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]  

10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah

Don Keith (N4KC) on June 20, 2008
View comments about this article!

Ten Reasons You Should Learn Dah-di-dah-dit Di-dah-dah

I know. Morse code's old news. Passé. Fuhgeddaboutit! With a plethora (whatever a plethora is) of wonderful, modern digital modes, and with good, solid SSB, FM, and even a smidgen (whatever a smidgen is) of AM-with-carrier to use to communicate, why would anyone want to learn the code now that you don't have to do so in order to earn a ham license?

0x01 graphic

I maintain there are at least ten good reasons for everyone—new ham or OT—to get out the code tapes, limber up the keying hand, build an oscillator, and learn the squeaks and squawks with which Samuel F.B. Morse and Alfred Vail blessed us way back in the 1840s.

Here are my ten. Others may be able to add more and I hope they will.

  1. As a means of getting the message through, the code has stood the test of time. In one form or another, the code has been in use for over160 years. It must have something going for it! Even now, with no requirement for even knowing a dit from a dah to become a licensed ham, there are plenty of stations to talk with, and contest activity on CW is stronger than ever.

  1. In marginal band conditions, CW is still far more reliable than many other modes. Some of the digital modes are as good or better, I grant you, but for a basic station, the code is still there when most everything else is unreadable. On CW, the bands open up earlier and stay open for DX longer. You can add a good half hour to either side of the gray line. A DX station that is unreadable on SSB may be perfectly workable on CW. For me, that alone is enough reason to be proficient in using Morse.

  1. In that same vein, if you are enjoying a nice QSO with someone and the band suddenly takes a dip, you can punch the rig's “CW” button and give the other OM a decent “73,” ending the chat on a good note.

  1. CW is legal anywhere on any amateur band on which you are licensed to operate. And on 30 meters—a darn fine band for some really interesting propagation—voice transmissions are NOT permitted.

  1. Like to chase sporadic-E, tropospheric ducting, or other fun propagation on 10 meters or VHF/UHF? One way to tell if the bands are open is through beacon stations. I am not aware of any beacon stations that use any kind of voice identification or location information. They are almost all in the CW portion of the various bands. They use Mr. Morse's dits and dahs. How else will you know where they are or what their grid square is? Is 6 meters open to Europe or are you hearing a beacon a half mile down the road? They sound the same if you can't “break the code.”

0x01 graphic

  1. DX! Do I need to spell it out? DX-peditions don't always use RTTY or PSK31. They almost always do CW. Because of the reasons mentioned in (2) above, and because contacts are made and completed quicker in many cases on CW than on phone, your odds of working that DX are greater. Of course, there seems to be far more stations calling the DX on SSB, too, so that in itself raises your odds of nabbing the guy on CW. Sure, you can learn just enough code to recognize your call and “599,” but can you be sure that station you worked was the one you saw on the DX cluster if you can't read his call sign? And what if he gives QSL info, switches the split from what was spotted, or moves to another frequency or band and lets everyone know—in CW? Happens all the time. DX station on 20 meters says, “QSY 40M 7007 UP 3,” yet guys keep calling him on the old frequency for half an hour after he disappears.

  1. So, the only operating you do is through VHF or UHF repeaters, using FM. You don't need to know no stinkin' code! But what if you hear a distant repeater? That beepity-beep you hear on most repeaters is its ID…in CW. How can you possibly know which repeater it is or where it is located, beyond making a guess? Ever travel? Take your rig with you? How will you know which repeater you are hitting or hearing? Maybe you can find it in the directory or maybe not. In urban areas, you may be in range of several repeaters on the same pair—each with a different access tone—so which tone do you use if you can't tell which repeater it is when it identifies?

  1. Simplicity. Nothing exotic about turning on and off a carrier. If you take your radio camping, on a cruise, on a business trip, it is much simpler and more effective to use CW. Add the element of QRP and you can operate about anywhere, from a bicycle to a bass boat, with basic battery power and compromise antenna. And a key, of course.

  1. It takes less spectrum. More stations can comfortably occupy the same slice of a band when everyone is on CW rather than SSB or FM. And that's by a factor of about 13—150 hertz for CW compared to more than 2000 hertz for SSB in many cases. It is easier to filter out adjacent channel interference and still maintain intelligibility, too.

  1. It's just plain fun! I have tried many modes and I enjoy them all (less digital since I'm pounding on a keyboard about ten hours a day and don't want to even see one when I get to the shack!), but I keep coming back to the joy and simplicity of Morse. There is a certain element of knowing something not everybody else knows, too. It's like our own double-top-secret language. And you meet the nicest people there. I would have hated to have missed all the great QSOs I have had down through the years just because I decided I couldn't memorize and recognize 26 letters, 10 numbers and a few pro-signs!

0x01 graphic

N4KC's 65-year span of Morse keys—a Lionel J-38, circa 1942, and a new K8RA iambic paddle, a Christmas gift this year from wife and daughter. This setup was used this year for Straight Key Night, a great opportunity to work CW at relatively slow speeds.

I understand that some people have greater aptitude for learning the code than others. It is more a chore than a pleasure for some. But here are a few tips that might make it less drudgery and more fun, based on my experience teaching many people the silly stuff down through the years:

  • Learn the code by sound, NOT by dots and dashes. “A” is “di-dah,” NOT “dot dash.” “B” is “dah-di-di-dit,” NOT “dash dot dot dot.” Learn how each character SOUNDS, not how many dashes and dots there are and in what order. That is especially true of the numbers. There is a temptation to count the numbers of dits and dahs. Your mind works much better if “6” is instantly “dah-di-di-di-dit,” not a dash and four dots.

  • Learn the easy ones first—E, T, I, M—and quickly start making words. Soon “the” (and other common words) will no longer be three Morse characters but a single sound.

  • If possible, have the characters you are listening to sent at higher speed but with pauses in between. That is, have code sent at three words per minute (fifteen characters in a minute…one every four seconds or so) but the individual characters sent as if everything was at 12 or 15 words per minute. As you speed up, the individual characters will still sound the same except the spaces between each will be shorter.

  • Receive the code at a speed just a bit faster than you can comfortably copy. Just like with exercise, push yourself and you will get quicker, longer lasting results.

  • Don't get flustered if you can't write down every single character on paper—“solid copy.” Do the best you can. If you try to go back and fill in gaps or linger too long, you miss a whole bunch of other characters.

  • When you are able to understand the code faster than you are able to write it down, start taking notes and do not try to jot down every character. You cannot write down every word of human speech in a conversation, either, unless you are a court reporter using a special machine! Those who copy fast code are doing it in their heads, not on paper.

  • In your head, convert everything you see—road signs, soup can labels, letters on the TV screen—to Morse code. Try to get the word “sent” in your head (or out loud if you are alone or don't mind being thought a lunatic) before you pass the sign or the commercial is off the TV.

  • Work with a friend or partner who is also learning CW. It makes it more fun, and especially if you compete to see who is the first to get to 5 WPM and each additional benchmark.

  • Practice. Practice! PRACTICE! There are few things you can learn without repetition. A good golf swing? A foreign language? How to play a musical instrument? How to type? You cannot devote five minutes a week to any worthy learning activity and expect to be successful. Set aside practice time each day. There is a great boost to self-esteem when you prove to yourself that you can do something that others perceive to be difficult—or dang near impossible!

  • There are plenty of good sources of code to copy. W1AW sends practice every day on multiple frequencies, and when you get good, you can copy official bulletins sent via CW, too. Visit www.arrl.org or see QST for times and frequencies. Or tune to the low end of 40 or 20 meters or anywhere on 30 meters. With today's electronic keyers, most code is well sent and easy to copy. You will find speeds from tediously slow to a tinkly whir…like a cricket on crack!

I believe there are two primary reasons people do not want to learn Morse code. One is they do not see the need or have any particular interest, and especially now that the requirement for licensing is gone. I hope my reasons in this article will be some impetus for you to give it a try. If not, that is okay, too, but you are missing some fun.

The other reason is that people simply think they will never be able to make sense out of the stuff. That they lack whatever brain cell is needed to make “di-di-dit” into “S.” That is not true. Anyone can learn the code and be proficient in its use. Anyone! It is a mindset that defeats some folks before they even try. If you are convinced you are the lone exception, there is nothing I can do to change your mind. But if you take the attitude that “Heck, I'm not going to let this stuff beat me!” then you are well on your way to increasing your enjoyment of the hobby.

I hope you will. I would love to meet you on 30 meters one night.

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by G5FSD on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Why can't you bleepers accept that it's a matter of individual taste - and some of us simply don't like the whole idea of CW? As much as we love the magic of radio, we simply don't love that part of it, no matter how magic it seems to you.

I'm glad you enjoy it, but it simply doesn't appeal to me. I won't object to you evangelizing, but no amount of positive spin will get me interested.

73 anyway
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N8PVW on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Evidently CW is not quite dead yet. MARS has resurrected CW nets and I just received a newsletter from SHARES headquarters 3 days ago informing me that the federal government is now going to be operating a regular CW net on the federal SHARES frequencies. So I brought a key into work to use on our station here. The way things are going we might be surprised by the U.S. military bringing back CW. My oldest son is an officer in the Navy and an electronic warfare officer and engineer. He told me that during his three tours over in Iraq some of the latest and greatest comms technology failed to work as well as advertised and he advocates bringing back CW to the battlefield. He said there are many others in the military that are of the same opinion.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by NE5C on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!

A very Nice article, well done.

You know a few of us were speaking about the topic of code, the other day.

I was saying that I really believe that now that it is no longer a matter of requirement for the license, I believe even "MORE" of our youth and some folks that never cared before about learning code, are now buying keys and taking a new found interest in it.

It was also mentioned that it is like saying to a child "don't you touch this Piano" over forcing them, to take piano lessons! You know that is the very thing that they can't wait to get there hands on when you are not around. (Laughing)

But isn't that the beauty of Ham Radio?
It gives each one us, the true personal "FREEDOM OF CHOICE" to decide what we would like to study, learn, and practice doing, OR not to do.

It wasn't that many years ago when a few of my Elders at work told me "I don't want nothing to do with COMPUTERS" I don't want one, and I certainly don't need to learn how to use one, in my lifetime!

My personal choice back then, to STUDY, LEARN, and to EMBRACE this thing called the computer...later on that choice, landed me a position as a Supervisor - over some of the very ones who said they didn't need it, at all.

I suppose I didn't have to have that job as a Supervisor. But there too, I have no complaint that it paid me more money, and I enjoyed working in a cooler climate controlled office, instead of where I was before "sweating for less" money!

My point is, that I have never forgotten that by keeping an open mind and heart - embracing and learning new things that I did not know before...In one way or another, "CHANGED MY LIFE!"

I also found out later, with an open heart, that by coming to know a man they call "Jesus"

***CHANGED MY ENTIRE LIFE***
God Bless you, and 73.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by AC0IV on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I upgraded to Extra (no code). Now I find that I am very interested in CW and can copy about 12 WPM. I find it interesting and fun. CW however is not for everyone. As for me I am getting more and more interested in it. I only wish that I had someone to practice with in Greenland. Yep that is where I work and I here lots of CW but it is a little fast for me now. I will get there and then watch out!
73’
AKA OX3UR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by VE3TMT on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Code will always be code, you either love it or hate it, and we all have our reasons for each. After 18 years in the hobby I am spending more time on CW now then I ever have.

But please, let's not turn this into another no-code debate. I enjoyed the article immensely.

VE3TMT
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KB2DHG on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
The code was my main reason I never got licensed way back in the 60's I thought I just could not learn it... So I deprived myself many years of being a ham and enjoying ths wonderful hobby...
With due dillagence I studied and passed my Novice test and became KB2DHG. I was so proud and had a sence of accompleshment that as an Extra today I kept my Novice call because THAT was the most significant hurdle in my life.
I then passed the 13 WPM code test for my General and after several years the 20 WPM for the Extra. Working SO HARD to pass those code test made me appreciate CW.
It was not untill they eliminated CODE from the requirements did I become an avid CW operator. I was mostly all SSB. Getting back into CW has been great and I find that I enjoy CW more now than ever!
I never would have thought I would be saying this as that CW was always my holding block... So to all you anti CW people out there, I offer you this simle advice, Don't knock it untill you really try it... You are depriving yourself a very nice experence of good radio fun.
Remember, If you don't know CW, You don't know DIT!
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by NB8N on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Hi Don,

Good stuff, all, but why waste breath on those who shun CW. I was disheartened when even minuscule expertise in CW was eliminated from the Amateur Radio License requirements, but, then, I saw the bright side. You see, all Extra Class tickets may look the same to the casual observer, but only the know-code operators can work wall-to-wall on all bands. The best part? This separation is not mandated by law, only ability. As Dirty Harry said, "A man has to know his limitations."

Bob – NB8N
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4CQR on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
This is going to be good.....
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W9PMZ on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Waiting on the 10 reasons not to learn........

73,

Carl - W9PMZ
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N8IK on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
CW-only transmitters and receivers are so easy to build! A 5 watt CW transmitter is as loud as a 100 watt SSB transmitter, all else being equal. And you can build one with just a handful of parts. Tons of fun!
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W1ITT on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Don..
All good points, but one minor correction: CW is not legal, at least in USA, on the five channelized allocations in the 60 meter band, but otherwise it can go anywhere.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N7YA on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Its been my mode of choice for 25 years. This goes to show that dropping the requirement didnt hurt the number of ops in the subbands. Unless my ears have been messing with me, the only decrease in activity on the bottom 50 is due to poor band condx. If anything, its been the best promotional tool CW has gotten since its inception. Im even thinking of getting back into key collecting when the economy levels off a little bit...but thats another can of worms, and i think i will leave it be.

73...Adam, N7YA
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by AI4EP on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
cw copy wouldnt be so bad if folks you are talking to ( communicating via cw with ) could send their OWN CALL SIGNS the same way 2 times in a row....they need to learn the basics of sending THEIR OWN CALL SIGN correctly before they go learning any thing else.

simple & to the point.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WO5I on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Very nice article!

The FCC has said that, going forward, nobody HAS to learn code. But there are a lot of folks that still will. They are the ones that don't take the path of least resistance; the ones that don't regularly get labeled "underachiever". Not all the Morseless are like this, but a fair percentage are.

The truth is, fewer and fewer people are going to want to take a bicycle when they can jump in the SUV. It's getting more and more like that with CW, but luckily the bike lanes are still open, still reserved for us CW peddlers, and we're the richer for that in so many ways.

Let the naysayers have their say. They will anyway.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K0BG on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I'll bet that if I wrote a similar article why everyone should have an HF mobile setup, I'd get the same type of responses. Mobile operation, like CW, are just two of the many facets of our fine hobby. The myriad of facets is what makes amateur radio so interesting to a very wide range of people. To each his own as they say.

I will absolutely agree with one statement made however; with respect to chasing DX, CW is where it's at!

Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.com
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W5ESE on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Good points you've mentioned.

I'll add just a few more.

o Using recent Field Day statistics as a barometer,
about 40% of HF activity is conducted using CW.

http://www.geocities.com/scottamcmullen/FieldDayContactsByMode.html

That's a lot of activity to be shut out of.

o Many exciting transceivers and other products are
available that are just for CW. Not only older
"legacy" items, but new products based on recent designs.

There are several examples, but here are a few:

Elecraft KX-1 http://www.elecraft.com/KX1/KX1.htm

Rockmite - http://www.smallwonderlabs.com/Rockmite.htm

AT Sprint - http://kd1jv.qrpradio.com/ATS3B/ats3b.HTM

Norcal 40 - http://www.fix.net/~jparker/wilderness/nc40a.htm


o Radio Amateurs have been learning the morse code
since the dawn of the hobby at the beginning of the
20th century. All amateurs learned it until it was
dropped from the requirements for the Technician
license in 1991. Not surprisingly, therefore, the
morse code is pretty deeply embedded in the
"culture" of amateur radio, and it's impossible
to really "grok" many facets of the hobby without
knowing and making some use of the code.

73
Scott
W5ESE
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W7ETA on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Nice prose.
..
73
Bob
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KG6WLS on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Nice read.

It's been a little while since we've seen a morse article, and I'm sure we'll see a few reasons why the Element 1 should have stayed in place.

When time allows (work & family first), I use all modes and CW is one of them.

--... ...--

Mike

 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6YE on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Don,

Congrats on a great article. I have enjoyed CW since the early 60s. It was all I could afford (Ameco AC1, DX-35, and DX-40 transmitters) and when I was not studying for school, I operated.

The great thing about ham radio is the diversity. One can operate SSB, CW, FM, SSTV, PSK31, etc. and not feel hemmed in.

Enjoy any or all facets of ham radio while you can.

Semper Fi,

Tommy - K6YE
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2UGB on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Nice article and well written. Of course, I am 100% cw so appreciate the strokes.

Don't forget the OHR series of cw-only transceiver kits. Thanks Marshall Emm.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Don, congratulations, that was a well written article and it just may even prompt some non-CW types to give CW a try. And for those that could care less about CW, that's a fine position as well. In any case, I'd like to add a couple of more reasons to Don's list:

#11 As I began my training to become a private pilot I found that knowing CW added another benefit. The ability to quickly identify VOR navigational beacons. VOR's (which stand for, VHF Omnidirectional Range) are omni-directional transmitters that provide one type of navigation service to pilots. Each VOR periodically transmits its own unique 3 letter designator (in CW) so a pilot can quickly identify which VOR they have their navigational equipment tuned to. Being able to quickly identify a VOR in CW can be a big plus to a pilot, especially in bad weather.

#12 Increased mental processes. I can't quite explain this one, but it seems like every time I've been involved with working CW (on a regular basis), my mind just seemed to be a bit sharper and work quicker. Perhaps working CW is akin to exercising your mind with cross-word puzzle's or other mind exercises games, who knows, but it sure seems that way to me.

For those of you that may be considering taking the time to learn CW, consider this. The ability (or lack of ability) to learn CW is purely a mindset. And it's really as simple as this... If your mind can picture the letter "A" when someone says the letter "A", your mind can also understand the same thing when it hears the sound, "dit-dah." None of us were born knowing what the letter "A" was, but we eventually learned it. Same with CW. Just like learning any language, its just a matter of repetition and practice. But the main key to learning CW (or anything) is keeping an open mind and a positive attitude. As soon as you utter the words "I can't", you more than likely "won't", and you shut your mental door on your ability to learn. But if you stick with CW you'll be amazed what changes begin to take place. In time, your mind will stop hearing CW in a letter-by-letter sequence and you will start hearing words and abbreviations (qth, rst, etc), almost like someone is speaking. This is where CW switches from being a learning process, to being fun. And with a bit more practice you may find you can copy CW in your head and you rarely have to pick up a pencil to write anything down. Perhaps watching the mind work its magic is one reason why CW operators always seem so impressed with the mode!

So the question becomes, is learning CW important enough to take the time to learn? To many, the answer is a solid no, and that's fine. But for you non-CW types that are currently enjoying our modern plug&play appliance modes (FM, SSB, PSK31, SSTV, etc), some day you may find that you're up for a bit more of a mental challenge. Should that occur, consider giving CW a try. You just may find it's well worth your effort.

KF4HR
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K4ELO on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Nice article. Works for me.
As for those who choose to forgo the code, that's ok, just leaves less crowding for those who use it.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K1CJS on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"The truth is, fewer and fewer people are going to want to take a bicycle when they can jump in the SUV. It's getting more and more like that with CW......"

I don't find that this is the case. Now that the requirement has been removed, there are a lot of hams learning the code--as evidenced by the increase of useage. An example--I used to type at about 15 words a minute--before computers came along, that is. Now that computers have been in common useage, I thought that my skill had increased a bit, but I took a speed test the other day and was a little shocked--my typing speed is about 80 words a minute now!

People are doing the same with the code--using it and getting used to it, instead of getting nervous wondering if they're going to pass a requirement test. I firmly believe that is why code use is increasing--people can now learn and use it at their own pace.

Morse code isn't dead--or even dying off--any more than ham radio is!
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by AK2B on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
If I haven't done cw in a while my fingers start to twitch. To the non-cw op, don't be offended - we just love this part of the hobby and just assume everyone else does too. It fits in with our tactile personality. We like to use our hands; we like talking with our fingers. But, it is not for everyone and never was. Now, people who learn cw will do it for all the right reasons.

Tom, AK2B
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WO7R on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
More reasons:

Weak signal work of all kinds. HF DXing is the obvious one already given.

But, what about VHFers? You might ask them about moonbounce, meteor scatter, and aurora. Yes, you can use some of the new fancy digital modes to do that, but every time my VHF friends demo these things to me. . .code is always there.

Without CW, I don't know if I could have ever finished my 5BWAS. Ten and fifteen meters to South Dakota were very difficult. Basically, I had to work them ground wave and, at my particular distance, CW was the way to go.

Another hidden advantage. If one is running a DXpedition, CW is something that is very easy to justify. Even if you grant that RTTY, PSK, et. al. are as spectrum efficient, the are not as _operationally_ efficient. A good operator can knock 'em down in code faster. Anyone who operates both modes for a while will learn this. It's why even DXpeditions that run RTTY typically run CW for several days first before they run any RTTY. Sure, some guys want to do 9 bands by 3 modes, but a lot of guys are happy to get one or two contacts, period. That group is easy to get out of the way with CW.

So, to the extent one is interested in things like Mixed DXCC, Mixed Honor Roll, 5BDXCC (which has no mode qualifier), 5BWAZ (which has no mode qualifier), CW will be very interesting to a lot of DXers for many years to come.

CW will live on without any sort of mandate, thank you very much. It's practical and hams will rediscover its benefits.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K5UJ on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
As a 99% phone operator I surprised myself by agreeing with most of the reasons. But there was a time when 100% of my operating was cw because I couldn't afford any fancy phone equipment. Those were the days when nearly every ham operated cw some, the pace of life was slower, and long-distance radio communication regardless of mode was thrilling to everyone, both ham and non-ham. People would get excited to get a "Radiotelegram" taken from the NTS and typed up on one of those nice forms the ARRL sold.

These days, cw stands for continuous work in my mind but I'll give it one thing, there are probably no where near the number of lids on cw as there are on phone, and I still use it to grab the hot dxpedition.

Working dx has been mentioned but I wonder what will happen when dx stations no longer know cw because their countries stopped requiring it to be licensed?
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KI4WGI on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I agree w/W5ESE & N2UGB...CW allows for way more homebrew projects... yes, I'm a no-code general but intend to learn code once i get a basic HF station up and running (presently remodeling & only have 2-meter rigs on the air).

Personally, I wish I'd went for the no-code tech when it became available. Working local VHF helped me get over mic fright as well as develop good on-the-air habits (at least in my area everyone well behaved!), not to mention I get to meet the local guys. At least one has offered to assist me learn code with "on the air" practice....of course once I can copy all needed charactors first. But as simple QRP transmitter with a local ham would be a fun way to gain proficiency!

Personally I'm glad the FCC dropped the requirement to become a Ham. However, now I'm in and enjoying it, I want to enjoy all of it.

Steve
KI4WGI
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by VE5JCF on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I'm one of the last amateurs to pass the 5wpm test before Industry Canada got rid of it. I used to only operate HF mobile (hence only SSB), but now that I have downsized to a car (fuel $), I brought the rig into the apartment and want to get back into CW. Ok, in my case I have to actually get into it as I've never actually made a contact with it after passing the test.

I was wondering if anyone knew of any good morse trainers that they could recommend. I'm looking for just a schematics and parts list rather than an assembled unit (kits are ok, but a free schematic/parts list would be best).

I've seen a few things online, but I wanted to get the opinion of someone with more experience on the matter.

Thanks,
Jared.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by VE6KLJ on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
What a nice article. I am slowly learning CW again after a long time. I'm 28, and been licenced for 10 years!! Actually Should be my anniversary soon. As with all things, life and school took over my learning of CW. Much to my joy,In Canada they removed the CW requirement and have HF access to those with the advanced license.

I've always been very interested in CW as it is an efficient way of communicating and simple. :)

So here's what I did to spurn my CW interest. I bought a 1943 vibroplex, and a korean era "leg clamp" straight key. Then I built a practise oscilator. By combining my vintage radio habit and electronics habit with CW I find i'm much more motivated to learn it. I suggest those thinking of learnig CW do the same. Pick up an vintage rig, or go QRP or mix CW with another of your interests..


Also, being that I have yet to own a home, CW (and psk) seem to be the modes that have most "bang for the buck".

My 2.71828183 cents ;)

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KD3JF on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Admit it. You don't have the smarts to learn CW. If you did you would love it. ROTFL
Paul, KD3JF
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by VE6KLJ on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
In regards to learning by sounds, I have found that Dr. Wheeler's Code quick system seems to work well. I remembered a recognised CW from years when I was trying to study, have resumed using the system and so far so good.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W4VR on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
...and to practice it after you've learned it keeps the brain cells active.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by NU0R on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
30 years ago I fell in love with Ham Radio. The love affair still exists today. Things have changed for me though. When I started out I knew I would eventually want to make Extra Class. I also knew that to acheive that goal I would have to be pretty good at CW. So, I basically limited myself to CW for the first 5 or 6 years. At that time I took and passed the Extra exam. At that time I coud send and receive 35 WPM CW. Let me change that a little--I could copy 35 WPM of properly sent CW. After making Extra I got lazy and took about 7 years off. When I returned to radio I discovered 2 things. First was that a digital revolution had taken place. I fell in love with PSK31. The second thing I discovered was that many of the Hams had terrible fists. Actually they fell into several categories. First was the guy who was sending via machine and was sending at 40 WPM and could not copy 20 WPM without his machine reader crutch. Next was the guy who ran everything together, characters, words, no punctuation, etc. Man you guys are just a barrel of fun to try to copy! And I have to include a third category. This is the Hams who are good at CW. They know CW and can send and receive it well at many speeds. Thank God for the third category. To the first two categories I would respectfully suggest this--- record your sending and save it for a month. In a month replay it and try to copy what you are sending. In conclusion, speed is of absolutely no value if the CW is not sent correctly. Our hobby is about communication, not "stump the other guy"! If you are not routinely getting complimented on your "good fist" you might want to ask yourself--- why not? 73 Bruce
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6TXD on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I became a NOCODE tech in the early 90's. I tried off and on to learn code.I purchased a keyer and code tapes as early as 1989. Some how I could not learn it. Around 2004 or so I heard some ugly rumers that the code was going away. Even though I couldn't learn the code I wanted to get my general while the code was still a requirement.

Through the use of the G4FON program and off the air practice and filling up two 70 page spiral binders. I felt ready to take the 5 WPM test. I took the test and failed. I went back to practicing and filled up another 70 pager notebook. Took the CW test again and FAILED AGAIN!

I was determined to pass this test. A month later I took the test again and BARLEY passed. But I passed. Recieved my General and a month later passed my Extra.

The odd thing is that I forgot about CW for a year. And after a year I decided to put the microphone on the shelf for a year and just use CW. I wanted to become at least marginally profficient at CW.

A year came and went then two years came and went and the mic is still on the shelf. I found CW to be the prefered mode.

It is funny how these things work out. I didn't want anything to do with code I just wanted the general license. And I turn out to become a cw operator and enjoy code. I now operate at the 15-17 WPM range.

Gerry K6TXD
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4KC on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
W1TTT: you are right, of course. I keep forgetting about that dang 60-meter deal.

For the record, I believe removing the code requirement for licensing will eventually increase the number of CW ops, for the same reasons cited by several others here.

And as K0BG mentioned, this article could just as easily have been about the joys of mobile operating...or slow-scan TV or EME or any number of other pursuits in this fine hobby. I just happened to pick CW, mostly because it used to be required that we know it and now it isn't. If you don't want to try it, don't.

Heck, I hear they've got contraptions now that can copy and send all those dots and dashes for you! You just need something called a "computer" and a "keyboard." You probably don't want to use those things and tune down to the CW subbands and sample what's going on though. Next thing you know, you'll be addicted, buying paddles, building QRP kits, working countries you never thought possible.

We wouldn't want that to happen!

Don N4KC
www.n4kc.com
www.n4kc.blogspot.com


 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N5IVZ on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
CW rules... otherwise, use your cell phone to talk or text!
 
My license plate for many years:  
by WB2WIK on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
CW4EVR
 
RE: My license plate for many years:  
by KG6WLS on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
<<My license plate for many years: Reply
by WB2WIK on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
CW4EVR>>

::I've yet to see it but, has anybody been "hardcore" enough to have their call sign or anything else tattooed in morse on their body? It seems that these days the younger generation can't wait to become of age to have ANYTHING inked on them.

73
 
Why use phone?  
by KASSY on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Here's what burns the...well, puts a run in my stockings...

Why are we all expected, somehow to use voice, keyboard modes, and have FM VHF or UHF radios?

I took the license exams, all that were available when I got licensed.

Nowhere on those exams was I given a typing test. Or a test to see if I could use a microphone. Or to see if I had the arm strength to lift a handheld radio. Or to see if my voice was capable of inducing an unmodulated carrier to shift frequency, or to create chasing I and Q signals.

As far as I'm concerned, using FM on repeaters, and using microphones and keyboards is not now, anyway, a license requirement, so why does everybody expect that I would willingly do so?

- k
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W8KQE on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
CW is another language to me.

Sometimes in a typical conversation, I tell people I know 3 languages fluenty... English, Greek, and CW!
 
