radio to work...

Basic Radio my butt -- more like basic whining
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W8DPC on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>KX8N Wrote:"We hams need to start organizing >petitions NOW! We need to voice our displeasure at >this most singularly pivitol decision. WE need to >make this decision, NOT the ARRL, NOT the FCC! "

>Yeah..another petition! One question..if it is a >petition to retain Morse testing and you want [all] >amateurs to sign this petition..what level do you >want to retain Morse testing at..the General or >Extra?
>We gotsta know..Generals may want to retain Morse at >5 wpm for their license too!!!

>Never mind..The Extra's have more than enough people >to show the FCC who the real boss is right?

>Good Luck...I think I will pass on the petition idea.


Charles, please go up and re-read my original post. I didn't propose the idea of the petition, I just quoted the poster who did. My entire post was about how ridiculous a petition would be, but you make it sound like that's what I want. Why?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE4MOB on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>> The day is coming when anyone will fill out an
>> application, pay twenty bucks, and wait for the
>> license in the mail.

>Are you willing to bet $1000 on that statement, John?
>We could each put $1000 in an escrow account for 10
>years, and if 10 years from now, that day doesn't >come, I get your thousand dollars. :-)

I'll go one further and give you double or nothing: in 20 years, you'll fill out an application and pay the $20 bucks, but even then there will be fewer hams then than there are today. Most hams will say to #*$% with it and leave.


 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W8DPC on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Nothing silly about it. No one can argue against the FACT that CW is basic radio"

It's no more necessary to demonstrate CW ability than it is necessary to fire up a Kenwood and show that you know how to call CQ on SSB during a test session.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KB3LSR on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Well, I'm a no-code tech currently. I did pass my general theory test not too long ago. What I don't understand is if we have the knowledge to operate on the PHONE MODE, why can't we? Do we need to take a test to prove we can work packet? Do we need to prove we can work Amateur TV? If it's not an international requirement, why need it? Sometimes I get confused, the elmers want more active hams, yet they refuse to accept changes that will allow for it. To be a mechanic, do I need to know how to overhaul a Ford Model-T or rebuild a carb on a 1974 Mustang? Seems like the newer cars don't require the same maintenance.

and to the guy that said "... .... .. -" in an earlier post, I am learning code and I can say " - .... .. ... .. ... - .... . -... . ... - -.-- . -" and "...- .. ...- . .... -. -- -.- -. -.. .. ---"

By the way, I'm only 21 years old and have a few friends that want to get into the hobby. So maybe there will be an interest in CW if it is not forced upon us?

73
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC8HKI on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
At least I know I will be able to send a message in an emergency where no microphone or laptop is accessable.

I hope everyone complaining about CW going away will elmer a younger ham to learn the importance of it.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC8VWM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
and to the guy that said "... .... .. -" in an earlier post, I am learning code and I can say:

" - .... .. ... .. ... - .... . -... . ... - -.-- . -

" and "...- .. ...- . .... -. -- -.- -. -.. .. --- "


Ok, let's see if I got this right,

...and to the guy that said "SHI" in an earlier post, I am learning code and I can say

"this is the best yet"

" and " v i v e h n m k n d i o

Huh?

It must be the QRM?

73 DE Charles KC8VWM
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KI4JIH on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I for one am disappointed that the code requirement may be dropped. Personally it doesn't matter, since i would like to know code in the possible event it may be the only means of communication i have available in an emergency.....However, no one speaks in Elizabethan English, or Ancient Greek any more. In my opinion it is more important to be able to COMMUNICATE, (which includes as much information as quickly as possible and comprehension by as many people as possible) rather
than the method and means of communication. When the use of a microphone became available, the whole world could speak, otherwise a code requirement would be a moot issue.

Use whatever means of communication you want, provided you are able to do so effectively.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KB3LSR on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
... = S
.... = H
.. = I
- = T

Let's see if I have that Right? Learn to read!!

And the other says VIVE HAM RADIO, I don't have time to go through the whole thing, but the spaces are there.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W8DPC on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"At least I know I will be able to send a message in an emergency where no microphone or laptop is accessable. "

Here's the thing, though... How many times has that happened in the last, say, 15 years or so? How many documented cases are there where CW saved a person's life?

Although I may sound anti-CW, I'm not. I actually like CW. But I don't now, nor have I ever, seen the knowledge of CW act as a filter to keep bad operators out.

Everytime I hear that argument, all I have to do is tune down to 75 meters, and I see the truth - Advances and Extras spouting off about sickening, revolting topics, passing judgement about everyone else on the bands, tuning up on top of each other, and spewing every form of profanity that you can imagine. It's a total embarrasment to ham radio, and makes operators like K1MAN seem insignificant in the overall picture. There's no possible way that I can see that eliminating CW from testing requirements could cause worse operators than that to show up on the bands. And these people have been on the air for 20+ years.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC8VWM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
lol,

Gee KB3LSR, I can read.

I guess the Farnsworth method isn't working out for me on the Amateur Internet.


 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"At least I know I will be able to send a message in an emergency where no microphone or laptop is accessable. "

or power ???

Oh I forgot -- you will send CW as you drag your feet on carpet creating static electricity...

I tell you -- if it gets to the point where your laptop, cellphone, and microphone has stopped working, maybe God is trying to tell you something....

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WB8WKA on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KD5DFM wrote:

>wb8wak said kd5dfm siad
>>If we had true entry requirements, they would be
>>relevent. Like for example, how to read a schematic,
>>solder, design a circuit, program DSP algorithms, lay
>>out PCB's, etc etc.

>um maybe you should go back and re read your novice
>and teck and general , i think the study material
>went over these points and you could and maybe should
>of tested on them ,

As a shameless plug for eham, here is their element test guide:
http://www.eham.net/exams/
Show me exactly where those requirements are tested (or provide your own reference) p.s. Material 15-20 years out of date is not relevent.


>i know you should be able to solder and read a
>schematic and know about electricity ,
>maybe we should re test you ;-) or maybe you didn't
>really learn form your study , pity its you that lost
>out re read those test books ;-) kd5dfm

Personal attacks/insults aside, yes I do. But I'll challege you. Go to an average ham club, maybe not one in San Jose, but one in middle america. And put your challege out. Then watch how many hams skitter away and/or avoid the question.

Point being, if you want a rite of passage, make it something useful and relevent.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KG6TCV on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I thought we were in the 21 st. Century, perhaps I should go to the back of the bus and keep my quite.
How many hams with General Class Lic. or higher actualy use CW, from my experience and the many clubs I attend only a couple in every room even use it, besides just how many would still have a general class lic. ot higher if they had to pass the code requirment each year and maybe if were going to be compled to stay in the 18 century we should do away with all privlages except CW then the CW Nasi could be happy dit dah dat .....
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC0SOG on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K8XN
"It's no more necessary to demonstrate CW ability than it is necessary to fire up a Kenwood and show that you know how to call CQ on SSB during a test session. "

I respectfully disagree. When I took the code test it was to demonstrate my ability to "copy" 5wpm code. In my view, CW is basically a mode where one needs to be able to copy "without" the aid of a device, ie: PSK or RTTY. Therefore it seems to me that retaining the 5wpm code requirement for General is necessary.

I don't agree with the statement often used that "CW is just another mode." I believe CW stands out as an exception. Also the effort to learn and copy 5wpm CW is no more difficult than the written exams when you consider the time it takes to learn the material.

73, Doug
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by VE3HBB on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Some of the comments here are so hostile I wonder about the commentator's sanity. I am referring specifically to the unfortunate comment regarding "no good lazy bastards. Shame on you.

73

Charles VE3HBB
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KB3LSR on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Instead of everyone bickering, why not talk about the possible BENEFITS of this. Like it or not, it will happen. I might still like to learn code, as other operators will. But instead of having such a horrid outlook on the future of amateur radio, why not look at the benefits? More operators, if they pass the tests and follow the rules, how will it turn into a CB service? We are self-regulating, CB isn't. More operators, means more DX opportunities, more net checkins and more CQ's. I learned one thing from my amateur radio experience so far, stay away from boards like this, they seem to bring out the worst attitudes and the worst outlooks. I like the local operators that help me through things and like to have good outlooks. Like it or not though, it will happen, if you don't like it, stay to CW only as a form of protest?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KB3LSR --

you are correct --

I am going to benefit from this by buying up every cheap HF transceiver I can right now as we speak and then once the code is gone you know that 400000 new HFrs are going to be looking for anything that can transmit and I will then sell the stuff for allot more then its worth -- hell half the stuff will probably be broken to begin with but what will they care-- they wil just be happy to get it...
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KB3LSR --

you are correct --

I am going to benefit from this by buying up every cheap HF transceiver I can right now as we speak and then once the code is gone you know that 400000 new HFrs are going to be looking for anything that can transmit and I will then sell the stuff for allot more then its worth -- hell half the stuff will probably be broken to begin with but what will they care-- they wil just be happy to get it...
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3DRK on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KB3LSR said:

". I learned one thing from my amateur radio experience so far, stay away from boards like this, they seem to bring out the worst attitudes and the worst outlooks."

You are 21 years of age and you speak of your amateur radio experience. Perhaps you could enlighten us all on what your amateur radio experience has been. I am listening.

Also I do not understand when you state your position of staying away from boards like this. Then why do you continue to make posts? I may be missing something here so please explain.

thanks.
john

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Out of all the posts so far this is the best one I have seen --


----


"Damn, they removed the {tower climbing} requirement for ham radio. We won't have any {tower climbers} anymore, since they won't be testing for {tower climbing ability}. I guess I'll sell all my ham gear, this just cheapens the hobby. These newbies want instant gratification, don't want to learn the art of {tower climbing}. Why, when I was licensed we had to {climb a 100 ft tower} now they wont have to {climb} at all! {Tower climbing} also acts as a filter to see who really wants those HF priviledges, keeps out the riff-raff. I've never met a person who couldn't {climb a tower} they're just basically lazy people and want something handed to them- now this!"

Substitute any ham related activity or knowledge for { } and you have the CW arguement.

---


 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KB3LSR on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Well, I've been interested in radio for a long time, started with Citizen's Band back when I was around 16 and finally took my test (and passed the first time) back in November. Since then, I've joined the ARRL, 2 local HAM clubs and ARES. Most of this experience has been through well-meaning elmers and not faceless people over the internet. I am continuing to make posts because like you, I have nothing else to do all day but bicker about CW.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N0TONE on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
It is my belief that those who post on these message boards probably are not REAL hams. Real hams get on the air. They are ham radio operators. They know that getting the license is only the entry point into true learning and operating.

Here's my bet: If you were REQUIRED to make a QSO today before you could post on eham, this board would suddenly get VERY quiet.

Those who are bemoaning the loss of the code test would be required to make that QSO on CW.

OK, let's hear the responses. For me, it's now 11:10am my local time, and I made one QSO on 160, and two on 30 meters so far today. Of course, I'm retired, but then anybody who's posting here at the moment is surely not at work.

AM
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE4MOB on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AM:

I work, and spend most of my time when I'm on the radio just listening.

But I'll gladly post my Field Day log if you want it. Probably about 200 voice Q's and 24 CW Q's (sent with a straight key, thank you).

Yes, I'm ashamed of my CW total. My goal is to at least triple that next year. The real problem will be deciding which of my dozen or so bugs and keys to use to do it...
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by DD3EO on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KX8N wrote:
""But I don't now, nor have I ever, seen the knowledge of CW act as a filter to keep bad operators out.""

Same here.
It doesn't keep the lids out.
Whe I got my licence in 1985, these whistlers, wannabe DJs and on-air aligners were active on 80 and 40 meters.
And guess what: We had 12 wpm at that time.
Now it is 2005, the code requirement is gone and the interference problem is the same, not better, not worse.

KB3LSR wrote:
""By the way, I'm only 21 years old and have a few friends that want to get into the hobby. So maybe there will be an interest in CW if it is not forced upon us?""
Getting rid of the requirement might actually help here, as the negativity of something forced upon one is gone, possibly sparking a wider interest.
When No-Code Novice-calls appear on the result lists of CW-Contests, then you know, something is changing...

With best regards
DD3EO.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC7ATO on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"FREE at last---FREE at last---thank the FCC Almighty---were FREE at last from any CW Test". (With apologies to MLK).
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by NE0P on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Although I may sound anti-CW, I'm not. I actually like CW. But I don't now, nor have I ever, seen the knowledge of CW act as a filter to keep bad operators out."

OK, then lets also get rid of the written test. After all, 75 meters has demonstrated that the written test doesn't keep bad operators out, nor assure that someone will be a good operator, since all of these 75 meter operators have passed the written test. Sounds like it is time it get rid of it also.

 
RE: no help at all  
by KC7ZRU on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I have to disagree.

My son passed his tech no-code back when he was 8.

Great time for all of us in the family to review, learn and spend time together. He and his Mom both studied the "Now you're talking" book. Took online practice exams and when I got home from work, asked questions. Great refresher for me!

Oh, she passed her tech at the same VE session too.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N0XIX on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"I am continuing to make posts because like you, I have nothing else to do all day but bicker about CW."


<chuckle>

Touche`, my friend. You've lightened my day.

<grin>


All the best,

N0XIX
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N0TONE on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KE4MOB wrote:

"I work, and spend most of my time when I'm on the radio just listening."

Not sure what you mean - do you listen to the radio while you work? In that case, then I could understand not being on the air.

But I submit to you this - if every amateur licensee only listened, then there'd be nothing to listen to. Being only a listener is selfish - you only provide on-air benefit to other hams by joining in QSO with them. If all you do is listen, you're not helping newcomers who want their first QSO.

I say again, you are a licensee, not an operator. We already have enough licensees who don't operate. We surely don't need more unusued licenses.

AM
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N0TONE on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Much as I treasure CW, I took Riley's comments at Dayton to heart - he said most of his troublesome operators are Advanced and Extra class. And when you look at the FCC enforcement logs, and then look up the callsigns, you find that a huge majority are those who were licensed in "the old days" when you had to take a code test in front of an FCC employee.

I do love CW, but I have to acknolwedge the truth that it does not seem to be any sort of filter to weed out bad ops, since most of the bad ops did pass a 13 or 20 wpm test.

AM
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K4CDK on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

Drop the code, make the test longer and harder and get out the beer and preztels for the cryers!!!!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE4MOB on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N0TONE, I'm not retired like yourself. I work 40 hours a week. So I really don't have the luxury of sitting in front of the radio for hours on end.

Am I a licensee? Yep, I'll admit to that. In between repairing other people's equipment, being trustee and technician for a two meter machine, and my bug collection, I don't get much time on the air.

And I'll disagree with you. We don't need more operators. We need better operators.

And in reality even operating doesn't guarantee that you're a good ham. I've heard lots of hams who have operated continuosly for decades and still are embarassing to listen to.

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AC9HE on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I am going to make a statement that I am sure is going to piss off alot of flame throwing old near kicking the bucket fools. "good". In my honest opinion, notice that I didn't abbreviate that, (because I am not lazy) the worst thing about this hobby is these idiotic ridiculously ignorant stupid repetatively foolish jackasses that continue to whine about CW being dropped as a requirement for the amatuer radio license. Tough shit, deal with it. Go back to your sticking recliner and shut up. And for those of you Extras that are not crybaby idiotic fools, thank God for you. I will never use cw, not because I am not interested, not because I didn't want to, Just because of you dumbass crybaby old retards. I can't wait til you have that eventual stroke that you are bringing on because of the stress you bring on yourself because of your constant bitching. Good riddens to you, put your ass in the ground and shove your damn keyer in the hole with you. Shut up for God sake, its done. And yes I used profanity, but it wasn't half of what I was thinking, reading this crap over and over every day. Its done, its been decided and I think its hilarious. If ham radio died tomorrow, I would live, it would be ok. For God sake quite obsesing about a HOBBY. And for crying out loud, please all you operators that are sick of listening to this speak up.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W8MW on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>NOTONE: We all know that the license is only an entry ticket to ham radio. Almost all of us were pretty stupid that day we took the test.

Absolutely true. For most of us there is one goal in taking a test. That's passing the test. Passing proves we completed a successful transaction with the government licensing authority. It doesn't prove anything else.

>NOTONE: Only many years of practice on the bands later gave us any genuinely useful knowledge .. You newcomers will go through the same process; you'll get licensed, and after that you'll start the real learning.

That concisely says what I experienced. Esoteric theory and formulas had no practical relevance to me .. until I put a station on the air and could see a direct benefit in learning and applying some of the technical concepts. It's been said we eventually become our own teacher. I believe that applies perfectly to the amateur radio experience. Most amateurs choose to expand their knowledge and/or proficiency in the areas of greatest personal interest.

Even though CW is among my personal interests, I am not the least bit worried about FCC's decision having any negative impact on amateur radio's future. I doubt we will see a huge influx of new amateurs. But I think it will help re-distribute our existing human resources into a more cohesive group of radio enthusiasts.

To the CW boys so concerned about the next person's code proficiency or lack therof, let me suggest you concern yourself with your own. You can devote a lifetime in pursuit of excellence in the art of telegraphy. There will always be a place to do it in amateur radio.

>NOTONE: Come on in, the water's fine and every ham who is worthy of the name will welcome you and treat you like a brother or sister.

There is nothing I can add to that except I share NOTONE's sentiments and am confident most hams feel the same.

73 Mike
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC5NWS on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Ok, the code testing is gone so maybe the arguments about cw will disappear also. The no coders won the battle and the war.I promise I will not talk about how much fun cw is anymore. I know where the cw guys hang out and thats where I will be.I hope everyone enjoys the hobby in whatever way makes them happy. Its just a hobby after all.
w5wlb
ootc
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K0RGR on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Blaming this on the ARRL is a bit like blaming the Titanic disaster on the iceberg. FCC went right back to the argument, indeed, the wording that they used back when they eliminated the 13 and 20 WPM tests, and made it crystal clear that the only reason they did not drop the requirement back then, over ARRL's objection, was the International requirement. They are merely completing the sentence that they started back then. I could not imagine that they could really take any other course - to do so would require them to reverse their previous decision. Why would they do that?

They've already proposed to accept ARRL's Novice Band Redeployment and Phone Band Expansion proposal verbatim in another NPRM, which I suspect we'll see become effective simultaneously with this one. They refer to it in this NPRM.

I really don't think we'll feel the impact of this for a very long time, if at all. There will be some people upgrading that wouldn't have otherwise. Maybe we'll retain more of our new recruits, which would be a real plus. CW might or might not die - I called CQ on 3545 for about a half hour the other night in 'prime time' - no takers. W1AW was about 30 over 9 here, and I heard one other station calling somebody else here in MN, so I think everything was working fine. Otherwise, there were some digital stations, and silence. So, maybe CW is already dead?