RE: My license plate for many years:  
by KF4HR on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"I've yet to see it but, has anybody been "hardcore" enough to have their call sign or anything else tattooed in morse on their body? It seems that these days the younger generation can't wait to become of age to have ANYTHING inked on them."

Granted licenses are becoming easier to obtain, but let's hope our ranks haven't dummied down that far! :^)

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4TOL on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Yassou George!!!
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KD5XB on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Quoting from the Coast Guard: ZUT
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W5CYC on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Catch it, catch it. Payday today.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WB2WIK on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah Reply
by W5CYC on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Catch it, catch it. Payday today.<

::Worst way ever devised to learn the code. I feel soooo sorry for those who went this route.

WB2WIK/6
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N0FQN on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
It's never been a question if a person can learn code, it's a question of whether they WANT TO LEARN code. If someone goes in with the mind set that code is too hard for them or any of the other excuses they use then, they are bound for failure and blame it on everything but, the real reason. I have ADHD and dyslexia and yet learned the code to 23 wpm. So, don't hand me your excuses about not being able to learn. Then there are those who absolutely abhor code. For them I'll be working contacts when the bands too rough for PSK, RTTY or SSB.

The 10 reasons(excuses), I've heard, why not to learn code.

1. It's icky
2. I can't learn it.
3. I'm lazy and won't accept the challenge laid before me. Change it, NOW!!!
4. Isn't this suppose to be a hobby? Then why work at it? Just issue me a license and get rid of this stupid testing!!
5. It's really icky!
6. I'm mentally challenged and don't want to learn.
7. Careful, I'm high tech, I can push a button.
8. What do you think I am smart or something? This stuff is Greek to me.
9. I am NOT going to work for something no matter what you say. I complain until you change it for me. We need to work on removing those math questions next.
10. Isn't this the "EASY BUTTON" hobby??

If this angers you then you fit into one of the 10 reasons.


 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W4KVW on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
CODE QUICK may be BAD for YOU but I learned the code in just 8 short 2 hour blocks with CODE QUICK & passed the test with 43 characters STRAIGHT COPY.MUST be SOMETHING "GOOD" about the system OM!I do NOT use code today but I learned it beacuse it was REQUIRED then to upgrade but it was NOT requred that I "USE IT"!Find your favorite mode & use it! }:>)

Clayton
W4KVW
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by G3SEA on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!

All good and valid reasons ( especially marginal condx and DX ) but each to his / her own ;)

KH6/G3SEA
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KC8SLC on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I'm currently 45 years old and became a ham op in 2001. There is nothing in this hobby cooler than building your own cw xcvr that puts out 1 watt, mount it inside an Altoids tin, and from the state of Michigan get a "solid copy" report from a ham in Connecticut!!!!!!!! And I'm just getting started with this QRP CW stuff. Tim { member of Michigan QRP Club }
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by V73NS on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
42,000 plus CW contacts
28 SSB contacts (friends and coworkers mostly)

Need V7? Learn the code.

QSL OM?
73 ES GUD DX TU
. .
 
Don lights one little candle.  
by AI2IA on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
It is better to light one little candle than to curse the darkness.

How long have we waited? How many Code Fanatics have we had to endure? How much nonsense has been posted before finally someone extends a helping hand, a positive input, a constructive set of suggestions, and a hardy invitation extended in the true spirit of amateur radio?

Thanks Don for doing more for the continued use and enjoyment of Morse Code than all the many bashing posts of years on eHam.net.
 
RE: Don lights one little candle.  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>How many Code Fanatics have we had to endure? How much nonsense has been posted before finally someone extends a helping hand, a positive input, a constructive set of suggestions, and a hardy invitation extended in the true spirit of amateur radio?

It's funny that we still have CW fanatics that haven't figured out that insulting no code people, portraying "real ham radio" as only CW, and attempting to make those who chose not to do CW seem like lazy bums has encouraged *zero* hams to try CW and is doing more to eliminate CW than anything else by turning people off to it.

This is a great article, by the way. Thank you Eham for finally publishing an article about CW that isn't flame bait.
 
RE: Don lights one little candle.  
by K4FX on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Nice article, no doubt about it, CW is where the DX is, one major reason is the language barrier, CW is a bit of a universal langauge, and all the no-code rules in the world are gonna make all the DX stations learn fluent English, if you wanna work them all, you are gonna have to work CW.

Also CW is FAR from dead, just listen to the bands on CW contest weekend, far from it!

K4FX
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WD9FUM on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I think my son will become a CW fan. He called my wife "Dit-Dah" instead of Mama when he was a little guy!

After being a ham for 30 years and trying just about every operating mode, I still have fun with CW.

Remember, having fun is what it's all about!
 
RE: Don lights one little candle.  
by N4KZ on June 20, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Nice read, Don, as always.

I taught myself Morse Code at the age of 13. That was more than 40 years ago. It was hard, a real struggle but worth every minute. Many years later, as I was running my first moonbounce sked on 2 meters with a European, just hearing my callsign bouncing off the moon from Switzerland in a long, slow CW transmission made the little hairs on the back of my neck stand up.

That would never have been possible without Morse Code.

True, CW isn't everyone's cup of tea but then again how do you know for certain without taking a sip or two or three?

73, N4KZ
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by QRZDXR2 on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
outstanding article. Thanks. I for one object to the whiners who don't like CW. So their!! I have to smile and laugh at the people who just don't get it. Makes me wonder why they have a extra class license yet, are so dumb as not to master the code just for the fun of it.

Those who whine and complain about a well written article that is ment to expose new hams to the first digital methode of commucations seem a little whacko.

writing that they don't like it and don't want to see it, shun the idea of someone else enjoying the mode.

Sure they are biased against the people who learn CW. As they admit, they can't, and so feel degraded in the eyes of others due to their mental inabilities. Thus, they want it to go away. When they get their way, once again their egos build back to above the playing field.

Hey its all part of being a ham. You like sideband, good for you. Others like CW. Like the poor guy on the radio who complains and whines, if you don't like the topic of conversation, turn off the computer and go watch TV or play a intendo game more to your level.

No one has attained CW without working at it. Their in is the problem. The word work just doesn't fit into their vocabulary. Everyone I know has and contenues to work at CW to be better more intellegent operators in more than one mode of operation (mainly voice)

As to the military using cw. It already is. I have heard that the bad guys over their are like our new hams here. They don't comprehend or work towards learning cw. thus its like a unknown to them. A plus for our guys because they can talk freely and not have to be conserned about interception. The special forces have never quit learing code for commucations to the best of my knowledge.

Keep up the good work. I enjoyed the article and your experiances with CW.

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by QRZDXR2 on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Makes a hit with the gals in the movies too.

A group of us all went to a old time movie. In it suddenly a cw tapping message came across. One of the girls asked what did they say? One of the others who was a ham extra class said, 'they told them that they were here." The gal next to me said, " you do that beep beep stuff, what did they say" I turned and smiled and softly said, " they told the other sub to surface as the trapped guys are going to start to escape and to PU". Wow she was impressed.

Suddenly from behind us came a voice, " he is right that is what they said" After the movie was over I turned around to find a older gent in his 80's behind us smileing. I asked him if he knew MC. He responded with, " of course I was in the navy subs in ww2 as a radio op"

I guess you never forget cw. He then asked me how I knew MC. I responded with "ham radio." He just smiled and then left.

It made a big hit with the gals. Very impressed.

The second time we impressed the group was when we went to disneyland. At the main station enterance their is a telegraph going off. Again someone waiting for the train to arrive asked what are they saying. I again responded with what the code was tapping out. If you want to know what they are saying, go to disneyland and listen for yourself. Yes it is a message in real time code. No fair cheating and looking it up on the web. I even let the park director know that he had a problem orginally. Its been fixed now. He was very impressed that I could read it. It had the problem I pointed out for years he said, in a letter back to me, along with 4 free passes as guest of the park. knowing CW pays
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KW6LA on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
> > Thank you Don for the nice article ! I love the Lionel J-38 key at ur desk. I use the same
key and love it. I must say ( When the student is ready, the teacher will appear ) and the same goes for
CW. I think ending the requirement for code was the right decision, however the 20 wpm Boys should
of got some added indenture like Extra / Plus for their hard work. It is an acquired skill and Damm hard
to master. I do hope that some of the Newbie's find that CW is something to strive for and enjoy it as much
as I have over the years. With the Flux @ 65 < < < I still can have a nice rag-chew on 20 meters CW even
if he / she is only running barefoot into a G5RV antenna. I operate as much ESSB as CW , so I am not one
of those who thinks if you own a microphone, you are not a real ham. I like many others , feel the FCC did
not do a very good job of back-filling the Q & A for the Extra class. It is way to easy to Blow thru the test with
out any real knowledge of radio . I only hope that this well written article inspires all Hams to improve their
skills in radio technology. What ever your Hot bottom is, run with it and have fun.



73's and HPE CU on CW * *



Tony KW6LA / T2 Commercial.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KB1NXL on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Who ever said "CW/Morse Code" is dead? It survives because it's a viable and robust communication mode. The biggest obstacle in Amateur Radio was the forced requirement to know code as a means to get "on the air". CW is and always will be just a mode, like phone or PSK31. Once the forced requirement was lifted, lo and behold how many posts revel in the fact that "...sales of keys are way up!.." or "...ARRL can't keep up with code CD sales..." I'm a bit tired of operators judging other operators by the delineation of when or if you entered the Fraternity of Radio Operators via code or no-code. If you enjoy tapping dadidadit dadadidah more power to ya! If you prefer calling CQ CQ CQ in voice, more power to ya!! This whole "Gee, i guess CW isn't dead after all.." argument is getting tired and stale. CW will always endure as long as the Amateur airwaves remain free.

73
KB1NXL
Rick
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N8CPA on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"Not surprisingly, therefore, the
morse code is pretty deeply embedded in the
"culture" of amateur radio, and it's impossible
to really "grok" many facets of the hobby without
knowing and making some use of the code."-- W5ESE

I grok that. And it's a lack of knowledge of that aspect of AR culture that makes so many newcomers feel like strangers in a strange land. And many of our
brass brothers, try as hard as they might, cannot
grok them. It is a quasi-linguistic issue.

AR had many years to develop as a brass mental substrate culture. I might take a few years for it to find its new substrate, amid the latter day materiel. But it will endure.

73,
Steve

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4OI on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
WOW -- great article and nice to have a long-running civil discourse on the topic for a change! We, as hams, are growing up! 73 de Ken N4OI dit dit
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by AD7KC on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
What a coincidence………I’ve been brushing up on my CW skills. When I studied for the test (5 wpm), all the advice I got was….”just learn to copy…never mind sending…that is easy”. Not Really

My 897 has a feature that allows me to practice sending without transmitting. When I used the keyer function, I wasn’t that bad. Though I can’t copy as fast as I was sending. As predicted by my advisors. I like my little Vibrokeyer. It is very cool.

The light bulb came on when I tried to use the straight keys (I have two), I am lousy. What a disappointment that was. After some research, the consensus seems to be, start with a straight key then – after a year or so – go back to the Vibrokeyer. Although I am bummed about the whole thing, got to do what I got to do. I want to get this right the first time.

Next thing is…where to find slow code? After more research, I found the SKCC (along with some others). http://www.skccgroup.com/ These folks really go out of their way to provide a learning environment for CW. During the course of my research, I learned quite a bit about Ham radio. Mainly – procedure. There is a lot of discipline with CW. Light bulb comes on again. I, now have a better understanding of where Amateur Radio ‘comes from’.

I have both the G4FON Koch Trainer and the Just Learn Morse Code software. I’m liking the Just Learn Morse Code software a little more. I’ve got something called a MorseMatic keyer. It lets me set up my key anywhere, any time I want, and practice. Don’t even need the radio. This is very cool to.

I figure, in a month (or so) I’ll ‘be ready’. I don’t want to make a complete ass out of myself. I should note that, when I come home at night from work I find copying code rather relaxing. This is an odd thing, but true. It takes so much concentration (for me), I forget all the stupid sh-t that has happened at work. Interesting development.

Either way……great article! One more thing though, you might add…..it is cheap to do!
 
Simplicity has it's own rewards  
by N8NSN on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"Code" communications have roots even further back than Morse... Smoke signals ? Yes it takes a desire to become proficient with the Morse code. But it is nice to have the mode as choice to use. Most of my best dx and regional contacts have been using Morse code. The folks that don't wish to use the mode have plenty of others to choose from. That's OK with me too... Just frees up more spectrum for us folks who want to use the Morse code.

That being said ... I am glad there are still ops using CW. I really hope this continues or perhaps the radio governing agencies around the world may change the allocations of these segments to include phone !

LONG LIVE CW !
 
RE: Simplicity has it's own rewards  
by KF4HR on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Ok, it's time to stir the pot a bit...

If you think learning CW is difficult now, here's something to ponder...

Prior to the invention of modulated CW (uh... for you new hams that's a transmitted on-off tone), CW operators copied the Morse Code by listening to timed "clicks". You might remember seeing this activity in old movies; at train stations, early telegram offices, etc. No CW tones folks..., just clicks!

Now here's the funny part. I read in QST years ago that when technology improved and modulated CW became the mainstay (this was still years before AM and SSB was a ham mode), old timers who could copy "click CW" used to razz the "modulated CW" operators! Evidently, back in yesterday year, only the "wimps" copied modulated CW! (Don't ya love it?!)

So, if we use the same "CW Op versus non-CW Op" argument, can we assume that the only REAL hams are only those that can copy CW just by listening to clicks?! (Even though I'm a CW op, I guess that makes me a CW wimp! :^)

And for you non-CW ops out there. When you get asked why you don't learn CW, your comeback might be,

"Why don't you learn CW by using "clicks" rather than "tone"... like the REAL hams used to!?"

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KC9JIQ on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Not to mention that hams in other countries may not speak the same language as you.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K5ML on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Congratulations, Don on another excellent article.

Those who love to chase DX but don't do CW are missing out on most and some of the best DX.

73,
Mickey, K5ML
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N4KC replied to another on June 20, 2008:

"For the record, I believe removing the code requirement for licensing will eventually increase the number of CW ops, for the same reasons cited by several others here."

Don, as usual you've written - indeed, crafted - a very good article. You are, after all, a professional wordsmith. You've also been spot-on in the article subject telling others what they want to hear. That seems to make the denizens of this din of inequity very happy.

The ARRL hit upon that same technique decades ago. But they went overboard on it and its membership may be dropping...that membership never exceeded a quarter of all US amateur radio licensees. Their book publishing business was far more profitable.

Of course everyone will go back to horses and buggies now that gasoline prices went into orbit. It's 'green' just like everyone's face will be with all those horse douvers lying around. Horseback was the first human transportation means over long distances, wasn't it?

Yes, everyone went right back to galena crystals and coherers after tubes were available, the first real 'receivers' for them newfangled radio waves.

Too bad the evil radio regulators made SPARK forbidden...everyone could have gone back to the first ham kilowatt transmitters that didn't use any of them pesky vacuum tubes.

Solid-state?!? Ya crazy! "When I was young we whittled our own ICs out of wood!"
...........

N4KC: "And as K0BG mentioned, this article could just as easily have been about the joys of mobile operating...or slow-scan TV or EME or any number of other pursuits in this fine hobby. I just happened to pick CW, mostly because it used to be required that we know it and now it isn't. If you don't want to try it, don't."

I've tried it, didn't like it, didn't need it. Now what?
...........

N4KC: "Heck, I hear they've got contraptions now that can copy and send all those dots and dashes for you! You just need something called a "computer" and a "keyboard.""

Sunnuvagun!

<cue music from show Oklahoma> "Everythin's up ta date in Kansas City...they gone about as fur as they kin go..."

Video rolls up from black on clip of dancers cavorting around a train station, steam train chuffing in background, old station telegrapher looking out his window (eyeshades on, garters on his sleeves), everyone in pre-1890 dress, all exuberant to be living in such modern times. <fade to black>
..........

N4KC: "We wouldn't want that to happen!"

Of course not! :-)

73, Len AF6AY

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K5CQB on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"Why can't you bleepers accept that it's a matter of individual taste - and some of us simply don't like the whole idea of CW? As much as we love the magic of radio, we simply don't love that part of it, no matter how magic it seems to you."


Maybe he wasn't writing to you. Maybe he was writing to people who were on the fence about CW and just looking for a reason to try it. Reminds me of the part in "12 Monkeys" where Bruce Willis thought the radio advertisement was talking directly to him. LOL
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N7YA on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I love code, i use it all the time...i even worked V73NS 6 times...all CW.

Lets all relax, for those who dont want to use it, its ok...you dont have to. But its a fun mode worth checking out if you are thinking about giving it a go. Ive always said this, but if you think about it, this is a ridiculous argument.

CW is great, its my prefered mode of choice, but i also use SSB and would like to try out other modes too....why? because i can.

Use whatever the hell mode you want...is this mundane infighting really worth it?

...then again, i dont hear these arguments on the air, just online.

73...Adam, N7YA
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WN2A on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Wonderful article! It's got my vote.

Anyone: Just send QRS and we will slow down, no problem!
See you on 80-2M CW
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by AE4TO on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Don: Congratulations! Nice Job!
For those of us that love cw is our duty to let everybody know how much FUN CW IS and introduce
more of our fellow hams to a practical,useful,simple
means of communication that is a JOY to use. Simply
check the quality of the cw operators, the friendliness that transends language barriers.
Is a excellent mental and cordination excercise were you can use simple, affordable, nature conservating energy efficient equipment.....complying with a Green planet.
Totaly up to date!
Long live CW Morse code......Sergio Potes AE4TO


 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY said "N4KC: "We wouldn't want that to happen!"
Of course not! :-) "

For those folks that don't know...Len tries to pass himself off as being an oldtimer, when in reality, he waited until the code requirement was dropped before becoming a ham...so basically he has ZERO experience in ham radio, and ZERO relavance in this discussion....

N4KC, thanks for a great article....it's too bad the anti-code bigots are trying to trash this thread.....you would think that now that they have their free upgrade, and access to HF phone bands, that they would let the pro-code folks enjoy a simple discussion of our favorite mode...
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR tried to add more 'reasons' on June 20, 2008:

"#11 As I began my training to become a private pilot I found that knowing CW added another benefit. The ability to quickly identify VOR navigational beacons. VOR's (which stand for, VHF Omnidirectional Range) are omni-directional transmitters that provide one type of navigation service to pilots. Each VOR periodically transmits its own unique 3 letter designator (in CW) so a pilot can quickly identify which VOR they have their navigational equipment tuned to. Being able to quickly identify a VOR in CW can be a big plus to a pilot, especially in bad weather."

Ahem...as one who was INTO avionics engineering BEFORE taking formal general aviation piloting lessons in 1962, I call that a bunch of hooey as a 'reason' to learn CW.

Every 'sectional' or 'local' chart has the frequency boldly printed where a VOR or VORTAC is located...at the center of the magnetic compass bearing circle of that VOR/VORTAC. Every civil aviation radionav receiver now is crystal controlled for frequency in that 108 to 118 MHz band for VOR. The line-of-sight for a VHF VOR signal is between 20 and around 70 miles depending on one's altitude. There is NO DX involved. VORs and VORTACs are NOT THAT MANY AND NUMEROUS THAT YOU CAN'T GUESS APPROXIMATELY WHERE YOU ARE OR WHERE THOSE MIGHT BE.

First, if you've had the proper flight instruction, you will be cautioned to PLAN AHEAD on knowing strange territory. GET ACQUAINTED with that territory. Since a general aviation trainer is usually really pushing it to make 120 Knots (roughly 135 MPH), you will NOT suddenly enter areas you've not studied on a map. Even if the mind fogs a bit (but not the weather) you SHOULD have SOME GENERAL IDEA on where you are. As long as you know that, you can glance at your sectional map and see what radionav aids are there. Radionav receivers are dependable in frequency (the 'VFO' kind went away years ago). The OBS (Omni-Bearing Selector) will either show the bearing to a ground station (newer) or you can select it by watching a 'to-from' needle with manual bearing dial rotation (older types). With two VOR bearings you've got a good triangulation on where you are...in less time than you can cover 20 miles over the ground in a Cessna 150. If you can't do it that fast then fire your instructors and practice on the ground or aloft when NOT at the controls...until you can.

If in a panic, just dial up radio comm to ONE TWENTY ONE FIVE and call for help. That's the international civil aviation emergency frequency and all towers are required to monitor it. Nearly all VORs are capable of having an adjacent tower operator talk to you ON a VOR frequency. Civil aviation VORs were DESIGNED for that, can handle voice without disturbing either the 30 Hz bearing signal or the 9.96 KHz bearing reference signal...audio space between them is free and clear for as-necessary voice communications. Every single VOR in the USA has that capability.

The ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) outlined the world's system of civil radionavigation and radiocommunications methods, means, and protocol back in 1955. That was a mere 51 years ago. It included DME (Distance Measuring Equipment) on about 1.2 GHz for very accurate distance indication to a DME ground station. It is now standard to pair the radionav frequencies of VOR and DME to reduce a pilot's workload. You won't find DME in most general aviation trainer aircraft (single-engine, two-place) but that is necessary for IFR (Instrument Flight Regulation) training.

The CW ID by tone keying hasn't been removed in over a half century because nobody has bothered to remove it. It doesn't harm a VOR's operation and nowadays is very long-lasting all-electronic generation. Any tower talking through a VOR will override that CW ID. If one can't figure out who that VOR station might be, one should NOT be up in an airplane!

If anyone cares to look, the computer program Flight Simulator had some sectional charts in it and there is one Part of Title 47 C.F.R. that gives all regulations on Aviation Radio Services in the USA.

The days of NON-directional LF beacons and bi-directional LF beacons (the old "A-N" ones) are GONE for aviation radionavigation. Some beacons may still be running, haven't checked...but their usefulness ran out decades ago.
..........

KF4HR: "#12 Increased mental processes. I can't quite explain this one, but it seems like every time I've been involved with working CW (on a regular basis), my mind just seemed to be a bit sharper and work quicker. Perhaps working CW is akin to exercising your mind with cross-word puzzle's or other mind exercises games, who knows, but it sure seems that way to me."

That is a SUBJECTIVE thing, doesn't apply to everyone on any objective basis. The only objective, disinterested observation I can make is that all good CW ops get that "thousand yard stare" and seem to block out everything all around them. Sometimes that includes spouses and other family members.

KF4HR: "For those of you that may be considering taking the time to learn CW, consider this. The ability (or lack of ability) to learn CW is purely a mindset. And it's really as simple as this... If your mind can picture the letter "A" when someone says the letter "A", your mind can also understand the same thing when it hears the sound, "dit-dah." None of us were born knowing what the letter "A" was, but we eventually learned it. Same with CW. Just like learning any language, its just a matter of repetition and practice."

Sorry, but that is against what reasoning people and scholars have found. Humankind developed language and eventually a written form of that because humans have the audio equipment AND universal aptitude to communicate that way. That began before recorded history of humans...it was already being done by the time the earliest records were uncovered.

Music is a subset of communications and involves as its basis normal rhythms of the body such as heartbeat. We can grok rhythms (to use a word invented by RAH). We don't grok the almost-random on-off patterns of many representative language substitutes systems naturally. Humand don't need 'training' to understand language, only a constant stream of that associated with physical actions plus reasoning ability AND a natural aptitude will imprint the meanings of language...well before a young human has the developed motor control (muscle coordination) to enable writing that language, they can speak and communicate with other humans. They have built-in equipment to do that.
..............

KF4HF: "But the main key to learning CW (or anything) is keeping an open mind and a positive attitude."

Learning ANYTHING requires several necessities. Yes, the generic "open mind" is necessary but a mind MUST be able to process ABSTRACT data. Very little in electronics or its subset called 'radio' is intuitive. Our minds are keyable to things we can see, touch, taste, smell, hear and we need the APTITUDES to process those and certainly more intellectual capacity to process the ABSTRACT. Never in my life have I seen an electron or a radio wave or any electrical current, only REPRESENTATIONS of them by some form of sensor or instrument. Yes, we can certainly feel a high enought voltage, but that is a secondary effect of the voltage and current affecting our nerves. We react to what our nerves respond to. Molecules and smaller are very, very ABSTRACT. But, we can intellectually LEARN abstract things. We can't all be electricity geniuses since that requires a very definite aptitude for several ABSTRACT things.

"Morse code" is simply a monotonic semi-rhythm REPRESENTATION of characters in the English language. It is NOT a 'natural' thing. Indeed, the first morse code was ALL NUMBERS; Morse's financial backer Alfred Vail suggested changing that all-number system to letters, numbers, and some punctuation marks with a code size per character approximating the number of characters found in a printer's type case. That was some time after the first Morse-Vail Telegraph service began in 1844. A "code" is generally defined as REPRESENTATIVE of a particular written language but it is NOT a language unto itself. We don't "learn a new language" by learning morse code, we learn the REPRESENTATION of it via what psycho-motor aptitudes we posess in our leetle gray cells (as Hercule Poirot might say it). Such aptitudes are NOT common to all humans. The US military found that out during WWII days and the absolute necessity to train millions in unique, sometimes arcane specialties. For decades thereafter, the US military had very basic aptitude tests given to new recruits, one of which was designed to approximate one's aptitude for morse code. I took one in 1952 and appeared somewhere around the middle of human aptitudes for that. <shrug>

From 1953 to 1956 I was dumped into a very BIG effort to maintain a very large HF radio communications station while in the US Army. NONE of those radio circuits used ANY on-off keying telegraphy from/to other parts of the Far East and the USA. "Keeping an open mind" AND a "positive attitude" I tried to learn everything I could with ALL the facilities of long-distance radio communications all around me. In the beginning of my assignment, I'd thought on-off keying telegraphy was still in wide use in the Army. "Keeping an open mind," I decided differently. If morse code was so useful, wonderful for radio back in 1953, why wasn't it used more? Reasoning with my "open mind" told me it was NOT that useful and had a limited future in radio communications. That would be a correct assumption of ALL HF radio communications internationally over time...with the exception of amateur radio...until this new millennium came around.

"Positive attitude." I'm generally an upbeat person. I also have a good aptitude for illustration-art, have the motor skills to translate images as they are into 2-dimensional representations with many media. It comes easily to me, yet others are barely able to draw stick figures. They can SEE the differences but can't DO them. We humans are NOT built or equipped with the SAME built-in aptitudes. If one is to keep a TRUE "open mind" then one MUST REALIZE THAT.
............

KF4HR: "So the question becomes, is learning CW important enough to take the time to learn? To many, the answer is a solid no, and that's fine."

Ahhh...but your very next sentence shows up your own viewpoint, thus losing your "open mind" dictum:

KF4HR: "But for you non-CW types that are currently enjoying our modern plug&play appliance modes (FM, SSB, PSK31, SSTV, etc), some day you may find that you're up for a bit more of a mental challenge."

My voice, my ears are NOT "plug-and-play." Neither are my eyes or hands. I was speaking and understanding two human languages fluently before I ever operated any radio transmitter. Others in my largely-ethnic society were the same way. Learning morse code is NOT any sort of intellectual feat or mental challenge...it is a psycho-motor skill involving intense and prolonged repetition of the representations of English language written characters until one's neural node connections are formed to enable such a skill. It is more like 'touch typing.' In middle school I took a typing class for reasons that it might be useful later...but also because there were a lot of girls there. Evolving hormones make us do interesting things. Our manual typewriters had NO characters on their keys. None. Blank. We had NO choice but to make our motor skills 'memorize' each and every key position. It was endless repetition of transferring English text into as near-exact copies (which would become grades based on errors) the first semester. The second semester involved speed and more complex texts to copy, again grades based on copy errors. No 'sidetone' on those typewriters, nothing rhythmic as I would later find on teleprinters. The room tended to have a high noise content during drills with three dozen typewriters in use. Still, we could hear the teacher's voice and understand her; we could all speak and hear rather naturally since before we took ANY classes.

Were all those typing classes necessary? I'd say so. We now have personal computers with keyboards and MUCH MORE computing power and memory than ANY mainframe computer had just 30 years ago. I can communicate by keyboard and screen at nearly the speed of light anywhere in the world where there is an Internet connection. In the 60 years since my middle school I've operated on most of the EM spectrum, far more than just amateur allocations from VLF on up to 25 GHz, all without requiring to use OOK CW morse codes or even being skilled in that, not only for DoD contracts but in 8 different US civil radio services. Now I have a 9th civil radio service where I am authorized to transmit RF energy using only certain modes and modulations with strict adherence to limits on what can be transmitted. I can plug my new radio into the electric socket and play around...within regulations of course. ANYONE with a reasonably open mind could do similar given enough lifespan, intelligence, "open mind" and "attitude." With or without some "plug & play appliances."

Would a similar exercise be necessary for morse code? Probably yes. Would it be USEFUL? NOT at all except to placate a bunch of moresmen hams in amateur radio. I'm 75 and not about to genuflect to some self-described tribal chieftan wannabe who wants to boss people around while waving a J-38.

ATTITUDE works BOTH ways. If you want to call anything but OOK CW as 'plug and play' then you are welcome to all the bad sounds you will receive in return. Remember to "keep an open mind" when someone doesn't instantly love your entreaties about morsemanship. You WILL find that morse code modes have been downsizing and going away constantly in the last half century. I didn't make them do that. The 'plug and play' people didn't do that. Morse code modes just didn't have the 'right stuff' to be useful compared to better modes in all of radio.
..........

KF4HR: "Should that occur, consider giving CW a try. You just may find it's well worth your effort."

I've had LOTS of mental challenges throughout my life. I've won most of them. Morse code skill isn't a mental one. I've "tried it" three times and, keeping an "open mind," decided it was NOT WORTH THE EFFORT. Now what?

What the morsemen have left is EMOTIONAL BIAS for THEIR personal skill. Fine for them. May they all enjoy it. It isn't an automatic badge for them to be radio authorities in a hobby activity.

36.5, Len AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Some ANONYMOUS being who calls hisself "radio123us" angrily scribbled on 21 Jun 08:

"For those folks that don't know...Len tries to pass himself off as being an oldtimer, when in reality, he waited until the code requirement was dropped before becoming a ham...so basically he has ZERO experience in ham radio, and ZERO relavance in this discussion...."

Ooooooo! Somebody with a really deep and BITTER animosity problems there? :-)

Tsk, tsk, tsk...I am 75 years old and was granted my first US amateur radio license on 7 March 2007 at age 74. "Extra out of the box" because I was ABLE to do that. That was almost on the 51st anniversary of getting my First Class Radiotelephone (Commercial) license in Chicago at the FCC Field Office there in 1956.

If you look real hard at the mastheads of Ham Radio Magazine in the late 1980s, you will find my real name there as Associate Editor. I was not licensed anywhere for amateur radio then. I've had articles purchased and published in HR with a full byline, including postal address before that.

If you really want to see this so-called "zero relevance" you claim, go to the FCC website and do a Search of docket Comments, using the full name you will see on my e-ham headers. READ those and weep. NO PHONY IDs used there. But, here you are, big fat PHONY ID and want to trash someone you don't personally like. Oh...boo hoo for you.

ANONYMOUS BEING: "...it's too bad the anti-code bigots are trying to trash this thread.....you would think that now that they have their free upgrade, and access to HF phone bands, that they would let the pro-code folks enjoy a simple discussion of our favorite mode..."

"Simple discussion?!?" Hardly. The PRO-code amateurs are all using the SAME tired cliche's that were used years and years ago. NO change. Alla same tired old stuff. They didn't stop since NPRM 98-143, they didn't stop through 18 Petitions docketed for Comments, they didn't stop through the final NPRM to eliminate the code test. Alla same tired old snit. Nobody was up-to-date or inventive enough on reasons to keep the code test. The FCC didn't buy it.

"Zero relevance" on Comments to the FCC? Did you use the same non-clever ANONYMOUS HANDLE there? Did you display the same OPEN ANIMOSITY you showed in your little mash note here? By law the FCC has to make ALL Comments on dockets visible to ALL. I have ALL the last NPRM Comments saved on a CD. I'm not going to bother looking through that for some PHONY ID that you are using. It's not worth my time, nor anyone else's.

Yes, I don't claim much experience IN AMATEUR radio. I've spent the last 55 years in OTHER radio services plus doing contract work for the DoD. The latter does NOT require any license to transmit. How about that?!? Yes, for the last three months I haven't transmitted anything. My SteppIR is expected to arrive on Tuesday, 24 June, has to be assembled. Its base is already in place, the coax run, radials buried. Haven't filled a single logbook on amateur radio, don't have to. All I've got is an Icom IC-746Pro, bought it cash from AES in Las Vegas...after my amateur license grant date.

Did I wait and wait and wait and wait until 23 Feb 07 came around? No, but you can't use my real story because you don't know what to make of it. I was engaged in a POLITICAL action of modernizing the US amateur radio regulations. Partly for others, partly for the sake of bringing a good argument to the federal level. I believed in what I was arguing to the FCC. Once the FCC announced (in late December of 2006) that the code test was going to go, I just sat back and smiled and that was that. No more fighting. Relaxation. Two months later I decided "Why not?" and went for it. Two weeks of cramming, going through every single question on the QP, and I was ready, confident, prepared. I did the same in late February of 1956 for my Commercial license. It works. You won't believe it because your attitude (and reasons for HIDING) won't let you. You must ATTACK personalities.

ANONYMOUS BEING, you let your personal animosity show through. You never studied The Amateur's Code about comradship or friendliness? Nope. No sign of it. Hey, no strain, I've heard your kind for decades, spouting the same old tired 'superior' BS. Nothing new. No sweat to me. I'll just lock and load whenever another of Your Kind shows up (they are easy to spot). :-)

Len, AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by QRZDXR2 on June 21, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Pro code so far 350. No code whiners responses 2. Hmmm I would say it was a great article with that response.

Why is cw more popular thses days?

Ever try to make a Sideband Radio out of spare parts?

Couple of transistors and indeed you can make a cw radio. Only problem is you need to use a key (on off) and their is nowhere to plug in the mic.

CW is more economical and doesn't use as much power to achieve the same results.

Now if you really want to be a great ham radio operator, use a straight key or bug and develope a fist that others can tell its you. Yes old timers knew who it was by the way they sent even on the telegraph.

Today with electronic keying its like a computer and you have to wait for the sign (call) to determine who is sending. Electronically then they all sound the same without personalites.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WX1F on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Can you say Auditary Perceptual Processing Disorder? That little disability is experienced by a large percentage of people who don't even know they have it! It has kept some really nice people completely away and out of Amateur Radio ever since Amateur Radio began. Don't know what it is? It's like this gang...how many of you have the skill to beat Tiger Woods in a game of golf? Not many, right? Same thing. Physical prowess is not granted to all of us by The Creator. But... somewhere in the past...a group of hams "decided"..that there should be a stop gap, to prevent "the riff raff" from entering "The Hobby"...and so the cw test was born. If you can learn it..fine. But please...stop telling everyone that "you just have to stay with it" and you will learn it. Because not all of you have the capability due to APPD and getting discouraged isn't nessessary anymore. Smoke em if you got em..but leave the rest of us to feel good about ourselves, that we passed the written exams.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY said "ANONYMOUS BEING, you let your personal animosity show through. You never studied The Amateur's Code about comradship or friendliness?"

Len, I was just stating the FACTS..with no animosity intended...

Read what I said again...the only one that is showing any animosity is YOU...your hatred and distain for any of the customs and traditions of ham radio show quite clearly in your posts here though...all I was saying is this post was NOT intended to be a code/no-code debate...that debate is OVER.....but Len, it's perfectly OK for folks to discuss their love for CW on this site if they want to....and they should be able to do so without anti-code bigots like youreself interferring....if you don't like folks discussing CW,then you can go to another thread....and that is why your posts have ZERO relavance here...you have a built in bias against ham radio traditions...
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KC8SLC on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Excellent article. I have been a ham for 7 years now and took up code about 5 years ago. I had alot of trouble learning it at 5 wpm and after several months and very little progress, was wondering if it was worth learning. I would listen to code being sent by other people and just could not make any sense of what was being sent. I did pass the 5 wpm code test to upgrade in the early part of 2003. It is now 2008 and I can copy @ 22 wpm and send at about 26 wpm!!!!!! I stuck with it and I love it!!!!!!! I now belong to two QRP clubs, build QRP xcvr{s} and I'm enjoying the hobby!! Taking a QRP rig with me this summer on a backpacking trip to Manitou Island is going to be cool!! 73, Tim.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY said "What the morsemen have left is EMOTIONAL BIAS for THEIR personal skill."

And what YOU have is a personal BIAS against folks that enjoy using this skill....it's fine that you don't like CW, but please let those of us who do enjoy it discuss it without your useless comments...no one in forcing you to learn CW now, so you should have absolutely no gripe with the "morsemen"...
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WB8NUT on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
CW is just another mode. Personally I have found that PSK31 does a far better job at "getting the message through" than CW. Plus I saw a gadget at Dayton that sends and receives PSK31 without the need for a computer. CW has its place among all the modes, but I wish this unhealthy obsession with CW among some people would end. Have fun with CW and all the other modes we have access to with the amateur service.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
WB8NUT said "CW has its place among all the modes, but I wish this unhealthy obsession with CW among some people would end. Have fun with CW and all the other modes we have access to with the amateur service. "

I don't see anyone here with an "unhealthy obsession" with CW, but there are a few with an "unhealthy obsession" AGAINST it....I agree, PSK31 works very well, and it a great mode..and I'm glad you enjoy it...if CW isn't your "cup of tea", then that's great too....that's why there are other modes...my GRIPE here is there is a group of anti-code bigots who havn't got over the FACT that the code/no-code debate is finished...instead of enjoying another great mode like PSK31, they seem to be on a mission to completely eliminate CW, and any positive discussion about it....it's perfectly OK for folks to promote their favorite mode of operations (even if it's CW), and these anti-code bigots for some reason can't get that through their thick skulls....
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>Smoke em if you got em..but leave the rest of us to feel good about ourselves, that we passed the written exams.

But then how can the code bigots feel good about themselves if they can't put down no coders? The elimination of the code test destroyed the one thing that made them better than others and lifted their spirits for years. And even worse, instead of having the luxury of a mandatory CW test to get people into CW, now they have to make CW look like fun and get people interested in their favourite mode voluntarily. And it was so easy to identify no coders you could shame back in the day. You could just look up their license class. Now you have to figure out when they took their tests and it's just not that easy. It's really difficult being a code bigot today.

So, before posting such insensitive comments, please think of the plight of the code bigots!


:-)
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>my GRIPE here is there is a group of anti-code bigots who havn't got over the FACT that the code/no-code debate is finished...instead of enjoying another great mode like PSK31, they seem to be on a mission to completely eliminate CW

Please show me some examples of "anti-code bigots" trying to eliminate CW here or elsewhere. You can't.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>So, before posting such insensitive comments, please think of the plight of the code bigots!

Let me add a serious follow-up to this cynical and hopefully humourous post. I don't consider all CW operators to be code bigots. We know who they are and they know who they are.

I think this article is great and anyone who knows CW can be proud of that. But if you're posting comments like "gee, CW isn't dead after all", "10 excuses not to learn code", or in general describe those who chose not to learn or use code as lazy or not applying themselves, you're probably a code bigot.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N3PZZ on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
The only thing more irritating than listening to code is hams who keep hawking it. Give it a rest......
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
STRAIGHTKEY said "Please show me some examples of "anti-code bigots" trying to eliminate CW here or elsewhere. You can't. "

STRAIGHTKEY did you miss this comment by Len AF6AY ?

AF6AY said "Simple discussion?!?" Hardly. The PRO-code amateurs are all using the SAME tired cliche's that were used years and years ago. NO change. Alla same tired old stuff. They didn't stop since NPRM 98-143, they didn't stop through 18 Petitions docketed for Comments, they didn't stop through the final NPRM to eliminate the code test. Alla same tired old snit."

Len seems to spend all his time worrying about whether something positive about CW might get posted on eHam, and when he finds something, he tries to stop it. I guess he figures since he was never able to do it, that he will do all he can to prevent other for learning and enjoying the mode....by his own admission, he waited over 50 years for this moment in time where he could get a codeless license. Now he spends ALL his time fighting an OLD battle that ended OVER a year ago....he REALLY needs to get a life...
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N3PZZ said "The only thing more irritating than listening to code is hams who keep hawking it. Give it a rest...... "

Instead of code, what if I REALLY loved PSK31 or SSB, and spent all my time "hawking" it on eHam..would that be irratating to you too ???? or could it be your BIAS is showing here ??? N4KC wrote a great article about the advantages on CW...he didn't force it on you or anyone else...and you were NOT forced to click on this thread....you chose to read it....just like on the radio, if you don't like what is being said, "turn the dial"...there is no need for you to read or comment if you are "irritated" by the subject....
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2RRA on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Great Article!

Those that are intelligent enough to comprehend the editors reason for this article appreciate it. Those that did'nt obviously have some issue's. So let me make this clear!

The article wasn't to create a debate on the no-code, code topic, but to share like we've always had about benifits of CW apposed to other modes. This article "is not" about why some people are just to lazy, or the fact the human brain for some can not register quick enough to adapt to code. Stop using the excuse that CW prevented you from wanting to take the test. Just say you couldn't pass it and could never get it.

The editor explained well why CW is still widely used and gave superb examples and reasons for the importance of CW. I for one agree and can say through experience it's all true.

73!
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W9OY on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
11. You get out of it what you put into it

73 W9OY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>>"Please show me some examples of "anti-code bigots" trying to eliminate CW here or elsewhere. You can't. "

>STRAIGHTKEY did you miss this comment by Len AF6AY ?

I missed it, but in reading the quote you cited and even his entire last post, I can't see where he's calling for the elimination of CW. Again, please show me some "anti-code bigots" who are trying to eliminate CW.

Len's basic points are correct. The pro-code test group used many cliches, though I'd actually classify them as red herrings or fallacies. The debate was about the code test but you would again and again get the same irrelevant arguments such as the code test "LID filter", code is a great mode so we should keep the test, code isn't dead, I had to pass the test so you should, too. There's several others. Even worse, some in the pro-code test group wrongly tried to characterize code test elimination proponents as ultimately wanting to eliminate the CW mode or even the written tests entirely. That tactic was despicable, but you saw it then and you still see it today, your post above being just another example.

I'm all in favor of positive and pro-CW articles and postings. I don't think anyone is against them. The key word is "positive". A pro-CW comment that is a thinly veiled insult to those who choose not to learn or use CW isn't a positive comment. Comments like "CW is real ham radio" or vice-versa are not positive comments. These inflammatory pro-CW comments are merely perpetuating the code/no-code debate and ultimately turn people away from CW.

I'm a CW operator myself, but over the past few years I've become disillusioned with the pro-CW group in amateur radio. In my opinion they're the biggest threat to CW continuing to exist.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
STRAIGHTKEY said "Even worse, some in the pro-code test group wrongly tried to characterize code test elimination proponents as ultimately wanting to eliminate the CW mode or even the written tests entirely"

That's not the issue here though....N4KC wrote a great pro-CW article, It was not meant to cause a code/no-code debate, but the anti-code bigots like Len take offense anyway...to folks like Len, the code test meant DEFEAT...it's something they could NOT accomplish...and that bugs them, big time...and they will try to do anything they can to stop the enjoyment of the mode...
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
ANONYMOUS BEING using 'radio123us' alias Posted on 22 Jun 08:

"Len seems to spend all his time worrying about whether something positive about CW might get posted on eHam, and when he finds something, he tries to stop it."

Heh heh heh...this anonymous non-ham is still trying to poison the well. :-)
........

ANON.BE.: "...by his own admission, he waited over 50 years for this moment in time where he could get a codeless license."

"Codeless license?" Yes, in 1956 I was granted a First Class Radiotelephone (Commercial) license. Absolutely NO code test involved with it back then. :-) That was 52 years ago and I waited a whole long month after release from active duty to do so! (horrors, all that WAIT) Er, the US Army didn't require any of us to have FCC licenses of any kind. <shrug>

In 1959 I got a Class D CB license. Absolutely NO test required. Even got a 'callsign'! :-)

In the 1970s I got an all-channel CB for my Camaro, used it many times while cross-country driving, NO TEST NOR LICENSE required by then. The only 'code test' was the Legal Code for Driving in many states.

Also in the 70s I got a Commercial PLMRS station license for a small partnership. NO test required, just proof of an existing First 'Phone.

In 1950 I'd gotten a CODELESS Illinois drivers license. Very simple written test, no driving test. I could already play the car radio before that license. :-)

Oh, yeah, in early 1957 I had to take a California driver test...absolutely HAD to know the California Motor Vehicle CODE. I passed that first time, no sweat. :-)

In 1952 to 1956 I was subject to the Uniform CODE of Military Justice...was never guilty of any infraction. I passed that CODE. :-)

Ever since 1956 (with my 'First Phone) I've been bound by the CODE of Federal Regulations, Title 47, on operating RF emitters. My 'First Phone got changed by the FCC into a General or GROL and became a lifetime, no renewal necessary license. I still have it and its in the FCC records. Now I have another, an Amateur Extra Class amateur radio license. NO CODE test for it, either...and some anonymous malcontent, so gutless that she won't identify herself, has to make nasty under a pseudonym. How wonderful for US amateur radio that there is such good cheer and fellowship for 'newbies' now. Big ASSet for ham radio as a HOBBY ain't it?

I think that for SOME people, THEY are already emotionally dead. The only good thing is that they are made of biodegradable material. :-)

73, Len AF6AY

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>N4KC wrote a great pro-CW article, It was not meant to cause a code/no-code debate,

I agree...

> but the anti-code bigots like Len take offense anyway...to folks like Len, the code test meant DEFEAT...it's something they could NOT accomplish...and that bugs them, big time...and they will try to do anything they can to stop the enjoyment of the mode...

I don't know Len, but I'm trying to figure out what makes him an anti-code bigot. Paraphrasing, he says he tried it, kept an open mind, and decided it wasn't worth the effort. Furthermore he says that others can enjoy the code, but it doesn't automatically make them "radio authorities". Where is he trying to stop enjoyment of the mode? It seems you're trying to make your opponent something he's not and then trying to defeat that imaginary created position.

But back to the original request I made, for the third time: show me where an "anti-code bigot" has wanted to eliminate CW as you stated earlier.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WA4ONV on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
If only fone operators just had the courtesy of CW ops the bands would be wonderful. Have you guys listened lately to the foul language used on 80 mtrs ?? Just my opinion.
Best of 73 to all.
Joe, WA4ONV A1 Op.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4UED on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
WELL I AM SURE IF YOU GOT YOUR LICENSE WITHOUT HAVING THE PLEASURE OF LEARNING CW YOU WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND ITS IMPORTANCE.
WHEN SSB IS IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE A QSO,I JUST GRAB THE KEY AND WORK MANY STATIONS.
I LOVE IT AND I HAVE FRIENDS THAT LEARNED THE CODE AT HIGH SPEEDS AS MYSELF.
WELL THEY DONT USE CW AS MUCH AS I DO.
ONE THING IS FOR SURE ITS A GREAT FEELING TO BE A PART OF WHAT HAM RADIO SHOULD BE LIKE.
IF A PERSON SAYS THAT HE CANT LEARN THE CODE, THEN HE HAS ALREADY FAILED.
CHUCK N4UED
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N7YA on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
This argument is just getting goofy now.

Were arguing over a MODE of ham radio....no wonder everyone thinks were a bunch of dorks and all but ignores us.

But hey, whatever sinks your boat....infighting certainly does that well.

73...Adam, N7YA
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N7YA said "This argument is just getting goofy now."

yes, it is goofy...a great pro-CW article has been taken over by the anti-code fanatics...again...

One of the reasons I sold most of my Amateur Radio equipment was because there are always these kinds on debates now, on and off the air....I've since have got back into music and used the money from the radios to buy some VERY nice guitars....in ham radio, you have alot of goofy folks, and a few, like Len, who try to pass themselves off as "pros"...it takes a while, but eventually folks get wise to the wannabee's and they are ignored (and Len will be too), but in music, you have ALOT goofy folks, but there is absolutely no doubt who knows their stuff really quickly....

If you want to run with the BIG BOYS in music, you have to practice, and practice, and practice, and practice...and then practice some more......so you don't get these types of debates and arguments....you either have the skill or you don't....the pros teach the newbies new skills to help them...and the newbies actually look up to and respect the pros (and that's way cool)...whatever level we are at, we've shared the exact same experience in learning at some point...

To take the analogy to ham radio...we have ALOT of "pros" and alot of "newbies" as well...both think they know everything...but none are willing to share with the other...why ? because we no longer share anything in common, the "learning experience" is no longer shared...who's to blame ? I know what I believe, but I'll let each one of you decide...

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>IF A PERSON SAYS THAT HE CANT LEARN THE CODE, THEN HE HAS ALREADY FAILED

What if a person says he doesn't have an interest in learning the code? Also a failure?

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N7YA on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
RADIO123...

I understand the analogy quite well, i play music for a living. The big difference is, when you hear a poor op on the air trying his best, we all rally around them and try to encourage...on the air, i mean, definately not online. If they are a great op but being a jerk (regardless of mode), we can pass them by, argue with them or even let it drag us down to the point of dropping the hobby altogether. Either way, they can be sidestepped, no matter what our sense of justice is wishing upon them.

On the other hand, in music, i play with numerous different musicians every show...sometimes i dont even know who im playing with until i get there and shake hands with them. I have no choice in the matter, contracts have been signed and i am committed to the performance. And im sure you are well aware, musicians personalities are dysfunctional at the very least. I play with some guys who are marginal third-stringers with great attitudes and work ethic, they get gigs by default. The company i mainly work for is extremely demanding on talent and attitude, so i play in numerous bands with guys from Wayne Newtons band, James Brown, Parliment, personal record deals, etc...all amazingly talented players, but some of these guys are serious prima donnas.

I cant stand that! I am a pretty upfront guy, i will call these guys out on it too. If anyone at all, especially on the job, comes across acting better than everyone else, i occassionally have to remind them that they are ONLY musicians...were not saving anyones life, we arent stopping any wars or bringing down gas prices, we arent developing the next Mars mission....were just playing instruments. Were NOT important to the grand scheme of things. A good, cohesive attitude goes a long way in this business, and this is the attitude that got me to first-call senior contractor in the company.

The reason? I never take myself and what i do too seriously, i just focus on enjoying the moment and being grateful for the opportunity to earn a decent living playing my old Fender bass and singing a few songs...with this outlook, it allows me to put it all into perspective. Another reason is because im not too stiff and proud to change styles on the fly and try a type of music ive never done before...im open minded to whatever is thrown at me. In turn, it expands my mind and experience...go figure. I put the proccess before myself...im not here to save the world.

Im just a goofy musician.

Of course, i take definate pride in the job i do and work very hard to excel at it. There is nothing wrong with pride as long as its kept in check...on the other hand, theres nothing wrong with being excited by what you enjoy doing. And i think this thread was only stating that, professing an enjoyment of CW and encouraging newcomers and OT's alike to either get back into it, or try it out.

But, being humans, we tend to put ourselves first over others....just a natural trait of survival. And since CW is not a life threatening thing (nor is ham radio or music, for that matter) and regardless of gas prices and reccessions and such, were not dying by the hundreds of thousands, these primal instincts must come out in other ways.

Now i cant tell anyone else what to think or feel, i dont even want that responsibility, i am only asking that we all try to put ourselves into perspective and realize were not as important as we would like to think we all are, and i mean everyone. We all love ham radio, we all want people to enjoy it like we do, but all too often, folks tend to get overly embedded in what they personally like, believe or grew up with and want everyone else to join the club...then we get the inevitable "kids these days, BAAAAAAAH", "MUSIC IS ALL CRAP NOWADAYS", "youre not a REAL ham unless you jumped through hoops like me", "youre going to burn in hell if you dont read this book" or even "lets move ham radio forward by dumping CW altogether" (say what you want, i've actually heard all these before...and with the CW comment, they werent just talking about the testing requirement), and so on.

Music, ham radio and various other fields all have their similarities...but individual personalities are the one thing we all have in common. There will always be pot-stirrers, loudmouths and egotists in every purposeful gathering. But the majority of any group is always going to be the regular folks, the ones who just want to enjoy the activity or just get the job done and not get too worked up about things....but what percentage of any group usually ends up attracting the most attention to their personal crusades? Thats right, the most vocal of the group. The folks who are usually not content with what they have, the same folks who are rarely satisfied until everything is exactly how they alone want it. With so many different personalities in the world, no two being alike out of 7 billion, this is an impossible task. Seeing this, i eventually realized a bigger picture and started focusing on repair work closer to home....basically, i checked myself before attempting to "fix" others (my request to folks on this list notwithstanding) and found that i had enough work to keep me busy so i figured i would let everyone else worry about themselves.

Which brings me full circle to my original point...constantly banging heads together does nothing to secure our bands, promote our hobby or increase the enjoyment of it. We cant expect modern rigs, DSP's and lab-created yagis to rescue our hobby from extinction, it starts with us and a desire to work together without placing any undue pressure on our fellow hams to become something they arent. Thats why i said earlier we should just relax and enjoy the time we have left to play with our radios and make friends with one another. This is my agenda. Unfortunately its not a dramatic solution, therefore, it will be back-burnered as well. The most popular shows on TV are drama-infested "reality" shows, with people arguing and locking horns for absolutely meaningless reasons. Again, i choose to watch other channels where i can actually learn stuff....how boring is that! All these shows prove my point nicely.

By the way, RADIO, im happy to see you got back into music...im a firm believer that music, along with laughter, is medicine for the soul. Hey, it works for me, at least.

73...Adam, N7YA
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W3TW on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
CW is legal anywhere on any amateur band on which you are licensed to operate. And on 30 meters—a darn fine band for some really interesting propagation—voice transmissions are NOT permitted.

How about 60 meters?
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N7YA said "And im sure you are well aware, musicians personalities are dysfunctional at the very least."

Yes I know this VERY well...I work a full time job in the day, and used to play gigs every night at local coffee houses (singer/songwriter stuff)...marriage, kid etc changed that, and now that our youngest daughter has finally left the nest, I have much more time to pursue that again...

I know you will understand about spending hours practicing scales over and over again....it takes alot of determination and "gumption" to keep at it...that's something I don't see in today's society, and now this attitude is feeding over into ham radio....folks want an instant license now, and no longer want to "learn" a craft....it makes me very sad to see the current state of our hobby....most anti-code folks have no idea what I'm talking about here though...

but lately, I've been playing with my latest "toy"...a custom 61 reissue Gibson SG...it's quite a jump for someone that used to playing acoustic folk music, but it's fun...will probably start gigging again soon...there's lots of venues in my area, and it's not hard to find constant "work" if you stick with it....

I'm glad to see there is another ham who understands where I'm coming from on this....73
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by MM30 on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I like all modes of Ham radio, I dont really have a "favorite" mode per say. What does that make me? Code or anti code? Neither, I like improving on my code skills (which is only about 5 wpm). I do not understand however the debate that is being constantly being brought up, Code or no code. But if someone does not wish to operate this mode I do not hold it against them. It would be counter productive to think that CW is the "end all, be all" of Ham radio. What about just having fun and enjoying the mode(s) you prefer to operate on? The key word is fun here because everytime I see a thread like this started it ends up with everyone taking sides, mainly those who use CW and those who choose not to. Nothing is ever said nor looked down on the operator that is 100% CW (plenty of them). It can only be hoped that the hams that love CW keep using it so others may learn......but only if they wish and want to. The real thing holding back ham radio in my eyes and from what I have seen on these threads is common sense. I enjoy building my own antennas and tinkering with what little gear I have. My focus is on experimentation and not just CW. This is what I think ham radio is truly about, having fun and learning at the same time within your own interest and capability. CW is only one slice of the pie though an important one. Please keep all of these these points in consideration before you post, it will make this thread a lot more enjoyable to read.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N0FQN on June 22, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Two questions I've asked over the years have never been answered by the anti-code group.

1. Is the testing for an amateur license to cover all modes available to us whether we choose to use them or not??

2.Is CW a mode available to the amateur community??

The answer is yes to both questions but, no one will admit to it.

The argument about a physical hearing disability holds no water in my book. If auditory is not acceptable use the light method. Turn the audio down and use a light to copy the code. Several rigs, today, have such capability built in and a code light is easily made. Any other lame excuses????

They removed CW from testing to supposedly bolter the numbers. It hasn't worked.

I chose to not do slow/fast scan TV(ATV), RTTY, satellites yet, I still had to answer questions pertinent to these modes of operation. Did I whine complain or give one of dozens of lame excuses? No, I went and found the information and studied it.

You call code a stop gap, I call it a mode available to the amateur community from the beginning and should be contained, in some form, in the testing.

 
RE: Don lights one little candle.  
by K1CJS on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Straightkey said:

"It's funny that we still have CW fanatics that haven't figured out that insulting no code people, portraying "real ham radio" as only CW, and attempting to make those who chose not to do CW seem like lazy bums has encouraged *zero* hams to try CW and is doing more to eliminate CW than anything else by turning people off to it."

I missed this comment the first time I read the thread through--but I caught it this time. I can only say this: No truer words have yet been spoken! Good point, OM.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>N7YA said "This argument is just getting goofy now."

>yes, it is goofy...a great pro-CW article has been
taken over by the anti-code fanatics...again...

Really? Was it an anti-code fanatic that gave us the top ten excuses for not learning the code? What about the guy that keeps calling someone an anti-code bigot, but can't seem to find a quote to support it? Your alleged take over by anti-code fanatics is one guy who is arguing with you, and you can't even prove he's an anti-code fanatic. How pathetic.

>One of the reasons I sold most of my Amateur Radio equipment was because there are always these kinds on debates now, on and off the air..

And I'm sure you haven't fueled any of these debates....(cynicism on)

>To take the analogy to ham radio...we have ALOT of "pros" and alot of "newbies" as well...both think they know everything...but none are willing to share with the other...why ? because we no longer share anything in common, the "learning experience" is no longer shared...who's to blame ? I know what I believe, but I'll let each one of you decide...

You can theorize all you like, however it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that insulting potential new CW operators and making CW look like a part of ham radio for angry old elitist men isn't doing CW much good. This supposed group that is against CW entirely (as a mode) is an invention of pro-CW testing group as a scapegoat and straw man.

Anyway, I'm not going to ask you a fourth time to support your previous claim; your unresponsiveness has given me the answer.



 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>Two questions I've asked over the years have never been answered by the anti-code group.

Please, please, PLEASE, someone tell me where this "anti-code group" is???? No one is against the code, they were against the *code* *test*. How many times do people have to say it until some people get it in their heads that the code test and the CW are two different things????


>1. Is the testing for an amateur license to cover all modes available to us whether we choose to use them or not??

No. We don't test for all modes, we never have. It's not practical nor is it necessary.