 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KC0JOV on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
While the idea sounds good, I think that we should keep it. When I started in ham radio back in 1999, I was in 8th grade. When I went to take the exam, I passed the code but not the test. However, after studying for a little bit more, I did finally pass. Its not that they are too hard, it is just that people are too lazy to learn it so they give up. Code really isn't that hard to learn, especially at 5WPM. You can learn code on the way to/from work/school. It really isn't that hard. So, I am for keeping the 5 WPM code. 73's, KC0JOV
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by THERAGE on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
tisk tisk. it seems like its time for you 'ol dudes to take your blood pressure meds before burst a vein.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC0JOV on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
THERAGE, I am not old, I am only 19, Thank you very much!!!!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Without CW, it's just CB."

I wish some of the hams--especially some of the ones on this site--would grow up. Gloom and doom galore, last seen when the code speed was dropped to 5 WPM for general and extra classes, and before that, when the technician class no code license was initiated. Neither change destroyed ham radio--if anything, more people became hams, and some of the tech operators are better operators than what are found on the HF bands.

The words I most hear from most hams are these: If the FCC eliminates morse code--ham radio is going down the drain. Wrong, wrong, WRONG! The FCC is now simply eliminating morse TESTING. Morse code WILL live on. If anything, its use may increase, since it won't be required learning. Now it may be more tempting BECAUSE it isn't required.

You want to improve ham radio? How about cleaning up 75 meters. How about getting to the operators who are crapping up the other HF bands with their bad practices. They've passed their morse but some are still worse than a good many of the technician class licensees.

Be happy with what you have and how you got it. If you are one of those who passed a morse code test, take pride in it. If the current NPRM is adopted and the morse testing requirement is dropped, you will always be able to say you were one of the ones who got their ticket when morse was required to get it!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W9WHE-II on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
COULD HAVE BEEN MUCH WORSE.
Had FCC adopted ARRL's proposal to "GIVE AWAY" HF priveleges, it would have been an UNMITIGATED DISASTER!

THANK GOODNESS ARRL does not have the amount of influence it pretends to have!

W9WHE
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC0JOV on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS, I agree with you. Sometimes 2m is pretty bad. I got in my car to come home from work and I tuned to a local repeater and some guy, who I don't think even had a liscense, was racially harassing another ham. It was disturbing to hear that kind of language on the air. Hopefully someone was monitering and tracked the loser down. Anyways, just thought I'd throw that in. 73s
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"This is truly sad, if it goes through. We hams are practically the last defenders and users of Morse in the states. No, this wouldn't spell the end of ham radio per se...but it would be a damned sad day indeed.
We hams need to start organizing petitions NOW! We need to voice our displeasure at this most singularly pivitol decision. WE need to make this decision, NOT the ARRL, NOT the FCC!"

The opposite is true too, I suppose. The people who favor elimination of testing should get together and organize and let their feelings be felt.........

You want to see another argument? OK--I got our my spark gap equipment the other day to use it, but--oh hell--I can't. It's against the law to do it. Spark gap has been eliminated. If, and I mean IF that was what was being done with morse, I would be against it. But that isn't the case. Morse will live on and it will still be used--maybe forever! (At least a lot of us hope so!) Its just the test requirement that is being spoken of here, NOT MORSE CODE ITSELF!!!


 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
".....but I would like to see the USA hold themselves to a higher standard and maintain the requirement for the Extra Class."

Translation: I had to do it, so everyone else should too.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KG6TCV on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hello Hello, my name is Steven, and I am still trying to pass my element 1 and driving to san diego to get it about 180 miles round trip every weekend this month, I'm not rich and its been a bit trying especialy the gas and all.

I live in the County of Riverside, CA. if I do not pass it at the end of the class this month, I will try to continue to try for a few more months.

I have been trying for more than a year now and the amazing thing is every time I ask someone for help, I recive the same answer, you'll get it it just takes time... do you have tapes.... do you have CD's....Pratice pratice pratice...

like I thought I was going to get it by just thinking about it....


I guess the lesson to be learned here is IF YOU CAN DO IT BY YOURSELF YOU EARNED IT....
AND IF YOU CANT I DO NOT KNOW WHAT TO TELL YOU,

Perhaps what they ment was I dont know anything about CW other than i passsed a long time ago and before you embarss me I cant help...

ANSWERS.
#1. I practic twice a day 12 to 25 munits each secission.
#2. there is not enough space here to show all the programs that i have purchased and or downloaded...
#3. I NEED HELP, I NEED HELP, I NEED HELP TO PASS THE CODE.

Anyone that want to help and spend time with me please email me at kg6tcv@arrl.net

Please no emails other than someone wanting to help, if the help is in the form of a mulituide of sugestions without any action and please keep your comments to your self, I have tried every imanagble idea and way to work on the code that I get pleanty of .
Please keep in mind that if I am so lucky as to pass the test in san diego in augest I will no longer be in need of assistance. however I will keep those in mind and email them promptly back one way or another.
I will Practice deglinty, and attend each class in San Diego this month, and attempt to pass the test the first weekend in Augest.

Thank You for your time. Sincerly Steven Rapata KG6TCV
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
".....The problem is, he only wants to operate CW and is not interested in SSB or any of the digital modes and can't understand why he has to take a test concerned with all of these other modes......"

Since when does the theory test have to do with 'modes'? Morse code is the only 'mode' test that there is. And if it escaped your notice, there are questions to do with morse code in the theory tests, so the tests still include some form of morse code. Or do you expect us to believe you're really that dense?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE4MOB on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"You want to improve ham radio? How about cleaning up 75 meters. How about getting to the operators who are crapping up the other HF bands with their bad practices. They've passed their morse but some are still worse than a good many of the technician class licensees."

Yep, they passed their CW *and* the written. Many became hams before the advent of the multiple guess test, too.

So by observation I can conclude testing does nothing to validate operating qualifications, since these folks are such bad ops yet still passed all the tests....which is remarkably the same argument used to throw CW testing under the train.

You see, the CW question is slowly, but surely, morphing in other questions: "Why have license classes and why test at all??" After all, according to most, the 20 WPM Extras who passed all the tests are the worst offenders...so class and tests much mean zilch.

So in the not so distant future, when you open up your new HF rig and find the mail-in application for your HF operators permit enclosed in the box, just remember it started with the No-Code movement.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
".....The FCC must act according to protocol. Petitions for rule changes are submitted. Then comes a round of comments. Then the FCC issues a NPRM, and then another round of comments, and then the FCC makes a ruling. In reality, the FCC knew what it wanted to do. It just needed to humor the public and go through the motions....."

Oh boy, there IS actually someone else who gets it. THIS IS A DONE DEAL. The FCC is just humoring us so we think we have a say in what is happening, but we actually won't--code testing will be dropped, and sooner than we think.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N6JSX--you're really stretching it some to mention logic in your rantings, nothing you've said is even remotely logical.....
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KB3LSR said "More operators, means more DX opportunities, more net checkins and more CQ's"

...and more QRM from ham wannabe's who don't have what it takes to pass the test right NOW....do you think the bands are actually going to get better by LOWERING the already ridiculously low requirements ??? Get real....
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"So long CW. About time you finally died!"

Another one who thinks CW is going away. Get with it why don't you and realize only testing may be ending. Morse code will continue to be used now AND in the future.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by IMBACKHF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KG6TCV

I don't know what to tell you -- good job in trying -- i guess I picked it up pretty easy -- went from zero to 6 wpms in less then two weeks with code quick and also went from nothing to General in the same amount of time...

just keep plugging away and relax -- I had no desire to be a ham but my dad did so i got it so he and I could talk back and forth...

.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4HSM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Back in the "good ole' days" when Amateur Radio was code only, and then VOICE came along...I'm sure back then the "vets" hollered and screamed "OHHHHHHH It's the end of ham radio!"

Ham Radio stuck around.

Then came this newfangled technology where pictures could be put to the words we heard...something called "television". I'm sure back then the "vets" hollered and screamed "OHHHHHHH It's the end of ham radio!"

Ham Radio stuck around. In fact, there's amateur television, or ATV.

Then came the lowering of the code to where you could get on VHF with no code requirement. I'm sure back then the "vets" hollered and screamed "OHHHHHHH It's the end of ham radio!"

Ham Radio stuck around. In fact, the growth was exponential.

Then came the internet. And the use of the internet on ham radio via packet gateways, IRLP, echolink, etc. The "vets" hollered and screamed "OHHHHHHH It's the end of ham radio!"

Ham Radio is still around, still popular, and still growing WORLDWIDE.

Now there is the PROPOSAL to eliminate code altogether. The "vets" are all going to holler and scream "OHHHHHHH It's the end of ham radio!"

Ham radio has persevered through all the "stumbling blocks" and technologies that were destined to doom the art, hobby, pastime, sport, service, or whatever you may choose to call Amateur Radio.

Fact is that amateur radio is the last service (that I know of) to employ code as part of advancing in the service. It was merely a matter of time.

Amateur radio will survive. It will adjust, adapt, and advance.

The end has been nigh for 80 years, and I haven't seen it stop yet.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Before I said "How about getting to the operators who are crapping up the other HF bands with their bad practices." I did mean to include the V-UHF bands in that statement too, not just to single out the HF bands. After all, there are operators using bad practices on just about every ham band there is.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by THERAGE on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KC0JOV, so you think that by passing the sloooooowww 5 wpm that you are up there in the ranks of all these other old pharts? what are you some kind of flag waver? i was winding coils for qrp rigs before you were even born. fb

--... ...-- - .... . .-. .- --. .
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"So in the not so distant future, when you open up your new HF rig and find the mail-in application for your HF operators permit enclosed in the box, just remember it started with the No-Code movement."

If this ever happens it will then be a sad day indeed, but this is really pushing the limit of imagination if you think it'll happen in the near future. After all, ham radio has been dying for many decades now?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N0TONE on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
W5WLB wrote:

"Ok, the code testing is gone so maybe the arguments about cw will disappear also."

Wishful thinking. There never has been a test on contesting versus noncontesting, and there never has been a test on the merits of ESSB, but they are both argued about incessantly.

Use whatever mode makes you happy. Welcome all newcomers, no matter what test they took. Gently guide people (including yourself) into better and better operating habits.

The tests can change all they want. We need not change the fundamental character and brotherhood one bit.

AM
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by G3SEA on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

Ofcom ( U.K. equivalent to the FCC ) is currently soliciting comments on the ' potential ' elimination of Amateur Radio licences in the near future or further out ! :O

You can imagine the barrage of 'comments ' streaming into their office :)

Stay tuned ;)

KH6/G3SEA
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by NO5WPM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KD7KS, sounds like you need to start "upholding the grand old tradition of HTML" if you want a website created, or why not just get an editing program to do it for you?
Hmmmm. I'll bet there are millions of useful websites created by people who don't know the first bit of HTML "code". How can that be? Wouldn't the ruin and degrade the tradition of making all websites manually in notepad? Would you have everyone who wants to create a website on the internet learn HTML?

I'm not really trying to single you out, just make a point.

See how easy it is to confuse "requirement" with "personal preference"?
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by WH6NY on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
These code ethusiasts are pretty arrogant, trying to shove their favorite mode down our throat via regulations. I'm so glad their tryanny is coming to a close. If you're as tired of these CW Nazis as I am, don't forget where they have exclusive use of certain bands, some people consider the CW sub bands a great place to tune up your rig before moving upband!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3DRK on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K4HSM said at length:

"RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo Reply
by K4HSM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Back in the "good ole' days" when Amateur Radio was code only, and then VOICE came along...I'm sure back then the "vets" hollered and screamed "OHHHHHHH It's the end of ham radio!"

Ham Radio stuck around.

Then came this newfangled technology where pictures could be put to the words we heard...something called "television". I'm sure back then the "vets" hollered and screamed "OHHHHHHH It's the end of ham radio!"

Ham Radio stuck around. In fact, there's amateur television, or ATV.

Then came the lowering of the code to where you could get on VHF with no code requirement. I'm sure back then the "vets" hollered and screamed "OHHHHHHH It's the end of ham radio!"

Ham Radio stuck around. In fact, the growth was exponential.

Then came the internet. And the use of the internet on ham radio via packet gateways, IRLP, echolink, etc. The "vets" hollered and screamed "OHHHHHHH It's the end of ham radio!"

Ham Radio is still around, still popular, and still growing WORLDWIDE.

Now there is the PROPOSAL to eliminate code altogether. The "vets" are all going to holler and scream "OHHHHHHH It's the end of ham radio!"

Ham radio has persevered through all the "stumbling blocks" and technologies that were destined to doom the art, hobby, pastime, sport, service, or whatever you may choose to call Amateur Radio.

Fact is that amateur radio is the last service (that I know of) to employ code as part of advancing in the service. It was merely a matter of time.

Amateur radio will survive. It will adjust, adapt, and advance.

The end has been nigh for 80 years, and I haven't seen it stop yet. "
______________________________________________________

K4HSM,

On QRZ.COM it shows you as licensed in 2000. When did you get your original ticket? Have you been around for the past 30 years? 50 years? You must have done some through research through past articles in QST or elsewhere of Amateur Radio Operators stating the demise of the hobby when ATV came on the scene. I would like to read those articles to further educate myself. I ask this since you know so much about the history of Amateur Radio and your statement of when ATV ( Amateur Television ) came on the scene. Where you there when this mode arrived?

I question you since you jump from ATV to the no code requirement for VHF and then jump to the Internet Issue like ECHOLINK. That is a very large GAP in years. It seems much has happened during those years which you do not show reference to. Please elaborate further the missing gaps and where you did your research and the sources so I and others may come to the same conclusion. If what you state is correct we are surely missing something.

So how long have you been licensed? And what were, if any, your previous calls?

I am asking you this so I can understand your viewpoint and understand better the issue.

Waiting for your reply.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<"So in the not so distant future, when you open up your new HF rig and find the mail-in application for your HF operators permit enclosed in the box, just remember it started with the No-Code movement."

If this ever happens it will then be a sad day indeed, but this is really pushing the limit of imagination if you think it'll happen in the near future. After all, ham radio has been dying for many decades now?>

That's exactly right. They dropped the CW requirement for Tech. Numbers went down. They dropped to 5 wpm (which IS no code) for the others and numbers went down. They lowered the exam standards and numbers went down. And now they are saying that more of what caused the problem will cure the problem!! Banning CW will NOT make the numbers go up - there is absolutely no reason to believe that it will, based on past experience (yes, I know that is redundant). They will go down again.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Basic Radio ??!!!??? -- what the heck does that mean -- CW is a mode and has nothing to do with the ability of a radio to work...>

OK, let me explain more fully, because some people evidently have not studied basic radio. If you build a radio transmitter and add nothing to it - no modulator, no amplifier stage, no nothing, that is a basic radio. It is simply an RF oscillator.
Now a basic radio CAN be used to convey information. We can't use SSB, that requires a lot of more stages, we can't use PSK, that requires connection to a computer. There is only one method we can use to transmit data with this basic radio. That is the digital method known as CW. It is not a mode. Repeat: CW is not a mode. It is turning an oscillator on and off in a predetermined pattern in order to convey information. Modes require modulating that basic rig in some way. Modulate the frequency and you have FM. Modulate the amplitude and you have AM. Strip the carrier (and one sideband) off that AM signal and you have SSB. Shift the frequency in a particular pattern and you have RTTY. I could go on and on but you get the idea (don't you?). End of lesson.

Now someone please tell me why that information is too advanced or difficult to be required in an exam for the top level?

I repeat: There should be 3 grades of license. A true entry level similar to the old Novice, with restricted privileges and power level. No CW. Then the General, moderate exam, covering almost all bands and modes. Again, no CW. Then the Extra should require an extensive exam, proof of having elmered at least 5 people from Novice to General, and 15 WPM CW. All General privileges, plus the Extra CW bands as now configured. Since, as now, the privileges gained consist of mainly CW frequencies, why not require CW?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
But my prior post is really whistling in the wind. Now that CW exam is going, next will be banning of CW from the bands (that organization is not named "No TEST International", it is "No Code International"). Then the written exam will come under attack because it discriminates against people who do not want to study (same successful argument - it worked once, why not again?).

As several have said: pack the license in the rig box.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by THERAGE on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KC0JOV sticks his snot nose in with this=
*K1CJS, I agree with you. Sometimes 2m is pretty bad. I got in my car to come home from work and I tuned to a local repeater and some guy, who I don't think even had a liscense, was racially harassing another ham. It was disturbing to hear that kind of language on the air. Hopefully someone was monitering and tracked the loser down. Anyways, just thought I'd throw that in. 73s*
Your atech, a lid, a newbie, a nocode, a 2x3, you work 6meters and above. stop trying to suck up with these cw ops. 2 meters at 25 watts with a cute little magmount on a car that mommie and daddy bought you doesnt give you any shine. go to the candy store with a few bucks buy a plug and play 2meter radio and now your a bonifide ham. Wow thats impressive.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3DRK on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Regardless of what the FCC proposes to do The Real Ham Operators will continue to use the CW Mode. That is something which no-coders cannot understand. They cannot see/hear that because they do NOT WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE LANGUAGE. The beauty of a language based on sound. The beauty of listening to a perfect FIST communicating at 20,25,30WPM as if that person is speaking to you audibly in person. This is how WE CW operators HEAR! It is unfortunate that they do not want to have "ears" to hear what we hear and with the elimination of CW in future exams many will not take the opportunity to learn and understand this fantastic mode. Sure it is only a mode but it is TRADITION. And to eliminate it is to ERASE Amateur Radio History.

The real beauty of the CW Mode is the EXPERTISE all CW operators exhibit. First Class Operators they are. Able to communicate with such delicacy and preciseness with sheer precision and Gentlemanly conduct and also to give a humor to the conversation through the tapping of the key.

Will CW die due to the non requirement by the FCC? No it will not. The mode will increase. Operators will get tired of the dribble the ssb modes engages them in. It is my belief that persons who love radio will take it upon themselves to learn CW no matter how hard it is. CW is what kept this hobby alive for so many decades and the mode will continue to challenge people. That is just the way it is like it or not.

The new licenses will go the route of the ssb and digital modes. Great modes. But sooner or later they will want to escape from these passive modes and will want something more actively challenging for their minds. And that is the CW mode. I say this with all due respect to my digital friends!

One has only to look at the growing QRP Community who use CW as THE Mode. These Guys are keeping the Traditions of what Amateur Radio is all about.

john-n3drk.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WA6CDE on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Welll.... what a great decision that the ARRL and FCC have come up with...

Gezzzzzz I mean its only 5 wpm code for @#$% out loud.. you can count that on you fingers and toes... but, be it code of the written test...

I always was told that ham radio people had a intelligence level a shade above the average bear... and that if somone wanted something ... they had to work for it...

Well now I guess we know better....

The other day I overheard a conversation on the HF bands... where two hams were talking about radios and antennas... and a third ham broke in... saying he was new... and just upgraded... he said he passed the EXTRA class license... When the others querried him... about his experteese... quickly they found he had none and probably just memorized or lucked out to pass the extra test...

Shortly there after... they both signed... and left the newbie without even saying good bye... but, then down the band... here are the two again... and the newbie breaks in again... to join in the conversation... again they both sign and leave... without giving the newbie any reconition... and again we found them down the band... this time when the newbie came into the conversation... one of the hams told him to go away... he was stupid and no one is going to talk to him... the newbie got upset and so they both left... the air...

Now I can see how the ARRL and the FCC are looking at this as way to bolster the numbers... but, are they really...

Will the old hams get fed up with the newbies... like above and leave ham radio... thus reducing the numbers ... and then will the newbies get fed up and frustrated and leave ham radio... due to the lack of being put up with... thus reducing the numbers even more...

Most people now that listen in to ham radio are not impressed... and most relate ham radio to the CB people anyway... look at the infighting that occurs on repeaters such as the jerk in LA... and tell me that this hobby is a mature and intelligent one... hmmmmm...

When Ham radio lost the electronics and smarts that it took to be one... it lost the attention of the people that it should attract.... The ARRL has in the past been instrumental in helping kill ham radio by its greed and thirst for new blood with dollar signs...

I think that the big pictuer is not as bright as what the ARRL and FCC are making it out to be when they say that it will bring in new "high tech people who will conrubuite to ham radio".... When in reality they should be saying... the manufactueres and the ARRL want to generate more MONEY... after all isn't it all about the MONEY anyway...

But, now who will turn out the lights at W1AW.. after all now that their won't be anymore code practice transmissions... the rest is just pure BROADCASTING so will W1AW go away... and is the ARRL in its thirst for more money... in reality shooting itself in the foot... only to slowly bleed to death when these newbies that don't have two nickles to rub togeather (ya I mean the kids too) who will support the groups, repeaters and emergency services... you can't seriously think they will... after all what did they put into it to make you think they are responsible and dedicated??? Ham radio Under the ARRL was never designed to be for kids anyway... so that is a lame excuse.... They don't send in checks and dollar bills to keep the ARRLs light and presses running... huh... (Ya sure your going to get them to send in 40 bucks a year for dues... right)
But, wait... what is this the FCC is going to start to charge higher fees... could it be that they are also going to charge for ham radio licenses such as they tried back when the CB bands were under way... hmmmm

Nope... If they eleminate the code... it will be something else that is keeping them from relizing their goals... and if you give it to 'em they won't respect it ... and eventually throw it away anyhow... That is the way of the youth of america not only in ham radio but all other areas of this countrys life...

Honor should be given to the achiever.... he is the credit to society... not the whinner who feels like he is offended and opressed... now wonder competition in this country is being done away with... we all just smile and shine the rejects on... geeee why would he even try if its just given to him... and he knows that if he whines long enough he will get his way...

I can just see one of these new guy getting his fingers into a 2KW amp... why we'll have to put lables on 'em because they won't understand that if they touch something... it might just kill 'em and then the gean pool would be more empty... Oh wow... think of the manufacture libility and litigation for wrongfull death... and what about antennas... ouch... after all they were never trained on any of this equipment and how to use it properly... can Kenwood say ching$ ching$... talk about product liablity... their goes the millions they made in profits... and so they close the doors...

5 wpm is not a killer... and if someone really wants to be a ham and get on the other bands... then the reward for intelligence and perservarance should be their... to the victor goes the spoils...kinda thing... ham radio was never designed to be a welfare recipiant... orginization...

No their are a lot of things to ponder over from the effect of losing the code section of the ham radio ticket... when you don't have competition... you have loosers all the way around...

I was once told that the 11 meter band would eventually become part of the ham bands again... wow.. guess their right... grin....

No matter what we do or say... its a done deal anyway... so my friend these are the good times... enjoy 'em while you can...

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N4RFJ on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
LOL! Wait its Deja voux, I remember back just before I got my first ticket. Lots of the old timers were complaining that the chicken banders would run rampant on ham radio. Then when the 13 wpm and 20 wpm requirements went away for General and Extra the battle cry was that the CBers were going to take over the HF bands. It was a nice theory, HOWEVER, It has not held much weight. The way the numbers of licensed operators have gone south lately its probably about time something was suggested to stimulate interest in amateur radio. I am 38 years old, thats what middle aged? As I look around me the others in this hobby who are even close to my age or younger than me are few and far between. I hate to be this blunt, but please consider this. If nothing changes and new and younger people are not more easily enticed to get into this hobby whats going to happen in the next say 20 to 30 years when the majority of the folks who are my age and older are not around anymore? I think it would be selfish and a tragedy to let such a wonderful hobby die with us because we were afraid of talking to a former GASP! CBer who was able to get licensed easier than we were. Oh and by the way, lots of currently licensed hams were once Cbers before it turned nasty. I remember going to the breaks in Miami with my dad when I was a kid and meeting with an incredible variety of people from other families they were mostly nice people. Out of that group of nice Cbers many of them became Amateurs, and I suspect thats what happened in other places besides Miami too.

Ok, that being said, God Bless You All J

N4RFJ
Joe Boston
Readyforjesus.com
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by WB7SFF on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The code requirement is the biggest deterrent that I have seen for keeping the Riff-Raff away from Ham Radio.

No doubt, it has kept some well deserved folks away as well, but all in all it has certainly worked in that respect.

Me, I'm against.

Skip
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by GILLIAM_LINEBERRY_EX_N4VOX on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I have been around emergency communications for almost 50 years. I have never heard one sent via CW, but I have heard manyb by voice. No one is going to buy the CW gets through comments. Many years ago when we had a lot of MARS traffic, we tried to get 20%passed on CW nets and some days they couldn't get through. We always got our voice traffic passed.

Ships have dropped radio operators and gone to satelite. The military doesn't even teach CW anymore, so the use has been prohibited on military frequencies.

Only a handful of people are wasting valuable spectrum sending meaningless dribble by CW. Welcome to the 20th century, even if it is 5 years late.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3DRK on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N4VOX said:

"I have been around emergency communications for almost 50 years. I have never heard one sent via CW, but I have heard manyb by voice"

Well Sir, if your idea of emergency communications is working the local 2 meter handheld's conducting the traffic through the intersection at the local WineFest, CW is not needed in such an Emergency.

john-n3drk.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC8VWM on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Say has anyone heard a copy from that Boss Hogg on 80 meters tonite? Breaker, Breaker, I need a radio check... Howz my modiation? ...I just got back home. I was busy splaterin bambi with my AK47 all over the woods with my friends all day, what you do all day.. play on CW or somethin?

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W8DPC on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Well Sir, if your idea of emergency communications is working the local 2 meter handheld's conducting the traffic through the intersection at the local WineFest, CW is not needed in such an Emergency. "

You're dancing around his question... when was the last time CW was necessary during a disaster, an emergency, or used to save a life, other than in movies?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W8DPC on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Oh boy, there IS actually someone else who gets it. THIS IS A DONE DEAL. The FCC is just humoring us so we think we have a say in what is happening, but we actually won't--code testing will be dropped, and sooner than we think. "

You've got it exactly right. The FCC wouldn't even mention it if they didn't intend to do it. Can anyone name one single time when the FCC decided NOT to do something that they issued a NPRM for due to a negative reaction? Even if every ham in the U.S. complained and opposed it, this thing is getting passed.

Although some may find it fun, comical, or necessary to moan and complain about it, all the debate is a huge waste of energy. You can cry, turn in your license, and threaten to kill yourself, and this thing is still getting passed, and most likely before the new year, if not right after.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W2DUG on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I fail to see how this will change things much. The guys who are operating CW will still be the ones who do so by choice, and the newbies on the HF phone bands will still be ignored by the seasoned hams. The best operators will still get lots of action, and the lids will move along. Newbies who are diligent, open to learning and polite on the air will succeed with some encouragement and elmering, and the newbies who didn't HAVE to learn code will quickly see the value of it and learn it anyway. Those are the kind of guys that even the most curmudgeonly hams should want to have in their ranks.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W9GDH on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I agree with W2DUG. If you want to use the full authorized frequency spectrum you will learn code.
I think the tests for the higher classes should be more in deepth and use 100 questions. After all we are looking for the highest skilled operator for the higher classes.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"......Repeat: CW is not a mode. It is turning an oscillator on and off in a predetermined pattern in order to convey information. Modes require modulating that basic rig in some way......"

If I may point out something to you, turning an oscillator on and off is the most basic way of 'modulating' there is. Since your example is off the mark and your statement that CW is not a mode is off the mark, it is suggested that that part of your argument is way off the mark.

CW is a 'mode' of operation--the most basic mode of operation there is. Switching an oscillator on and off is the strongest 'modulation' that can occur--which is why CW signalling is by far the best way to get through and the most easily 'heard' mode when the bands are noisy.

Were you absent the day they taught Basic Radio 101?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
".....But, now who will turn out the lights at W1AW.. after all now that their won't be anymore code practice transmissions......"

I really don't think that will happen--at least for the forseeable future. There will still be those who will want to learn the code, and the ARRL won't be too fast on the switch to turn that code practice transmission off. (At least I hope not.....)
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3DRK on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KX8N said:

"Oh boy, there IS actually someone else who gets it. THIS IS A DONE DEAL. The FCC is just humoring us so we think we have a say in what is happening, but we actually won't--code testing will be dropped, and sooner than we think. "

You just figure that out Einstein?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"You're dancing around his question... when was the last time CW was necessary during a disaster, an emergency, or used to save a life, other than in movies?"

Lets see now, the last one that was really conspicuous was. hmmmmmm....... 1918?? Funny how the Titanic keeps coming up! (Pun intended) :-)
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
By W2DUG:
".....The guys who are operating CW will still be the ones who do so by choice, and the newbies on the HF phone bands will still be ignored by the seasoned hams. The best operators will still get lots of action, and the lids will move along. Newbies who are diligent, open to learning and polite on the air will succeed with some encouragement and elmering, and the newbies who didn't HAVE to learn code will quickly see the value of it and learn it anyway....."

Boy, did you hit the nail on the head--you buried it in the board with one bang! I fully agree with this statement--those who don't may go the way of the lids, ignored and disgusted.....
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N3DRK, I suggest you read the posts more throughly before you post--he was quoting someone else whom he was agreeing with. Now why don't you read through the entire article and see if you can find out who made the original statement.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W9GDH on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Looks like EBAy will have a lot of HF gear to sell if the FCC drops the CW test.
You know that Amateur Radio will die if you don't know CW.
Things change in this world, get use to it.
If you like CW use it, if you don't, DON'T.
Yes CW is an Oscillator turning on and off. A spark gap transmitter is also turned on and off. A balanced modulator's output is turned on and off by unbalancing it with audio.
THINGS CHANGE. GET USE TO IT !!!!!!!!!!!!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N8NNE on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS said,

".....but I would like to see the USA hold themselves to a higher standard and maintain the requirement for the Extra Class."

Translation: I had to do it, so everyone else should too.


Wrong!!

Translation: I would like to see the USA hold themselves to a higher standard and maintain the requirement for the Extra Class.

I have the ability to state just exactly what I intend to convey, and I did just that.

You have no right nor ability to speak for me. So please desist from doing so.

N8NNE
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
To N8NNE:

I did not address my comment specifically to you although I quoted your words--so many others say exactly the same thing. So, pardon me if you thought I was talking directly to you, I wasn't.

Oh, and BTW, I stick with my statement--Way too many of those who say what you said have the "I did it, so should you" attitude.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by DD3EO on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KH6/G3SEA wrote:
""Ofcom ( U.K. equivalent to the FCC ) is currently soliciting comments on the ' potential ' elimination of Amateur Radio licences in the near future or further out !""

When I look on the Ofcom website, things look much differently:
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/aradio/
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/news/2005/05/nr_20050526

Quote from the second link:
""Ofcom is not proposing to remove the need for amateur radio users to hold a Wireless Telegraphy Act licence. Nor will it will remove any regulation which safeguards the integrity of radio spectrum used by the amateur radio community. Rather, it is seeking the right balance between maintaining sufficient regulatory control to avoid undue interference whilst removing unnecessary bureaucracy and cost.""
and:
""Ofcom intends to introduce a simpler, low-cost, electronic licensing process. This would mean:
Amateur radio licences would be valid for life, thereby avoiding the need for paper-based annual renewals which currently cost most users 15 a year; and

Licences would only be updated where amendments to licence details were necessary (for example, changes of name, address or licence level). This would be facilitated by a free online licensing system.""

The whole thing looks like a modernized version of the regime, that is in place here in Germany since a long time ago: Licence is perpetual, unless you violate the rules and regulations.

With best regards
DD3EO

 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W1DUD on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
*****************Yawn,...ZZZZZZzzzzzzz.............
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by DAR1232 on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I am not a ham as yet,but I am studying to take the tech test soon. I'll be glad they are going to drop the code requirment as I have no interest in code operation. I want to get on the air as a new ham do some talking to other hams around the world as soon as possible. I am 74 and need to get going as soon as possible as time is running out.
It's the same thing as the FCC dropping the building part of the tests and all the theroy. We need to some radio theory that is for sure ,but how many hams builb radioes today. I have serviced radioes and TV's long ago. But try and service anything today and you will shoot your self.
I'll stuy harder to get my ticket as soon as possible.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WR8D on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Guys and gals it honestly is not the i did it so you should have to also attitude. This has been showing up for the past few years since the "dumb down" started. Depending on where you live in this wonderful country you may have ran into ole bubba with his hardcore cb attitude. I have honestly seen the dregs of the earth come into the hobby in the last few years. These are filthy mouthed individuals with no regard for rules and no respect for anyone on any frequency. "Period"... We put classes on here locally for weeks at a time and tried to beat into their heads to leave the freeband attitude and filth on 11 meters since they were shooting for a ham license. We did get a few good ones but mostly they are just cbers with a ham license now. How many times would you tell a new ham to use his call on the two meter machines and not his cb handle. Or why after one did all that studying would any repeater owner have to put up with this situation in the first place. Groups of them would band together and go from repeater to repeater using only their cb handles and saying 10-4 to this and that just to rile up the older ham community. I even had musice being played on mine at one time. I'm not a doomsayer but i'm not a dumbass either i can see between the lines. The above situation has happened in many parts of the country. The older ham is in no way against new blood entering the hobby. We just want a hobby after all the rule changes are made. We're hams, we have rules we go by , we respect each other and others in far countries. I'll leave you folks with this one and i mentioned it a few weeks ago on an earlier thread here. We had several of them take the classes. Five of them made extra in a few short months. "Under five months". I never could make that one understand why his moonraker would'nt work on 80 meters. They study the question and answer and know nothing at all about radio when its over. But they have a ham license. They operate exactly the same on the hambands as they did and still do for that matter on cb. 1500 watts just to watch the watt meter, and talk to another one a half mile down the road doing the exact same thing. Try to say something to one of them and get cussed to pieces. We tried another six months to elmer and were told they knew more about radio since they had been on cb for 25 years. "Coming Soon Now To Every County In Every State" I just hope we got something left after the smoke clears. 73, John WR8D
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AB0WR on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Well Sir, if your idea of emergency communications is working the local 2 meter handheld's conducting the traffic through the intersection at the local WineFest, CW is not needed in such an Emergency. "

kx8n:
"You're dancing around his question... when was the last time CW was necessary during a disaster, an emergency, or used to save a life, other than in movies? "

How about the recent tsunami? If you had bothered to read about it in QST, 73, or World Radio you would know that most of the on-site hams in that area using HF to handle emergency traffic were forced to go to QRP, Morse Code/CW in order to conserve the batteries they had available.

tim ab0wr
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WI4SS on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
..".....The guys who are operating CW will still be the ones who do so by choice, and the newbies on the HF phone bands will still be ignored by the seasoned hams. The best operators will still get lots of action, and the lids will move along. Newbies who are diligent, open to learning and polite on the air will succeed with some encouragement and elmering, and the newbies who didn't HAVE to learn code will quickly see the value of it and learn it anyway....."

I will agree with that comment as well. I would like to see the test remain... however I won't blow a gasket if it goes... I do want the entry criteria for the licenses - at least general and extra to be a pretty good challenge. Operators need to work and study for their licenses. This will build a sense of accomplishment for their efforts....

Either way - welcome to those that wish to join the hobby and contribute positively...

73 de WI4SS
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by URBANGORILLA on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
WR8D knows what's comming. So do I. Just read the posts from arrogant nasty Technician class "hams" on this thread and every other code/no-code thread since 2003. The hatred and contempt for the elderly, the avid CW ops (young or old), and any ham that doesn't want the hobby dumbed-down any further than its already been just oozes from them, not to mention their hatred and contempt for CW itself. There was even one (WH6NY) who suggests that phone ops tune up on CW frequencies before using their radios on the phone frequencies. Its obvious that WH6NY intends doing this with his new HF privileges once this NPRM is made law. Is this what we can expect from codeless Generals who have the utmost contempt for CW and CW ops? Thank you FCC for opening the flood gates. I hope you enforcement guys down at Commission HQ are ready to deal with a massive enforcement problem a la CB. Only this time, don't shirk your responsibility like you did with the Citizens Band. Just remember that the rest of the world will be affected by what you look to unleash on the HF amateur frequencies.

73
UG
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by G3SEA on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

To DD3EO

You missed the point.

I have the Ofcom Consultative document in front of me.

Questions (5 & (6 ask for COMMENTS on ELIMINATING the licence entirely either in the near future or later.
ie the hobby would be turned into a CB like free for all with all the consequent interference chaos.

This is something that at the very least the ITU would oppose.

We KNOW Ofcom offers the ' carrot ' of a free lifetime licence. What has the RSGB and U.K. hams in a tizzy are those two questions ( (5&(6 ).

KH6/G3SEA

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Those who are saying the ham bands will turn into a "CB free-for-all" either have experience in one small part of the country or are talking through their hats. I used to drive tractor trailer and have been all over the eastern and central part of the country.

I have heard some entry level hams retain their CB slang and reject elmering, but those hams have been banned from repeaters until they clean up their act--and many of them finally do clean up their act. If one stated he had been a CBer for twenty years so he should know what he is doing, they would be reminded that ham radio isn't CB radio.

I have heard worse on the HF bands, however, much worse. Swearing, transmitting over others on the band, not using call signs when required, and the list goes on. And it seems the hams who are crying about the morse tests possibly ending are the same ones who are on the bands with their own style of operation. That style cannot by any stretch of imagination be considered 'good amateur practices', rather just the opposite.

There also seems to be a heck of a lot more technician class licensees operating according to good amateur practice than there are general or extra class licensees. You just have to listen to the bands to see that--unless the techs are illegally operating on the HF bands.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Were you absent the day they taught Basic Radio 101? >

Don't get personal, you'll lose. I have TAUGHT Basic Radio 101, and quite a bit higher.