>2.Is CW a mode available to the amateur community??

Yes.

>The answer is yes to both questions but, no one will admit to it.

So if the answer to both of them in your mind is yes, why aren't you lobbying to have testing that demonstrates proficiency of PSK, RTTY, MFSK, Phone, EME, WSJT, Fax, SSTV?


>The argument about a physical hearing disability holds no water in my book. If auditory is not acceptable use the light method. Turn the audio down and use a light to copy the code. Several rigs, today, have such capability built in and a code light is easily made. Any other lame excuses????

Are you a doctor? You have a rather simplistic view of this issue; there's more to decoding code than just hearing it, there's a mental process involved, and being a CW operator you should know that. Using your line of thinking, a mentally retarded person should be able to copy the code by turning down the volume.


>They removed CW from testing to supposedly bolter the numbers. It hasn't worked.

"Supposedly" according to the pro-CW testing group. There were other reasons, but saying it was just to bolster numbers makes for an easy argument for the pro-CW group to say the test elimination was a failure.


>I chose to not do slow/fast scan TV(ATV), RTTY, satellites yet, I still had to answer questions pertinent to these modes of operation. Did I whine complain or give one of dozens of lame excuses? No, I went and found the information and studied it.

How about if we asked you to show proficiency in all of them like you had to with CW? I'm sure you'd be complaining then.


>You call code a stop gap, I call it a mode available to the amateur community from the beginning and should be contained, in some form, in the testing.

Who has called it a stop gap? And again, there's 10 or 20 other modes available to the amateur community. Do you support testing for proficiency in receiving all of them?
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K1CJS on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Posted by Radio123us:

".....N4KC wrote a great pro-CW article, It was not meant to cause a code/no-code debate, but the anti-code bigots like Len take offense anyway....."

Read your post and then tell us why YOU started the code/no code debate here pal--not Len. You took his post and twisted the wording around, just like you have been doing for the entire time you've had your 'CB handle' personna here on this site.

It seems like you're THE pro code bigot here--the mirror image of the people you're complaining about. Do us all a favor--GIVE IT A REST.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY: I've had LOTS of mental challenges throughout my life. I've won most of them. Morse code skill isn't a mental one. I've "tried it" three times and, keeping an "open mind," decided it was NOT WORTH THE EFFORT. Now what?

Len, you're pretty good at trying to suppress my options - thanks for nothing. Learning CW isn't a mental skill? Surely you jest.

If after trying CW for a whole 3 times (wow you really knocked yourself out!), that nasty ol' CW has you mentally stumped and you've determined it's not worth your effort, why did you feel compelled to read an article about learning CW? Nothing better to do?

Many posting in this thread (including mine) state that CW isn't for everyone - and again, that's fine, but you seemed to ignore that point in your reply. My reply was geared to those those that might be up to the CW challenge. Obviously you're not.

Suggestion. Next time you see an article about learning CW, ignore it and go do something else that makes you feel a bit less bitter. Have a great day.

KF4HR
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W0EKS on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!

An Overlooked Method to Learning Code

When I originally became licensed, there was still a sending test. I believe this was a key reason (pardon the pun) I was able to stick with learning the code. I not only practiced copying code, I also had to prepare for the examiner to hear my "fist".

After the FCC ended the sending test requirement, the learning of code stopped being interactive. It was reduced to drilling ones self with recordings and computer programs. Some of these methods are effective, but quite frankly, they are boring. The sending is what kept it fun when I was learning.

My advice: No matter what method you choose to learn copying code, you really have to find yourself a cheap key and oscillator (or your rig's side tone) if you want to enjoy learning it. We learn to speak by both listening and talking, so why should it be any different with code?

73, Jack - N0NV

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WB1AAT on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Since the FCC eliminated the requirement it really comes down to personal preference. Sure there are some benefits such as having more band space and more effective communications per watt than phone, but that has to be compelling to the individual. Over the years I never got past 7-8 WPM but that doesnt mean I want to rain on someone else's parade by suggesting their way isnt "right". And when I get bored or curious, I whip out a morse reader program on the computer. Heck, even big contesters I've observed use macros and dont send everything by hand anymore.

I remember enough to realize that the beeping on my colleage's cell phone when he gets a text message is saying "S-M-S".
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Jack - N0NV: Good point.

Sending CW definitely speeds up the learning process. The logic behind the FCC dropping the CW sending test eluded me, but perhaps it was a sign of things to come. During the learning process I also found myself mentally working through street signs, book text, and such, in morse.

I also had to 'send' for my CW tests too, and to add to the stress, my CW tests where accomplished sitting in front of an FCC examiner. Anyone remember those fun days?

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WW2JS on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Just my opinion, some people may agree and some may not, but I have found that learning to copy and send code at 20wpm is far more difficult than passing the actual extra exam.

Joe-WW2JS
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Was the sending test stressful? I never had to take the sending test so perhaps that's why I've never viewed it as stressful, as I never had a problem sending. Receiving was always my issue, especially with the 20 WPM. At that speed I would get nasty hand cramps. Today I copy as much as I can in my head and write down just key details.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WA2JJH on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Simple CW rigs can be built from a few parts.
I get RARE DX on CW, that I cannot with any other mode.
99.4% of the worlds population does not know morse code.
CW operation has abbreiviations that are used by hams world wide.

English is not spoken by everybody. The simple abrvs for signal, location, name, and other data are known by every ham that BOTHERED
TO LEARN CW.

CW QSO'S ARE ALWAYS CIVIL!

Granted many no code extra's know their theory and may have experience from serving in the armed forces. You got your code free ticket.

I am puzzled why so many NO CODE hams still rag on as if there was still a 20WPM code test for Extra.

Live and let live. Since, an anti-CW ham has never found the delights of CW, how can they comment on what a crummy mode it is????????

I like learning different launguages, I travel abroad often. Does anybody have a problem with that too!!!!
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W0EKS on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!

<<Was the sending test stressful?>>

Not really. Copying is more difficult. I think that was the rationale behind removing the sending test. I suppose it was stressful to someone with a not-so-good fist. But with the sending test in place, people experienced more gratification during learning process (in my opinion).

Jack - N0NV
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W4HIJ on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Nice article. I struggled to get my Novice ticket at 5 WPM even though my Dad was a great CW op. He tried to help as best he could but I just couldn't seem to get it but I finally managed.
When I decided to upgrade to Technician so I could keep in touch with my Dad on 2 meter FM, I had to pass the General class written exam. I remember the VE's asking me if I diddn't want to at least try to pass the 13 WPM test and I wouldn't try. Funny thing was, I stayed in the room while other applicants took it and I might just could have passed it. I'll never know.
Anyway, it wasn't until the code requirement was lowered to 5 WPM for all classes that I went down and got my General. I was grandfathered in since I had passed the General class exam years ago.
Now I'm trying to get back into radio after awhile away. I want to get my CW skills up to par when I find the time after getting my station back together. I've decided I really want to be able to work CW and work it well.
The only thing that tends to irk me about some of the CW guys is the ones who proclaim themselves "real" Extra class operators bedcause they passed 20 WPM code. The FCC removed to code requirement, get over it guys, a 5 WPM or no code Extra is now just as real of one as you are. Seems kind of a childish attitude to me.
73,
Michael, W4HIJ
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4UED on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
HELLO, ITS N4UED. I KNOW MANY NO-CODERS AND THEY ARE GOOD OP'S.
TAKING THE CODE AWAY DID NOT HURT US.
ON 10 M I DO HERE ALOT OF CB LINGO.
I WONDER IF MY FIRST PERSONAL IS CHUCK WHAT IS MY 2ND.
OR IF MY HANDLE IS CHUCK IS MY NAME ALSO CHUCK.
AS FAR AS YOU FOLKS LEARNING THE COSE THAT YOUR BUSINESS.
THIS I LISTED ABOVE D0ES SOUND SILLY. I ASK FOR A NAME.
I NOTICED ON CW I NEVER HEAR ANYONE ASKING FOR ANYTHING BUT YOUR NAME.
I THINK THAT WE NEED BO BECOME ELMERS OF THOSE THAT NEED SOME INSTRUCTION.
THEY CAN TAKE THE AADVICE OR GET MAD.
NO NEED TO GET MAD.
I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT YOU DO FIND MORE CB LINGO ON 1OM.
IF THAT TRUE THEN IF WE HEAR WE SHOULD GET IN A QSO AND TALK TO THEM.
I WAS ON A NET ON 40 METERS RELAYING FOR A NET CONTROL ONE DAY.
ALL OF A SUDDEN THE WATCH DOG OF THE

NET CAME ON AND JUMPED ON ME ON THE AIR IN A WAY THAT WAS SHAMEFUL.

I WAS ASHAMED FOR THOSE LISTENING THAT WERE STUDYING TO GET THEIR LICENDE AS WELL AS THE SWL'S OUT THERE.

THIS NET MANAGER CAN BE RUDE IF YOU SAY SOMTHING OR DO SOMTHING THAT IS NOT IN HIS BOOK OT THOUGHTS.

I WANTED TO MENTION THIS BECAUSE I STILL CHECK-IN EACH DAY AS MANY OTHERS DO.

YOU HAVE TO TAKE SOME HAMS WITH A GRAIN OF SALT AS I DID.
I E-MAILED HIM AND RECEIVED NO REPLY,HOWEVER I DID NOT EXPECT ONE.

JUST REALIZE SOME TAKE THE HOBBY MORE ALOT SERIOUS THAN OTHERS.
I SAY THIS BECAUSE WHEN A DISASTER COMES WE ALL PULL TOGETHER.
ITS JUST LIKE ANYTHING ELSE IN LIFE.

THERE IS A BUTTON ON MY RADIO THAT I USE ALOT TO FILTER OUT THINGS I DONT WANT TO HEAR.

ITS NOT THE NOTCH OR THE DSP.

IT IS THE OFF SWITCH.

IT WORKS EVERYIME.

ITS NO WAY I CAN GET EVERYONE TO GET ALONG OR TO LEARN THE CODE.
I ACTUALLY USE APRS AS WELL AS CW AND SOME SSB.

WHEN I THINK BACK TO THE OLD TIME NET MANAGER,I THINK WHAT IF WE DIDNT HAVE RULES AND MONITORING STATIONS.

WHERE WOULD WE BE?
THANKS FOR E-HAM FOOR PROVIDING A OUTLET FOR ALL OPINIONS. CHUCK N4UED





 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KASSY on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
W4KVW said:
"CODE QUICK may be BAD for YOU but I learned the code in just 8 short 2 hour blocks with CODE QUICK & passed the test with 43 characters STRAIGHT COPY.MUST be SOMETHING "GOOD" about the system OM!I do NOT use code today but I learned it beacuse it was REQUIRED then to upgrade but it was NOT requred that I "USE IT"!Find your favorite mode & use it! }:>)

Clayton
W4KVW"

INTERESTING way of WRITING you HAVE there, CLAYTON. Sort OF diTRACting from the CONTENT to have the EYES bouncing UP AND down like that.

Code "quick"? Hmmm...

My gramps pointed me to the "Just Learn Morse Code" website. Download the SW and install. You are presented with a fraction of the alphabet (not the easy ones, either - they don't start with "E I S H 5", but throw the four-element characters at you along with the others", and when you feel comfy, you tell the SW to throw more at you.

I was receiving at 8wpm on the second of two evenings.

I think the reason it was easy for me is that nobody told me it should be hard.

In response to the usual questions I get when I indicate this - no, I'm not a spring chicken, no I'm not a musician, and no I do not find learning languages easy.

But code sure was...as I said, I think only because I had no pre-conceived notions about what it was or was not.

I chose not to use phone - I had heard YLs on phone and did not want to be the cause of what ought to be an embarrassing feeding frenzy. You'd think you men have never had a QSO with an estrogen-enabled ham before. That was actually my reason for not using phone.

Some folks may have a tough time with code. But in my experience (which is, admittedly, low), whether code is easy or hard is really more about whether a person expects it to be easy or hard. Since I had no thoughts one way or another, and I tend to be upbeat, it was easy for me.

But still...I have my reasons for using CW and not phone, and everybody else has their reasons for using their mode of choice, and all of that is perfectly fine.

- k
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>Since, an anti-CW ham has never found the delights of CW, how can they comment on what a crummy mode it is????????

I wish someone could show me where these anti-code hams are. Everyone I've ever talked to fallen into one or two of these three basic groups:

The Pro-Code Group

The Anti-Code TEST Group

The "I don't do the code / I don't have the desire to do the code but you can enjoy CW if you like" Group

I haven't found anyone other than a few Internet forum trolls who occasionally post an inflammatory anti-code comment to get people fired up. Apparently there are still many people who think "anti-Code Test" means "anti-Code", or if you're not pro-code or choose not to learn the code you must be anti-code. It would be nice if we could get out of this rut in the next decade or two.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KA8VIT on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>CW is legal anywhere on any amateur band on which you are licensed to operate. And on 30 meters—a darn fine band for some really interesting propagation—voice transmissions are NOT permitted.

Anywhere but 60-meters... <frown>

73 - Bill KA8VIT
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS said "It seems like you're THE pro code bigot here--the mirror image of the people you're complaining about. Do us all a favor--GIVE IT A REST. "

Chris, I believe KF4HR said it VERY well....

"Suggestion. Next time you see an article about learning CW, ignore it and go do something else that makes you feel a bit less bitter. Have a great day."

Chris, the code no/code-debate is over...so you and your code-hating buddies have no business in this thread...why are you guys so bitter ??? you got what you wanted...so pleeeease go enjoy it...
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>Chris, the code no/code-debate is over...so you and your code-hating buddies have no business in this thread...why are you guys so bitter ??? you got what you wanted...so pleeeease go enjoy it...

So instead of a code/no code debate, you started a pro-code versus anti-code ham debate. What a hypocrite.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
STRAIGHTKEY said "So instead of a code/no code debate, you started a pro-code versus anti-code ham debate. What a hypocrite. "

Why ? because I speak the TRUTH here ??...this thread was NEVER intended for the code haters...it was meant for those that might have an interest in learning CW....but the code haters showed up with all the venom, bitterness, and hatred that they've had since this all began.....you see, to them it's not about getting the upgrade, it's now about getting even...they are angry for having to wait so long for this (50 years in the case of AF6AY), and they will do anything to keep folks from enjoying this wonderful mode in the future....

Think about it....what other motive do they have for showing up in a pro-code thread ??? They hate CW, so the only reason they could possibly be here is to cause trouble...nuff said ...
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
ANONYMOUS BEING using CB-handle of "RADIO123US" scribbled in anger on June 23, 2008:

"STRAIGHTKEY said "So instead of a code/no code debate, you started a pro-code versus anti-code ham debate. What a hypocrite. "

"Why ? because I speak the TRUTH here ??..."

The TRUTH is OUT THERE! The TRUTH clogs the x-files of every FBI office...the TRUTH is stored at Area 51...the TRUTH is lurking under Calvin's bed..."

"this thread was NEVER intended for the code haters...it was meant for those that might have an interest in learning CW....but the code haters showed up with all the venom, bitterness, and hatred that they've had since this all began..."

Oooooo! Venom! Bitterness! Hatred! :-)

WOW! What a nasty reflection you cast in your own mirror!

"..you see, to them it's not about getting the upgrade, it's now about getting even..."

Tsk. I never got any "upgrade." I just took all three test elements on a Sunday afternoon last year and passed them. I've never had any other amateur radio license. <big questioning stare>

"they are angry for having to wait so long for this (50 years in the case of AF6AY),"

NO NO NO! It was - in your logic - SEVENTY FIVE YEARS for me, not "50." You think I was BORN wanting passionately to 'earn' a ham license?!? And I cried right after birth because I "couldn't do it?!?"

Oy veh. Sweetums, I think YOU have a great big problem.

The big problem is that the FCC emptied your personal Brag Bag when they announced that all code testing for amateurs would cease back in December of 2006 (exact time to be announced).

"and they will do anything to keep folks from enjoying this wonderful mode in the future...."

Riiiiight...I'm going around looking, searching for ANY source of beeping and then "doing anything" to stop it? Are you seeing this Terminator creature lots of places? Are you seeing a shrink about that seeing?

"Think about it....what other motive do they have for showing up in a pro-code thread ??? They hate CW, so the only reason they could possibly be here is to cause trouble...nuff said ..."

Oy oy...like on and on he goes. Like a broken record, nu?
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
STRAIGHTKEY....if you had any doubt....Len just proved my point....
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>STRAIGHTKEY....if you had any doubt....Len just proved my point....

I thought you said "nuff said"?

Your point was that anti-code people have taken over the forum. When you peel away the comedic material and the monologue, Len still hasn't said anything that is anti-code. From his previous posts it's obvious that he supports everyone's right to use and enjoy code. Since you and others aren't getting the point, he's playing you.
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N7ZF on June 23, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Thanks for the nice article. About a week before you published this, I decided to start learning and practicing Morse code again. Your article gave me many reasons to do this that I had not even considered.
Bob/N7ZF
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>Your article gave me many reasons to do this that I had not even considered.

An excellent book on code you may want to read is N0HFF's The Art and Skill of Telegraphy. You can download it for free here:

http://www.qsl.net/n9bor/n0hff.htm

I wish I would have had this book back when I was a teenager learning the code, but it's valuable for a CW veteran as well.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Len. I think I understand your CW learning issue now. It's time management. With all the time you spend ranting, you probably could have learned the code by now.

Again, you obvious have nothing better to do. Sad. Perhaps channel 19?

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W5ESE on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
> Was the sending test stressful? I never had to take
> the sending test so perhaps that's why I've never
> viewed it as stressful, as I never had a problem
> sending.

It wasn't as stressful as the receiving test.

In my case, I had to pass the 1 minute with no errors
receiving test for 13wpm and a sending test for my
General license in 1976. The sending test was
administered after you passed the receiving test.

The FCC examiner urged me to "come on; pick up the
pace a little bit". :)

It was hard only because it was difficult (for me)
to judge how fast I was sending.

I took the 20 wpm element in 1978; by then, the
receiving test had changed from one-minute-with-no
errors to a multiple choice test, and the sending
test had been dropped.

I think the sending test was dropped because it
was almost unheard of for someone to pass the
receiving test but be failed on the sending test.

73
Scott
W5ESE
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K5END on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Very nice article. Cogent and well written.

I think morse-code/CW is one of the greatest things Ham radio has to offer, indicated by the points made in the article.

It also seems to be somewhat of an esoteric environment, but not by design.

Those who choose not to learn morse code exclude themselves from the club. So be it.

I've never met anyone who regrets learning morse code.

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR tried to re-jump-start a very tired old personality-conflict non-topic on 24 Jun 08 with:

"Len. I think I understand your CW learning issue now. It's time management. With all the time you spend ranting, you probably could have learned the code by now."

You may have a point. I think we can see it coming through your hair. Be careful, it looks sharp.

"Learned the code?" Well, I learned and practiced the IEEE Code of Professional Conduct as an electronics design engineer, still believe in that as a Life Member. IEEE is a worldwide professional association of about a quarter million members. Life Membership is a no-charge full-voting term one can achieve by being a member for a long enough time; I've been an IEEE member for 35 years.

I learned the Motor Vehicle Code of the State of California enough to pass every test the state made me go through to keep my driver's license since 1957.

I was directly answerable to the Uniform Code of Military Justice 1952 to 1956.

I've learned a lot about cryptographic codes but Title 18 of the United States Code. It states I'm not supposed to share all with someone unless they have a Need To Know.

I've passed TWO top-of-their-service FCC license tests (in one sitting) and the FCC is responsible for maintaining Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

I also learned of the Code of Hammurabi at a very early age and thought it was both logical and democratic. You know...the one about "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, etc."

Lots and lots and lots of LEARNING in my whole life. Hope the appeal of learning for its own sake never stops.

Take heart. I gave up my project of inventing anti-gravity...something kept holding me down.
............

"Again, you obvious have nothing better to do. Sad. Perhaps channel 19?"

Awwww, don't cry for me Angostura...

WHICH "channel 19?" In TV broadcasting the nearest ones to me on that channel are San Diego and Santa Maria, both rather far from our southern house. Both are in the new DTV channel listings. Except maybe San Diego...during Inversion conditions over the Los Angeles Basin, San Diego does manage to propagate to here.

For Inland Harbor and seaport communications there is a channel 19 on VHF. Can't recall using that channel while in the San Pedro Harbor area or Galveston, TX, radio testing trips since we identified 'channels' by location/authority/area-use by name rather than number.

Maritime Radio Services have all that information, didn't look up the Part number in Title 47 C.F.R. As I recall there is an identification of HF SSB voice 'channels' in Maritime Radio Services also...I've used two of those channels as a non-boating private citizen who has a valid Commercial Radiotelephone license.

In Aviation Radio Services (another Part in Title 47 C.F.R) the radionav and comm 'channels' are identified by frequency by the FCC. The FAA accepts that and includes the 3-letter ICAO abbreviation; nobody in civil aviation uses the term 'channels' for radio use.

US amateur radio service has 5 CHANNELS specifically for voice in what is called '60m' band. Not for worldwide use or in the ITR Radio Regulations. NO morse code allocated there.

Too low a frequency to suit my residence down south but it might work in our residence up in Washington state (Kitsap County, just east of Tacoma, 10 acres of high pines).

Oh, yeah, you must mean CB on the ham-band-that-was-50-years-ago! Of course. CB users are the scum of the earth, the lowliest creatures who've ever mashed a PTT switch? You despise them so much because NONE who ever used CB took ANY test of any kind? Sorry, can't help you out in your mental delusion/illusion. I've got two CB transceivers, both stock, from 1959 (Johnson Viking Messenger) and 1960 (Bendix brand, unknown OEM contractor-made). Don't know if the Bendix works anymore; the Johnson was checked okay three years ago on all its three available crystal-controlled channels. Never had any 'Channel 19' for either. Both are tube type designs. There are millions of CB
transceivers IN-USE today, mostly on the highways and used by truckers.

So...I'm supposed to OBEY your dictum to be a Manly-Ham to learn morse code? Are you thinking it is a 'morse goad?' :-) We Amateur Extras who prefer voice and data modes are 'Girlie-Hams'? Of course. We can NEVER be as good as you say you are in radiotelegraphy. There's just NO satisfying the rabid dictums of the ultra-conservative ham morsemen. All that exercising of your dictums begins to sound a tad obscene...?

73, Len AF6AY
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KG5VK on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
many will not learn it because they are too lazy to learn anything new !
many people in all walks of life (not just our hobby) like to have their heads buried in the sand
while I am no cw guru I love working the sweet dx on the low low end on 40m cw band, it IS why upgrading to Extra was worth the effort !

73
steve
KG5VK
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N5AX on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I learned CW way back when because I did not have
money to buy a mic or a modulation transformer...
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
One more great reason to use CW. You won't run into Len.

KF4HR
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K8MHZ on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"many will not learn it because they are too lazy to learn anything new !"

New???
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Great article!

I'll add this:

There are a bunch of technical reasons like bandwidth, simplicity of equipment, gets through when many other modes don't, etc.

But the big reason is that we enjoy it.

We may enjoy it because of some or all of the technical reasons. But there's another reason: It's a unique and fun experience all by itself.

Sure, it takes some skill to do Morse Code. In fact, it takes a *set* of skills to be a decent Morse Code radio operator, and it takes some effort to learn those skills, just as it takes some effort to learn the skills to play a musical instrument, or converse in American Sign Language (ASL) or do almost any art or craft. Yet those things can be enjoyable all by themselves, just in the doing.

It's important to distinguish between a desired end result and the process to get it. Some would say the destination and the journey.

If all you want to do is get a routine communication from A to B, email, a telephone call, US postal service and several other options are a lot easier than amateur radio, let alone Morse Code - *IF* all you are concerned about is the end result (destination) and not the process (journey).

OTOH, sometimes the journey is important too. That's where amateur radio and Morse Code offer something special even to routine communications.

Why do 21st century people still do things like learn to play musical instruments, even though they are never going to make any money at it and could get much more music for much less time and effort by using a CD player or iPod?

Why do 21st century people still do things like learn to do woodworking, or fine arts, or crafts, or many other things, even though they are never going to make any money at it and could get much more furniture, artwork, or craft pieces for much less time and effort by simply buying them?

I think it's because there is something very basic in human nature about learning skills and using them. Particularly when you don't have to. I think it was Mark Twain who said the work is what a body is obliged to do, and play is what a body is not obliged to do.

IOW, what really makes Morse Code great is that once you have the skills, it offers a unique communications experience. And nowadays amateur radio is one of the few places to get that experience.

Some wonder what would make Morse Code great to our young people, as they are the inheritors of our GRAND amateur radio traditions. They need to be interested in our hobby, and practices, and views, in order
to make our hobby survive.

The answer to that is the uniqueness of the Amateur Radio experience.

Amateur radio cannot "compete" with the internet, the cell phone, or the video game by trying to offer the same things those other systems offer. Nor should it even try.

Amateur radio needs to stand on its own as a unique experience. As something totally different from the internet, the cell phone, etc. *That* is what brings in new people - and keeps old ones. The unique experience.

Consider this true story:

About a decade ago, an unknown writer named J.K. Rowling came up with a long and involved book. Her book told of a secret hidden world existing parallel to the world we all know. This world was full of strange characters and creatures with unusual names, odd customs and rules, and most of all, magic.

The book and its sequels became best sellers overnight. It was particularly attractive to young people, even though they are not really children's books at all.. I have seen many, many children under the age of 10 carrying enormous hardback editions of the books with them wherever they go, reading them whenever possible.

In a world filled with hundreds of TV channels, computers, the internet, video games, electronic music and much much more, these young people preferred the ancient communications technology of the written word in a printed book. Why?

I say it is because the Harry Potter books offer a unique experience. There is nothing quite so attractive to young people - or many older folks - as gaining entry to a secret world that is not known to most people. They are enthralled by all the detail of the books, rather than put off by it. They are not at all dissuaded by the length of the books, nor the effort it takes to read them. Rather they enjoy the challenge of discovering and understanding the magical world. Plus the books are very well written. There are many allegories to the modern techological world in those books - after all, isn't a sufficiently advanced technology indistinguishable from magic?

Of course even the youngest readers I have met know that the world of Harry, Ron and Hermione is a complete fiction, but that does not reduce their enjoyment of it.

The world of amateur radio is in some ways like the magical world of Harry Potter - except that amateur radio is real, and we can be more than spectators to it.

True, not everyone likes the Harry Potter books. Neither will everyone like amateur radio no matter how it is changed.

But if we present amateur radio, and Morse Code, as unique experiences, at least some will be attracted to it. That's all we need.

73 de Jim, N2EY
 
10 Ways To Promote Morse Code  
by N2EY on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I've been a ham more than 40 years, and seen a lot of new stuff enter ham radio in that time. I remember when VHF FM and repeaters were new, when computers in the shack were a new thing, the first packet setups, AMTOR setups, APRS, PSK31 etc. And I've seen new life come to the use of things like AM, vintage rigs, 160 meters, and more.

One thing they all had in common was that those who loved those things promoted them to the amateur radio community in every way possible.

So here are 10 ways to promote Morse Code

1) Use Morse Code on the air. For ragchewing, DXing, contesting, traffic handling, QRP, QRO, QRS, QRQ, whatever floats yer boat. If your favorite band is crowded, try another and/or get a sharper filter. If
you contest, even a little, send in your logs, photos, soapbox comments, etc. Our presence on the air is essential - one of the reasons FCC took away so much of 80 recently is that they were convinced it
wasn't being used. Our presence on the air is more important than ever.

2) Work on your Morse Code skills. Got a CP certificate? How about the next higher speed?

But it's not just speed alone. Can you send and receive a message in standard form? Can you do it faster than someone on 'phone? Can you do both "head copy" and write it down? How about copying on a
mill? Ragchewing? Contesting? Being able to have a QSO at slow as well as fast speeds?

3) Find a local club that does Field Day and go out with them. Particularly if they have little or no Morse Code activity on FD now. Help with their Morse Code efforts however you can - operating, logging, setting up, tearing down, etc. FD is one way to actively demonstrate 21st Century Morse Code *use*. Talking to people about Morse isn't nearly so effective as showing them!

4) Set up a Morse Code demo at a local hamfest/club meeting/air show/town fair/middle school etc. Not as some sort of nostalgia thing but as a demonstration that Morse Code is alive and in use today.

5) Conduct training classes - on the air, in person, over the 'net, whatever. Help anybody who wants to learn. Could be as simple as giving them some code tapes or CDs, pointing them to online resources like G4FON, or as involved as a formal course at a
local community center.

6) Elmer anybody who wants help - even if they're not interested in Morse Code at all. Your help and example may inspire them.

7) Write articles for QST/CQ/Worldradio/K9YA Telegraph/Electric Radio/your local hamclub newsletter/eham.net etc. Not about the code *test* nor
about Morse Code history, the past, etc., but about how to use Morse Code *today*. For example, how about an article on what rigs are best for Morse Code use, and why? Or about the differences between a bug, a single-lever keyer, iambic A and iambic B? Your FD experiences with Morse Code? (see QST, June, 1994, page 55 for an example) Yes, you may be turned down by the first mag you submit it to - but keep submitting.

8) Get involved in NTS, QMN, ARES, MARS, whatever, and use Morse Code there. The main reason so much emergency/public service stuff is done on voice
is because they don't have the people - skilled operators - to use any other mode.