You do NOT need an additional stage beyond the basic oscillator to send CW. No modulation circuitry required. That was my point. I admit I may have oversimplified in my short explanation, but was trying to get through to some who don't understand that CW is basic radio - simplest circuit required. And, by the way, I agree with you - that is one of its strengths.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WA4DOU on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Every journey to a distant place begins with the first step. We've known this was in the works for 15-18 years. It should hardly come as a surprise. Assuming that it comes to pass, we should not vilify those who come after the change and are no longer required to pass a cw test. No one loves cw more than I do. I consider it to be our most valuable mode, performance wise. I've read a lot of nonsense for quite some time on this subject. It clearly is a subject of great passion for a lot of us and IS the Holy Grail of amateur radio. If you must vilify anyone, look down on with my blessing, those who have agitated for and denigrated cw in the Internet medium or in person. And those who had no ambition and motivation as regarded amateur radio unless and until the test was eliminated. But above all, show some dignity. Tom Horn showed dignity even at his own hanging, for a crime he didn't commit, when his friend, the sheriff, had to carry out the sentence. We still have cw, we can still use cw and cw remains very valuable to us as a weak signal mode in dx, etc. We as cw ops are really the only one who know from expereince just what cw is capable of. Everyone else who denigrates cw from a posture of ignorance, is whistling in the wind. So let'em whistle. Quit whining, its unbecomming.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by X-WB1AUW on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Page 25 of the 30 page document, contains complete directions for filling comments.

�Commenters� might find it useful to read the NPRM before making comments.

Bob
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K1GB on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I really don't have too much of a problem with eliminating the code as a testing requirement. Where I DO have a problem is not replacing the code with something else. You cannot just drop the code and not replace it with something else, such as a longer and/or more difficult exam. Remember when all the exams (except for Novice) were 50 questions? Maybe the passing grade needs to be greater than 74%?
These are questions which the VECs must address.
We are truly "dumbing down" our hobby/service if we don't.

I also think that the FCC should not have dismissed creating a new entry level class to entice young people into Ham Radio. Many of them fail the Technician Class exam and would probably be discouraged to re-attempt it in the future. Some kids find the material alone to be intimidating.
As a VE I know of several such instances. A new entry level class would have been a great way to get much needed new blood into the hobby.

73, Gordy K1GB




 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KC8NMW on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The day after the code requirement is dropped, the sun will still come up in the east and set in the west. Millions of americans will go about their daily lives and the hundreds of thousands of hams will to. Some will wake up feeling bad, others feeling good, and some not even aware of what just happened in their hobby. I remember hearing the armegeddon type scenarios after the speed was reduced to 5 wpm for gen and extra back in 2000. All the know it alls in our hobby and the dinosaurs said "thats it, ham radio is over with, i am selling my equipment, it is going to become a cb band" Well guess what, here we are 5 years later and the hobby is going strong. Sure we have our share of problems, but none of them can be proven to be from the code speed being lowered. There has always been qrm'ers and their will continue to be qrm'ers.

I am "slow code extra" and damn proud of it. This is just a hobby and for those of you who might make a living off amateur radio, i.e. tech's or working at a radio store - just think of all the new business you will get from the "cb'ers" coming in to buy a radio or get an old serviced.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5DFM on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>As far as your comments about basic training and >repelling. I've been a police officer for several >years and before that I was a correctional officer so >don't lecture me about basic training and what you >have been threw.

OK Eric , i wasn't trying to lecture you , let me put it this way , how would you feel if you had to patrol with a new police officer who didn't have your training or expertise ?????

>You want to talk about BS, what is BS is the old >schoolers yelling the no code techs are going to turn >HF into crap, well I think those ass clowns have done >a nice job of that already, listen to 75 meters one >night.

this i agree with you , but there are good operators out there also , one group as an example is called the free wheelers and they are a fun nice group . . john


Eric Kc5Fog
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4HSM on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I do the website for This Week in Amateur Radio (twiar.org) and the Exec Producer wanted me to pass this along:

This Week in Amateur Radio will be collecting comments during the next six days from the amateur radio community at large regarding the FCC No Code NPRM and the ARRL Regulation by Bandwidth proposal.

Record your comments as an MP3 file recorded at least 16/22Khz and e-mail it to w2xbs(at)twiar.org.

Remember to keep your comments suitable for air.

George - W2XBS
This Week in Amateur Radio
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4HSM on July 23, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N3DRK:

To answer your question, I was licensed in 1993. Which is why I prefaced my comments on events before 1993 with "I'm sure that the vets said...".

At the time I wrote this I didn't have much time to come up with poignant moments, so I picked and chose the ones that stood out.

I do know that Hiram Maxim, W1AW, did speak of "the demise of amateur radio" many times in his commentaries to QST under a pseudonym. I think it was "The old man" or something like that.

I do know some who have been around for a lot longer than I (one was a close friend and elmer who predates organized callsigns, and is now SK) and often reminisced how "the guys" often spoke of gloom and doom for many events, like television, for example. Even broadcast radio was shaking over it's come-uppance.

No, I am not that old, nor do I speak for anyone but myself, but I figured the doomsday experts need to have a little food for thought.

Since you must know...
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W5UX on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
We ran tests and found that SSB had much gain over AM and also took up less space so naturally we gave up AM and bought radios that would work SSB. We compared SSB to CW and found that CW had gain over SSB and took up less space so We are going to get rid of CW. The army said that CW has a 14 DB gain over SSB. Oh well.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I think what bothers alot of folks here the most is you have a bunch of folks who CAN'T MAKE THE GRADE NOW who are going to get a free ride.....I guess I was raised to believe that you had to actually WORK for what you got....I guess the anti-code folks don't have that kind of ethic though.....and because they won't have to put out any effort go get a license, the license will be of little value to them, and that will cetainly be reflected in their operating habits...
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE5CMK on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
We should also require that everyone who wants to drive a car also learn to shoe horses.

How about, everyone who wants to use phone be first required to prove they can speak Swahili at the rate of five words per miniute.

How is this different?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N3DRK on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KE5MCK said:

"We should also require that everyone who wants to drive a car also learn to shoe horses.

How about, everyone who wants to use phone be first required to prove they can speak Swahili at the rate of five words per miniute.

How is this different? "

If you do not know how this is different then you do not have the capacity to understand any explanation. You sound like a teenager so that is understandable.

In your argument why don't you take it a step further. Why not say get rid of amateur radio because it is outdated. We have cell phones now.

You need to read the articles about the Tsunami Disaster. Those hams volunteering their time in the Asian countries had to use CW, did you hear me? CW and QRP, which means low power. Why do you think that is? Think about it.

Learn the code Carl. I know it would take time away from your video gaming but it will be more productive in the long run.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"......a bunch of folks who CAN'T MAKE THE GRADE NOW who are going to get a free ride......"

Where do you see the free ride?? There is a possible reduction in testing requirements because of the dropping of the morse test, but there is no free ride being given--no free upgrades.

After reading the NPRM and putting the pieces together, it looks like even though code testing may go, the credit for passing element 1 will still be used to ascertain operating privileges. Simply put, if you don't have credit for element 1, you don't automatically get HF privileges. You still have to take and pass the general theory test to get the privileges that a current tech with an element 1 CSCE has. (Yes, I know you'll have more privileges than that with the general class license)

Current technician class operators will NOT automatically get the privileges associated with element 1 credit-- the NPRM says that very plainly. All this NPRM does do if it is adopted is eliminate the code test--that is also very plainly stated.

So, in the end, there are no 'free rides' or 'automatic upgrades' associated with this rule making petition--just the elimination of one of the required elements to get either a general or an extra class license. No 'free rides', just the use of less gas to get where you're going. (And at the price of gas today, maybe that's a good thing!! ;-))
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KB3LKW on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I guess all the money and hours I spent on learning the morse code is for not. I also guess that hard work and determination are not the way to get where you want to be in life. I drive a tractor trailer for a living,I guess since there is not enough drivers we should just forget about traning people and give everyone how wants a cdl license well just give them one.If the code requirement would have been 20 wpm then I would have studied long and hard to get there.I guess I might as well buy stock in Yaesu,Icom,Kenwood ect... since everyone in the world we be going out and buy an Hf rig.This truly is sad.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE5CMK on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N3DRK, I stopped being a teenager about fifty years ago at about the same time I fell in love with HAM radio. So yes I would like for you to explain.

I have never had any difficulty with technical aspects related to taking and passing the FCC tests. Even back when I would have been required to explain the functions of various components and draw wiring diagrams. I could even (by rote) deal with the archane rules and requlations of the FCC.

However, Morse code defeated me. I could with practice learn to send at a fair rate but receiving proved impossible. After a letter or two it all just turned into noise. And yes, I've tried the tapes along with several other "magic" learning methods like blinking lights and different frequency buzzers.

All in all, we can say that the "gatekeeper" kept me out for a good many years. I got my Technician license only at the urging of some friends who assured me that "soon" I would gain access to HF. Now it seems to be coming to pass, and I welcome the change.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS said "So, in the end, there are no 'free rides' or 'automatic upgrades' associated with this rule making petition--just the elimination of one of the required elements to get either a general or an extra class license. No 'free rides', just the use of less gas to get where you're going."

Chris, we've discussed this before...if the current written exams are not made more difficult, then YES, they are getting a FREE RIDE....My whole opinion of this would change if they would stop publishing the questions and answers, and make the written exams more difficult...until then, the written exams are a joke....and they are getting a FREE RIDE...
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KG6WLV on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I HAD to add my two-cents worth, and I'll try not to waste much of anyone's time. Here are my observations:
Macho 1kW stations, with "high-fidelity SSB" using WAY more power to effect communications than necessary, are as much a detriment to the health of the Amateur Radio Service as this proposal is;
The contesting I hear on HF is as much a detriment to the ARS as this proposal -- thank God I don't hear it on the WARC bands. I find it amusing that there are hams who object to opening HF to no-coders, but don't mind flooding the bands with QRM to win a contest. If fairness is the issue, why not ban contesting as it's presently constituted? It certainly is "unfair" to operators who would like to use some of the HF spectrum without deliberate, harmful interference on the weekends. The closest resemblance to CB that HF has is on a contest weekend, and everyone knows it;
I hear plenty of ops with code-proficiency -- presumably -- with operating practices FAR inferior to mine, and I haven't made my first QSO!
Why not a PSK31 proficiency requirement, or RTTY, or any other mode that someone favors? Because that wouldn't be fair, either. I've spent many, many more hours studying for my code requirement than I did my theory, and STILL didn't pass my code test. I can't play the piano or the guitar, either, although I'd like to do that, too. But I still can contribute to this hobby/service/culture;
Obviously, CW is a useful skill, and anyone who denies it is unrealistic. It's a great weak-signal mode, and as others have noted, it's usable when all else fails, and no high-tech equipment is required. But the sum of all human knowlege is static; we discard ideas and concepts and add others as we change our mode of living -- we don't know how to build pyramids like the Egyptians did, but we don't need to know how, either. 150 years is a good run for Morse Code; compare it to the life of the LP record or the CD, for that matter;
I've been monitoring HF avidly for many years, and when I get on the air I will emulate the operating practices of the best operators, no matter who they are, and try to help the people who come along after. Isn't that what this is all about? Character and a desire to serve don't come from a code requirement;
And lastly, maybe the fellow who mentioned his younger students could learn code but not the theory should look to himself. Perhaps his own biases in favor of code made that easier to teach. I've worked as a substitute teacher with students of all ages, and I'd love the opportunity to teach theory to a group of kids.
And lastly, after reading numerous posts to this forum, perhaps we need a SPELLING test for the ARS!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AB0WR on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
ke5cmk:
"We should also require that everyone who wants to drive a car also learn to shoe horses.

How about, everyone who wants to use phone be first required to prove they can speak Swahili at the rate of five words per miniute.

How is this different? "

I had to take a physical driving test with DMV examiner sitting in the seat beside me before I got my first driving license.

Why should getting an Amateur Radio license be any different?

And remember, this CAN be a safety issue just like driving. If you don't know what you are doing with a programmable UHF radio you can intefere with life saving operations and cause loss of life just like you can driving a car. So that won't cut it for a reason as to why it is different.

ke5cmk:
"However, Morse code defeated me. I could with practice learn to send at a fair rate but receiving proved impossible. After a letter or two it all just turned into noise. And yes, I've tried the tapes along with several other "magic" learning methods like blinking lights and different frequency buzzers."

Since you obviously have such a serious hearing/comprehension problem I am surprised you could learn to send since sending requires a feedback similar to receiving in order to insure proper element and character spacing and proper character formulation.

I must also assume you have a problem with audible speech elements which are much more complex than Morse Code. Did you learn sign language to communicate? If so, you can apply the same techniques to learning Morse Code.

It just requires a "can-do" attituce instead of a "can't do" attitude.

tim ab0wr
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AB0WR on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
kg6wlv:
"Why not a PSK31 proficiency requirement, or RTTY, or any other mode that someone favors? Because that wouldn't be fair, either. I've spent many, many more hours studying for my code requirement than I did my theory, and STILL didn't pass my code test. "

I assume you are speaking of a typing test? -- because you don't manually formulate the audio elements sent in psk31 or rtty it would be pretty hard to test for that kind of efficiency.

If you learned to touch type you learned the same kind of skill it takes to do Morse Code. In the case of typing it is a eye/hand or mind/hand coordination. It the case of Morse Code it is an ear/hand or mind/hand coordination method. When you hit the shift key and another key to make a capital letter you are doing a sequence of events quite similar to sending a Morse Code character. A shiftkey/a is quite simiar to doing a left/right (i.e. a dit/dah) on an iambic keyer to send the letter "a". Once you've learned the combination to send you can learn the combination you hear, see, or feel in order to receive.

As a VE I once saw someone write down each dit and dah they heard during each character and the letter at the end of each character. After the test they went back over the copy to make sure letter was correct based on the dits and dahs they wrote down. If you can read then this should be a workable method for you as well.

Perhaps it just takes someone to show you different ways of accomplishing the task? A "can-do" attitude instead of a "can't-do" attitude?

tim ab0wr
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by DD3EO on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KH6/G3SEA wrote:
""To DD3EO

You missed the point.

I have the Ofcom Consultative document in front of me.

Questions (5 & (6 ask for COMMENTS on ELIMINATING the licence entirely either in the near future or later.
ie the hobby would be turned into a CB like free for all with all the consequent interference chaos.""

After reading and rereading the PDF, I understand now.
To be frank, I don't think, that this will happen.
Why? International treaties, ITU regulations, the CEPT plus it would run contrary to the HAREC harmonization effort.
However, opposing voices are still useful, so that the Ofcom's skepticism is reinforced.

The reason, why I didn't understood first is the fact, that a UK Ham licence seems to be a three part thing.
(Radio Examination Pass Certificate, WTA Licence, Paper Licence with the call)
Here in Germany, you pass the test, get your licence, that's it. No renewals, no separate parts...
So from that point of view, the whole process in the UK could use a bit of streamlining.

With best regards
DD3EO
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
gee. gonna be a lot of hams with sore legs next week, from all the knee jerking.

The sky didn't fall. Life as we know it didn't end. And the hobby is not going to change as a result of the NPRM, even when the FCC declares it official.

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
R-123, yes, we did. The points discussed before, however, included auto upgrades of techs to general class, thereby giving techs a 'free ride'. I was and am against that. But auto upgrading is not the case here. The NPRM plainly states no automatic upgrades and no extra privileges will be accorded.

The one (and quite possibly the only) way to read it is when this change goes into effect, the current privileges will stand. If you are a tech class and have a CSCE for element 1, (morse) then you will still have limited HF access. If you don't have that CSCE, then you will not, and you will have to pass the general theory test to get HF privileges. It is only the element 1 test that will be eliminated, not element 1 credit, when considering operating privileges. The NPRM says that too, if you look closely--it says no other changes will be made, only the code test will be dropped, and current privileges will remain the same.

Oh, and BTW, I still think the tests should be toughened up to compensate for the removal of element 1--I heartily agree with you there.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP said "The sky didn't fall. Life as we know it didn't end. And the hobby is not going to change as a result of the NPRM, even when the FCC declares it official."

...and Marty will still be a clueless NEWBIE....
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by N3BSZ on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Back in the late 80's I was given some older gear by wife of a SK. The local hams in the area wanted the equipment to be given to a younger person interested in ham radio. I was just 12 years old and new a little about the hobby, like people used a mic and key to commnicate all over the world. I saw an add in a local news paper in the free section.

This is what it basicly said:

Free: amateur radio, collins kwm-2, mic, key, globe scout deluxe, and misc items.

Being a 12 year old I knew what ham radio was, but never heard of amatuer radio, but I hoped i was right and this would be my dream.

I call the lady's phone number and got no answer. I was afraid that someone was going to beat me to it so I kept dialing the old rotary phone and she finally picked it up. It was mine...

This was my entry point into amatuer radio.

I met with a local ham and tried to learn the 5 wpm requirement and master the novice test. I got A, E, T, N, and the easy 2 caracter letters, but nothing more. I tried for some time and finally gave up. I was able to understand the theory without much difficulty, but that would not help.

In March 1992 I finally got it. N3BSZ.

I have played with building antennas, Heath Kits, Field Day, VHF contest, projects from QST including board design.

I now work as an engineer for one of the largest radio broadcast companies in the world. I work on 50000 watt transmitters on AM (yes antique modulation), and da antenna systems and 108000 watt erp fm stations. I have been out of amateur radio for almost seven years.

Why you might ask? Is it because I don't have the time, 1500 watts is too borning, no that is not it.

When I moved from Northeastern PA to western NY I did not receive a warm welcome. I went on different "open" repeaters in hopes of striking up a converstation and I got nothing back. I threw my call into the mix during drive time after listening for a while and the same thing. Did these hams have a computer with them and know that I was a "3" land ham and worse off I was a Technicaian WITHOUT HF privleages? I doubt it.

If I had my way with the FCC, I would remove the code requiments for those who wish not to take that part of the test, but require them to take an additional in depth theory test, better yet actual hands on. The one part I give the code requirement is it addressed you having to do something for the license, not just memorize something.

How many hams today can actually read a schematic and build or repair their rig. Better yet, use an analog VOM? More and more hams are becoming closet hams, this is what will bring the end to amateur radio.

73,

Tom n3bsz in 2 land
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> and Marty will still be [...]

a person who accurately predicted, on this site, and others, that the FCC would continue to dismiss all of the arguments for element 1 and drop it.

If that's 'clueless', I'll be happy to remain 'clueless'; but you seem to have an odd definition of the word.

Now I'm looking forward to reading the phone band restructuring NPRM.

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC8VWM on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I would have expected better from an "Extra"
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K6IHC on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> I can just see one of these new guy (guys) getting his fingers into a 2KW amp... why we'll have to put lables (labels) on 'em (them) because they won't understand that if they touch something... it might just kill 'em (them) and then the gean (gene) pool would be more empty... Oh wow... think of the manufacture libility (liability) and litigation for wrongfull (wrongful) death... and what about antennas... ouch... after all they were never trained on any of this equipment and how to use it properly...


I don't see how passing the Element 1 exam would prevent the above scenario...?
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"the worst thing about this hobby is these idiotic ridiculously ignorant stupid repetatively foolish jackasses that continue to whine about CW being" too difficult to learn.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W5UX on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I WAS WRONG

I had been saying that there was not a mode that would beat CW. I was wrong. There is a mode that will beat morse. "CB."
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<... And the hobby is not going to change as a result of the NPRM, even when the FCC declares it official.>

The overwhelming majority - on EACH side of the issue - will strongly disagree with you on that one.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AC9HE on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This sounds like a daycare and someone took away all the toys.........

It.......is hilarious.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by AD5TD on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
File your comments with the FCC!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC8VWM on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
If this forum is any indication, the FCC will have a lot of reading to do for the next 3 or 4 years.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WA6CDE on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hey while the FCC is thinking.. which I know it must hurt 'em to do that...

I see no reason why they shouldn't give everyone the extra class ticket.. after all then everyone could use all the spectrum... Look at the savings.. in regestration... and paper work... why no more tech, genereals.. everyone is a extra class ham... one license does it all... and no more discrimination either... no more pissing contests... equality and fairness for all...

I want my extra class ticket... given to me.. should be the cry of these babys...

A movement should be started by the ARRL to consolidate ham licenses into one... as a cost savings measure... grin...
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1DA on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Complly with international law??? Oh yes and have our servicemen tried in "international courts too while you are at it..
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1DA on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The real danger is when digital "get your email on HF phoney hams" begin to occupy all that "unused" bandwidth on the no longer relevant cw portions with their automatic stations. Just ask the mighty League what safeguards are going to be in place so that the dx windows don't have these relatives of the "autopatch only" techs of years past talking to their brokers right there on ham radio. The stuff DOES NOT CARE what else in on the frequency. The mighty league answer is that "technology" will solve the problem WHEN ..--..
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1DA on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

Remember folks it was our fearless leaders in the mighty ARRL league who insisted that incentive licnsing and 20 wpm extras were the way to go "for the hobby" NOW they have run about as far away as they can from that concept with nary a "we were wrong" to be heard. I guess they can do no wrong as long as we have a short memory.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by G3SEA on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

To DD3OE

There are quite a few things that need streamlining in the U.K. :)

In QSO's with U.K. hams on EchoLink repeaters I got the impression that Ofcom was staffed only by ' bean counters ' :) This may explain the absurdity of questions 5 & 6 in their original documentation.

Agreed such an action ( dumping the Technical Competency exam ) would be opposed by the ITU.

KH6/G3SEA
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by A_HAMS_WIFE on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
In reference to the NPRM docket 05-235;

I FULLY AGREE WITH THIS PROPOSAL!

It is simply amazing to read the comments from persons against the proposal. Most can not use correct spelling however they want to keep Morse Code (CW) as a requirement. I truly believe those people should spend as much time and effort learning to spell as they did learning the code. What an embarrassment to the hobby! In case of an emergency I do believe it would be a MUST to send the proper spelling of words if indeed code had to be used!!

Some CW operators are moaning about things that are not even involved! The CW Bands are not going away, only the CW testing for the license is changing!

The rate of new amateur radio users is not increasing at a desirable rate due to the conduct and attitudes of most of the existing CW operators.

The silence on the bands speaks VOLUMES to those of us wishing to save a dying hobby, and it is clearly stating, the lack of interest in this hobby is astonishing! CW operators need to understand the traditional ham radio operators seem to be a dying breed and if they wish to keep it alive they need to adapt to the changing times, and be encouraged by the progress being made and the number of people interested and caring enough in the hobby to pursue modern changes.

The beliefs of most of the CW operators seem to be everyone needs to know the code to get the General and Extra licenses simply because they had to at the time they wanted those particular licenses. Does that mean since these operators had equipment which was of lesser quality than the present equipment at the time they tested for these licenses, everyone should continue to use what they had available to them at that time instead of using the present equipment with advanced technology simply because they had to? How absurd!

Stop with all the WHINING and get on board with the changing times. Help amateur radio bounce back to the exciting hobby it used to be. I have heard CW operators comparing amateur radio with CB radio operation and claiming that as the direction amateur radio is headed. Well, I do not believe that will happen simply because code knowledge is dropped from the licensing requirement, however, I have also heard conversations on CB radios are still very active, which is more than I can say for amateur radio most of the time! What good does it do to have a license with or without knowing code if there is no one on the bands to hear it?

With the turmoil of todays world the hobby could use all the positive reinforcement and licensed users it can get!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by THERAGE on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K4JF writes=

"the worst thing about this hobby is these idiotic ridiculously ignorant stupid repetatively foolish jackasses that continue to whine about CW being" too difficult to learn.

WRONG!! The worst thing about this hobby/service is idiotic ridiculously ignorant stupid repetatively foolish jackasses like you that continue to bitch and moan that the cw requirement should stay in place. cw is not what makes a good op. people such as your sorry self is what is creating bad ops and killing ham radio.

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

 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by W2SWR on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I have been a technician since 1999. Along with me passing my tech lisence I had also passed my element 3, then watched it expire. I have been passing element 3 practice test on QRZ.com since 2001. I have been trying to pass my element 1 for the past 5 years. I have tried all the methods out there. I have tried all the tapes and software. I have even had a tutor who is an extra. I've been told that my send speed is up to 10 to 15 wpm. I cannot recevieve at even 5 wpm. As a child I was told that I am tone deaf. The extra that tutored me thinks that this may be a part of the problem. I look forward to the dropping of the morse code requirement.

73's

de Mike, W2SWR
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<K4JF writes=

"the worst thing about this hobby is these idiotic ridiculously ignorant stupid repetatively foolish jackasses that continue to whine about CW being" too difficult to learn.

WRONG!! The worst thing about this hobby/service is idiotic ridiculously ignorant stupid repetatively foolish jackasses like you that continue to bitch and moan that the cw requirement should stay in place. cw is not what makes a good op. people such as your sorry self is what is creating bad ops and killing ham radio. >

No, you're wrong!! Completely. I didn't write the above - I just cut and pasted from an earlier posting and reversed the last 4 words to illustrate that the REAL problem is the ridiculous whining and, even worse, the uncalled-for name calling on BOTH sides of the issue.

And you should read someone's position before bitching at them!! I have advocated elimination of the CW requirement for HF access for quite a while. So point the insults somewhere else and don't make yourself look like an idiot.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<It is simply amazing to read the comments from persons against the proposal. Most can not use correct spelling however they want to keep Morse Code (CW) as a requirement. I truly believe those people should spend as much time and effort learning to spell as they did learning the code. What an embarrassment to the hobby! In case of an emergency I do believe it would be a MUST to send the proper spelling of words if indeed code had to be used!!>

Actually, I found the reverse to be true. Especially the more vocal ones!


<Some CW operators are moaning about things that are not even involved! The CW Bands are not going away, only the CW testing for the license is changing! >

Not quite the case. There are strong advocates to ban CW from ham bands. You can read them right here and on the other board. They don't call themselves "No Test".

<The rate of new amateur radio users is not increasing at a desirable rate due to the conduct and attitudes of most of the existing CW operators. >

I doubt seriously if those who don't want to learn CW are being deterred by what is said on the CW bands.

<The silence on the bands speaks VOLUMES to those of us wishing to save a dying hobby, and it is clearly stating, the lack of interest in this hobby is astonishing! CW operators need to understand the traditional ham radio operators seem to be a dying breed and if they wish to keep it alive they need to adapt to the changing times, and be encouraged by the progress being made and the number of people interested and caring enough in the hobby to pursue modern changes.>

The "silence on the bands" is primarily a natural function - the sunspot cycle. They are very active during band openings such as 2 weeks ago. Especially on the little CW portion. "Modern changes" in and of themselves will not kill the bands or keep them alive.

When the exams were simplified, number of hams went down. When no-code Tech came in, the number of hams went down. When the code speed was dropped to 5 wpm, the number of hams went down. Why in the world does anyone think that more of the same will reverse the trend?
The trend is due to something else, not CW. It has to be because changing the CW requirement has had no effect. I submit that it is part of a larger anti-technology trend in the US today. The same thing that is causing enrollment to drop at engineering schools and in the technical fields. Kids say "it's too hard", and opt for fields that take less effort.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>> ... And the hobby is not going to change as a
>> result of the NPRM, even when the FCC declares it
>> official.

> The overwhelming majority - on EACH side of the
> issue - will strongly disagree with you on that
> one.

and yet, nothing will change.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> If this forum is any indication, the FCC will have
> a lot of reading to do for the next 3 or 4 years

75 days.

then they make it permanent.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on July 25, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> If this forum is any indication, the FCC will have
> a lot of reading to do for the next 3 or 4 years

75 days.

then they make it permanent.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N0TONE on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
A_Hams_Wife,

For a woman, your writing style is astonishingly masculine. I commend you on your ability to completely eliminate any telltale signs of the feminine touch in your comment. No subtlety or veiled hints in your writing, you make your statements and then repeat them over and over like a man. You must have studied very hard to accomplish that feat.

You don't mention whether you're a ham. If not, then some of the errors in factual observations you make surely are forgivable, but I will cover them so other readers have an accurate perspective.

Disclaimer: for the record, while I am a 99% CW operator, I endorse the elimination of the CW testing requirements. My comments herein are a matter of factual evidence, not an attempt to persuade.

Claim(s) #1:
"It is simply amazing to read the comments from persons against the proposal. Most can not use correct spelling however they want to keep Morse Code (CW) as a requirement. I truly believe those people should spend as much time and effort learning to spell as they did learning the code. What an embarrassment to the hobby! In case of an emergency I do believe it would be a MUST to send the proper spelling of words if indeed code had to be used!!"

I have taken mental note of the grammar and spelling, and compared with what position the person is taking. The non-CW ops in general have a lower level of accomplishment in both, although it must be observed that both camps have produced atrocities in spelling and grammar. Honestly, my friend, your own posting's grammar and punctuation leave much to be desired, and this diminishes the strength of any claims you make in this area. Interesting that you suggest a person spend equal time learning CW and spelling/grammar. Most US citizens receive 180 hours of instructor-led time and are expected to contribute 360 hours of self-study for spelling and grammer. I've never had a student of CW require more than 80 dedicated hours to get to 13 wpm. Therefore, I would be honored if anybody chose to spend an equal amount of time studying CW as they did spelling, grammar and punctuation. Had you any actual experience with professional emergency preparedness and response teams and/or the military, you would realize that as bad as hams' spelling and grammar is, it is not below that of other services providing a theoretically "more professional" service. Further, abbreviations on CW render spelling nearly worthless in any case.

Claim #2:
"The rate of new amateur radio users is not increasing at a desirable rate due to the conduct and attitudes of most of the existing CW operators."

Conjecture. Again, as a non-operator, you are not in a position to understand the differences between the operations on phone versus CW. It requires only brief encounters with both to recognize the calibre of on-air behavior for CW ops to be notably superior. As a non-operator, you would of course, have no reason to know this, so perhaps your view is tainted by your husband's notions.

The reason for which the rate of new users is not increasing is a topic of great debate. It may be due to absence of follow-through from the VEs and VECs (my opinion is that is the primary cause) or it may be due to the unpleasantness that the newcomer encounters on two meter FM, the place where they're usually encouraged to go, but it is most surely not due to behavior of CW ops, which the "want to be" hams never meet anyway.

Claim #3:
"The silence on the bands speaks VOLUMES to those of us wishing to save a dying hobby, and it is clearly stating, the lack of interest in this hobby is astonishing! CW operators need to understand the traditional �ham radio� operators seem to be a dying breed and if they wish to keep it alive they need to adapt to the changing times, and be encouraged by the progress being made and the number of people interested and caring enough in the hobby to pursue modern changes."

Again, as a non-operator, you can not be held accountable for this misinformation. If you have a receiver which is equipped for proper CW operation (if you only operate phone, and have not invested money in a CW filter, then you would never know this is true), then you will normally find more CW QSOs in progress on 40, 15, 12 and 10 meters than phone QSOs. When propagation is poor, you'll hear more CW than phone on 20 meters as well. Only if you have a proper CW filter in your rig, though. It is a case of "I'll see it when I believe it". If you set up your station to be most effective on SSB, then those are the signals which you will hear best. Your allusion to silent bands is rendered irrelevant when compared to the more frequent complaints of crowded bands, which complains come from regular users of HF.

Claim #4:
"The beliefs of most of the CW operators seem to be everyone needs to know the code to get the General and Extra licenses simply because they had to at the time they wanted those particular licenses."

No CW operator believes this or has said this. This is a claim made against CW ops by anti-CW ops. It is not true when they say it, and it does not become true no matter how many times they say it. I am a prime example. I had to pass a 25 wpm test (they were once that high), but I am perfectly content to welcome any new ham into the service, whether he/she passed any test at all or not. After all, one can only pass the tests which are available at the time of license.

Claim #5:
"Stop with all the WHINING and get on board with the changing times. Help amateur radio bounce back to the exciting hobby it used to be."

You lead. Get your license, then shut off the computer and turn on the radio and make a contact.

I've been in ham radio nearly 70 years. It's as exciting today as at any time I remember. There are just as many signals on HF as always, but they are weaker because today's ham seems ready to buckle under to the CC&R authorities all too easily and too many compromise antennas are in existence. Records are being set for log submissions for every HF contest. We have more modes available than ever before.

The only dying part about ham radio is VHF FM repeater operation and that SHOULD die, since that particular kind of operation is better performed with a cell phone. But a cell phone cannot replace the thrill of HF.

AM
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by THERAGE on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<No, you're wrong!! Completely. I didn't write the above - I just cut and pasted from an earlier posting and reversed the last 4 words to illustrate that the REAL problem is the ridiculous whining and, even worse, the uncalled-for name calling on BOTH sides of the issue.>
well then before you cut and paste be sure you illustrate where it came from asshole!!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<It's as exciting today as at any time I remember. There are just as many signals on HF as always, but they are weaker because today's ham seems ready to buckle under to the CC&R authorities all too easily and too many compromise antennas are in existence. Records are being set for log submissions for every HF contest. We have more modes available than ever before.>

AMEN.

<The only dying part about ham radio is VHF FM repeater operation and that SHOULD die, since that particular kind of operation is better performed with a cell phone. But a cell phone cannot replace the thrill of HF. >

Well, not really. The "commuter roundtables" that are popular here can't be replaced with cellphones. But autopatch operation is almost completely dead for the reason you specify.

An excellent post, NOTONE. I agree with most.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by WS4Y on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is just awful. Well I'll file my comments
in opposition but I'm sure it will do no good.
Sad day.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by KC2MFW on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
CB radio was a '70's fad and I don't think those still into it would want to put the effort into studying for the written exams.
I'm not sure we will see much of a rush to HF as a result of this.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WA6CDE on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
to: A HAMS WIFE...

WHERE DO YOU GET OFF COMING ON HERE AND PUTTING YOUR TWO CENTS WORTH OF MINDLESS DRIBBLE IN...

Like so many from the peanut gallery..... That are fence sitters... you are not a ham yet you have the gall to come in and tell others hams what is and isn't.. Get real

You know little or nothing about CW... And its operation... if you did then you would have a call sign other than some hams wife...

Clearly not only is your spelling not correct by also you grammar... heaven forbid that we not send the correct period or comma on your behalf when an emergency is underway. Lady I suggest you go back into the kitchen where you belong... and not come back until you get a ham license.. I am sure you have heard the choice word before describing your meddling...

Truly a CB canadate... bet you pick up your hubbies radio mic and talk too when he is away...
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by N2VWP on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
[QUOTE FROM NY7Q]
SAD, SAD, SAD DAY. THE NO GOODS, LAZY BASTARDS HAVE WON THE BATTLE, BUT NOT THE WAR.
----------------------------------------------------------

It's amazing to me how many comments there are like this. Well, my friend, I am one of those "lazy bastards" apparently. I've held a no code-tech license for several years now... due to time constraints (because apparently I'm lazy with working, school and some family issues, etc etc) I really haven't had too much time to explore my capabilties to their fullest in the past.

I have quite an extisive background in computers, networks, and electronics/circuitry holding certifications from Novell, Cisco, Microsoft and several others.

While I am still going to try to learn code, I think the decision to drop it as a requirement is a good one. Something that the "old timers" keep saying which no-one seems to be picking up on is that amateur radio is a HOBBY. All the people that use CW will continue to learn CW. People like me may or may not get a full grasp on the code; at least the requirement drop will allow us to try as we go. CW should be a preference, just like any other mode...

I guess what I'm trying to say is code, or no code, there will always be several 'classes' of operator: the causual (me), the country-bumpkin (as some one quoted the duke boys), the jerk that transmits over everyone else or hogs a frequency, the hard core enthusiast, and probably several thrown in between; code won't change that.

If the proposal goes thru and I get my General by upgrading via the written test, not immediately learning CW doesn't make me any worse of an operator. I know the theory and practices, I am articulate and experienced, and I enjoy the HOBBY.

73
Rob [n2vwp]
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WA6CDE on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
ahhh yes that brings up a good question... besides me wanting my free upgrade to extra... will all the previous hams that have taken the written test and failed the code be automatically upgraded to the new license..??? if the testing is no different than what the tech has... will the FCC and ARRL suddenly turn on the printing presses and issue auto upgrades...???
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by W5UX on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The worst and least efficient mode is probably voice. Even rtty will run circles around it.
 
RE: You ain't gona believe this one...  
by WA6CDE on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Gordon West has weighed in on the subject of license giveaway... yahooo... note the code section...



AN ALTERNATIVE TO GETTING A HAM LICENSE

"IF YOU NEED THE HAM TICKET, WE MAY TALK YOU OUT OF IT!"

By Gordon West

When a major metropolitan fire department called up to book a special weekend Technician class ham course for their pilots, we turned them off on ham radio as their primary low-cost way of getting free aeronautical ATV.

The professional skipper called in for a ham class, but later discovered how a marine single-sideband radio could easily satisfy his "requirement" to offer the boat owner long-range, non-satellite, e-mail capabilities.

A major local sheriff�s department recently called wanting to pay for a special class to license 25 officers to handle "Baker to Vegas" radio communications. They wanted their own personnel to have the ham license to specifically keep communications within their own department on frequencies different than regular PD simplex channels.

A RC flying club wanted in on a weekend Technician class, JUST to get off of 72 MHz and onto the ham radio 6-meter "black flag" band. They, too, were discouraged to obtain the ticket.

Same thing with a desert area hang glider club�-they wanted up on APRS, and needed some frequencies that would be uncrowded to talk from glider to chase vehicle.

In each of these cases, our initial conversation quickly reveals the applicant has absolutely no other interest in becoming a ham other than meeting a licensing REQUIREMENT. We can almost tell by the tone of the conversation they have no other aspirations over the airwaves other than to satisfy their own private comms.