9) Join FISTS & SKCC and any other group that supports Morse. Give out numbers to those who ask for them even if you're not a contester/award collector.

10) Forget about "the test". It's long gone and FCC won't bring it back. Yes, they made a bad decision, but that's nothing new, just look at BPL or their rulings on the sale of broadcast radio stations.

FCC won't preserve our standards and values - we have to do it.

And our attitude is a key part of that (pun intended). If we're seen as a bunch of old grumpy gus types, not many will want to join us. But if we present ourselves as a fun-loving, welcoming, young-at-heart-and-mind, helpful group with useful skills, people will want to join us.

73 es KC de Jim, N2EY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K8MHZ on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Let's face it, being proficient at Morse Code automatically places one in a sub culture. Some see that as good, others see it as elitism. All in all, it doesn't really matter. The flaw in our quaint little group is taking an operators choice of modes either personally, judgmentally or putting forth outright bigotry.

It's human nature to belittle those with differing likes and practices. That primordial ingraining can, indeed, be neutralized. Good food and drinks are the ultimate catalyst in the quest to maintain equilbrium.

If Honda and Harley riders can get along, so can we...
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR writes: "Sending CW definitely speeds up the learning process."

I agree 100%. It's similar to the way learning to speak a language helps one understand it.

KF4HR: "The logic behind the FCC dropping the CW sending test eluded me"

It was simply a matter of reducing FCC/VEC workload. Rarely did anyone who passed the receiving test fail the sending test, so why bother with the sending test was the argument. It also eliminated the need for a Morse-qualified examiner able to judge whether you could really send good code or not.

KF4HR: "I also had to 'send' for my CW tests too, and to add to the stress, my CW tests where accomplished sitting in front of an FCC examiner. Anyone remember those fun days?"

Oh yes, I did too. In fact I taught myself to block print at 30 wpm because my "Palmer Method" longhand wasn't good enough for Morse Code copy.

When I went for the Extra in 1970 I was the only one there for 20 wpm. So I had the examiner's undivided attention! Yes, I passed Extra code and theory on the first go, the summer between 10th and 11th grades.


73 de Jim, N2EY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N3PZZ on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Did I irritate you? Like I said, it's still an irritating noise and so are the people who won't let it die. And since this is a public forum, I choose to click on it. Go play with code if you want to, who really, really cares? I wasn't attacking you unless of course, your an irritating noise. By your response's,
I think maybe so. So say anything you like, I'm not interested in people who just like to annoy.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR couldn't stop complaining on June 24, 2008:

"One more great reason to use CW. You won't run into Len."

Good grief, you have something against Len Winkler, KB7LPW, TOO?!? [great name! :-) ]

AF6AY

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K5END on June 24, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
quote, "
If Honda and Harley riders can get along, so can we... "

Since when do Honda and Harley riders get along?

Oops, sorry; wrong fight, wrong forum.

<grin>
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on June 25, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR couldn't stop complaining on June 24, 2008:

"One more great reason to use CW. You won't run into Len."

No complaints Len (AF6AY). You're living proof that the FCC's decision to drop the CW licensing requirement was a mistake. Get some help, and good luck.

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N3PZZ on June 25, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Radio: If you didn't like my bias opinion. You can turn your computer off. Nobody forced you to click on and read it.
Go ahead and MOO about that too, Buckwheat......
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 25, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N3PZZ said "Radio: If you didn't like my bias opinion. You can turn your computer off. Nobody forced you to click on and read it.
Go ahead and MOO about that too, Buckwheat......"

N3PZZ, thanks for once again proving my point about the anti-code bigots....it's NOT about getting access to the HF bands anymore, is it ??? I believe it's about revenge...since you and your anti-code friends now have access to all the HF bands, there is no reason to be here in tis thread except that you have an "axe to grind" with the pro-code folks...admit it, you are mad for all the many years you have waited and waited....now you just want to get even....

Just proves why we should have left things the way they were....
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K1CJS on June 25, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Radio123 yet again doesn't have a clue.....

"Chris, the code no/code-debate is over...so you and your code-hating buddies have no business in this thread...why are you guys so bitter ?....."

Hey, I'm not bitter at all. One thing though--you're right, the know code/no code debate is over. So why did you start it up again?? Sour grapes?

I never hated or said I hated morse code. I just didn't see the need for the test--the ONLY mode test--and the FCC obviously felt the same way. Also, the only 'buddies' I have are ham radio operators--which you refuse to be identified as. I think its YOU that don't belong here, you and your trolling. Kindly go elsewhere with your gripes.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 25, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"You're living proof that the FCC's decision to drop the CW licensing requirement was a mistake"

Then how do you explain the myriad of code test-passing hams who are "dopes" on phone and those who have been fined by the FCC for various actions? Looking at it objectively, the code test did a rather lousy job as a filter. Of course I'm sure that you will argue that it kept out most of those dang cbers.

I can't get over the lack of logic displayed by many who supported the code test. And then when you top that off with the irrelevant arguments used in favor of the code test, it's clear why many didn't "get it" then and still don't get it today. But it's much easier to dumb-down the whole dropping the code licensing requirement to "it didn't increase numbers, so it was a failure" then to come to terms with the reality of CW's place and testing for it.

Keep spewing the venom if it makes you all happy, but realize you're pissing away the future of CW...
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 25, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS said " never hated or said I hated morse code. I just didn't see the need for the test--the ONLY mode test--and the FCC obviously felt the same way"

Then why do you your anti-code friends feel the NEED to come into a pro-code thread ???...it's ONLY a mode now....no NEED for you to be here, unless you have something positive to share about the MODE....get a grip Chris, you have been a TROLL and a troublemaker in practically ALL of the pro-code threads here....
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 25, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
STRAIGHTKEY said "Keep spewing the venom if it makes you all happy, but realize you're pissing away the future of CW... "

Believe what you want, but I stand by my statement...it has turned out to be a terrible mistake...but NOT because it let a bunch of unwanted folks into our ranks...it was a terrible mistake because it divided us....and a divided group is far weaker than a united one....so, instead of a nice conversation about a great MODE and it's benenfits, the anti-code bigots have turn this into a fight again...why ?? because they still have an axe to grind with the "morsemen" (that's AF6AY's term)....if someone posted an anti-code thread right now, I would NOT comment, as far as I'm concerned that fight it over...I would hope the anti-code bigots would show some of the same courtesy to those of us that love the mode...but I suspect they won't...
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 25, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR just can't stop with personal attacks in his 25 Jun 08 posting:

"No complaints Len (AF6AY). You're living proof that the FCC's decision to drop the CW licensing requirement was a mistake."

Now, now, Angostura, you are not being nice. Well, you are being what your new name is.

The way to rectify this alleged mistake has many ways. First, you can write your congresscritter and DEMAND everything gets put back The Way YOU Want It. Second, you can write the FCC and 'order' them to Put It Back The Way YOU Want It. Third, you can write your newspaper and outline a terrific sob story about Nobody Wants Things The Way YOU Want It. A fourth option is to take the FCC to Federal Court and DEMAND that the FCC should Put It Back The Way YOU Want It. Rather drastic that fourth action since it will CO$T a lot for legal representation for YOUR Side.

Keep in mind that the no-code-TEST movement started well before 1990, the year the first no-code-TEST NPRM 90-43 was released by the FCC. The FCC officially created the no-code-TEST Technician class in 1991 and hundreds of thousands of American citizens became Technician class radio amateurs. This morning there were 303,744 *active* Techncian class licensees out of a total US amateur radio license number of 658,337. That means that 46.1 percent of *active* licensees are in this Technician class and the majority (but not all) entered without any code test whatsoever. The next larger class is General and this morning there were 143,170 *active* licensees or only 21.7 percent of the total. Technician class licensees are over twice that of General class.

FCC NPRM 98-143 realeased in 1998, (note the prefix number assignment) proposed a number of changes for 'amateur radio restructuring.' The major change that resulted in R&O 99-412 (to take effect in mid-2000) was ONE code test rate of 5 WPM, rather wiping out the morse code Brag Bag of Extras, Advanceds, and Generals. In the years 2000 to 2005 there were no less than 18 Petitions released for Comment, most of which demanded SOME kind of morse code test but most of those allowed a no-code-test condition. Thousands of Comments and Replies went to the FCC on all sides of the issue. Not seeing any consensus from the (deeply split) 'amateur community,' the FCC simply ELIMINATED any code testing for any new amateur radio license. The FCC gave cogent reasons for that most-radical departure from The Way Things Were. ALL changes to amaetur radio regulations have been available to the public since the FCC was created in 1934. Any perusal of PUBLIC changes and Comments and Replies to dockets preceding those changes will show that the PUBLIC was generally in favor of them. There was ALWAYS the opportunity for individuals to Comment and to Petition the FCC on ANY of those twenty items. I have a full copy of ALL Comments and Replies on the code test elimination NPRM, even submitted an Exhibit of the categories as they appeared day-by-day. That Exhibit can be seen as accepted after the end of the official commentary on the NPRM and is merely an Exhibit, not a comment either way on the docket.

KF4HR: "Get some help, and good luck."

Thank you but I already have "help" on final cementing of the base of my SteppIR vertical. Its base was poured and cured with 2" PVC outdoor conduit (partially buried), coax inside, done by my landscaper as part of a larger re-landscaping. I put in the 14 radials at that time. "Luck" isn't guaranteed on the final cementing and the wind or large animals from the hills may bump the temporary tripod support for it before the final cementing cures. We have free-roaming deer in our neighborhood and my city has posted that fact for strangers.

Otherwise, I see absolutely NO SANE REASON to play amateur radio operator to the standards and practices of the 1930s and bother learning manual telegraphy because some younger than me (and in much more need of attitude change) say "I MUST." If they answered my "Why" with a "Because..." then I could ascertain their rather childish demands. That is understandable. A "MUST" answer is nonsense. Those set-in-their-ways stalwart admirers of the PAST have NO authority whatsoever. Several have tried to bully me with that testosterone-induced terror-tactic and it just didn't do anything but make me shake my head at Their unthinking immaturity.

Do I "need" telegraphy skills to "work foreign DX?" Yes, if that were required. It is NOT a requirement of my amateur radio license to "work foreign DX." I am bilingual-plus-a-half and have NO DESIRE to work foreign (non-English-speaking) DX.

Do I "need" telegraphy skills to participate in "contests?" No. It is NOT a requirement of my amateur radio license to participate in radio "contests." Not all radio "contests" require telegraphy skills.

The FCC gives all US amateur radio licensees many, many OPTIONS. We can do much in any of the many bands allocated to us IF we want. So many telegraphy-skilled amateurs insist and insist on HF-only, CW-only. That is self-limitation. NOT a positive attribute. We CANNOT live in the PAST, only the present...and prepare to greet the future. There are many, many NEW things to try and many just waiting to become useful. Amateurs can't use some of the modes I've used with my Commercial license decades ago. That's probably a political situation and may even be due to lobbying by stauch ultra-conservative old-timers who can't seem to understand that US amateur radio is NOT solely telegraphy.

Those who actually WANT to learn manual telegraphy are very free to do so. After 150 years of wireline use and 112 years of radiotelegraphy use, there are all sorts of teaching aids and methods for learning or improving radiotelegraphy skills. The OPTION is there for anyone. But, an OPTION is NOT a requirement. Worse yet, what YOU think or what YOU like is NOT a requirement of everyone else. Really. It may be strange to you to realize that but it IS true. Guaranteed true.

OPTIONs are open to everyone in US amateur radio. "Option is NOT a failure" to paraphrase the Apollo 13 Flight Director.

As Edward R. Murrow used to sign off, "Good night and good luck." [YOU need it]


 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 25, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
K1CJS replied to an ANONYMOUS BEING on 25 Jun 08:

"Radio123 yet again doesn't have a clue.....

"Chris, the code no/code-debate is over...so you and your code-hating buddies have no business in this thread...why are you guys so bitter ?....."

Hey, I'm not bitter at all. One thing though--you're right, the know code/no code debate is over. So why did you start it up again?? Sour grapes?

I never hated or said I hated morse code. I just didn't see the need for the test--the ONLY mode test--and the FCC obviously felt the same way. Also, the only 'buddies' I have are ham radio operators--which you refuse to be identified as. I think its YOU that don't belong here, you and your trolling. Kindly go elsewhere with your gripes."
-------------------

This anonymous being with a CB Handle is himself the Gripe of Wraith. He could not serve his whines at the right time. Now his whine has turned to vinegar and he thinks we will drink it. Happens to a lot of those who cannot accept change.

Let them Wassail and Skol all they want with their home-brew whine...it might be amusing to see their lips pucker in such ugly ways...<shrug>

73, Len AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY wrote: "The FCC officially created the no-code-TEST Technician class in 1991 and hundreds of thousands of American citizens became Technician class radio amateurs."

Just as hundreds of thousands of Americans became radio amateurs before the Tech lost its code test in February 1991.

In fact, if you look up the numbers, US amateur radio grew *more* in both percentage and total numbers from 1982 to 1991 than from 1991 to 2000.

AF6AY: "This morning there were 303,744 *active* Techncian class licensees out of a total US amateur radio license number of 658,337. That means that 46.1 percent of *active* licensees are in this Technician class and the majority (but not all) entered without any code test whatsoever."

So what? Why is that important in any way?

The plain and simple fact is that even before 1991 the Technician had become the most-popular entry ploint for new hams. That's because it gave the licensee 2 meters and 440, which the Novice did not. After March 1987 the Tech did not use the same written exam as the General, either, but had all Novice privileges. When the code test for Tech was dropped in 1991 that just sealed the deal.

AF6AY: "The next larger class is General and this morning there were 143,170 *active* licensees or only 21.7 percent of the total. Technician class licensees are over twice that of General class."

You're being disingenuous, Len. There's also the Advanced and Extra classes. Add them to the General and where is the majority?

On top of that, since April 2000 the FCC has renewed all Tech Pluses as Techs. Which has caused Tech Plus to shrink until now it is the smallest license class of all. By May 2010 there will be no more active Tech Pluses at all.

And even though the Tech lost its code test in 1991, you did not become a radio amateur then.

AF6AY: "The major change that resulted in R&O 99-412 (to take effect in mid-2000) was ONE code test rate of 5 WPM,"

No, that wasn't *the* major change. Those licenses had been available since 1990 with just 5 wpm and a Morse Code test waiver - a letter signed by any doctor.

The major changes (plural) in 99-412 were:

1) the reduction from six open-to-new-issues license classes to three.

2) the reduction of written testing for all classes, in terms of both the number of tests and the number of questions. Tech written testing was cut almost in half, General and Extra written testing were cut by about a third.

3) The elimination of Tech Plus by the renewal of all Tech Pluses as Technician.

4) The reduction of code testing to one speed (5 wpm) to satisfy the treaty.

And even though the code test was reduced to 5 wpm, and even though you publicly stated you were "going for Extra out of the box" on Jan 19, 2000, you didn't get any class of amateur radio license.

http://tinyurl.com/c5qyv

AF6AY: "In the years 2000 to 2005 there were no less than 18 Petitions released for Comment, most of which demanded SOME kind of morse code test but most of those allowed a no-code-test condition."

Is that wrong, Len? Should amateurs not petition the FCC?

AF6AY: "Thousands of Comments and Replies went to the FCC on all sides of the issue. Not seeing any consensus from the (deeply split) 'amateur community,' the FCC simply ELIMINATED any code testing for any new amateur radio license."

You're being disingenuous again, Len.

The majority of those who commented wanted at least some Morse Code testing to remain. But FCC ignored the majority and just eliminated it.

If you're going to talk about ancient history that's over-and-done, at least get the story right.

AF6AY: "I have a full copy of ALL Comments and Replies on the code test elimination NPRM, even submitted an Exhibit of the categories as they appeared day-by-day."

And yet you wanted the FCC to ignore the majority of comments.

Only when the Morse Code test was completely gone did you even try for an amateur radio license. That makes you a newcomer, yet you lecture all of us on How Amateur Radio Should Be.

AF6AY: "Otherwise, I see absolutely NO SANE REASON to play amateur radio operator to the standards and practices of the 1930s and bother learning manual telegraphy because some younger than me (and in much more need of attitude change) say "I MUST.""

Who has said "you must", Len?

If you don't want to learn it, don't. You've done so for over 57 years...

This thread is about promoting the learning and use of Morse Code by amateur radio operators. Every other mode and activity has its promoters and users; we're just doing the same thing. Is that wrong?

AF6AY: "If they answered my "Why" with a "Because..." then I could ascertain their rather childish demands. That is understandable. A "MUST" answer is nonsense. Those set-in-their-ways stalwart admirers of the PAST have NO authority whatsoever. Several have tried to bully me with that testosterone-induced terror-tactic and it just didn't do anything but make me shake my head at Their unthinking immaturity."

How did anyone try to "bully" you, Len? And who were they? Reading your voluminous writings it seems to me that *you* are the one who tries to bully others.

AF6AY: "Do I "need" telegraphy skills to "work foreign DX?" Yes, if that were required. It is NOT a requirement of my amateur radio license to "work foreign DX." I am bilingual-plus-a-half and have NO DESIRE to work foreign (non-English-speaking) DX.

Do I "need" telegraphy skills to participate in "contests?" No. It is NOT a requirement of my amateur radio license to participate in radio "contests." Not all radio "contests" require telegraphy skills."

It is not a requirement that a ham use his/her license at all, Len. Does that mean there should be no test?

Your argument seems to be all about what you do not want to do. You've had a license for over a year but as far as anyone knows you've only used it for a few local line-of-sight VHF/UHF contacts. A year just to put up an HF antenna? Hundreds of thousands of Novices assembled entire stations and went from raw beginner to General or Advanced in less time.

AF6AY: "The FCC gives all US amateur radio licensees many, many OPTIONS. We can do much in any of the many bands allocated to us IF we want."

So do the part that interests you, Len, rather than putting down what others do.

AF6AY: "So many telegraphy-skilled amateurs insist and insist on HF-only, CW-only."

What do you mean "insist and insist"? That they *choose* to focus on HF CW? What's wrong with choice?

AF6AY: "That is self-limitation. NOT a positive attribute."

WRONG.

It's a choice, Len. As for self-limitation, your waiting over a half-century to get an amateur license is a self-limitation too, as is your choice not to do DX, contests, Morse Code, etc.

AF6AY: "We CANNOT live in the PAST, only the present...and prepare to greet the future. There are many, many NEW things to try and many just waiting to become useful."

Using and promoting Morse Code isn't "living in the past", Len. It's the present and the future.

Because something is old does not make it bad, and because it is new does not make it good.

AF6AY: "Those who actually WANT to learn manual telegraphy are very free to do so. After 150 years of wireline use and 112 years of radiotelegraphy use, there are all sorts of teaching aids and methods for learning or improving radiotelegraphy skills."

Which makes it easier to learn and use than ever before.

AF6AY: "The OPTION is there for anyone. But, an OPTION is NOT a requirement."

No one is saying it is, Len. What's your point in posting in this thread, anyway? If you have no interest in using Morse Code, why are you here?

AF6AY: "Worse yet, what YOU think or what YOU like is NOT a requirement of everyone else. Really. It may be strange to you to realize that but it IS true. Guaranteed true."

Of course. And that works both ways: what AF6AY thinks and/or likes is not a requirement on anyone else.

Even if you did petition FCC to ban anyone under the age of 14 years from US amateur radio, for no good reason at all:

http://tinyurl.com/y6uhr3

It seems to me, Len, that what you really want is for the *use* of Morse Code by everyone to just disappear, because *you* don't like it, and never managed to learn it.
 
What is the point?  
by KA4KOE on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I am a code fanatic if there ever was one, owning a gold Vibroplex as an anniversary gift. Did I care about losing the code requirement? Sure I did, but I saw the reasoning and got over it. I made my comments to the FCC when asked. We have to learn to be good losers. Sportsmanship......thats a good word that we need more of these days.

I just want to play radio in whatever means or fashion that suits me at the moment. It doesn't have to be CW; it can be voice, or digital, or manpack camping, building, etc. Right now I'm in a building phase, and thats okay. It keeps the electric utility bill down during this southern hell summer.

Just quit arguing like little babies in the sandbox over who gets the pail next and play nice.

KA4KOE



 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WB8UHZ on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
G5FSD

HMMMMM, not a ham, not in the data base. Why are the site ops allowing a non ham to comment on anything?? What would he or she or "it" know or understand about the code to be able to comment about the code? G5FSD whomever you are you clearly lack any knowledge to make an informed comment. Please earn a license and then come back to us with your words of wisdom.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N3PZZ on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Radio: No axe to grind here.
Did I hear somebody say, MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
Every hole has an opinion and you certainly have yours. I'm not interested in anyone who sits behind a keyboard and complains about other peoples views. I didn't complain about the article,I thought it was fine, but you didn't ask me my view on it, oh well. Go find some one else to annoy. As grand dad once said, If I want to hear the wind blow, I'll fart.
This isn't worth my time. Go MOO some more.
73's all
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WL7CW on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I think everyone should learn CW.
But I also think nobody should learn it.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"I think everyone should learn CW.
But I also think nobody should learn it. "

You're pro-anti-code :-)
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>Believe what you want, but I stand by my statement...it has turned out to be a terrible mistake...but NOT because it let a bunch of unwanted folks into our ranks...it was a terrible mistake because it divided us....and a divided group is far weaker than a united one....

The division was there before the test was removed. It was in the minds of all those who thought and continue to think CW ops are better than phone ops. If the division wasn't there before there wouldn't have been all the angst over the elimination of the code test.

>so, instead of a nice conversation about a great MODE and it's benenfits, the anti-code bigots have turn this into a fight again...why ??

I have a question for you, why can't the pro-code people talk about the code without bringing up the testing issue and have this often sought after nice conversation about a great mode? How about a thread without cynical, "oh my, the code isn't dead after all" comments? How about no dumbed-down ham radio comments? Why the "I do 100% CW" boasting? There's just always a chip on the shoulder, always an axe to grind with those not doing the code, always a judgment to be passed.

>if someone posted an anti-code thread right now, I would NOT comment

I doubt that.

>I would hope the anti-code bigots would show some of the same courtesy to those of us that love the mode...but I suspect they won't..

This victim act is getting old. As a CW operator I'm tired of CW discussions by pro-code people sounding like a therapy session.

And again, I have yet to find a true anti-code person. This "if you're not with us, you're against us" attitude is eroding CW interest.

If you talk to the AMers, the PSK people, the RTTY people, or the handful of other mode interest groups in amateur radio, you won't hear anyone complaining about those who "shun" their modes. There's no sorrow over tests. They don't refer to non-followers of their mode as lazy. They just do what they do and enjoy it. It's such a marked difference between these groups and the CW group. The CW group is the only one with a superiority complex and is convinced its mode is dying and unknowingly doing everything in its power to turn away new recruits.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N3PZZ said " I didn't complain about the article,I thought it was fine, but you didn't ask me my view on it,"

So what was this comment about then ???

"N3PZZ said - The only thing more irritating than listening to code is hams who keep hawking it. Give it a rest...... "

Sounds like a complaint to me ?? Once again, you prove my point, that the anti-code crowd has an agenda...

N3PZZ said "73's all"

This statement has "CBer" written all over it...where did you learn that ???? Channel 19 ??? The correct usage is "73"....
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
STRAIGHTKEY said "I have a question for you, why can't the pro-code people talk about the code without bringing up the testing issue and have this often sought after nice conversation about a great mode? How about a thread without cynical, "oh my, the code isn't dead after all" comments?"

Obviosuly, from this statement, you are NOT a "pro-code" person, even though you say you are...I figured this out a long time ago...just thought I would wait until you confirmed it...thanks

STRAIGHTKEY said "And again, I have yet to find a true anti-code person. This "if you're not with us, you're against us" attitude is eroding CW interest. "

You are either blind, naive, or stupid....all you have to do is read AF6AY's posts an you can see a VERY angry and bitter person who hates the code and will try to do anything he can to ruin anyone's enjoyment of it...but since you seem to agree with Len, I would count you among the "biased" anti-code group...
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>Obviosuly, from this statement, you are NOT a "pro-code" person, even though you say you are...I figured this out a long time ago...

There's nothing in my statement above that makes me not a pro-code person. This is your problem - you label anyone who says anything remotely critical of CW or of the statements that pro-code people make as being anti-code. This is typical of the extremist element often seen in the CW community.

>just thought I would wait until you confirmed it...thanks

And likewise thanks for confirming with me that you're not really a pro-code person, you're merely a troll looking to stir up code debate.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by STRAIGHTKEY on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>This statement has "CBer" written all over it...where did you learn that ???? Channel 19 ??? The correct usage is "73"....

Time to pick another fight! Let's label people CBers! (Nevermind that you'll never hear a CBer say "73s".)
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"If only fone operators just had the courtesy of CW ops the bands would be wonderful. Have you guys listened lately to the foul language used on 80 mtrs ?? Just my opinion. Best of 73 to all. Joe, WA4ONV A1 Op."

Joe you bring out a very good point. Some conversations on 80 SSB and AM are definitely foul. And to make matters worse some of the operators actually seem proud of their lid'ish activities. And of course let's not forget about the people who won't identify themselves but happily and purposely cause interference to on-going QSO's, Nets, SSTV transmissions, DX pile-ups, etc.

As you point out the CW operators typically exercise a high level of operating courtesy. I think that's absolutely true.

It really makes one wonder what mindset poor operators have and what makes them tick. Reading through some of the negative based responses on this thread seems to shed some light on that situation.

KF4HR


 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K9MHZ on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
>>>>N4KC wrote....
Simplicity. Nothing exotic about turning on and off a carrier. If you take your radio camping, on a cruise, on a business trip, it is much simpler and more effective to use CW. Add the element of QRP and you can operate about anywhere, from a bicycle to a bass boat, with basic battery power and compromise antenna. And a key, of course.<<<<

I remember my very first transmitter was a single tube 6146 oscillator that I built from an old TV and some parts from an electronics store that actually sold coils, etc. Just a kid in the 70's with no money and a "Xeroxed" (photocopied) copy of a schematic from an old Handbook that I checked out of the library. Loved that thing, but even though it chirped like a morning bird, it was a thrill to see it load up every time I used it.

Today, the QRPers (I think) do a ton to advance the hobby with efficient antennas and super sensitive semiconductor devices. They love CW for the reasons you've listed, and you've got to admire what they do.

Cheers,

Brad
K9MHZ

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 26, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N2EY dusted off his much-used macros and repeated his rrap crap act on 26 Jun 08:

" ... <much stated-many-times-before non-discussion omitted> ... "

"Even if you did petition FCC to ban anyone under the age of 14 years from US amateur radio, for no good reason at all:"

Sorry, Jimmie boy, but I have NEVER Petitioned the FCC for anything. What you say is a 'Petition' is on the last page of my Reply to Comments of Michael Deignan on NPRM 98-143 dated 13 Jan 99. Anyone can see that Reply at the FCC website. Just search using my legal name and the date of 13 January 1999.

Those who bother to look under that date will see for themselves that I did indeed give reasons for my statement. That YOU didn't like it is irrelevant. You are NOT a judge, never were. Since there was so much flak about that arbitrary age limit, especially by those boy wonders who got BEFORE age 14 (like you did), I dropped any further mention of it. You remain NINE YEARS BEHIND THE TIMES on that, Jimmie.

Yet you HAVE to keep bringing it up after 9 years. Are you a mental bullemic?
........................

N2EY: "It seems to me, Len, that what you really want is for the *use* of Morse Code by everyone to just disappear, because *you* don't like it, and never managed to learn it."

It "seems to me," Jimmie that you are - as usual - trying to REWRITE something to suit your nasty nature of anyone who doesn't love, honor, and obey morse code...as a 'good ham should.' You've done that for ten years elsewhere and to others, mostly on rec.radio.amateur.policy and IT HAS NEVER WORKED. After a whole decade you should be able to understand that it will NEVER WORK. At least with me. It MIGHT work in frightening a teenager but that is about it. You are being dishonest.

The FCC gives all USA radio amateurs lots and lots of OPTIONS in using the amateur bands. All the bands, not just the few on HF. The FCC does NOT require ANY radio amateur to exclusively use, in whole or in part, for the amateur's whole license period, ONE particular mode or modulation. Despite the long, long years of oration by the ARRL (who knows what is good for ham radio) that Code is King, NO ONE amateur licensee is FORCED to use it. The ARRL has no real authority in radio, is primarily a publishing house.

OPTION is not a failure.

The comments on NPRM 98-143 were about the TEST for morse code skill, NOT the USE of it...except that olde-tyme radiotelegraphers (like yourself) are UNABLE to separate USE from TEST. That's a common behavior problem and I can't drum it into you or them that they are SEPARATE THINGS.

The Comments on the 18 Petitions before the FCC regarding restructuring the restructuring again had olde-tymers equating TEST and USE and trying to force them together...while others were able to recognize that they are SEPARATE THINGS.

The Comments on the last NPRM that led to the FCC eliminating all amateur code tests were the same way. Olde-tymers INSISTING that the code test HAD TO STAY, even if for ONE CLASS. It was nonsense then, it is nonsense NOW. The matter is settled. It is OVER. TRY to live with it, not run around like some chicken after an unplugged bug, clucking nasty because the Sky Fell On Your BRAG BAG.

I repeat what I've said before I was licensed as an amateur now that I AM licensed as an amateur, USE AND ENJOY ANY LEGAL MODE OR MODULATION ALLOCATED TO YOUR LICENSE CLASS. Repeat, ANY legal mode or modulation allocated.