We try to work with these ham applicants to help them better understand alternative radio services for what they want to do. For mariners, the marine radio service offers companion ship-to-ship and ship-to-shore high-frequency bands. For police and fire, we tell them how to obtain more information from WESCAM for live video feeds. For the Baker to Vegas requests, we encourage the municipalities to look within their own cities and bring in licensed hams to help out with the follow-me-vehicle communications. For hang gliders, we might turn them onto the multi-use radio service (MURS) which offers no-license, 5-VHF-channel operation at considerably higher power levels than no-license, half-watt, FRS equipment.

Here at Radio School, we regularly offer FREE kids classes. We also invite volunteers within scouting, schools, and the American Red Cross to take the classes at no teaching charge. We offer specialty classes for sailors, as well as RVers. The classes are preceded with required home study, and this gives all of our students a head start on both the theory as well as the Morse Code.

Most important, our classes are not over when they pass the test. We agree with Dave Sumner, K1ZZ, Chief Executive Officer of the American Radio Relay League, in his February, 2005, editorial about the importance of getting new licensees on the air, joining the League, and working with their local ham radio club. ". . .Give them opportunities to learn more than the bare essentials to pass the test. . .," states Sumner, pointing out that all hams should go out of their way to let brand new hams into our fabulous hobby and service.

This May we hope that the Federal Communications Commission will announce license restructuring. A more straight-forward, entry-level exam is absolutely necessary. The current 511 Technician class test is doing nothing more than challenging an applicant�s capability to rote memorize Q & A�s to get through the exam. A more basic entry-level exam that covers radio operation on the new bands they will achieve is what is necessary.

If the Morse Code test goes by the wayside, I anticipate MORE hams will begin learning the code than ever before once they listen in on high frequency. Code will never die, and getting rid of the code test will sweeten the concept of learning a new language of dots and dashes to preserve some ham radio heritage.

Let�s hope by this time next year we have a new restructured amateur service and will have applicants coming out of the woodwork wanting to join in on all that ham radio has to offer. And if they�re joining ham radio as a hobby and service, we welcome them in our classes.

But if they JUST need the ham ticket JUST to do free e-mail out at sea, or if they are JUST getting the ham license so they can fly RC or have their own private comm channel, be assured we will introduce them to OTHER radio services where they won�t be "required" to talk to any other unknown operator other than their little group of pals on the same frequency. This is not in the spirit of ham radio, but better suited for other radio services.

So send us those hobbyists that really want to play ham radio, and rest assured we will take good care of them here at Gordon West Radio School.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse  
by EI5FK on July 27, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is only a proposal and a sad one at that, makes you wonder what is the "hidden aganda" and its probably a commercial one at that, shame though to have to "scrape the bottom of the barrel" to get more operators on HF.
watch this space for the next move "WE WANT THE CW ALLOCATION" for more data or ssb.
Charles
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse  
by THERAGE on July 27, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Piss off!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse  
by OLDFART13 on July 27, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
As I said before, the super easy 5wpm code exam should be maintained for the Extra class license. If you are too stupid or lazy to learn if for Extra then you are just a whinny little gurlyman!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse  
by W5UX on July 27, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This bickering is getting out of hand. One poster called this welfare and affirmative action radio. That was a rude thing to say.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse  
by A9KW on July 27, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
If you want to use hf.Then you must pass the code.
No freebees here folks.Work for what you want,dont wait for some one to give it to you.
THATS THE LAZY SOB WAY OF GETTING SOMETHING
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse  
by IMBACKHF on July 27, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 27, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
".......the differences between the operations on phone versus CW. It requires only brief encounters with both to recognize the calibre of on-air behavior for CW ops to be notably superior. ........"

You really have to be miopic to have made this statement. There is just as many bad operators on HF as there is on the V-UHF bands, and just as many good ones too.

The following is just my point of view: Yes, the CW ops may seem to have better manners, but there are a lot more phone ops than CW ops when you look at all the bands, and it still seems like there is more if you just look at the HF bands. Maybe that is why there aren't many bad CW operators.

If you say the brass pounders love what they do and are therefore better and more polite while doing it, I would have to agree with you. BUT---with a mike in their hands and if someone interferes with them or their QSO, I'll bet most of them would turn into one of those less than desirable operators--just like most anybody else. The 75 meter band, while it may be better than it once was, still has some of the worst, troublesome, and just plain rude operators that there is overrunning it.

And on the other hand, some--not most but some--of the best and most polite operators are on the V-UHF bands. If you can't see that, either you spend all your time on HF, or doing CW ops, or both. And if you do spend all your time there, you aren't really qualified to comment on the V-UHF bands, are you.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse  
by K4RAF on July 27, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"In each of these cases, our initial conversation quickly reveals the applicant has absolutely no other interest in becoming a ham other than meeting a licensing REQUIREMENT."

Now what is the problem if they MEET the REQUIREMENTS?

If they sign a call, I don't see a problem. If you are going to read into intent, then I could name 25 operations that could be called into question.

The whole Gordon West article shows just how stupid some people become, playing gatekeeper & goaltender!!!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WR8D on July 27, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Ref AE6IP: The only thing that will change will be the attitudes toward each other. There's division on the bands now it will get much worse. 73, John
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4CDK on July 28, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Sounds worse than a day care --- Children don't pout as bad.....
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC0UDV on July 28, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Technology progresses.
Everything changes beyond our control.
For our own sake we need to be able to accept and live on.

73 de Henk Meewis
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on July 28, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Sounds worse than a day care --- Children don't pout as bad.....>

Why not? The pouting and whining got them an NPRM.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC8VWM on July 28, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"SAD, SAD, SAD DAY. THE NO GOODS, LAZY BASTARDS HAVE WON THE BATTLE, BUT NOT THE WAR."


Truely a candidate for the CB band. It is this sort of mentality that will ruin Amateur Radio, not NCT's



 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by A9KW on July 29, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Anybody that wants to be a ham should pass the code.
If these people do not want to pass the code let them stay on the chicken band.How do you think they are going to act on the ham bands.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KE7ELT on July 29, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
your attitude is wrong you better listen on hf to the seasoned hams , you better look in the mirror and see if your behavior is the best some of the hams i have heard on 40 and 80 meters are shocking and these are extras doing this , the new comers wont hurt its the attitude and behavior of then seasoned hams that will hurt
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on July 29, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KE7ELT said "your attitude is wrong you better listen on hf to the seasoned hams , you better look in the mirror and see if your behavior is the best some of the hams i have heard on 40 and 80 meters are shocking and these are extras doing this , the new comers wont hurt its the attitude and behavior of then seasoned hams that will hurt"

I'm on the HF bands quite a bit, and you know what is funny ???....I don't hear these folks that you describe here...sure, I've heard a LID or two, but they are in the minority...now I DO hear ALOT of LIDS on the local 2 meter machines, and most of them are NCT's...I wonder why there is such a difference in what we observe...maybe it's because you have never really spent much time on the HF bands ???...are you just repeating the same line that all the other NCT's use to justify their anti-code view ???
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WR8D on July 30, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
123US, you pretty much put it in a nut shell. I had to bring the fcc in save my two meter machines. I have some nct's that will never straighten up and are banned from our two meter machines. They blame the older hams. All we wanted them to do was use their call signs every ten minutes, and act like amateurs instead of dumbass cbers. Typicially they'd key up and call, hey eagle are you on here. After 6 months of trying to elmer and getting cussed and having music played on the repeaters we just gave up and banned them. Nuff said, its coming everywhere soon. 73, John WR8D
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K1CJS on July 30, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I also suspect that location plays a large part in whether or not you can hear the lids on the 2 meter band. In my area, the 2 mtr. repeater users are by and large NOT lids. There may be an occasional slip up and sometimes you may hear a carryover from CB, but those are just about always just that--slipups. Also, those slip-ups are almost always corrected and apologized for.

I have no doubt that there are repeaters which have big problems with lids and former CBers who refuse to change their ways. Just remember this: (as if I had to say this) HF has a much longer 'reach' than the two meter frequencies do. That's why bad operators on the 2 meter band seem to be few and far between while those on HF seem to be more widespread.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K1GB on July 30, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Whether you are for or against the code requirement,
I highly encourage EVERYONE to tell the FCC in their comments to create a new entry level with limited HF privileges. It's no secret that we are an aging group and we need new blood desperately, or we will go by way of the dinosaur. So please look beyond your own interests and think of our future!

Tnx and 73,

Gordy K1GB
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD5ZER on July 30, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I wish someone would end this thread.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by WR8D on July 30, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Just ending this thread will not make this problem go away. Its been there now for years and i'm sure now after this all passes everyone will get a taste of what some of us have had to go through already.
73 WR8D
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on July 30, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I suspect that if the FCC goes through with this scheme, you will soon see things like SSB nets on HF that only allow folks who have passed the code test...and the no-coders will find they have a tough time being accepted into the mainstream HF community...this likely will create fights on the air, that will be worse than any fights we have seen here....it will basically destroy the bands...all because a bunch whiners wanted a FREE ride....is changing the rules really worth the damage it will do to ham radio ??...I say NO !!!
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse  
by K4JF on July 30, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<The whole Gordon West article shows just how stupid some people become, playing gatekeeper & goaltender!!! >

I fail to see how helping someone get the CORRECT means for what they want to do, can be called stupid. A more accurate term would be: "helpful".

If Amateur Radio is not the best means for what they want (and that was the case in all examples) then all should be glad that they received good advice to get the best radio service for their wants and needs.

Thanks, Gordon West.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by GILLIAM_LINEBERRY_EX_N4VOX on July 30, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
if radio123 is correct then the people that have passed the code test will be the problem and will have to be removed from the bands.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on July 31, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Do not worry. The vast majority of HF users aren't bitter old pharts that care about credentials and the vast majority of HF voice nets aren't going to change because the bitter old pharts whine on the web.

The whole nonsense about 'earning' HF priviliges is pretty much an artifact of the web. The majority of hams on HF are in countries that have already (in some cases long ago) abandoned CW requirements for HF. The sky didn't fall then. It's not going to fall now.

A few bitter old pharts unable to cope with people who obtained their licenses under different rules than they did will do no more than demonstrate that CW was never a gatekeeper, since it never kept them off the air.

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on July 31, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS is right on the mark to say that the appearance of the 2m problem depends on where you are. Reading the enforcement notices there seem to be a lot of problems in a limited number of areas.

On the other hand, here in Northern california, we have a lot of repeaters, and I've never encountered the sort of LID behavior associated with them -- even though I scan 2m on my commute ever day.

Our most notorious offender is someone who interfers with HF nets.

YMWV
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on July 31, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP said "The vast majority of HF users aren't bitter old pharts that care about credentials and the vast majority of HF voice nets aren't going to change because the bitter old pharts whine on the web."

sMarty, since you ONLY have VERY limited experience in ham radio, you really can't speculate on this.....I suspect the VAST majority of HF users in the USA do NOT support this change, and there will be ALOT of bitterness when it and if happens....
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on July 31, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> sMarty, since you ONLY have VERY limited experience
> in ham radio, you really can't speculate on
> this.....I suspect the VAST majority of HF users in
> the USA do NOT support this change, and there will
> be ALOT of bitterness when it and if happens....

You can "suspect" all you want. I, on the other hand, get on the air and talk with hams all the time. As an active net control on two of the HF voice nets, and a regular user of several others, I have enough experience to know that the bitter old pharts are a tiny percentage of people on the air, and that they have almost no represenation in the active nets.

The comments to the FCC bear out this position. Even among long time licensed hams the MAJORITY of comments were favorable of dropping the code test.

No, the bitter old pharts aren't going to do much more than squeak a little bit on phone, and they'll be so overwhelmed by the hams who have class that they'll be even less noticed than the jammers.

Besides, if one believes what they write on the web, they're all going to throw away their mikes and stick to CW, where, I assure you, they'll be happy to take contacts from anyone who can run at speed, whether they passed a code test or not.

And if they do decide to be vocal bitter old pharts, all they will accomplish is demonstrate that the CW test was never any sort of gateway, just as the FCC has maintained for years.

Sorry, but I have more faith in long time hams than you do. The VAST majority of them are classy people and will continue to remain so.

The old pharts were wrong about removing code from the tech test causing an influx of a thundering hoard of CBers that would ruin vhf and above. The sky's not going to fall this time either.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on July 31, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP said "I have enough experience to know that the bitter old pharts are a tiny percentage of people on the air, and that they have almost no represenation in the active nets"

Sorry sMarty, your TWO YEARS experience is NOT enough for you to know the whole story...there's a silent MAJORITY that you have yet to see.....

AE6IP said "The old pharts were wrong about removing code from the tech test causing an influx of a thundering hoard of CBers that would ruin vhf and above."

sMarty, get your head out of the sand...the no-code CBers have pretty much destroyed 2 meters around here....maybe you just don't have enough of them around your area...just wait until you hear your CB friends on the HF bands...Now it's obvious why you have always been against testing...you want more of these CB buddies to join you on the air...why don't you just go back and join them instead....
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on July 31, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
poor radio, he wants bad things to happen so much. he's going to be so disappointed.

_real_ hams have far more class than radio's imaginary bitter olde pharts.

'nuff said ;)
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
AE6IP said "_real_ hams have far more class than radio's imaginary bitter olde pharts."

Marty, it's too bad you are NOT a real ham....real hams don't want to eliminate ALL amateur testing...which is something you have wanted for a long time...
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by N4QA on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This morning, registered my comments with FCC regarding the subject NPRM (proceeding 05-235).

Whichever side of the fence you find yourselves on,
if you consider yourselves 'real hams', take a few minutes to file *your* comments at FCC.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4TFC on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Time has come CW will be here forever in our history Samual Morse did it when it was needed he had no Radio we now have modes that work better faster. I have been licensed in all 6 classes of license Novice to Extra and find no need for CW and have run emergency traffic on battery in the new digital modes. My children have learned cw but don't care for it. So if you feel the need for CW go at it do YOUR thing We need a new hold on Ham Radio or we will lose the whole thing total to spectrum loss to industry. BPL??? We need Younger Hams the average age now is 45 We have 5 un-used repeaters in my area we have no no-code users on UHF or VHF Come through Collinsville VA with your receiver on. Use it in total or Lose it time to move on.

Rick K4TFC

www.k4tfc.com
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KD8AKU on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KC5FOG said:
>>>"WILL ALL THE OLD SCHOOL STOP USING THE "ITS GOING TO TURN HAM RADIO INTO CB RADIO" SCARE TACTIC. No one fell for it back when the old timers tried that when the FCC made the no code tech license, and no one is buying it when you try it now about the removal of code, so get a better line, because no one is buying it.


JUST SAY WHAT IT REALLY IS, YOUR MAD BECAUSE YOU HAD TO DO THE CODE AND NOW PEOPLE WON'T AND YOU FEEL IT ISN'T FAIR. So just remeber what you always tell your childern when they tell you something isn't fair."

But, Eric, if it weren't for the straw men in the code vs. no-code debate, there wouldn't be any men at all!

Very well said - I think this is really about sour grapes rather than any real concern for the hobby at large. No-code tech has failed to turn VHF and above into CB, but reality has never stopped doom-sayers before.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RADIO123US on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
KD8AKU said "No-code tech has failed to turn VHF and above into CB, but reality has never stopped doom-sayers before. "

Your obviously don't live near a BIG city...in my area, the no-code CBer have pretty much trashed the 2 meter machines...once these CBers get on HF, the whole world will hear them....
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RSGBLTD on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hi,
I`m Sorry YOU missed the Point!!
Ofcom are offering U.K Amateurs a Free Licence for Life! Now we Decide if we want it that way or Renewable free at a set intervel?

The Rsgb Ltd would have us Believe that Ofcom wants to Give us a Free Licence as the 1st step in deregulating Amateur Radio!! What Rubbish, As Ofcom States, The fee we pay for our Licence does Not effect their Regulations regarding the Radio Spectrum!!

Below are the Questions and Some Answers to the Consultation!

Question 1: Do you agree with the proposal to introduce a lighter, electronic licensing process? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 2: Do you agree with the proposal to issue licences which remain valid for the life of the licensee? If not, please explain why. YES
Question 3: Do you agree with the proposal to issue electronic amateur radio licences free of charge? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 4: Do you agree with the proposal to apply an administrative charge when processing postal applications for amateur radio licences? If not, please explain why.
NO. Disadvantaged to All who Do Not have Access to the Internet. May not even be Able to get to Public Access place through Disability?
Question 5: Do you agree that WT Act licence exemption for radio amateurs is not currently practical?
Yes
Question 6: What are your views regarding the possibility of WT Act licence exemption for radio amateurs in the longer term?
This will never be a practical possibility, as the wide access to the radio spectrum and the freedom to use various modes of operation which radio amateurs enjoy, requires technical knowledge and discipline, which can not be ensured without examination and licensing, I also disagree with the possibility of WT Act licence exemption in the longer term for radio amateurs because of the implications to existing international agreements. There would be a requirement for HM Government to re-negotiate long established international agreements with the European Union (EU), The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), and the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administration (CEPT). As well as these agreements, the Foreign Office has also negotiated a number of reciprocal operating agreements with countries outside of the EU. Also to achieve WT Act licence exemption parliamentary time would have to be found to change the Act to reflect the non requirement to hold a licence. Deregulation or WT Act licence exemption, would spell the end of amateur radio, as there would be no requirement for entrants into the hobby to take any formal examinations.
Amateur radio operators could and would operate at will outside of the harmonised amateur radio bands. There would be no control of transmitter
power levels, and there would be widespread interference. Unless deregulation
was the chosen route of all other foreign administrations the UK amateur would
be disenfranchised.

Question 7: Is maintaining the existing licensing regime but with an extended renewal period your preferred option? If so, please state the renewal period that you believe would be appropriate and explain why. NO
Question 8: Do you agree that the current licensing system is over-burdensome? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 9: Do you agree with the proposal to apply an administrative charge when processing applications for a Notice of Variation to an amateur radio licence? If not, please explain why.
No. Administer it in the Same way as a New Free Licence for Life! And take it away from the Rsgb who would love to Profit from it and probably do at Present?

Im still Disappointed to see that the Rsgb have still Not given a Real Response to the Ofcom consultation on Amateur Radio Licensing????
The Rsgb made a Big issue (Hype) about it Before it was made Public and now All that we have from the Rsgb is a Timetable for them to visit Amateurs around the Country!! This is all well and good, But until then will still do Not have a Response from the Rsgb?
Maybe the Rsgb knows it was Making a Big Fuss about Nothing and now looks rather Silly considering All the Hype the Rsgb made about the Consultation is NOT Justified!!!!
I look forward to meeting the Rsgb Reps in my County soon and will have Questions such as..
1. Is the Rsgb a Limited Company (Rsgb Ltd)?
2. How much money does the Rsgb make from Radio Licensing and Training courses and Exams??
3. What would happen to the Rsgb if Amateur Radio was Fully Deregulated? (I do NOT support this)
4. Is the Rsgb looking after the Amateurs interests or the Rsgb own interest?
5. How does the Rsgb Justify charging over 40 for membership? I was told its worth it for Radcom? But dont the Advertisers Pay to Advertise in Radcom to Cover its Publication (1000.00 a Page)??
6. I was told that the Rsgb believes that Profit should not be made from Amateur Radio Operators? If so How does the Rsgb Justify its self from Making Profit from Amateur Radio Operators??
7. We are All Intituled to ask these Questions Especially if you are a Fully paid up Member of the Rsgb!!
I look Forward to seeing a Real Response from the Rsgb on its Website Concerning the Ofcom Consultation in the Very near future!!!!
By the time the Rsgb gets around the Country, Most peoples responses will have Already been sent to Ofcom!!
But do Enjoy your Holidays!!!! (At our Expense!!)
Im Disappointed to See that the Rsgb Has NOT even Sent its own Response to Ofcom as others have Already Done??
Lets Not Debate the 15 Amateur Radio Licence Fee, Lets Debate the Rsgb Charging over 40 for Membership a Year?
Ofcom Licence 15
Rsgb Membership 40+??????