USE of one mode/modulation over another does NOT make anyone some kind of 'judge' who can blacklist all those that don't agree with him. You've tried very, very hard for many years to blacklist me. It didn't work. Disagreement with what YOU think is best for amateur radio is not nor ever has been an 'insult' to you personally yet you always get on that victim act and boo-hoo how mean those are to you. Poor baby.
----------------
Manual telegraphy is a mature skill after over 150 years of existance (112 years of that on radio). There are MANY ways to learn that skill. All of those are OPTIONS anyone can use. Despite so many options, some just won't bother. Those people are just exercising their OPTIONS. Those people are NOT 'inferior' to you because of their indifference towards radiotelegraphy. You are NOT 'superior' to them just because you favor radiotelegraphy. Try very hard to understand that, Jimmie. REALLY TRY. It will come to you after a while that such is true. Just keep on practicing trying to understand other human beings. Eventually you will get it right. Or maybe not. Maybe we will have to pry that code key from your cold, dead fingers. [the brass is recyclable]

USE AND ENJOY ANY LEGAL MODE OR MODULATION ALLOCATED TO YOUR LICENSE CLASS.

Is that so hard to understand?

37, Len AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on June 27, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY wrote: "I have NEVER Petitioned the FCC for anything. What you say is a 'Petition' is on the last page of my Reply to Comments of Michael Deignan on NPRM 98-143 dated 13 Jan 99."

An unconnected request of FCC stuck at the end of Reply Comments.

AF6AY: "Anyone can see that Reply at the FCC website. Just search using my legal name and the date of 13 January 1999."

Or they can click either of these links:

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6006041560

http://tinyurl.com/y6uhr3

AF6AY: "Those who bother to look under that date will see for themselves that I did indeed give reasons for my statement."

They weren't good reasons, though.

You also made these statements in a public forum about the licensing of young people:

http://tinyurl.com/yxq3rr

http://tinyurl.com/2akck9

http://tinyurl.com/2k5mb5

AF6AY: "That YOU didn't like it is irrelevant. You are NOT a judge, never were."

You're not a judge either, Len. Never worked for FCC, nor been a VE either.

Yet you accused the ARRL VEC of "fraud" in the licensing of a couple of young children. You essentially claimed they could not have passed the license tests honestly, even though you don't know any of them and weren't at the test session.

There's never been a minimum age requirement for a US amateur radio license. Not since the beginning of radio. So if there were a problem with the licensing of under-14s, there would be plenty of examples, right? Yet you could not come up with a single example of a Part 97 violation caused by a person under the age of 14 being licensed. Not one example of a problem caused by the lack of an age requirement.

AF6AY: "Since there was so much flak about that arbitrary age limit, especially by those boy wonders who got BEFORE age 14 (like you did), I dropped any further mention of it."

"So much flak?" You mean others did not like the idea either?

I simply mention it as background information. You don't seem to want people to know about it.


AF6AY: "It "seems to me,"...that you are........trying to REWRITE something to suit your nasty nature of anyone who doesn't love, honor, and obey morse code"

Nope, Len, I'm just posting some facts, observations and opinions.

AF6AY: "You are being dishonest."

How? What have I written that is not true? When I write "It seems to me..." that means it's my opinion. It's an opinion based on reading your many many many words in a number of venues over the years. It's an honest opinion.

AF6AY: "The FCC gives all USA radio amateurs lots and lots of OPTIONS in using the amateur bands. All the bands, not just the few on HF. The FCC does NOT require ANY radio amateur to exclusively use, in whole or in part, for the amateur's whole license period, ONE particular mode or modulation......NO ONE amateur licensee is FORCED to use it."

So what?

No radio amateur is required to operate on any particular band or mode, yet there are test questions on all the band limits and allowed modes. No radio amateur is required to operate a transmitter above the power level that would require an RF exposure analysis, yet there are test questions on RF exposure. No radio amateur is required to operate equipment using a particular technology, yet the exams are full of test questions on certain technologies, and completely ignore others.

By your logic, nothing should be on the exams that isn't required. But since no ham is required to actually operate at all, you're really saying there should be no test.

That's where your logic leads.

AF6AY: "The comments on NPRM 98-143 were about the TEST for morse code skill, NOT the USE of it...except that olde-tyme radiotelegraphers (like yourself) are UNABLE to separate USE from TEST."

Sorry, that's just not true.

This thread isn't about the test; it's about the use of Morse Code and promoting it. Yet you are here arguing about the test. That says you can't separate one from the other.

AF6AY: "The Comments on the last NPRM that led to the FCC eliminating all amateur code tests were the same way. Olde-tymers INSISTING that the code test HAD TO STAY, even if for ONE CLASS."

And you insisted that it had to go. Even though you weren't a ham then.

AF6AY: "It was nonsense then, it is nonsense NOW."

No it wasn't.

AF6AY: "The matter is settled. It is OVER. TRY to live with it, not run around like some chicken after an unplugged bug, clucking nasty because the Sky Fell On Your BRAG BAG."

I don't have a "brag bag", Len. And as I've said many times, including earlier in this thread, the test is gone and not going to come back. I accepted that long ago. Even when I was helping to write one of those 18 petitions I knew the chances of success were small.

And while Morse Code is my favorite mode, and 40 CW my favorite band, I am skilled and experienced in the use of many other modes and bands. Being a somewhat-skilled radiotelegrapher has not limited me in any way; in fact, it's helped.

AF6AY: "I repeat what I've said before I was licensed as an amateur now that I AM licensed as an amateur, USE AND ENJOY ANY LEGAL MODE OR MODULATION ALLOCATED TO YOUR LICENSE CLASS. Repeat, ANY legal mode or modulation allocated."

Show us where you wrote that before, Len. I can't recall you ever writing that before.

I do recall your many put-downs of certain modes and technologies, though. The many insulting nicknames you have for people who disagree with you, too.

AF6AY: "USE of one mode/modulation over another does NOT make anyone some kind of 'judge' who can blacklist all those that don't agree with him. You've tried very, very hard for many years to blacklist me."

No, I have not tried to "blacklist" anyone. Unlike you, I have never told another to "shut up" in an online forum.

Like this example:

http://tinyurl.com/3ygllb

What I have done is to point out things you have written, and point out errors of fact and reasoning contained in them. That seems to really bother you.

You have also claimed I wrote things which I did not write. When this was pointed out, you did not correct your mistakes.

AF6AY: "Those people are NOT 'inferior' to you because of their indifference towards radiotelegraphy. You are NOT 'superior' to them just because you favor radiotelegraphy."

Where have I said they were? That "inferior/superior" stuff is your bag, Len, not mine.

AF6AY: "Try very hard to understand that, Jimmie. REALLY TRY. It will come to you after a while that such is true. Just keep on practicing trying to understand other human beings. Eventually you will get it right."

See? There you go. Why do you call me "Jimmie"? It seems to be an attempt to cast yourself as superior to me. A mature adult who understands other human beings wouldn't stoop to such childish antics.

I understand other human beings better than you want to admit, Len.

AF6AY: "USE AND ENJOY ANY LEGAL MODE OR MODULATION ALLOCATED TO YOUR LICENSE CLASS."

If you really believe that, Len, why are you posting in this thread? Why all the insults, and misinterpretations of what others have written?

Why all the put-downs of those who *use* Morse Code, and the constant denial that Morse Code skill is useful in amateur radio?

Your many, many, many words over the years paint a clear picture of how you view the *use* of Morse Code by anyone.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K1CJS on June 27, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Radio123 spewed out:

"Then why do you your anti-code friends feel the NEED to come into a pro-code thread ???...it's ONLY a mode now....no NEED for you to be here, unless you have something positive to share about the MODE....get a grip Chris, you have been a TROLL and a troublemaker in practically ALL of the pro-code threads here...."

Since when do YOU have the right to say where members of this site can and cannot go? Nobody tries to tell you that, so BUGGAR OFF!

Posts I have made on this thread have been with a positive slant toward code. GET IT THROUGH YOUR MELON BUDDY--I was anti code TEST, not anti code.

--And you're calling ME a troll??? Look in your mirror and see the REAL TROLL here--YOU. If you weren't so ticked off about code and so much a part of the 11 meter crowd, maybe you would get a ham license--then you could get rid of that cutsy handle you plaster up on ham boards.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K1CJS on June 27, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
And before you start with your baloney that you ARE a ham operator---PROVE IT!!!
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4KC on June 27, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Fellas, I'm afraid that three or four of you have once again succeeded in hijacking a thread. There might actually have been some folks who wanted to read and offer rational and helpful comments--pro or con--about my original article.

I doubt if many of them would have waded through all this silliness to try find any of those. While it's certainly your right to post anything you want here, I'd like to suggest you do us all a favor and take the personal rants and attacks to some other venue.

Thank you...and 73,

Don Keith N4KC
www.n4kc.com
www.n4kc.blogspot.com
www.donkeith.com



 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 27, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N4KC posted on June 27, 2008:

"Fellas, I'm afraid that three or four of you have once again succeeded in hijacking a thread. There might actually have been some folks who wanted to read and offer rational and helpful comments--pro or con--about my original article."

Don, you are right...and possibly wrong in your approach to this subject.

Putting on my old 'editor's hat' (not all that used and not used much lately), I'd say that your words were well crafted and concise. Praises be as an example of how more of the other article writers should emulate. I would nominate you as the 'Strunk and White' example for all article authors on e-ham (writers will know the term as a short, concise guide for writing good English).

But, seriously, I see your approach to this was, in part, equivalent to waving the Red Flag on a military rifle range signifying a start to begin rapid firing in 20 seconds. The division on morse code use has been so deep and in-place for so long that it was an INVITATION for many to spew. Of course many did.

In the history of all communications, the on-off keying representation of characters in a language is at least 150 years old. I don't know the exact date when the original Morse Code (all numbers) was changed to the Morse-Vail system (all characters) after 1844. Radiotelegraphy has been in use for 112 years since the first radios could only do on-off carrier keying. There have been many, many ways devised to teach radiotelegraphy in that period of over a century of existance. Nearly all of them were successful...but NOT to each and every individual. Each individual must find their own 'system' of learning it.

I've found at least two websites that offered FREE learning programs suitable for most any PC. I'm sure there are at least as many more available for free. I'm sure that there are some morse code classes somewhere in localities that offer basic learning and practice sessions...but that isn't universal in the amateur community. We can't count on family members to always pass down the skill since there are few of those in the mainstream of society now.

Lets take a look at some basics, generalities about minimal radio communication:

Yes, on-off carrier keying IS a prime method of receiving the faintest RF signal for the average radio amateur...but it is not the best possible technical means.

Yes, on-off carrier keying makes it possible to communicate - for purposes of a brief contact - with a non-English-speaking radio amateur. Such enables higher radio contest scoring. But, the ability to converse on anything more than brief contact information requires one of the two to be sufficiently fluent in a common language. Morse Code is just
not the 'universal translator' as in the Star Trek TV show universe. Conversation is limited to very familiar terms without a common-conversation language to both operators.

Yes, an on-off carrier keying mode makes the least-possible-component-set transmitter of radio energy. However, an audio source and one varactor diode would add audio frequency modulation to that same simple transmitter. There need not be any basic technical changes in an HF receiver, not even in a simple crystal set, to receive FM. [see 'slope detection' techniques...certainly not the best but long-ago trials have proved it is possible]

Yes, on-off carrier keying was the very first mode in the first public demonstrations of radio as a communications means 112 years ago. It was the ONLY way to use the first primitive-technology radios. That's roughly four generations back in time.

Beyond the above there is only the SUBJECTIVE EMOTION of individuals about the mode. That EMOTION can be intense and diverse, and divisive to an extreme among many.
............

N4KC: "I doubt if many of them would have waded through all this silliness to try find any of those."

That "silliness" has been amply demonstrated since 1990 and the FCC NPRM on a creation of a code-TEST-free amateur radio license in the USA. That resulted in the no-code-TEST Technician class license. That "silliness" persisted in NPRM 98-143 on restructuring USA amateur radio. That "silliness" kept on coming throughout the 18 Petitions on changing USA amateur radio between years 2000 and 2005. It didn't stop when the NPRM was released in 2005 on the possible elimination of all USA amateur radio code testing for any amateur license. USA amateur radio has had 17 years of recorded-in-public-access-government-archives of much "silliness."

"Silliness" is, was, will be done by those who INSIST that only THEIR mode is the "best" one and only THEY "know what is good for everyone else to use." As of the end of 26 June 2008 the FCC database shows 658,591 individual USA amateur radio licensees still within their 10-year active license term. There are 53,791 more individual licensees possibly in their 2-year grace period. That is a very large group and no one individual - nor minority membership organization - can possibly have "THE answer or judgement capability."

Agreed, "silliness" doesn't achieve any common ground. But, such "silliness" also identifies some of the "silly" stalwarts who refuse to change or step down from their self-defined ivory towers. Sometimes, a bit of "silliness" in terms of humor or satire is a NECESSITY to throw some water on those other over-heated adamant "sillies." :-)
...........

N4KC: "While it's certainly your right to post anything you want here, I'd like to suggest you do us all a favor and take the personal rants and attacks to some other venue."

Agreed. There's a nice anonymous tagline of years ago that may explain it: "Mankind invented language to satisfy its need to complain." :-)

73, Len AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on June 27, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Agreed. There's a nice anonymous tagline of years ago that may explain it: "Mankind invented language to satisfy its need to complain." :-)

73, Len AF6AY

Finally, some funny rational as to Len's argumentative responses! Words Len obviously lives by.

Len, did I detect a hint of something positive in your last response to the author of this thread? If so, congratulations! Coming from you, even a hint of a positive response is very refreshing! You may be coming around ol' buddy!

Folks, don't let Len fool ya. Even though his responses have been mostly negative, I think most can read between the lines. It's obvious Len secretly envy's those who have mastered the CW QSO. Why else would anyone spend so much darn time and effort analyzing so many responses, for all this time, on a subject, that he claims he has no interest in?! (Sure Len sure.) Yes folks, it might take a shrink to drag it out of him, but there's a very good chance Len has a secret interest in learning CW! And yes Len, there are several free computer programs that will help you learn! Heck, if you try and be a bit more positive maybe some of the locals might help ya too!

Well, I say... You go Len! We have faith in ya! Turn that frown upside down! You can do it! And if all else fails...

dahdahdidah didahdidit dididahdit!

KF4HR
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KD4VCU on June 27, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I originally got into amatuer radio when they added the Technition Plus with No-Code. Over the years I tried learning code but never got it all down. With the removal of the code I got back into radio again and now have my General Lic and plan on taking my Extra soon. Once that is done, I may try my hand at morse again. But for me, I generally have a lot of things going on that just prevent me to the time to study, since it is hard to pickup.

Your article is good. But your 10 reasons for learning CODE focused only on Amatuer radio type activities. There are others.

Every knows the code for "S.O.S" right? I used to fish and one night I was stuck on the river with an engine that would not crank. No cell phone capability and of course no ham radio in the boat. I was litteraly out of luck, no way to paddel a large Bass Boat. If the engine had not started, my next option was to start sending S.O.S by flashlight at nearby houses and cars. Now, my only hope was that someone in those houses and cars knew enough about the code too know I was in trouble.

Many people over the years have had thier lifes saved by knowing code as it can be used with lights to sound to simply banging a rock on a pipe.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KG4TKC on June 28, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Thanks Don for another fine article,and a handshake for the gentle way you tried to prod the strays back on the path,,:) You are a Southern Gentleman!

I'd like to second the motion on the beacons. That is a simple and fun way to enjoy cw, along with the important info you gain. Nothing so nice as hearing those first 10 meter beacons in the spring,or those more rare ones for Christmas. I keep a rough log and notes in a spiral notebook on the beacons I hear.

After reading this fine article and all the better comments,it got me back thinking about homebrew portable CW QRP again. Then I remembered an article you did a few months back on balanced feedlines and wire antenna's,so I looked it back up,and started thinking about flat 300 ohm ribbon right out of the back of the QRP rig,and how nice a portable that would be.

Thanks again for the nice article. You,Eric,and a few others I always watch for here for your fine work. GL,73,have a great Field Day,and may the spots soon be with us,KG4TKC.
 
11 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by VA3TO on June 28, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
11. Personal challenge & accomplishment

I initially found it difficult to learn CW but then I took a step backwards and looked at it from a different perspective. Instead of being something I "had to do" to get my ticket I embraced it as a personal challenge with the new attitude being "I'm not going to let this beat me". I put in the effort, persevered and eventually earned my ticket in 1985. Although I'm no contest CW speed demon, I still enjoy the mental stimulation of making the odd CW contact. I am also very glad that I learned it for weak signal/moonbounce operating.

I have since continued with the "personal challenge" "go-getter" attitude in other aspects of my life which has proven to be fulfilling.

CW is no longer required as a licencing requirement but as others have pointed out, there are still valid reasons to know and use it. Nobody said it is easy but if you take it on as a personal challenge and stick with it then you can be all the more proud of your accomplishment !


73 de Hugh VA3TO / NA3TO

 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W3HR on June 29, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
It amazes me how the comments of the "no-coders" continue to be so antagonistic and contentious. Take your own advice guys and "get over it". After all, you won. You got your way. The code was eliminated as a requirement. So what is it now... you won't be happy until it's eliminated as a mode, too?

Please.

Just go along your happy way into the flood gates - proud that evil, elitist roadblock no longer threatens the nation's slackers - and leave the rest of us to our own devices.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on June 29, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
W3HR posted on 29 Jun 08:

"It amazes me how the comments of the "no-coders" continue to be so antagonistic and contentious."

Tsk, no more so than pro-coders have been antagonistic, contentious, AND smuggly superior in their attitudes towards 'lesser classes' for DECADES.

"Take your own advice guys and "get over it". After all, you won. You got your way."

Tsk, another sore loser... :-)

"The code was eliminated as a requirement."

The code TEST was eliminated. As in TEST for any USA amateur radio license. TEST.

TEST. It was only a TEST. If that had been a REAL requirement for amateur radio, the pro-coders would have launched their emotional megaton missives en masse.

"So what is it now... you won't be happy until it's eliminated as a mode, too?"

NO ONE was talking about ending the mode/modulation...except the very worried pro-coders who lost their one remaining Brag Bag claim to amateur fame.

NOTHING was eliminated in mode allocations favoring pro-coders. Anyone can operate OOK CW in ANY allocated amateur band except in the five new channels on '60m band.' Indeed, only two amateur band allocations are CW-only, small slivers of spectrum at the bottom of the 6 and 2 meter bands.

"Just go along your happy way into the flood gates - proud that evil, elitist roadblock no longer threatens the nation's slackers - and leave the rest of us to our own devices."

Tsk, sour grapes.

"Nation's slackers?!?" Not-nice group pejorative...from the pro-code contingent. You owe hundreds of thousands of USA radio amateurs who did NOT take a code TEST a very big apology. APOLOGY. I know it sits in pro-coders' craws badly now, but look back at how arrogantly superior the pro-coders comments have been for decades before 2007...and after.

There is nothing wrong with any radio amateur USING International Morse Code in OOK CW mode . What is arguably wrong is trying to portray: (1). Amateur radio in the USA as some kind of national service that ONLY the 'good' can do; (2) Morse code as the ultimate achievement in radio operating skills that ALL MUST DO...especially now in this new millennium on the 112th year of all radio. USA amateur radio is essentially - and de facto - a HOBBY activity. While it is not de jure described as a hobby, all of the de jure definitions combined describe it as non-professional. The Part 97 radio service title even includes the fact that it IS non-professional; i.e., amateur.

Many, many licensed radio amateurs find morse code USE to be enjoyable. As many, if not more, just don't bother using it. The original article statement by Don Keith was aimed at those who don't use it, but perhaps MIGHT WANT TO. Blathering more pejoratives about those who never tested for the skill, do not use it regularly, is extremely NEGATIVE towards use of that mode. Just how do you rationalize that insulting "nation's slackers" term as something that MIGHT INTEREST some non- or poorly-skilled in radiotelegraphy in learning it or getting better at it?

Answer: You can't say insults are positive. USA amateur radio is NOT a military barracks and the pro-coders are NOT barracks sergeants ruling it. Amateur radio just isn't a JOB done for money. I've been there, done that in both areas.

"Into the flood gates?!?" Wrong. There were NO "floods" of eager applicants after 22 Feb 07 to break levees and flood the airwaves with trash that defied old-time-absolutely-professionally-correct-amateur-procedure communications. The numbers do NOT prove it. I could bore everyone with actual numbers of real, true amateur radio license changes all the way back to 2003. It wouldn't do any good since you can't escape from your mindset. The elimination of the USA amateur radio morse code test came TOO LATE to recover from that very real shrinkage happening since 2 July 2003. "Flood?" No. Only a slight, very slight rise of inflow of newcomers who are NOW just barely offsetting the very real outflow of EXPIRATIONS. That is REALITY, not some fantasy imagination about "floods" of newcomers.

Anyone THAT CARES TO learn morse code has that option. OPTION. [note that] They can be unlicensed or licensed in any other radio service...makes no difference. It is up to the individual. Some find it interesting and enjoyable. There are many ways to learn it. Manual telegraphy is mature, having been done for more than 150 years. Manual radiotelegraphy is also mature at 112 years. Learning or improving the skill is available to anyone. If an individual wants to learn, they should NOT BE TALKED DOWN TO. That will TURN THEM OFF.

On the other hand, individuals may NOT want to learn radiotelegraphy. That is no crime nor moral flaw. The amateur radio regulations of the USA do NOT recognize radiotelegraphy skill as essential to obtaining an amateur radio license here. WE are all equal under the law.

Skill in morse code radiotelegraphy has NO REAL APPLICATION in any radio service in the USA outside of amateur radio. It does NOT make any USA radio amateur 'better' than any other radio amateur EXCEPT in the USE of radiotelegraphy. Morse code skill can teach NOTHING about radio theory, how it works or how to fix it. Morse code skill cannot make a better human being. It is only a psycho-motor skill that can be 'learned' only by long, repetitive drills in cognition, then more associated psycho-motor skill drills in acheiving good sending. That's all it is. It is only a personal, individual accomplishment.

Anyone who wants to PROMOTE morse code radiotelegraphy has to project a POSITIVE approach to possible users. POSITIVE. In modern-day times, NOT exhortations on what once WAS, nor nastygrams sent to those who you think are 'lesser' than you.

73, Len AF6AY

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by OLDFART13 on June 29, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
by W3HR on June 29, 2008
"It amazes me how the comments of the "no-coders" continue to be so antagonistic and contentious. Take your own advice guys and "get over it". After all, you won. You got your way. The code was eliminated as a requirement. So what is it now... you won't be happy until it's eliminated as a mode, too?

Please.

Just go along your happy way into the flood gates - proud that evil, elitist roadblock no longer threatens the nation's slackers - and leave the rest of us to our own devices."

That sums up the anti-code bigots hatemonger attitude that still continues to this day.

I'm outta here.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on June 30, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY writes: "The code TEST was eliminated. As in TEST for any USA amateur radio license."

That's right. And this thread isn't really about that test, it's about the reasons to learn Morse Code today, right now, even without a test.

AF6AY: "NO ONE was talking about ending the mode/modulation...except the very worried pro-coders who lost their one remaining Brag Bag claim to amateur fame."

Some folks have spoken of the *use* of Morse Code as being a negative thing. Not the test, the *use*. Others have claimed that it's not much used by other radio services any more, and that radio amateurs shouldn't use it either.

One does not need to look far to see negative messages about the *use* of Morse Code. When it is described as turning off young people, for example....

AF6AY: "NOTHING was eliminated in mode allocations favoring pro-coders."

Not true. Recently, several HF bands had their 'phone/image segments widened and their Morse Code/data segments narrowed. This particularly affected those who hold the General and Advanced license classes and who want to *use* Morse Code.

AF6AY: "Anyone can operate OOK CW in ANY allocated amateur band except in the five new channels on '60m band.'"

Only within the limits of their license class.

More important, while Morse Code is technically legal in the 'phone/image subbands, it is considered poor amateur practice to do so except in unusual circumstances. In 40+ years as a radio amateur I have never used Morse Code in the 'phone/image HF subbands.

Also, you forgot the 219-200 MHz allocation, Len. No Morse Code allowed there.

AF6AY: "Indeed, only two amateur band allocations are CW-only, small slivers of spectrum at the bottom of the 6 and 2 meter bands."

That's right - which means all the rest of the non-phone/image HF subbands are shared with data modes. HF voice, however, does not have to share with data modes, only image modes.

AF6AY: "I know it sits in pro-coders' craws badly now, but look back at how arrogantly superior the pro-coders comments have been for decades before 2007...and after."

It seems to me that you want to blame a large group for the words of a few. But you do not want to be reminded of your own words or actions.

I suggest you examine your own attitude and behavior first, Len. Set a good example, IOW.

This thread is about reasons to learn Morse Code *today*. In 2008. It's about promoting the *use* of Morse Code by radio amateurs, just as many other modes are promoted.

Is it OK for radio amateurs to promote the use of Morse Code? Is it a Good Thing for radio amateurs to promote the use of Morse Code?

N2EY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6JPA on June 30, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Gentlemen,

From an originally no-code licensee with a real interest in improving my code speed and technique, I want to thank Don, the author, for his insight in offering his reasoning for maintaining the interest to learn CW.

The beginning of the thread has a lot of useful information. It is unfortunate that, somewhere along the way, various forces have redirected the original focus of the author to what appear to be personal agendas.

May I respectfully request that those with these agendas on both ends of the code debate, for the sake of us that would like to gather useful information here, please stop acting like the south sides of north facing donkeys?

Contrary to what one may think after reading some of these eHam forums, there are still plenty of us that DO want to learn and become better all-around operators. It has also been my experience that, fortunately, the majority of operators (outside these forums at least…) have been very helpful and informative.

The rewards of this wonderful past time are based upon us being respectful of each other's methods of enjoyment, being able learn from those before us, and to appreciate ALL modes that are available to us that we choose to enjoy.

Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

Jim, K6JPA
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WA2JJH on June 30, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Radio123 has been around eham FOR YEARS!. Radio123, I am surr has his reasons for being ANON.

One "new jack" is tryng to be A SICK TYPE ALPHA HAM, by bragging about M.O.S, other non ham experience. Thats been done before. NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOUR PAST!

However this same "New jack"" has gone out of his way to dig up personal info on Hams, then publishes it here.
No big deal, to me, when he did it to me.. It is because of borderline pesonalities, some opt fpr ANON.

Many of us have Lexus-Nexus or other E-P.I. service too! We just use it for business.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WA2JJH on June 30, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Yup. Lenny I lectured at the IEEE many times. I just lost interest in the IEEE. I found too many people without direction. You never got a 4 yr degree. So what!!! You seem to translate your insecurities into inate aggression for those that learned something, you could not!
Lenny, especially to a UNSTABLE NCO RET, would I ever confirm OR DENY anything.
Did, I work for an E.W. contractor? You threatened to publish my entire dossier here. I forgot. Was, I in gulf war !.......I forgot.
NOBODY can take your accomplishments away. However attacking your fellow hams is a very clear indicator of many things. YOUR just the new kid on the block.
I have seen this happen before. Yes, I agree The Koreon War Vets got a raw deal .That is the crux of the whole thing is it not!!!!

This is a POST for people who likE CW. YET, YOU HAVE TO GET ON YOUR SOAPBOX.

WHY DO YOU NOT WRITE YOUR OWN ARTICLE? WHAT A CONCEPT!!!!!!!

HERE IS A START.."".WHY CW SUCKS BY SSGT OR CHEIF PETTY OFFICER LENNY ANDERSON""
CW SUCKS BECUASE, I HATE IT'S RANDOM-QUASI-DIGITAL PATTERN
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K4RD on June 30, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Thanks, I have been a CW Wannabe for over 5 years. Maybe I just needed a logical set of reasons to get off my Duff, learn CW, and use these two keys I have in my shack.

73,
K4RD
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on June 30, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY: "You can't say insults are positive."

Well, Len, you've tossed enough insults at people online to know that!

AF6AY: "USA amateur radio is NOT a military barracks and the pro-coders are NOT barracks sergeants ruling it. Amateur radio just isn't a JOB done for money."

Nobody says it is.

But does that mean Amateur Radio can have no standards, no traditions, no values?

AF6AY: "I've been there, done that in both areas."

But you've only been a licensed ham about 18 months. Yet you want to tell us and the FCC How Amateur Radio Should Be. And woe betide anyone who disagrees with you or points out any of your mistakes.

AF6AY: "There were NO "floods" of eager applicants after 22 Feb 07"

Yet "lack of growth" was one of the primary reasons cited to eliminate the last vestige of code testing.

So, by your logic, the Morse Code test wasn't really a barrier to growth at all.

AF6AY: "Anyone THAT CARES TO learn morse code has that option. OPTION. [note that] They can be unlicensed or licensed in any other radio service...makes no difference. It is up to the individual. Some find it interesting and enjoyable. There are many ways to learn it."

I agree 100%!

What this thread is about is encouraging radio amateurs to exercise that option to learn and use Morse Code. Is that wrong?

AF6AY: "If an individual wants to learn, they should NOT BE TALKED DOWN TO. That will TURN THEM OFF."

Perhaps you should take that advice, Len.

AF6AY: "The amateur radio regulations of the USA do NOT recognize radiotelegraphy skill as essential to obtaining an amateur radio license here. WE are all equal under the law."

Under the law, yes. But we are not all equal in skills, knowledge, experience, or accomplishments.

AF6AY: "Skill in morse code radiotelegraphy has NO REAL APPLICATION in any radio service in the USA outside of amateur radio."

So what? This is a website and a thread about *amateur radio*, not other radio services. What does it matter whether or not other radio services use it? As you have said yourself, many many radio amateurs use Morse Code and enjoy it. Isn't that reason enough to promote it?

And in fact there is a use for Morse Code skill in another USA radio service: cell phones.

AF6AY: "It does NOT make any USA radio amateur 'better' than any other radio amateur EXCEPT in the USE of radiotelegraphy."

Isn't that enough? Isn't a person with useful skills in amateur radio a better radio amateur than a similar person without those skills?

AF6AY: "Morse code skill can teach NOTHING about radio theory, how it works or how to fix it."

Not by itself. But having Morse Code skill can help someone learn both theory and practical radio.

AF6AY: "Morse code skill cannot make a better human being."

Sure it can! It's not guaranteed, but Morse Code skills can indeed make someone a better human being. I know, because Morse Code skills made me a better human being in many ways.

AF6AY: "It is only a psycho-motor skill that can be 'learned' only by long, repetitive drills in cognition, then more associated psycho-motor skill drills in acheiving good sending."

No, that's not true. In fact, you earlier said there were many ways to learn it.

And since you haven't learned it, nor taught it, how would you know?

In my experience of 41+ years using Morse Code, it does not take long for most people to learn the basics of sending and receiving Morse Code *if* they use an effective, intelligent, open-minded approach. 30 to 45 minutes a day, every day for 4 to 6 weeks is usually enough to get 5 to 10 wpm. That's not "long, repetitive drills".

Once the basic skills are mastered, they can be improved by actual use on-the-air.

AF6AY: "That's all it is. It is only a personal, individual accomplishment."

It seems to me that you want to minimize that accomplishment, Len.

AF6AY: "Anyone who wants to PROMOTE morse code radiotelegraphy has to project a POSITIVE approach to possible users. POSITIVE. In modern-day times, NOT exhortations on what once WAS, nor nastygrams sent to those who you think are 'lesser' than you."

That doesn't seem to be the way you do things, Len. Perhaps you should practice what you preach.

N2EY
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KC8SLC on June 30, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Well written comment by N2EY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by AK7V on June 30, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Learning code is essentially trivial for "highly gifted" people.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
As this thread and its follow-on responses fades off into eham forum history, maybe we can draw a few conclusions.

* First, great article (thank you Don!)

* A few people felt it was their obligation to defend the non-CW operator and in doing so responded with some negative comments.

In order to keep negative comments from (maybe) creeping in to future CW articles, perhaps authors might want to consider prefacing their articles with a few lines:

1. Yes, everyone realizes CW is no longer a FCC licensing requirement.
2. No, CW operators are not "better" than non-CW ops, they just have the capability to use CW, while non-CW operators don't.
3. Some find CW has certain advantages, while others don't.
4. Some learn CW, others don't or can't, and for every reason imaginable. (But who cares?)
5. If you don't like CW, making negative comments tends to come across as purely excuses why you can't or don't learn CW. It's much better to just say you don't care for CW and leave it at that. Or better yet, don't say anything at all.

Articles such as this are meant to bring out advantages of CW (as seen by some). With the FCC dropping the CW licensing requirement and new non-CW hams joining our ranks I think the advantages of CW need to be brought to the surface now and then.

CW operating is enjoyed by many, is alive and well on our bands, and will continue to remain that way. CW is just another mode, but unlike most modes that require a push of button or flip of a switch, CW requires a bit more effort. Whether that effort is worth it, is of course up to you. If so, that's great. If not, that's great too. It's as simple as that.

KF4HR
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4ZFQ on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I became a hame in 1985. I have never liked morse until now. The stigma of the "testing" is gone and their is no pressure to "perform" to someone's standard. Will I ever be a "high speed operator"?, brobably not, but I think I will learn to enjoy another realm of the hobby now! Thanks for a great article!!

73
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KA8NSG on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
CW is like RF! Habit forming! LOL bring it on! CW forever! My best contacts as a Novice back in the 80s were CW contacts! And SK nite is a blast! And yes CW will get thru when all else fails
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR posted on 1 Jul 08:

"As this thread and its follow-on responses fades off into eham forum history, maybe we can draw a few conclusions."

<snip>

"Articles such as this are meant to bring out advantages of CW (as seen by some). With the FCC dropping the CW licensing requirement and new non-CW hams joining our ranks I think the advantages of CW need to be brought to the surface now and then."

On the face of it, that is a fair and equitable statement. In the history of USA amateur radio, it completely overlooks at least a half century of continuing exhortations in favor of radiotelegraphy. It is far, far from "now and then."
..........

"CW operating is enjoyed by many, is alive and well on our bands, and will continue to remain that way."

I have no arguments against the first two reasons. They are true and evidenciary. That it "will continue to remain" is highly subjective and applicable only to the immediate future...and perhaps just to its devotees.
..........

"CW is just another mode, but unlike most modes that require a push of button or flip of a switch, CW requires a bit more effort."

It requires a different effort. Speech itself may be commonplace but those who speak seldom hear what they've said as others hear them. Most people get a bit embarrassed to hear recordings of their own voices played back to them after they've said it. It takes conscious effort to speak distinctly and correctly in an environment of high interference and noise level.

Typing on a keyboard, as in 'touch-typing' without looking at the keys, is a psycho-motor skill that requires a considerable amount of practice to attain reasonable proficiency (approaching or exceeding 60 WPM). It is applicable to many, many forms of communications other than 'radio.' To express thoughts and ideas via such typing on a keyboard requires more internal skill in formulating those thoughts and ideas into words that can be written clearly and distinctly...even if the eventual reader is unable to correctly understand them in context or as they are.

Radiotelegraphy, as done in amateur radio, employs a considerable amount of jargon and abbreviations. That isn't precisely a psycho-motor skill by itself. Such requires a different data set within the mind and the ability to interpret highly-abbreviated communications. That adds to the individual cognition workload, is easiest to native-English-speakers as opposed to those who have only a bare skill at English...some of whom have native languages that do not use any characters as in a written alphabet. It is possible to use complete 'clear-text' (no abbreviations) sending and communicate clearly but the time to fully communicate it all is lengthened uncomfortably.

By comparison, speech over radio itself can be highly compressed, abbreviated, full of jargon, yet be completely comprehensible. An everyday example is civil airways radio communications between air traffic controllers and pilots at busy urban airports. Both pilots and controllers are very busy doing other things besides talking over radios; the push a lot of control buttons, flip many switches, coordinate their hands and feet and eyes and sense of balance while trying to control aircraft. The jargon set is formidable to those unfamiliar with it or flying itself, but perfectly understandable to those familiar with flying and air traffic control. Yes, once in a while there are mistakes made, mistakes that can result in great tragedy of lost lives and destruction of property on the ground. It isn't perfect but it has grown and modified itself over the years to be - overall - safe and efficient.

By comparison, radiotelegraphy done by radio amateurs very rarely results in any tragedy other than an individual's personal embarrassment. Radiotelegraphy skills are no longer involved in any life-threatening conditions such as Safety Of Life At Sea. Radiotelegraphy by radio amateurs is done for their own personal enjoyment. Radiotelegraphy by itself is not perfect but subject to manual errors similar to typos by touch-typists. Further, cognition of radiotelegraphy signals is also subject to similar typos even in clear-signal conditions.

The only "push of a button" CW that many of us, mostly non-radio individuals, do is the push of a keyless-entry key fob transmitter to unlock an automobile. No special skill needed, no interpretation. But most such keyless-entry transmitters use on-off keying CW. No license required, no special skill learning needed by anyone to do that. That extends to the remote control of a garage door mechanism, same principle.
...........

"Whether that effort is worth it, is of course up to you. If so, that's great. If not, that's great too. It's as simple as that."

It should be, in theory. In practice it is belied by the very personal emotional state of ndividuals...such as the the 'simple push of a button" or "flipping of a swtich" comment tossed out in an otherwise-unprejudicial appearing rational comment.

ALL learning of abstract or unfamiliar skills takes personal committment, dedication. We cannot learn all of those many and varied skills...life is just too short. Telegraphy skills have been learned by many over the last 150 years (approximate) of the representation of English language characters by on-off keying codes. We cannot want to learn a skill where the emotional state of leaders in a skill demand that we do it just because they say we MUST...and then be told we are 'morally wrong' if we don't. <shrug>

AF6AY
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4JDU on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Wow Don what a great statement to make! I guess we have the old ham heads even though we're not that old. My Nov 2007 article in CQ magazine would not have been possible if i had not known CW. The chairman of the Chinese Radio Sports Assn. spoke no english. NONE ! he invited me to the office of CRSA and as i climbed the stairs i said dah di da dit .... da da di dah ! and the barrier was broken! The radio electronics teachers (who did not know code) were flabergasted! I was happy albeit a little slow... maybe 10 words a minute. But on three seperate trips to china i was wisked away like a celebrity sometimes on all expense paid weekend... jusy because i knew a little code. This CW stuff speaks for itself.
congrats on keeping it in front of the people.
jeff
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"We cannot want to learn a skill where the emotional state of leaders in a skill demand that we do it just because they say we MUST...and then be told we are 'morally wrong' if we don't. <shrug>

AF6AY"

Len, WE? Who the heck is "we" (better to speak for yourself). Leaders? Who are these Leaders you speak of?

And who said you MUST learn CW? Obviously no one has to (any more). And being morally wrong if you don't learn CW? Come on! Again, you're seeing CW as a negative aspect of the hobby.

I hate to break it to ya OM but some newly licensed amateurs are learning and using CW, (pssst.... even though they don't have to!). And imagine this... they're even over-coming your so-called "emotional state" in the process! Wow! How can that be?

You might as well face it Len, whether you like it or not, people are still learning and using CW, and it will continue because as the author and others have pointed out, there are advantages to using CW.

Sorry you feel the way you do about CW Len. Unfortunately there's not much anyone can do about your feelings on the subject. <srug right back at ya> ;^)

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by AK7V on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
If you're a naturally curious person who spends a lot of time tuning the bands, it's hard not to learn at least some CW. And if you bother to try and operate it, it's hard not to become competent at it.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR writes:
"2. No, CW operators are not "better" than non-CW ops, they just have the capability to use CW, while non-CW operators don't."

It seems to me that, all else being equal, having a capability/skillset related to Amateur Radio makes one
a "better" radio amateur than someone without that capability/skillset.

Isn't that a fundamental part of what makes someone a better radio amateur?

KF4HR: "3. Some find CW has certain advantages, while others don't."

The advantages exist regardless of whether they are acknowledged or not.

I would say that some find the advantages of Morse Code convince some to learn it, while others don't find those advantages to be adequate reasons to learn it.

KF4HR: "I think the advantages of CW need to be brought to the surface now and then."

I agree 100%! The way to insure the survival and growth of Morse Code in amateur radio is to promote it in every way possible. (See "Ten Ways", listed above).

KF4HR: "unlike most modes that require a push of button or flip of a switch, CW requires a bit more effort."

I would say that Morse Code requires more *skills* than other modes, not more effort (once learned).

Here's proof:

This past weekend I went out on Field Day with a local group. We ran three HF stations and one VHF/UHF station, in suburban Philadelphia.

The three HF stations were similarly equipped: modern solid-state 100-watt-class rigs with ATUs, all-band-dipole antennas (one OCF dipole, two G5RVs), and networked computer logging. All three HF stations could use any HF amateur band used on Field Day. The station with the oldest and lowest-cost HF transceiver (Kenwood TS-450s) was used for Morse Code, the other two (both Icoms, one an IC-746pro) were used for SSB.

There was also a solar-battery-powered QRP rig that was used for a time on Morse Code to get the natural power bonus. The Morse Code station was also responsible for sending the FD message to the SM for bonus points.

There were 4 or 5 Morse Code ops. They were outnumbered at least 5 to 1 by phone ops. Some ops, like me, worked both modes to keep the stations busy.

Yet when FD ended, the single Morse Code HF station had made more FD QSOs than the two HF SSB stations plus the VHF/UHF station *combined*. 509 Morse Code to 440 'phone QSOs.

73 de Jim, N2EY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K9MHZ on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I think this thread is up to several terabytes by now. The moderators probably had to add disk drive space.

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Jim writes: "It seems to me that, all else being equal, having a capability/skillset related to Amateur Radio makes one a "better" radio amateur than someone without that capability/skillset.

Isn't that a fundamental part of what makes someone a better radio amateur?"

Jim you made a lot of good points, and that's a good question. But your phrase 'all else isn't equal' leaves questions in my mind. For things to be equal everyone would have to have the same needs and goals to achieve, but has this thread points out not everyone feels having a CW skillset is that important, regardless of what benefits they might reap. Some don't or won't except the challenge to learn CW. Others just plain don't like the mode. Personally I don't see any issue with this. Even when CW was a licensing requirement (for all license classes); some people enjoyed CW, and others didn't.

But I'm not sure I'd say knowing CW makes one a "better" amateur, and certainly not in the eyes of all amateurs.

Instead of a CW op being "better" perhaps it could be said that knowing CW just allows someone to reap certain advantages within the hobby (and there certainly is), if one should so choose.

I learned CW back in the mid-60's but I don't consider myself any "better" than a non-CW operator, especially based solely on my knowledge of learning and operating CW.

But on the subject of being a 'better' amateur, let's consider another angle for a minute.

Perhaps an analogy to learning CW might be... learning Spanish. Granted the English language is the most common language on the bands, but certainly not the only one. Many countries (DX stations) speak Spanish; also a popular language. It could be argued that a US amateur who speaks English and Spanish has an advantage over an amateur who only speaks English. Why? Because obviously not all Spanish speaking DX stations speak English! So, all things being equal, can we consider amateurs who can speak more than one language "a better ham amateur operator?" And if so, shouldn't all of us English-only speaking amateurs be signing up to learn Spanish to 'better' our amateur skillset?

Perhaps this analogy provides some insight as to how a non-CW op might see learning CW, to become a "better" amateur.

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on July 1, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR tried once again to make this a personal battle on 30 Jun 08 with:

"And who said you MUST learn CW? Obviously no one has to (any more). And being morally wrong if you don't learn CW? Come on! Again, you're seeing CW as a negative aspect of the hobby."

I am just seeing radiotelegraphy as another optional mode for any amateur licensee to use.

I do not regard it as "negative." I do not regard it as positive. It is just THERE, one of many modes allocated to all classes.

KF4HR: "I hate to break it to ya OM but some newly licensed amateurs are learning and using CW, (pssst.... even though they don't have to!)."

It is an individual choice. OPTION. It does not make them 'emotional' nor does it make them unemotional, not in any sense of the exaggerated one you want to say. It is their choice, their option. I applaud and highly regard individuals having options, acting on those options without duress of any kind.

KF4HR: "And imagine this... they're even over-coming your so-called "emotional state" in the process! Wow! How can that be?"

It isn't a "be." You are simply trying to paint another in a bad state because you feel slighted that not everyone shares your viewpoint. One of the grand masters of that technique is N2EY...who has had 10 years of on-line verbose painting of opposite-opinion individuals as morally and ethically deficient, even corrupt. I am emotionally neutral on radiotelegraphy for myself. I am only "emotional" (actually logically and correctly persistent) on the removal of OPTIONS, the enforcement of testing for ONE mode versus the government NEVER testing for any other mode except radiotelegraphy.

KF4HR: "You might as well face it Len, whether you like it or not, people are still learning and using CW, and it will continue because as the author and others have pointed out, there are advantages to using CW."

You might as well face it, whether you like it or not, people are still not bothering with learning or using radiotelegraphy. That will continue because they will act on their own desires and opt to do what they want to so.

Yes, there are SOME advantages to using radiotelegraphy over other allocated modes. You have overlooked that I've already stated those in public.

KF4HR: "Sorry you feel the way you do about CW Len."

I don't think so. You seem to be just pissed-off that someone dares to take a neutral stance and not jump up and down cheering for learning a 150-year-old skill...and especially one who dares to state some opinions which are opposed to yours.

KF4HR: "Unfortunately there's not much anyone can do about your feelings on the subject."

Irrelevant. "My feelings" aren't in-play here nor do they matter on the subject.

Now, ON THE SUBJECT, what can YOU offer OTHERS as true positive methods or inspirations on learning radiotelegraphy? I've seen none from KF4HR...only attempts to cast those who do not favor the mode as in being "emotionally unstable" or other mentally corrupt ways that don't exist in reality.

As I've already said, there exist today, have existed for decades, many different ways and methods to learn radiotelegraphy skills. You have NOT discussed this, preferring instead to concentrate on some kind of personal battle of wills against others who do not agree with you.

Which method of learning do YOU think is best to learn radiotelegraphy? What have you to offer for others who MAY want to learn? Which method for learning radiotelegraphy do YOU recommend? What reasons do you give for those methods...OTHER than those being the one(s) that YOU used? Remember that all individuals are just that, individual, and possess different aptitudes, different personal desires.

Outside of Don Keith and a few others in the beginning, I've seen very little actual POSITIVE recommendations toward learning radiotelegraphy other than: They Did It, It Was Always The Thing To Do, and assorted pep-rally style cheering for radiotelegraphy over every other mode...as if it were some team-sport battle for supremacy over other modes.

That's not much of an inducement to learn, just a repetiton of printed and spoken necessities that has been tossed at all beginners for 94 years (of federal definition of amateur radio since 1912).

Nothing is going to be solved by just engaging in very personal battles of wills on one "side" against the "other side"...as you have repeatedly done. Nothing is going to be solved by saying that all those who are not now encouraged enough to learn radiotelegraphy skills are "lesser" humans in any regard. Nothing is going to be solved, certainly NOT as an inducement to newcomers that an old-timer is "superior" BECAUSE of radiotelegraphy skill.

All USA radio amateurs have OPTIONS on what they can do and on what they want to do. Acting on personal options does not make them "superior" or "lesser." Option is not a failure.

AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 2, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY writes (speaking about Morse Code):

"I do not regard it as "negative." I do not regard it as positive."

Your words about Morse Code, and those who use it and promote it, tell a very different story, Len. A very negative story.

AF6AY: "It is their choice, their option. I applaud and highly regard individuals having options, acting on those options without duress of any kind."

Yet back in 1998, in Reply Comments, you asked FCC to institute a minimum age requirement of 14 years for any class of amateur radio license. You later defended that request in online forums. Such a requirement would have removed the option of people under 14 getting amateur radio licenses.

AF6AY: "You are simply trying to paint another in a bad state because you feel slighted that not everyone shares your viewpoint. One of the grand masters of that technique is N2EY...who has had 10 years of on-line verbose painting of opposite-opinion individuals as morally and ethically deficient, even corrupt."

How have I done that, Len? Give us an example.

All I've done, on and off since 1997 in various forums, is to point out logical and factual mistakes in some things you and others have written. I've also provided links to things written in the past as verification.

Why is any of that wrong?

For example, suppose someone were to say that they were in favor of change, that others have to embrace change, move forward, let go of the past, accept the future, etc. And suppose that person described those who resist change in very negative terms.

But then, when that person was faced with "accepting change" (say, in the form of a minor change to the zoning code), suppose the person did everything they could to oppose the change.

Would it be wrong to point out the contradiction between what the person said others should do, and what they did in a similar situation?

AF6AY: "I am emotionally neutral on radiotelegraphy for myself."

Your behavior and writing about it since before 1997 says otherwise.

AF6AY: "I am only "emotional" (actually logically and correctly persistent) on the removal of OPTIONS, the enforcement of testing for ONE mode versus the government NEVER testing for any other mode except radiotelegraphy."

Well you are persistent!

But all testing for Morse Code in US amateur radio is gone, removed, kaput, and it's not coming back. So why are you posting in this thread?

AF6AY: "Yes, there are SOME advantages to using radiotelegraphy over other allocated modes."

I agree! And that's what this thread is about.

AF6AY: "You seem to be just pissed-off that someone dares to take a neutral stance and not jump up and down cheering for learning a 150-year-old skill...and especially one who dares to state some opinions which are opposed to yours."

Reading your words, Len, it appears that you are the angriest one here. Your frequent SHOUTING, calling others names, posting inaccurate histories that minimize the role played by Morse Code in radio communications (such as its role in two World Wars, Korea, and other conflicts) all prove that.

AF6AY: "Now, ON THE SUBJECT, what can YOU offer OTHERS as true positive methods or inspirations on learning radiotelegraphy?"

See my list of "Ten Ways" earlier in this thread. Or my story on Field Day 2008.

AF6AY: "Which method of learning do YOU think is best to learn radiotelegraphy?"

The Farnsworth/Koch method, for the basics, combined with learning to send on a straight key (the skills reinforce each other). Once the basics are learned, on-the-air and computer-based learning will improve the skills.

30 to 60 minutes per day, every day. Some folks do better by dividing the time into multiple sessions.

AF6AY: "What have you to offer for others who MAY want to learn?"

Lots of encouragement, suggestions, links to resources, on-the-air practice, etc.

AF6AY: "Which method for learning radiotelegraphy do YOU recommend? What reasons do you give for those methods...OTHER than those being the one(s) that YOU used?"

The success rate of the methods, plus their applicability to how most humans learn.

AF6AY: "Outside of Don Keith and a few others in the beginning, I've seen very little actual POSITIVE recommendations toward learning radiotelegraphy other than: They Did It, It Was Always The Thing To Do, and assorted pep-rally style cheering for radiotelegraphy over every other mode...as if it were some team-sport battle for supremacy over other modes."

There you go, minimizing and being negative.

AF6AY: "Nothing is going to be solved by just engaging in very personal battles of wills on one "side" against the "other side"...as you have repeatedly done."

Sounds more like what *you* have done for more than a decade, Len.

AF6AY: "Nothing is going to be solved by saying that all those who are not now encouraged enough to learn radiotelegraphy skills are "lesser" humans in any regard. Nothing is going to be solved, certainly NOT as an inducement to newcomers that an old-timer is "superior" BECAUSE of radiotelegraphy skill."

All else being equal, though, a radio amateur with a useful skill set is a better radio amateur than one without that skill set. Whether the skill set is Morse Code, soldering, putting up antennas, or any of many other things widely used in amateur radio.

Is it wrong to encourage others to increase their amateur radio skill sets?

 
The Hero  
by N2EY on July 2, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
http://www.prismnet.com/~nielw/hero/hero.htm

73 de Jim, N2EY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 2, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY says: "Which method of learning do YOU think is best to learn radiotelegraphy? What have you to offer for others who MAY want to learn? Which method for learning radiotelegraphy do YOU recommend? What reasons do you give for those methods...OTHER than those being the one(s) that YOU used? Remember that all individuals are just that, individual, and possess different aptitudes, different personal desires."

Len, all good questions. Although based on your past postings, I'm not sure if you're asking these questions because you really want to know, or you're asking because you're once again being defensive.

Truth is, learning CW is not rocket science, although as I've already stated, it does require effort. Single aged kids have learned it, middle aged people have learned it, and older people have learned it, and from all walks of life. And as some of the postings noted, some people learned it even with handicaps - so it can be done; yes, even by you (if you so choose). But it seems you'd rather spend your time complaining about why you should learn it, rather than just doing it. Your choice.

Keep in mind "how to learn CW" was not the subject of this thread. But if you are seriously interested in knowing how people learned CW, why not create a new thread on eham.com and find out!?

Learn CW or don't Len, personally, I really don't care. But for those that who enjoy CW, there's no need to pee on their parade. Can't you just go work your SSB and FM and allow the CW ops to do their thing? Or is that too much to ask?

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 2, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N2EY wrote: "It seems to me that, all else being equal, having a capability/skillset related to Amateur Radio makes one a "better" radio amateur than someone without that capability/skillset.

Isn't that a fundamental part of what makes someone a better radio amateur?"

KF4HR replies: "Jim you made a lot of good points, and that's a good question. But your phrase 'all else isn't equal' leaves questions in my mind."

Well, actually, the phrase I used was "all else being equal".

KF4HR: "For things to be equal everyone would have to have the same needs and goals to achieve, but has this thread points out not everyone feels having a CW skillset is that important, regardless of what benefits they might reap. Some don't or won't except the challenge to learn CW. Others just plain don't like the mode. Personally I don't see any issue with this. Even when CW was a licensing requirement (for all license classes); some people enjoyed CW, and others didn't."

All I'm saying is that learning things that are useful in Amateur Radio makes one a better radio amateur. That's not limited to Morse Code! For example, learning and using the standard phonetics makes one a better 'phone operator, compared to someone who doesn't know/use the standard phonetics.

KF4HR: "But I'm not sure I'd say knowing CW makes one a "better" amateur, and certainly not in the eyes of all amateurs."

I say it does - as do many other things. Perhaps "more accomplished" or "more skilled" are terms you'd prefer to "better".

KF4HR: "Instead of a CW op being "better" perhaps it could be said that knowing CW just allows someone to reap certain advantages within the hobby (and there certainly is), if one should so choose."

I think we should not fall into the trap of political correctness where everything must be equal lest someone feel bad.

KF4HR: "I learned CW back in the mid-60's but I don't consider myself any "better" than a non-CW operator, especially based solely on my knowledge of learning and operating CW."

I learned Morse Code back then too, and have used it ever since. I consider myself a better radio amateur than I would have been if I hadn't learned it, or used it.

Perhaps that's the key: Comparisons with oneself, rather than others.

KF4HR: "Perhaps an analogy to learning CW might be... learning Spanish....It could be argued that a US amateur who speaks English and Spanish has an advantage over an amateur who only speaks English."

I'd say it's true.

KF4HR: "So, all things being equal, can we consider amateurs who can speak more than one language "a better ham amateur operator?"

Yes - all else being equal. But that's not just true of Spanish; it's true of many things.

KF4HR: "And if so, shouldn't all of us English-only speaking amateurs be signing up to learn Spanish to 'better' our amateur skillset?"

If we are so inclined, why not?

Of course learning Spanish is much more involved than learning Morse Code. And its application *to amateur radio* is much more limited than Morse Code.

KF4HR: "Perhaps this analogy provides some insight as to how a non-CW op might see learning CW, to become a "better" amateur."

The point I'm trying to make is that learning of many kinds - including Morse Code - can in fact make one a better/more accomplished/more skilled radio amateur.

This past Field Day I taught some other amateurs how to use a slingshot launcher to put wire antennas up in trees. They now have a useful radio skill and knowledge they didn't have before. Doesn't that make them "better" radio amateurs than they were?

73 de Jim, N2EY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 2, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N2EY: "If we are so inclined, why not?"

Agreed. And that's the key to CW and non-CW types alike.

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on July 2, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR continued trying to make this a personal battle on 2 Jul 08:

"AF6AY says: "Which method of learning do YOU think is best to learn radiotelegraphy? What have you to offer for others who MAY want to learn? Which method for learning radiotelegraphy do YOU recommend? What reasons do you give for those methods...OTHER than those being the one(s) that YOU used? Remember that all individuals are just that, individual, and possess different aptitudes, different personal desires.""

"Len, all good questions. Although based on your past postings, I'm not sure if you're asking these questions because you really want to know, or you're asking because you're once again being defensive."

NEITHER. A neutral position is simply neutral...in regards to PERSONAL, individual choice.

"Truth is, learning CW is not rocket science, although as I've already stated, it does require effort."

I have stated more than once that a psycho-motor skill requires constant practice. Recently I drew an analogy to 'touch typing' (using a keyboard without looking at the key markings). In middle school (we called it junior high school back in the 1940s) a two-semester course would take all students from zero to 60 WPM copying English text...including some number lists. ALL of the manual typewriters were WITHOUT key markings. We had NO choice but to get all our synapses connected in associating characters and words through our fingertips.

Since all of us in 9th grade were reasonably proficient in English to have gotten that far, we could read English text (even if some did not fully comprehend it). The classes were constant drills of copying and of ways to learn how to improve that skill. It was an elective class but I do not recall any who were drop-outs.

A CLASS environment subtly imposes some competitiveness to all, aiding motivation. Everyone wants to complete the course and some want to achieve the highest grades, so it is a motivation to apply oneself. We simply DID it. I looked at it as a useful skill for the rest of my life, regardless of what work I would eventually do for a living. By the way, I've worked WITH real rocket scientists at Rocketdyne in Canoga Park, CA, for three years.

In the US Army of the early 1950s, a Field Radio MOS required morse code skill of 20 WPM and that was taught at Camp Gordon, GA, one of two locations for Signal Corps training then. A classroom environment was used there and the classes were longer and MORE VIGOROUS (and rather dictatorial) than in any civilian high school. Not everyone succeeded in such an environment and some frustrated service people, unable to keep up, simply walked out or stopped. That was understood by the Army and such were simply re-assigned to other signal schools or sent to other MOS training locations.

I did not attend those Field Radio MOS schools, being assigned to Radio Relay school at Fort Monmouth, NJ. I did make acquaintences with several others later (including two commissioned officers, one of whom was an instructor at Gordon) who described the training and procedures used. The only other radiotelegraphy skill classes were Military Intelligence MOS, primarily for listening-only 'intercept' analysis, not a Signal Corps communications function. Intercept analysis is now taught at Fort Huachuca, AZ, and only three MOS classes include radiotelegraphy cognition. As of about 1998 the method of teaching was switched over to computer programs, those capable of sending (and recording what was sent for scoring) random groups typical of the old style of cryptography of text.