What Say You??
73s
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RSGBLTD on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hi,
I`m Sorry YOU missed the Point!!
Ofcom are offering U.K Amateurs a Free Licence for Life! Now we Decide if we want it that way or Renewable free at a set intervel?

The Rsgb Ltd would have us Believe that Ofcom wants to Give us a Free Licence as the 1st step in deregulating Amateur Radio!! What Rubbish, As Ofcom States, The fee we pay for our Licence does Not effect their Regulations regarding the Radio Spectrum!!

Below are the Questions and Some Answers to the Consultation!

Question 1: Do you agree with the proposal to introduce a lighter, electronic licensing process? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 2: Do you agree with the proposal to issue licences which remain valid for the life of the licensee? If not, please explain why. YES
Question 3: Do you agree with the proposal to issue electronic amateur radio licences free of charge? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 4: Do you agree with the proposal to apply an administrative charge when processing postal applications for amateur radio licences? If not, please explain why.
NO. Disadvantaged to All who Do Not have Access to the Internet. May not even be Able to get to Public Access place through Disability?
Question 5: Do you agree that WT Act licence exemption for radio amateurs is not currently practical?
Yes
Question 6: What are your views regarding the possibility of WT Act licence exemption for radio amateurs in the longer term?
This will never be a practical possibility, as the wide access to the radio spectrum and the freedom to use various modes of operation which radio amateurs enjoy, requires technical knowledge and discipline, which can not be ensured without examination and licensing, I also disagree with the possibility of WT Act licence exemption in the longer term for radio amateurs because of the implications to existing international agreements. There would be a requirement for HM Government to re-negotiate long established international agreements with the European Union (EU), The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), and the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administration (CEPT). As well as these agreements, the Foreign Office has also negotiated a number of reciprocal operating agreements with countries outside of the EU. Also to achieve WT Act licence exemption parliamentary time would have to be found to change the Act to reflect the non requirement to hold a licence. Deregulation or WT Act licence exemption, would spell the end of amateur radio, as there would be no requirement for entrants into the hobby to take any formal examinations.
Amateur radio operators could and would operate at will outside of the harmonised amateur radio bands. There would be no control of transmitter
power levels, and there would be widespread interference. Unless deregulation
was the chosen route of all other foreign administrations the UK amateur would
be disenfranchised.

Question 7: Is maintaining the existing licensing regime but with an extended renewal period your preferred option? If so, please state the renewal period that you believe would be appropriate and explain why. NO
Question 8: Do you agree that the current licensing system is over-burdensome? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 9: Do you agree with the proposal to apply an administrative charge when processing applications for a Notice of Variation to an amateur radio licence? If not, please explain why.
No. Administer it in the Same way as a New Free Licence for Life! And take it away from the Rsgb who would love to Profit from it and probably do at Present?

Im still Disappointed to see that the Rsgb have still Not given a Real Response to the Ofcom consultation on Amateur Radio Licensing????
The Rsgb made a Big issue (Hype) about it Before it was made Public and now All that we have from the Rsgb is a Timetable for them to visit Amateurs around the Country!! This is all well and good, But until then will still do Not have a Response from the Rsgb?
Maybe the Rsgb knows it was Making a Big Fuss about Nothing and now looks rather Silly considering All the Hype the Rsgb made about the Consultation is NOT Justified!!!!
I look forward to meeting the Rsgb Reps in my County soon and will have Questions such as..
1. Is the Rsgb a Limited Company (Rsgb Ltd)?
2. How much money does the Rsgb make from Radio Licensing and Training courses and Exams??
3. What would happen to the Rsgb if Amateur Radio was Fully Deregulated? (I do NOT support this)
4. Is the Rsgb looking after the Amateurs interests or the Rsgb own interest?
5. How does the Rsgb Justify charging over 40 for membership? I was told its worth it for Radcom? But dont the Advertisers Pay to Advertise in Radcom to Cover its Publication (1000.00 a Page)??
6. I was told that the Rsgb believes that Profit should not be made from Amateur Radio Operators? If so How does the Rsgb Justify its self from Making Profit from Amateur Radio Operators??
7. We are All Intituled to ask these Questions Especially if you are a Fully paid up Member of the Rsgb!!
I look Forward to seeing a Real Response from the Rsgb on its Website Concerning the Ofcom Consultation in the Very near future!!!!
By the time the Rsgb gets around the Country, Most peoples responses will have Already been sent to Ofcom!!
But do Enjoy your Holidays!!!! (At our Expense!!)
Im Disappointed to See that the Rsgb Has NOT even Sent its own Response to Ofcom as others have Already Done??
Lets Not Debate the 15 Amateur Radio Licence Fee, Lets Debate the Rsgb Charging over 40 for Membership a Year?
Ofcom Licence 15
Rsgb Membership 40+??????

What Say You??
73s
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RSGBLTD on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hi,
I`m Sorry YOU missed the Point!!
Ofcom are offering U.K Amateurs a Free Licence for Life! Now we Decide if we want it that way or Renewable free at a set intervel?

The Rsgb Ltd would have us Believe that Ofcom wants to Give us a Free Licence as the 1st step in deregulating Amateur Radio!! What Rubbish, As Ofcom States, The fee we pay for our Licence does Not effect their Regulations regarding the Radio Spectrum!!

Below are the Questions and Some Answers to the Consultation!

Question 1: Do you agree with the proposal to introduce a lighter, electronic licensing process? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 2: Do you agree with the proposal to issue licences which remain valid for the life of the licensee? If not, please explain why. YES
Question 3: Do you agree with the proposal to issue electronic amateur radio licences free of charge? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 4: Do you agree with the proposal to apply an administrative charge when processing postal applications for amateur radio licences? If not, please explain why.
NO. Disadvantaged to All who Do Not have Access to the Internet. May not even be Able to get to Public Access place through Disability?
Question 5: Do you agree that WT Act licence exemption for radio amateurs is not currently practical?
Yes
Question 6: What are your views regarding the possibility of WT Act licence exemption for radio amateurs in the longer term?
This will never be a practical possibility, as the wide access to the radio spectrum and the freedom to use various modes of operation which radio amateurs enjoy, requires technical knowledge and discipline, which can not be ensured without examination and licensing, I also disagree with the possibility of WT Act licence exemption in the longer term for radio amateurs because of the implications to existing international agreements. There would be a requirement for HM Government to re-negotiate long established international agreements with the European Union (EU), The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), and the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administration (CEPT). As well as these agreements, the Foreign Office has also negotiated a number of reciprocal operating agreements with countries outside of the EU. Also to achieve WT Act licence exemption parliamentary time would have to be found to change the Act to reflect the non requirement to hold a licence. Deregulation or WT Act licence exemption, would spell the end of amateur radio, as there would be no requirement for entrants into the hobby to take any formal examinations.
Amateur radio operators could and would operate at will outside of the harmonised amateur radio bands. There would be no control of transmitter
power levels, and there would be widespread interference. Unless deregulation
was the chosen route of all other foreign administrations the UK amateur would
be disenfranchised.

Question 7: Is maintaining the existing licensing regime but with an extended renewal period your preferred option? If so, please state the renewal period that you believe would be appropriate and explain why. NO
Question 8: Do you agree that the current licensing system is over-burdensome? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 9: Do you agree with the proposal to apply an administrative charge when processing applications for a Notice of Variation to an amateur radio licence? If not, please explain why.
No. Administer it in the Same way as a New Free Licence for Life! And take it away from the Rsgb who would love to Profit from it and probably do at Present?

Im still Disappointed to see that the Rsgb have still Not given a Real Response to the Ofcom consultation on Amateur Radio Licensing????
The Rsgb made a Big issue (Hype) about it Before it was made Public and now All that we have from the Rsgb is a Timetable for them to visit Amateurs around the Country!! This is all well and good, But until then will still do Not have a Response from the Rsgb?
Maybe the Rsgb knows it was Making a Big Fuss about Nothing and now looks rather Silly considering All the Hype the Rsgb made about the Consultation is NOT Justified!!!!
I look forward to meeting the Rsgb Reps in my County soon and will have Questions such as..
1. Is the Rsgb a Limited Company (Rsgb Ltd)?
2. How much money does the Rsgb make from Radio Licensing and Training courses and Exams??
3. What would happen to the Rsgb if Amateur Radio was Fully Deregulated? (I do NOT support this)
4. Is the Rsgb looking after the Amateurs interests or the Rsgb own interest?
5. How does the Rsgb Justify charging over 40 for membership? I was told its worth it for Radcom? But dont the Advertisers Pay to Advertise in Radcom to Cover its Publication (1000.00 a Page)??
6. I was told that the Rsgb believes that Profit should not be made from Amateur Radio Operators? If so How does the Rsgb Justify its self from Making Profit from Amateur Radio Operators??
7. We are All Intituled to ask these Questions Especially if you are a Fully paid up Member of the Rsgb!!
I look Forward to seeing a Real Response from the Rsgb on its Website Concerning the Ofcom Consultation in the Very near future!!!!
By the time the Rsgb gets around the Country, Most peoples responses will have Already been sent to Ofcom!!
But do Enjoy your Holidays!!!! (At our Expense!!)
Im Disappointed to See that the Rsgb Has NOT even Sent its own Response to Ofcom as others have Already Done??
Lets Not Debate the 15 Amateur Radio Licence Fee, Lets Debate the Rsgb Charging over 40 for Membership a Year?
Ofcom Licence 15
Rsgb Membership 40+??????

What Say You??
73s
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RSGBLTD on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hi,
I`m Sorry YOU missed the Point!!
Ofcom are offering U.K Amateurs a Free Licence for Life! Now we Decide if we want it that way or Renewable free at a set intervel?

The Rsgb Ltd would have us Believe that Ofcom wants to Give us a Free Licence as the 1st step in deregulating Amateur Radio!! What Rubbish, As Ofcom States, The fee we pay for our Licence does Not effect their Regulations regarding the Radio Spectrum!!

Below are the Questions and Some Answers to the Consultation!

Question 1: Do you agree with the proposal to introduce a lighter, electronic licensing process? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 2: Do you agree with the proposal to issue licences which remain valid for the life of the licensee? If not, please explain why. YES
Question 3: Do you agree with the proposal to issue electronic amateur radio licences free of charge? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 4: Do you agree with the proposal to apply an administrative charge when processing postal applications for amateur radio licences? If not, please explain why.
NO. Disadvantaged to All who Do Not have Access to the Internet. May not even be Able to get to Public Access place through Disability?
Question 5: Do you agree that WT Act licence exemption for radio amateurs is not currently practical?
Yes
Question 6: What are your views regarding the possibility of WT Act licence exemption for radio amateurs in the longer term?
This will never be a practical possibility, as the wide access to the radio spectrum and the freedom to use various modes of operation which radio amateurs enjoy, requires technical knowledge and discipline, which can not be ensured without examination and licensing, I also disagree with the possibility of WT Act licence exemption in the longer term for radio amateurs because of the implications to existing international agreements. There would be a requirement for HM Government to re-negotiate long established international agreements with the European Union (EU), The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), and the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administration (CEPT). As well as these agreements, the Foreign Office has also negotiated a number of reciprocal operating agreements with countries outside of the EU. Also to achieve WT Act licence exemption parliamentary time would have to be found to change the Act to reflect the non requirement to hold a licence. Deregulation or WT Act licence exemption, would spell the end of amateur radio, as there would be no requirement for entrants into the hobby to take any formal examinations.
Amateur radio operators could and would operate at will outside of the harmonised amateur radio bands. There would be no control of transmitter
power levels, and there would be widespread interference. Unless deregulation
was the chosen route of all other foreign administrations the UK amateur would
be disenfranchised.

Question 7: Is maintaining the existing licensing regime but with an extended renewal period your preferred option? If so, please state the renewal period that you believe would be appropriate and explain why. NO
Question 8: Do you agree that the current licensing system is over-burdensome? If not, please explain why. Yes
Question 9: Do you agree with the proposal to apply an administrative charge when processing applications for a Notice of Variation to an amateur radio licence? If not, please explain why.
No. Administer it in the Same way as a New Free Licence for Life! And take it away from the Rsgb who would love to Profit from it and probably do at Present?

Im still Disappointed to see that the Rsgb have still Not given a Real Response to the Ofcom consultation on Amateur Radio Licensing????
The Rsgb made a Big issue (Hype) about it Before it was made Public and now All that we have from the Rsgb is a Timetable for them to visit Amateurs around the Country!! This is all well and good, But until then will still do Not have a Response from the Rsgb?
Maybe the Rsgb knows it was Making a Big Fuss about Nothing and now looks rather Silly considering All the Hype the Rsgb made about the Consultation is NOT Justified!!!!
I look forward to meeting the Rsgb Reps in my County soon and will have Questions such as..
1. Is the Rsgb a Limited Company (Rsgb Ltd)?
2. How much money does the Rsgb make from Radio Licensing and Training courses and Exams??
3. What would happen to the Rsgb if Amateur Radio was Fully Deregulated? (I do NOT support this)
4. Is the Rsgb looking after the Amateurs interests or the Rsgb own interest?
5. How does the Rsgb Justify charging over 40 for membership? I was told its worth it for Radcom? But dont the Advertisers Pay to Advertise in Radcom to Cover its Publication (1000.00 a Page)??
6. I was told that the Rsgb believes that Profit should not be made from Amateur Radio Operators? If so How does the Rsgb Justify its self from Making Profit from Amateur Radio Operators??
7. We are All Intituled to ask these Questions Especially if you are a Fully paid up Member of the Rsgb!!
I look Forward to seeing a Real Response from the Rsgb on its Website Concerning the Ofcom Consultation in the Very near future!!!!
By the time the Rsgb gets around the Country, Most peoples responses will have Already been sent to Ofcom!!
But do Enjoy your Holidays!!!! (At our Expense!!)
Im Disappointed to See that the Rsgb Has NOT even Sent its own Response to Ofcom as others have Already Done??
Lets Not Debate the 15 Amateur Radio Licence Fee, Lets Debate the Rsgb Charging over 40 for Membership a Year?
Ofcom Licence 15
Rsgb Membership 40+??????

What Say You??
73s
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RSGBLTD on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Sorry for the repeated posts!!
73s to ya All
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RSGBLTD on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hi All,
The Rsgb is Hopeing Ofcom will have a licence for 5 or 10 years and would then want to Administer it for Ofcom and Reap the rewards! Rsgb Licensing Ltd!!

As for the Code issue....
Many Countries have dropped the CW Requirement and All that has changed is a loss of the Test and NOT CW.

The way some people talk on here and other Websites, You would think that the USA Operators are the Only ones on HF?

HF PROPERGATES, thats right so its a Worldwide Issue and the World is Watching you.

Did we have Threads like these on Amateur Website Forums when Other Countries Dropped Code?
I Think Not?
Again the World is watching (And Listening)You.
73 to you ALL.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RSGBLTD on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hi All,
There are Thousands of Amateurs on HF Already Worldwide,
So that means Thousands of Radio Amateurs That have taken No CW test Beaming their Signals into the USA.
If the Current Insults Continue and the Degrading of Amateurs by other Amateurs,
Then the Only part of an Antenna Beaming towards the USA will
Be a REFLECTOR!
What say you?
Did I mention that HF Propagates?
73s All
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on August 1, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> Your obviously don't live near a BIG city...in my
> area, the no-code CBer have pretty much trashed the
> 2 meter machines...once these CBers get on HF, the
> whole world will hear them....

This is going to make you sad, radio, but "your area" is the exception, not the rule. I _do_ live near a BIG city, and I travel all over the country. If your "CBber" problem really exists, (it might you could live near the problem repeaters in the LA area,) it's rare, and it's unlikely to extend to HF.

Anyway, the "whole world" already hears the problem children on HF. CW testing didn't keep them off, and dropping the test ain't gonna make things any worse.

Sky didn't fall when it was dropped from the Tech test. Sky ain't gonna fall now, either.

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RSGBLTD on August 2, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hi All,
Any New Radio Amateurs or People Thinking of Joining the HOBBY of Amateur Radio may well look to the Internet to find Information regarding it,
After typing in Amateur Radio into an Internet Search Engine they may well find a Link to eham.net or Qrz.com? So in their Pursuit to find Information about This Great Hobby we Share worldwide what do they Find?
Answer: A Forum like this and a Thread like this One!!
What would their thoughts be Regarding Joining such a hobby where People Spend Most of their Time INSULTING Others and Generally DEgrading FELLOW Amateurs!!
I Put it To You ALL That you should be ASHAMED of Yourselves!
Who in their Right Mind would want to even Consider Communicating with Such Insulting and Shameful Individuals? Let alone Spending Hundreds of or $$ for the Privilege?

If Any Person looking to come into Amateur Radio has read this far in the Thread I can Only Apologise to Them and say that We are Not All like Those who Post Here!!

American Amateurs seem to give the Impression that they are the Only ones in the World on HF or who use Morse Code?

For Their Information, MANY Countries Around the World have Dropped the Morse Code Requirement!
So This Means that there Are Now Many Amateurs WorldWide that Use HF and have Not Taken a Morse Code Test!

And Guess What? Morse Code has not Gone because of it!
Those Radio Amateurs in the Countries that No Longer have a CW Requirement STILL ENJOY USING Morse Code if they so Wish!

American Amateurs Communicate EVERY DAY with Fellow Amateurs Worldwide that have Not taken a CW Test!!

THE HF Band WorldWide is NOT Full of So Called CB`ers Because of It or Full of Undesirable Amateurs because they have Not Taken a Morse Code Test!!