Does the computer-to-student on an individual student basis prove better or worse than class environment learning? I don't know. The parallel to that pseudo-random group character generation military method was probably the AH0A computer program available free from www.ah0A.com. Joe Speroni's program may not be the first one as many different programs are still available, some purchaseable. Ads and links to downloadable telegraphy self-teaching programs are now plentiful.
............

KF4HR: "But it seems you'd rather spend your time complaining about why you should learn it, rather than just doing it."

That is your subjective opinion and is simply false on the basis of publicly-available text as stored at federal government website servers.

All along, since 1998, I've continued to state that I, personally, have no enmity towards the idividual USE of OOK CW radiotelegraphy. I was only against the TEST for same as required by law. As so many others have done, I voiced that complaint directly to my USA government agency, the FCC, in regards to NPRM docket 98-143 through the 18 Petitions that proceeded NPRM docket 05-235 (for ending telegraphy testing). Against the TEST, NOT the USE.
...........

KF4HR: "Keep in mind "how to learn CW" was not the subject of this thread."

Really? :-)

If I had difficulty in interpreting the START of this article, I would write Don Keith directly. I have no such need since Don writes very well indeed.

I take it YOUR interpretation of this (newer) THREAD is all about individual bragging about how (OOK) CW is, so superior, so everlasting, that those who do not do it are all lower than river bottom scum? :-)

Or is it possible that a number of you just want to ATTACK someone who does not share your own visions of what is good, proper, divine and allmighty? A verbal gang-bang? :-)
...........

KF4HR: "But for those that who enjoy CW, there's no need to pee on their parade."

Tsk, tsk, I'm not. If you take such a terrible offense then YOUR approach is way too sensitive and I daresay you would have great difficulty in objective debate with others.

I've already stated in public - not just here - that OOK CW radiotelegraphy DOES have some positive attributes for amateur radio of today. Neither have I stated that it is 'faultless' nor 'must be done to be "real"' as some OOK CW radiotelegraphy advocates have implied or claimed. That may be the key to "what this thread has become:" a one-sided non-debate of YOUR side against all non-believers.

Those of us who look at OOK CW radiotelegraphy on a purely objective basis must, according to you, be dismissed, be shunned, be locked-out, be freely-insulted, because YOU and YOUR Kind do not personally like what we say as truth. That is why you make a following statement: "Can't you just go work your SSB and FM and allow the CW ops to do their thing?"

Oh, my, and just WHERE am I "not allowing the CW ops" to "do their thing?"

That only exists in your mind, a perception or a phantasm of "insult." Is that because I do not agree with you? Is that because I am personally unaffected by Brag Bag claims of "CW ops'" innate "superiority?" Could be. Or it could be that YOU are just personally pissed off because I don't agree with what YOU like?

If you think I am NOT "allowing CW ops to do their thing" ON THE AIR, you are wrong. If you wish to complain to the FCC Enforcement Division about my on-air activities, you only need contact the FCC. [good luck on proving that] If you want to complain about my posting on e-ham and wish to have me locked out, that is also possible. Good luck on your quest, Don Quixote. (all the best to Rosenanda)

"Or is that too much to ask?"

...of yourself, also. :-)

AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 2, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR tried once again to make this a personal battle on 30 Jun 08 with:

"And who said you MUST learn CW? Obviously no one has to (any more). And being morally wrong if you don't learn CW? Come on! Again, you're seeing CW as a negative aspect of the hobby."

No personal battle Len, but I do think you're digging yourself in deeper and deeper, and making less in the process.

Len, you made a previous statement. Answer it if you can. Who said you must learn CW?

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WA2JJH on July 3, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
<<<<AF6AY: "Morse code skill cannot make a better human being." >>>>

Perhaps not. However in your case, the old "CW test RIFF-RAFF FILTER" would have stopped you from getting a ticket! :)

I have been using EHAM over about 6 years.

You win the prize for insults, bad will, and just being a pain in the butt in general.

Eham used to toss people, years back. However, the persona non grata ham would just come back as an ANON.

In fact you soumd like an ANON that blasted CW. That ANON vanished about the same time you started picking E-fights with people.

There are a number of "rocket scientists" on EHAM. Many cannot brag about it because it is current technology.

Did they let you wind the spring on the Pershing in silo? Were you Jack Northrops drinking buddy? NOBODY CARES!


However Lenny, it has been interesting analysing your change in behavior and tactics. You improved. You no longer say....saluting you with the finger and up yours. You do know RF, nobody said you did not.

You came close to breaking federal law when you claimed to be able to get info on anybody here. You did go against peoples wishes by typing their ULS #'s.

Many of us here can do that. Lexus-Nexus is not bad. There are tons of E-P.I.'s that can dig up your personel intel too.
It is all about intent. The fact that you did it with harmless material is no big deal. However, it shpws poor judgement and a lack of respect for anybody.

I can see why OCS would have shugged you off. I guess NCO's that behave like you are exempt from being gentlemen.

BTW, my friend who is in theater now is a "gunny" SGT. I can see why he has so many AF-NCO jokes!



Be very interesting to work you on 20M phone.(I know you are CW impaired)
Did you get your ticket so you can brag that you have total operating rights on HF world wide?

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by WA2JJH on July 3, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Lenbo, I think they gave you over 400 micrograms, when you were involved with the MK-ULTRA program. :)
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on July 3, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR posted on 2 Jul 08:

"No personal battle Len, but I do think you're digging yourself in deeper and deeper, and making less in the process."

"Digging?" No, I did that in April for the base of my vertical...and its radials. It was only as "deep" as it needed to be. My contractor laid the 2-inch RMC that protects the cabling; that required him digging. My contractor also poured the cement for the base. Any more questions?
...........

KF4HR: "Len, you made a previous statement. Answer it if you can."

I can answer QUESTIONS. I MAKE statements. Try to understand the difference.

I sense you are a clone of N2EY, that absolute Master of Misdirection, always trying to change the subject under discussion into another area that only has a bearing on personalities you do not like. That's an excellent technique for avoiding a discussion ON a subject (especially when the avoider can't come up with a valid reply). It works on the unwary. I'm not a beginner in computer-modem communications. :-)

That isn't "discussion." It is just the usual invitation to attend an endless summer of Flame Fest. Not for me.

73, Len...KMA
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 4, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR wrote: "No personal battle Len, but I do think you're digging yourself in deeper and deeper, and making less in the process."

AF6AY: ""Digging?" No, I did that in April for the base of my vertical...and its radials. It was only as "deep" as it needed to be. My contractor laid the 2-inch RMC that protects the cabling; that required him digging. My contractor also poured the cement for the base."

So installing a simple vertical HF antenna has taken you over a year.....

AF6AY: "Any more questions?"

Yes. Who said you must learn Morse Code?

KF4HR: "Len, you made a previous statement. Answer it if you can."

AF6AY: "I can answer QUESTIONS. I MAKE statements. Try to understand the difference."

In my experience, you do not answer most questions. KF4HR asked you a question, and you are now ducking him.

Here's the question again: Who said you must learn Morse Code?

You do make a lot of statements, though. Sometimes (not always!) those statements are in error, and you get very upset when someone points out the errors.

AF6AY: "I sense you are a clone of N2EY, that absolute Master of Misdirection, always trying to change the subject under discussion into another area that only has a bearing on personalities you do not like."

You're projecting what *you* do onto others, Len. What you describe is not what I do.

What I do is to ask questions and point out errors of fact and logic. And I ask questions to clarify the situation.

You have called such questions "loaded", but in fact they are not, because you are not limited to a yes or no answer. You misdirect away from such questions, but that very misdirection is an answer in itself.

KF4HR asked you a question. You're avoiding answering him. That reveals a lot. Probably no one ever told you that you must learn Morse Code. The plain and simple fact is that you simply don't like Morse Code. And that's OK, nobody says you must like it.

I suspect that your dislike of Morse Code, and one other factor, prevented you from getting an amateur radio license for almost 60 years.

The "other factor" is that you imagine yourself to be better than most others at many things. (This attitude comes through loud and clear in your postings to me and many others.) If you were going to be a radio amateur, you wouldn't start as a "Novice", because you considered yourself an Expert from day one, and that "novice" name itself was an insult to you.

But you didn't have an easy time learning Morse Code. It's a skill, not book learning, and you thought it beneath your effort, abilities and expertise to learn. After all, you were a Radio Professional, wasn't that enough? How dare those "Amateur" licenses require something you didn't already know? Your 1958 citizens band license didn't require a test at all, who did these amateurs think they were?

Your animosity towards ARRL probably stems from the "incentive licensing" changes of the 1960s. Those changes meant that full privileges required an Extra license, not a General or Advanced. With its 20 wpm code test, that put full amateur privileges even farther away from you. And in those days an Extra, unlike General, could not be earned in a single test session; there was a two-years experience requirement.

Even when code waivers appeared in 1990 and the Tech lost its code test in 1991, you didn't get a license. I think that's because you wanted only the very top license, and didn't want to admit you had difficulty learning anything.

In January 2000, in a public forum, you said you were 'going for Extra out of the box.' Since the changes of April 2000 reduced the test speed to 5 wpm, I and many others thought you'd have an Extra in a matter of weeks. But it took over seven years from that statement of yours, and another rules change that completely dropped all Morse Code testing.

You've written recently that you tried to learn Morse Code in 2002. Obviously, you didn't succeed in learning 5 wpm. Why didn't you ask those of us with experience for help?

Now you've got your license, and some equipment. What will you do with them? You've expressed disdain for contesting, DXing, and denied that amateurs play any real role in emergency or public service communications. Your equipment is all store-bought, not kit or homebrew. The world wonders....

AF6AY: "That's an excellent technique for avoiding a discussion ON a subject (especially when the avoider can't come up with a valid reply)."

Well, you should know, Len. It's what *you* do.

It seems to me that you want to be the judge and jury of what constitutes a "valid reply". Others must follow your rules of behavior, but *you* don't. That's clear from many of your postings, here and elsewhere.

You can have a real discussion on these forums, Len, even with me. But that requires things like admitting your mistakes and addressing others as equals.

AF6AY: "It works on the unwary. I'm not a beginner in computer-modem communications. :-)"

But you are a beginner in amateur radio, Len. A year and a half just to install a simple HF vertical?

AF6AY: "That isn't "discussion." It is just the usual invitation to attend an endless summer of Flame Fest."

Discussion does not mean everyone is going to agree with you, Len. Nor does it mean everyone is going to accept your statements at face value.

It also means that relevant outside information, such as things you have written elsewhere, can be brought into the discussion even though you want them kept out.

Discussion means accepting all of those things, and that others are not going to shut up just because you tell them to.

AF6AY: "Not for me 73, Len...KMA"

Does that mean you're leaving eham.net, Len?

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 4, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR wrote: "No personal battle Len, but I do think you're digging yourself in deeper and deeper, and making less in the process."

AF6AY: ""Digging?" No, I did that in April for the base of my vertical...and its radials. It was only as "deep" as it needed to be. My contractor laid the 2-inch RMC that protects the cabling; that required him digging. My contractor also poured the cement for the base."

So installing a simple vertical HF antenna has taken you over a year.....

AF6AY: "Any more questions?"

Yes. Who said you must learn Morse Code?

KF4HR: "Len, you made a previous statement. Answer it if you can."

AF6AY: "I can answer QUESTIONS. I MAKE statements. Try to understand the difference."

In my experience, you do not answer most questions. KF4HR asked you a question, and you are now ducking him.

Here's the question again: Who said you must learn Morse Code?

You do make a lot of statements, though. Sometimes (not always!) those statements are in error, and you get very upset when someone points out the errors.

AF6AY: "I sense you are a clone of N2EY, that absolute Master of Misdirection, always trying to change the subject under discussion into another area that only has a bearing on personalities you do not like."

You're projecting what *you* do onto others, Len. What you describe is not what I do.

What I do is to ask questions and point out errors of fact and logic. And I ask questions to clarify the situation.

You have called such questions "loaded", but in fact they are not, because you are not limited to a yes or no answer. You misdirect away from such questions, but that very misdirection is an answer in itself.

KF4HR asked you a question. You're avoiding answering him. That reveals a lot. Probably no one ever told you that you must learn Morse Code. The plain and simple fact is that you simply don't like Morse Code. And that's OK, nobody says you must like it.

I suspect that your dislike of Morse Code, and one other factor, prevented you from getting an amateur radio license for almost 60 years.

The "other factor" is that you imagine yourself to be better than most others at many things. (This attitude comes through loud and clear in your postings to me and many others.) If you were going to be a radio amateur, you wouldn't start as a "Novice", because you considered yourself an Expert from day one, and that "novice" name itself was an insult to you.

But you didn't have an easy time learning Morse Code. It's a skill, not book learning, and you thought it beneath your effort, abilities and expertise to learn. After all, you were a Radio Professional, wasn't that enough? How dare those "Amateur" licenses require something you didn't already know? Your 1958 citizens band license didn't require a test at all, who did these amateurs think they were?

Your animosity towards ARRL probably stems from the "incentive licensing" changes of the 1960s. Those changes meant that full privileges required an Extra license, not a General or Advanced. With its 20 wpm code test, that put full amateur privileges even farther away from you. And in those days an Extra, unlike General, could not be earned in a single test session; there was a two-years experience requirement.

Even when code waivers appeared in 1990 and the Tech lost its code test in 1991, you didn't get a license. I think that's because you wanted only the very top license, and didn't want to admit you had difficulty learning anything.

In January 2000, in a public forum, you said you were 'going for Extra out of the box.' Since the changes of April 2000 reduced the test speed to 5 wpm, I and many others thought you'd have an Extra in a matter of weeks. But it took over seven years from that statement of yours, and another rules change that completely dropped all Morse Code testing.

You've written recently that you tried to learn Morse Code in 2002. Obviously, you didn't succeed in learning 5 wpm. Why didn't you ask those of us with experience for help?

Now you've got your license, and some equipment. What will you do with them? You've expressed disdain for contesting, DXing, and denied that amateurs play any real role in emergency or public service communications. Your equipment is all store-bought, not kit or homebrew. The world wonders....

AF6AY: "That's an excellent technique for avoiding a discussion ON a subject (especially when the avoider can't come up with a valid reply)."

Well, you should know, Len. It's what *you* do.

It seems to me that you want to be the judge and jury of what constitutes a "valid reply". Others must follow your rules of behavior, but *you* don't. That's clear from many of your postings, here and elsewhere.

You can have a real discussion on these forums, Len, even with me. But that requires things like admitting your mistakes and addressing others as equals.

AF6AY: "It works on the unwary. I'm not a beginner in computer-modem communications. :-)"

But you are a beginner in amateur radio, Len. A year and a half just to install a simple HF vertical?

AF6AY: "That isn't "discussion." It is just the usual invitation to attend an endless summer of Flame Fest."

Discussion does not mean everyone is going to agree with you, Len. Nor does it mean everyone is going to accept your statements at face value.

It also means that relevant outside information, such as things you have written elsewhere, can be brought into the discussion even though you want them kept out.

Discussion means accepting all of those things, and that others are not going to shut up just because you tell them to.

AF6AY: "Not for me 73, Len...KMA"

Does that mean you're leaving eham.net, Len?

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N6HPX on July 4, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
The guy had alot of good points on this and even if your not interested in others are and the info from this is benefitial for those who made the effort to do it. So enjoy whatever mode you prefer and let us enjoy ours.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on July 4, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N2EY, self-styled Torquemada of the Internet, once again did his Inquisition Thing on the 4th of July TWICE with:

"AF6AY: ""Digging?" No, I did that in April for the base of my vertical...and its radials. It was only as "deep" as it needed to be. My contractor laid the 2-inch RMC that protects the cabling; that required him digging. My contractor also poured the cement for the base.""

"So installing a simple vertical HF antenna has taken you over a year....."

No. I ordered it in early May, 2008. Fluidmotion/Steppir was backlogged and said it could be delivered in late June. It was.

You are welcome to try to subpeona Fluidmotion/Steppir for court information in regards to that, Sir Sheriff of Nothingham.
.........

"... Who said you must learn Morse Code?"

YOU have. Repeatedly over the last decade.
.........

"KF4HR asked you a question, and you are now ducking him."

You speak for all? Oh, my...

Go back a few posts in this article thread. I was trying to steer the subject AWAY from personality conflicts and back into learning morse code. Er, learning morse code was the big kick-off first article along with its advantages (according to Don Keith).

Just who was "ducking" who there? Wasn't me.
.........

"Here's the question again: Who said you must learn Morse Code?"

YOU have, Sir Sheriff of Nothingham. Repeatedly, for a decade. :-)
.........

"You're projecting what *you* do onto others, Len. What you describe is not what I do."

Tsk, tsk, you are holding your mirror the wrong way and looking at yourself.

What are you doing in both of these identical postings? Rhetorical question...you are just trying to vent your angst against anyone who has a different opinion of things than you do, what you like, what you feel everyone should do (to be as good and proper and true as you are?).

I think it would be very nice of others could come up with more ways to MOTIVATE and LEARN morse code for the benefit of others, not continue to battle pro-code versus no-code. Not for me, for others among the 650+ thousands who are active-period licensed USA radio amateurs. I AM one of those licensed USA radio amateurs, Sir Sheriff.
.........

"What I do is to ask questions and point out errors of fact and logic. And I ask questions to clarify the situation."

BS, Jimmy. It is very, very apparent what you are doing now, what you have been doing for a decade. :-)

Hmmmm...let's see...is a personal opinion subject to "fact and logic?" Now, I don't personally care for morse code use for myself right now. Is that "wrong?" Yes, according to the personal definitions of YOUR "fact and logic." But, Sir Sheriff of Nothingham, YOU are always putting yourself up as the Ultimate Judge of Opinion and any deviation from YOUR opinion is a "departure from fact and logic." What does that tell everyone else?

Sir Jimmy, you made a (wrong) statement about "taking a year and a half to put up a simple vertical antenna." I answered that truthfully. Call Fluidmotion/SteppIR yourself to verify it. BUT...this article is NOT about "antenna installations," is it? Not even about "digging." It is about the advantages of learning morse code as seen by several other radio amateurs. I still think it would be nice if everyone got BACK to the original subject thread. I just don't expect that to happen and this thread will - as all seem to do - just piddle down to the usual personal conflict snarling and Flame Fests.
.........

"KF4HR asked you a question. You're avoiding answering him. That reveals a lot."

Why not let Ralph speak for himself? I've asked him questions and got no replies. You haven't chastized him, only me. Doesn't that show something to all others? Here I was trying to steer the subject back to the original article thread and YOU have to horn in with your Sister Act again (put away the Spanking Ruler, Sister Nun of the Above, it is ineffective).
.........

"Probably no one ever told you that you must learn Morse Code."

Hola? Hundreds have told me I MUST. :-) Even the FCC...in order to get an amateur radio license in the past. :-) No problem to me, I just went Professional years ago and didn't bother getting an amateur radio license for a long time. :-)

"The plain and simple fact is that you simply don't like Morse Code."

Why do you insist on stating the OBVIOUS? I've stated that in public for about a half century. :-) MORE CORRECT, I just don't care for it. It isn't a black-white situation of either "love" or "hate."

"And that's OK, nobody says you must like it."

WRONG!!! But, nobody can tell the Sheriff of Nothingham he never said it because he will deny it. :-)
.........

"I suspect that your dislike of Morse Code, and one other factor, prevented you from getting an amateur radio license for almost 60 years."

Sir Sheriff, I was never "prevented" from doing that. :-) I just didn't bother to do so when I was 15...nor at age 58 in 1991. I decided to get an amateur radio license at age 74. [that's a "plain and simple fact" :-) ]
.........

"The "other factor" is that you imagine yourself to be better than most others at many things."

I *AM* better than most others in SOME things, Sir Sheriff. :-)

Lots of OTHERS are better than most in those same things...and in other things.

Oh, oh, a lot of resentment starts to show up in your choice of words and phrasing...
.........

"If you were going to be a radio amateur, you wouldn't start as a "Novice", because you considered yourself an Expert from day one, and that "novice" name itself was an insult to you."

It did?!? Tsk, tsk, you KNOW these things? You are also a licensed expert in radiotelepathy? Amazing!

"But you didn't have an easy time learning Morse Code. It's a skill, not book learning, and you thought it beneath your effort, abilities and expertise to learn. After all, you were a Radio Professional, wasn't that enough? How dare those "Amateur" licenses require something you didn't already know? Your 1958 citizens band license didn't require a test at all, who did these amateurs think they were?"

WOW! Resentment in your tone is shining like a beacon! You must be running a couple hundred watts PRP (Peak Resentment Power) there!

On leaving active duty with the US Army I went to a Chicago FCC Field Office and passed my First Class Radiotelephone (Commercial) license so that I could continue in civilian radio...IF (and only IF) I chose to do so. That was in early 1956. I'd had three full years of rather intense military-professional radio communications experience (beginning ON HF) then. Was I a "novice" in radio then? No. Did the FCC accept anyone "getting Extra out of the box" then? They might have, don't remember, because I was interested on getting on with the rest of my life. An amateur radio license did not interest me then.

Why should I have gone FIRST into amateur radio as a Novice class? You have NEVER explained that reasoning every time you brought it up (as some kind of "moral virtue").

Oh, and I never had an "1958 citizens band license." I got one in 1959...to put a transceiver in my restored 1953 Austin-Healey sports car. :-)

Strange, but I've worked with and for several licensed radio amateurs since 1957 and none of them ever gave me the flak you've given me about "getting a Novice class amateur license FIRST." None of them ever pressed the point. But, I was working directly IN radio-electronics at work, that terrible professional radio thing that you seem to despise so much.
...........

"Your animosity towards ARRL probably stems from the "incentive licensing" changes of the 1960s. Those changes meant that full privileges required an Extra license, not a General or Advanced. With its 20 wpm code test, that put full amateur privileges even farther away from you. And in those days an Extra, unlike General, could not be earned in a single test session; there was a two-years experience requirement."

No, sweetums, your amateur "Dr. Phil" act is worse than your posing as Sister Nun of the Above. :-)

IN the 1960s, much like IN the 1950s, I just had NO interest in getting an amateur radio license of my very own. Period. Surprise, surprise, Gomer. :-)

"Animosity" to a minority membership organization that doesn't represent ALL USA amateur radio as they imply? Yeah, you may have something there, but NOT for the reasons that you imagine. :-)
...........

"Even when code waivers appeared in 1990 and the Tech lost its code test in 1991, you didn't get a license. I think that's because you wanted only the very top license, and didn't want to admit you had difficulty learning anything."

WOW! Talk about trying to paint me Morally and Ethically CORRUPT! :-)

In 1990 the use of morse code in every other radio service in the world (except amateur) was continuing to decline. The Maritime Community was developing their final GMDSS for SOLAS (Safety Of Life At Sea) and thus giving up the morse code 500 KHz International Distress Frequency. That was done and now any bridge officer that knows how to operate a simple GMDSS transmitter can send a distress call without needing any 'sparky' to send it in morse code over an old OOK CW transmitter.
..........

"In January 2000, in a public forum, you said you were 'going for Extra out of the box.'"

Did I swear an oath to do that, in front of officials, one hand on the Bible? Wow, you keep bringing that up so much, you ought to get a writer for National Enquirer to do a feature article on that! :-)
..........

"Obviously, you didn't succeed in learning 5 wpm."

"Obiously" you are full of snit. I got up to 8 WPM many years before 2002, sweetums, and I've written that AND the reasons why I stopped going higher in cognition rate. It was a PERSONAL CHOICE. I didn't see any personal value in continuing that endeavor.

Hello? Can you say PERSONAL CHOICE and not make some moral-ethical crack about it? I don't think you can. You've had that not-doing-as-you-command-therefore-one-is-morally-corrupt attitude for a decade.
..........

"Now you've got your license, and some equipment. What will you do with them?"

What am I 'SUPPOSED' to do with it, Sir Sheriff of Nothingham? Follow your 'leadership,' oh mighty code warrior of 40m?

I will use my amateur radio license and my radio equipment AS I CHOOSE TO DO and within the laws of the land. It is my PERSONAL CHOICE. It is my accomplishment and you don't have one single moral-ethical judgement authorization over what I do.

"Your equipment is all store-bought, not kit or homebrew."

Sunnuvagun! More resentment on your part? Would you like a copy of my AES on-line order where I paid for all of it via a single credit card purchase? :-)

Would you actually be willing to look at an e-mail attachment that shows it? Or would you just disregard it like you have in my previous private e-mailings to you?

No matter...YOU will ALWAYS FIND FAULT with anything I do or say...as you have for a decade. :-)
.........

"Discussion does not mean everyone is going to agree with you, Len."

After 24 years of computer-modem communications I am quite aware of that. :-) Try to apply that to your own written communications. TRY. So far, you are always resentful of anyone with an opposite opinion.

"Nor does it mean everyone is going to accept your statements at face value."

Sweetums, NOTHING I've ever written in public is EVER taken at face value by yourself, not even when I present prima facie evidence to support it. :-)
.........

"Does that mean you're leaving eham.net, Len?"

Don't get your hopes up Sir Sheriff of Nothingham. :-) It's time to celebrate the Independence of the United States of America and I will leave my computer to go watch the celebratory fireworks with my wife tonight...driving there a short distance in an agency-bought car all ready-made (not homebrew or from a kit), paid for all at once on purchase. :-)

AF6AY (extra "out of the box" whether you approve or not)
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 5, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N2EY wote: "So installing a simple vertical HF antenna has taken you over a year....."

AF6AY: "No. I ordered it in early May, 2008. Fluidmotion/Steppir was backlogged and said it could be delivered in late June. It was."

So deciding which HF antenna to buy, and installing it, has taken you almost a year and a half. OK, Len.

N2EY (and KF4HR):"... Who said you must learn Morse Code?"

AF6AY: "YOU have. Repeatedly over the last decade."

Where and when? Show us.

AF6AY: "Go back a few posts in this article thread. I was trying to steer the subject AWAY from personality conflicts and back into learning morse code."

How were you doing that?

N2EY: "Here's the question again: Who said you must learn Morse Code?"

AF6AY: "YOU have, Sir Sheriff of Nothingham. Repeatedly, for a decade. :-)"

Then show us some examples. If I did it "repeatedly", posting a link to it should be easy.

But I predict you won't do that, Len. Because you can't.

Recently, in another eham thread, you posted that I wrote something about the Technician class which I did not write. You did not - could not - back up your claim.

.........

N2EY: "You're projecting what *you* do onto others, Len. What you describe is not what I do."

AF6AY: "I think it would be very nice of others could come up with more ways to MOTIVATE and LEARN morse code for the benefit of others, not continue to battle pro-code versus no-code."

I did that. See my list of "10 Ways" earlier in this thread.

N2EY: "What I do is to ask questions and point out errors of fact and logic. And I ask questions to clarify the situation."

AF6AY: "BS, Jimmy. It is very, very apparent what you are doing now, what you have been doing for a decade. :-)"

Which is?

I'm not calling you names, Len, despite what you call me. I'm just pointing out inconsistencies.

AF6AY: "is a personal opinion subject to "fact and logic?""

It can be.

If a person expresses a personal opinion that is based on invalid information and/or faulty logic, shouldn't that be pointed out?

AF6AY: "Now, I don't personally care for morse code use for myself right now. Is that "wrong?" Yes, according to the personal definitions of YOUR "fact and logic.""

Where have I ever said that opinion was wrong, Len? Show us. I don't think you can.

AF6AY: "Sir Jimmy, you made a (wrong) statement about "taking a year and a half to put up a simple vertical antenna."

Ah - no.

What I actually wrote was:

"So installing a simple vertical HF antenna has taken you over a year....."

And that was based on the limited information you provided. Now I know it was incorrect, and should be revised to read:

"So buying and installing a simple vertical HF antenna has taken you almost 18 months....."

See? I revised my observation based on updated info.

AF6AY: "this article is NOT about "antenna installations," is it? Not even about "digging.""

Then why did you bring it up?

AF6AY: "It is about the advantages of learning morse code as seen by several other radio amateurs. I still think it would be nice if everyone got BACK to the original subject thread."

But Len, you're one of the folks who pulled it away from that subject.

N2EY: "Probably no one ever told you that you must learn Morse Code."

AF6AY: "Hundreds have told me I MUST. :-)

Who?

AF6AY: "Even the FCC...in order to get an amateur radio license in the past. :-)"

Now you're changing the situation.

N2EY: "The plain and simple fact is that you simply don't like Morse Code."...."And that's OK, nobody says you must like it."

AF6AY: "WRONG!!!"

Who says you must like it, Len?

N2EY: "I suspect that your dislike of Morse Code, and one other factor, prevented you from getting an amateur radio license for almost 60 years."

N2EY: "I was never "prevented" from doing that. :-) I just didn't bother to do so when I was 15...nor at age 58 in 1991. I decided to get an amateur radio license at age 74."

Only after the test was completely eliminated for all classes of US amateur radio license.

N2EY: "The "other factor" is that you imagine yourself to be better than most others at many things."

AF6AY: "I *AM* better than most others in SOME things, Sir Sheriff. :-)"

Maybe. But you *imagine* yourself to be better in many more things.

N2EY: "If you were going to be a radio amateur, you wouldn't start as a "Novice", because you considered yourself an Expert from day one, and that "novice" name itself was an insult to you."

AF6AY: "It did?!? Tsk, tsk, you KNOW these things?"

Your words confirm them, Len.

N2EY: "But you didn't have an easy time learning Morse