Amateur Radio has its Share of Idiots, I Grant you That, But I would say they are ALREADY Licensed and Posting on HERE!!
How Many people Posting on Here have a Callsign that Has the Use of HF?
Give The Rest of the WORLD a BREAK and Amateur Radio and act like the Ambassadors for Amateur Radio that You Should BE!!
73s
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on August 2, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<For Their Information, MANY Countries Around the World have Dropped the Morse Code Requirement!>

Not a valid argument for anyone over 8 years old (that's the age I taught my kids of the worthlessness of "Everybody else is doing it!")
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by VK3TEX on August 2, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
As for you guys over there in the states, with all the code/ no code debate, well, some of the comments have been constructive, but some also very distasteful and appalling...
Our licences have been free of the code testing requirement for more than 20 months now and our Radio hobby here has not gone to HELL... No lunatic CB'ers taking over the bands... No Jamming or interference issues...Nothing.
The only things that have happened have been positives;
1: Some Hams who were restricted to VHF and above have come down to HF and actually set up on the lower bands and have got even greater joy from the hobby by meeting new people they never would have met on VHF and above, and enjoying the lower bands. This is not a bad thing surely?
2: Adding to the above, most licence classes can now all communicate with each other because of many common bands. This is not a bad thing surely?
3: Many Hams who have come down to HF now feel that Morse code would be a good thing to learn, as now they are not pressured into it and can take their time and decide if they WANT to use the mode. This may actually increase the participaton in CW? This is not a bad thing surely?
You guys in the States should stop worrying about code/ no code and concetrate all that energy positively into getting more people into Ham Radio.
Because, all we have is each other, and the more people we can get in, the longer the hobby will survive and prosper.
If dropping the code has so many worried, there are always plenty of other hobbies out there to occupy ones time. Stop crying about it, and let's move Amatuer Radio in a positive direction!
Cheers and good luck,

Les, VK3TEX.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on August 3, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<If dropping the code has so many worried, there are always plenty of other hobbies out there to occupy ones time. Stop crying about it, and let's move Amatuer Radio in a positive direction!
Cheers and good luck,

Les, VK3TEX. >

So you are saying that: "If one likes to use code, tough. Go find another hobby."

Pardon me if I find that rather ungentlemanly.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KF4BOG on August 3, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I've been a ham since 1995 and just renewed by licence . And i love the hobby alot. I think that droping the code will help more people get the ham ticket. Let the code go
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by VK3TEX on August 3, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hi K4JF
You know exactly what I'm saying....
No one is stopping anyone from using code. Use it all you want. There is nothing stopping your enjoyment of the mode of CW.
Just like there is nothing stopping you from enjoying SSB, FM , Didital modes, RTTY, SSTV etc, etc.
Why haven't we been rigorously tested in these modes before we are allowed to transmit on them? Because they are a MODE of transmission. Just like CW is a mode of transmission.
Why have a testing requirement for one mode over another? No logical sense to it.If you enjoy the mode use it. Clear? (I cant explain it any better...)
The exam requirement will be gone but NOT the mode, just like AM is still there for anyone to use.
I cant understand why this is so hard to comprehend by some out there.
Sorry if i have seemed un-gentlemanly in my comments to you but you have mis- interpreted my post.
We are doing just fine here in Australia without the CW requirement for passing an exam, people are still using it now and into the future.
I'll tell you a true story;
There was a young boy(15) last year who came to our club to get his full Ham licence. He passed the theory and regulations part of the exam and also DID the morse(We told him it was NOT required...) cause he ENJOYED the mode,not because he had to do it. It was optional for him, he wanted to show he COULD do it, but only because he wanted to and enjoyed it. It wasn't a requirement. He is happy in his own mind that he is CW proficient. What's wrong with that? Nothing.
These days he enjoys the mode, along with the other modes available to him. He pounds along quite nicely at 20WPM...No one's forcing him to do this... See?
Some of the comments regarding this issue have been rather emotional and childish in some instances...
As they say; Life moves on, move along with it or you will be left behind...

Cheers,

Les VK3TEX.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on August 3, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<We are doing just fine here in Australia without the CW requirement for passing an exam, people are still using it now and into the future.>

But you are still allowed to use it. There is a strong, loud group here in the States insisting that code be banned on Amateur bands. They make no bones about it, and are constantly attacking anyone who uses code as an "elitist" and a "snob". THOSE are the ones I object to.... right here on these forums.

Many of them are also advocating removal of theory testing because "why do I need that if all I want to do is talk?". All part and parcel of the same trend.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by VK3TEX on August 3, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<But you are still allowed to use it. There is a strong, loud group here in the States insisting that code be banned on Amateur bands. They make no bones about it, and are constantly attacking anyone who uses code as an "elitist" and a "snob". THOSE are the ones I object to.... right here on these forums.

Many of them are also advocating removal of theory testing because "why do I need that if all I want to do is talk?". All part and parcel of the same trend.>

Hi K4JF,
Ban CW off the Amateur bands?! That's the most ridiculous thing i have heard for a long time... First, you would need a legitamite reason to ban it, and i can't see any. Secondly, to ban something officially, you would need to change LAWS. Not going to happen... Thirdly, why not ban any of the other modes? This banning idea will NEVER happen because there IS NO REASON TO DO IT.
The theory and regulations is the difference between Amateur Radio and CB/Cellphones.
If all they want to do is "Talk" then they can go out and buy a cellphone.Simple.
Amateur Radio is much more than "Talking"...
To remove the CW requirement from the exams and BANNING CW off the bands is like the difference between night and day...Totally not the same.
I'm sorry that some people feel like banning CW off the bands over there in the States, as this logic only shows how stupid and ignorant they are.
Like one of the other UK Hams pointed out in another post, " The world is watching the US hams" And sadly, what we have seen so far is not encouraging.

Les, VK3TEX.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on August 4, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Hi K4JF,
Ban CW off the Amateur bands?! That's the most ridiculous thing i have heard for a long time... First, you would need a legitamite reason to ban it, and i can't see any. Secondly, to ban something officially, you would need to change LAWS. Not going to happen... >

I agree that it is ridiculous. But under US setup, we do not need a law to ban it. The FCC has full authority and can ban it with a rule. A law (passed by a legislature) is not necessary. Example: there is no law against spark. It is banned by regulation.

And, sadly, reason doesn't seem to be a part of it. Here, if some people protest long and loud enough, it can get changed. It doesn't take reason or logic.

CW is squeezed into a small enough portion of the bands now. But the antis are demanding that be "opened up". The FCC hasn't spoken on that issue but I'm sure they will.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by GILLIAM_LINEBERRY_EX_N4VOX on August 4, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
CW has been banned on the military frequencies by the Dept. of Defense. It just takes the FCC to ammend the Part 97 rules to prohibit the mode. But the FCC has not proposed banning the mode, just eliminating a requirement to pass a test for one mode.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on August 4, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<CW has been banned on the military frequencies by the Dept. of Defense. It just takes the FCC to ammend the Part 97 rules to prohibit the mode. But the FCC has not proposed banning the mode, just eliminating a requirement to pass a test for one mode. >

Almost correct. I don't think MC is "banned" on military frequencies. Just not currently authorized. Believe it or not, there is a difference.

The FCC has not yet acted on the next phase of the nocoders plan.... yet. But is someone is successful on the first part, what is to stop them from going to phase two?
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by N1LEU on August 4, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I'd like to take this moment to add my input on this topic. In my opinion I think CW should be retained as a requirement for operation in HF, General & Amateur Extra classes of license. This preserves the heritage and history of the hobby as well as the art and skill of cw, Yes CW is an art and a skill that should not be thrown to the gutter like a used coffee cup. Even though I am a no code tech. (often refered to by some less intelligent hams as Tech Minus.) In the early 20th Century CW was used by ships to contact other ships and ports, The U.S. Military used CW in times before World War II and CW also helped spread the word over telegraph wires in the Old West while states were still being added to the Union. In poor conditions CW gets thru when voice and other modes can't! We need CW! In a disaster when all else fail and the QSB and QRN is high what mode can you depend on to assist in relief efforts? SAVE CW! Don't let a CW become a distant memory.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on August 4, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> But you are still allowed to use it. There is a
> strong, loud group here in the States insisting
> that code be banned on Amateur bands. They make no
> bones about it, and are constantly attacking anyone
> who uses code as an "elitist" and a "snob". THOSE
> are the ones I object to.... right here on these
> forums.

You're confusing a tiny number of loudmouths with 'strong loud group'. You're also confusing people who complain about what they see as snobbery with people who wish to force code off the bands.

There are very few people who wish to force code off the bands. They aren't going to act in any concerted fashion. And you'll find a surprising number of the people you think of as no-coders who will oppose disallowing the mode. I, for one will comment against any proposal to restrict morse code.

Besides which, they could make no valid case for disallowing the mode.

 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by AE6IP on August 4, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
> CW is squeezed into a small enough portion of the
> bands now.

Q: What portion of the amateur bands is CW allowed on?
A: All

CW is not squeezed into any portion of the bands. CW is given a dedicated portion of the bands, but that's not the only place where it is allowed.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by RSGBLTD on August 5, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hi All,
What I find Interesting is that there is No Practical Part of the USA Amateur Radio Exam??
There are 3 Licence exams in the U.K and the 1st Two have a Practical Element in them!
We Have the Foundation, Intermediate & Advance,
Below are some of the Practical aspects required for the 1st two Licence Exams........

Foundation Exam!!

11. Practical Assessments
This part of the syllabus is carried out and assessed as part of a recognised training course.
This section is an introduction to the practical assessments which are designed to test your
Practical knowledge of the operating practices and procedures of this course.
The detail given below limited with much greater explanation given in the section on Operating
Practices & Procedures. Please read through and become familiar with that section before
Attempting your practical assessments as it will make is so much easier for you.

8e Competence in making radio contacts.
This part of the syllabus is carried out as a practical assessment by registered assessors.
8e.1 Demonstrate, using a VHF/UHF transmitter/receiver, correct tuning in to an amateur Fm voice signal and a data signal such as packet. Read the signal strength meter (where fitted).
For this assessment you will need to know :-
1. How to set the rig into FM mode of operation.
2. Identify the main tuning control and tune to and FM voice signal and an FM data signal.
3. Where fitted locate the signal strength meter and be able to read the meter to provide a
Signal strength as part of the RST report
8e.2 Demonstrate correct operation of a VHF transmitter/receiver in simplex mode.
Note: Controls used shall include frequency, squelch and, audio gain (volume).
Recall the meaning of signal reports exchanged during a contact.

Make a simplex radio contact and exchange signal reports.
For this assessment you will need to know :-
1. How to ensure the rig is in simplex mode
2. The location and function of Main tuning of frequency control, squelch control and, audio
Gain (volume) control.
3. Be able to show you know meaning of signal reports exchanged during a contact.
4. How to make a simplex radio contact and exchange signal reports.

8e.3 Demonstrate, using an H.F. transmitter/receiver, correct tuning in to an amateur SSB voice
Signal and a Morse signal. Read the signal strength meter.
Mainly similar to the VHF rig but this time you have to tune to the slightly more difficult to
Resolve (hear) SSB or single side band signal.

8e.4 Demonstrate correct operation of an HF. Transmitter/receiver in an s.s.b contact.
Note: Controls used shall include frequency, the RIT (clarifier), audio gain (volume), RF
Microphone gain and antenna tuner (ATU).
Make an H.F. SSB voice contact and exchange signal reports.
Mainly similar to the VHF rig but this time you have to additionally :-
Be able to identify and operate :-
1. The RIT ( Receive Independent Tuning or clarifier) this is the control that allows you to
change the Receiver frequency but leave the Transmit frequency as on the main tuning
indicator.
2. The RF microphone gain control increases and decreases the amount of audio signal that is
modulated onto the carrier. Too much gain and over modulation will occur causing
distortion of the received signals and possible out of band harmonics
3. The antenna tuner (ATU) to match the antenna and feeder impedance to the 50 ohms input
Impedance of the rig.

8e.5 Demonstrate a CQ call on VHF/UHF, making a contact and initiating a change of frequency
(QSY) off the calling channel.
1. You need to be able to demonstrate that you understand where on the 144MHz band plan
the calling frequency is located. If you have not already read through the main section on
Operating practice and procedure now is the time to do it.Click Link
2. make a CQ call on that frequency
3. Understand that you need to and carry out a change of frequency (QSY) off the calling
channel immediately after the initial contact with a station has been made.

8f Connecting a transmitter/receiver.
This part of the syllabus is carried out as a practical assessment by registered assessors and may
be part of a training course.
8f.1 Demonstrate connecting a transmitter/receiver to a power supply, antenna and feeder.
A simple exercise where you you will have in front of you a transmitter/receiver, a power supply,
Antenna and feeder together with all the necessary interconnecting cables and all you have to do is
connect them up in the right order.

8f.2 Demonstrate, using a 1/2 dipole antenna with adjustable elements, that the SWR varies as the
Length of the elements are varied. Set up the dipole for minimum SWR.
Note: The elements are not to be adjusted whilst transmitting.Correct procedure for a radiating
test shall be demonstrated.


INTERMEDIATE EXAM:

Candidate is properly able to"

1 10d.1 Measure the resistance of a number of different resistors and confirm their values using the colour code.

2 10d.2 Demonstrate the ability to make good soldered joints.

3 10d.3 Construct a simple circuit containing a battery, resistor, LED, lamp and switch.

4 10d.4 Measure potential differences and currents in a simple circuit.

5 10d.5 Demonstrate that a diode will only conduct in one direction in a simple DC circuit.

6 10d.6 Demonstrate that a transistor can be used as a switch in a simple DC circuit.

7 10d.7 Fit a suitable RF connector (PL259, BNC or N-type) to a piece of coaxial cable.

8 10d.8 Fit a 13A plug to a piece of three-core mains cable.

9 10e Construction
10e.1 Construct a simple amateur radio related project (e.g. direct conversion receiver, crystal calibrator, 'grid' dip meter, ATU
& SWR meter, Morse oscillator, audio amplifier) either from a pre-prepared kit or from a published or personal design.

10 10f Simple frequency calibration
10f.1 Calibrate a variable frequency oscillator (VFO) employing an adjustable tuned circuit. Calibration to show the relevant
Amateur band edges. The VFO may form part of the project to satisfy 10e.1, or be part of a previously constructed project or
provided by the assessor.
The items shown above are assessed as a practical demonstration by the candidate and 'signed off' by the assessor on the Record of
Achievement. Note: If the candidate is disabled in any way that reasonably prevents the carrying out of any practical procedure, he
or she may talk another person through the task or describe it to the assessor. The assessor may judge 'disabled'.

The Foundation Licence even includes a Morse Code Assessment, Although this is NOT a Test!!
You must receive Morse texts by Ear and send by Hand with the use of a Crib Sheet!

This is How Morse Code has been Tested in the U.K from Approx Jan 2002, Although it has Not been a Test since 2003.

I cant Believe that USA Amateurs are GIVEN the ANSWERS to the EXAMS!!
That has to be The Biggest JOKE in the Whole of the Worldwide Amateur Community!!

No One in the USA has the Right to Look down on a Fellow Amateur considering even the Extra Class has it Given to Them on a Plate!!

QUESTION:
How does RECIEVING 5 Words per min in Morse Code ONLY, Make Anyone a Better Amateur or have More Practical Knowledge of Amateur Radio if they have NOT Even had a Practical Assessment as Is Required in the U.K EXAMS!!??????????????????????????

I will say this again..
CW has Been Dropped in Many Countries around the World for Years!!
And has Not had the Bad Effect so Many talk of,
CW is STILL Used in Those Countries and I Expect you Communicate with them?

The Only Effect these Forums and Threads are Having on Amateur Radio is Putting OFF the New Amateurs Every Country Desires, And Also Giving Amateur Radio a BAD Name!
THE WORLD IS WATCHING!!
73s
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on August 5, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Q: What portion of the amateur bands is CW allowed on?
A: All
CW is not squeezed into any portion of the bands. CW is given a dedicated portion of the bands, but that's not the only place where it is allowed. >

Right in theory, wrong in practice. I was talking about operating, not regulation. Yes, CW allowed on all portions, because the bandwidth is small. But as a practical matter, in the real world, there is no CW except in the bottom 60 KHz of each HF band, and even smaller portions of VHF and up. The incompatibility of CW with digital and voice modes has relegated CW to a small portion of each band. One simply cannot continue a CW QSO when a high power voice or (other) digital station starts up. And to call CQ above x.060 is an exercise in futility.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on August 5, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<There are very few people who wish to force code off the bands. They aren't going to act in any concerted fashion. And you'll find a surprising number of the people you think of as no-coders who will oppose disallowing the mode. I, for one will comment against any proposal to restrict morse code.>

There are quite a lot, as a matter of record on here and QRZ.com. Not act in concerted fashion? How about a formal organization with its own website? As for people whom I think are anti-code? I only think those are against who SAY they are against. How else would I think?

<Besides which, they could make no valid case for disallowing the mode.>

Of course they could. Same argument they used successfully so far. "It's obsolete and has no place. We need the spectrum to talk on."
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K6SDW on August 5, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Sadly, it's time -- just tune the CW bands these days and they are mostly vacant. CW is my preferred mode so I will keep the faith and still work CW as my primary mode.

But, it is time to say 73 to an old friend, Continous Wave!!

Cheers...
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by K4JF on August 5, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<Sadly, it's time -- just tune the CW bands these days and they are mostly vacant. CW is my preferred mode so I will keep the faith and still work CW as my primary mode.

But, it is time to say 73 to an old friend, Continous Wave!! >

Uhh, I would suggest some antenna or receiver work. They are quite busy here - allowing, of course, for the current sunspot minimum. If allowed, they will be well populated in 4 or 5 years.
 
FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for Al  
by K8JX on August 14, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I have read the comments posted here over almost a whole month. Absolutely nothing posted here convinces me that we should abandon the Morse code requirement. A friend, N8NFZ and myself, saw this coming over 2 years ago and we did something about it. We created the Michigan Amateur Radio Telegraphers Society. It has one focus, one intention: Keep the Pool of trained operators who know how to communication via Morse Code, alive and growing. I'm not promoting what we're doing, but suggesting that instead of complaining about it, become active, both in letting the F.C.C. know how you feel and by also becoming a force in your area that uses the Morse Code. Keep it alive by using it! The greatest danger is that when this last generation who had to learn the code passes away, so maybe will the code.
so lets get busy.
 
RE: FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement fo  
by KC0JOV on April 30, 2006 Mail this to a friend!
THERAGE,

I am sorry that you have such a negative attitude. First of all, I am a tech plus (in case you are too OLD to know what that means, that means that I have code privilages.) Secondly, my parents have not bought me anything. The rig I own was from a fellow ham, WA0FEV. It is an old Heath 2M. There is this little thing that some people refer to as SCHOOL (i.e. college.) That means that I don't have the money nor the time to advance any further at this time. When I graduate, I will have the extra time to advance to Extra. So drop your sorry attitude and grow up. If you are truly a MAN, give me your call. I would like to knock some sense into your dense skull. You can reach me at kc0jov@qsl.net. Email me, I dare you!!!!!
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Other News Articles
Get On the Air with Santa:
Ham Talk Live #144 -- BeLoud Contest Station:
Jordan's First CubeSat, JY1Sat, is Designated as JO-97:
IFFK Gets Ham Radio Support:
Voyager 2 Spacecraft Enters Interstellar Space: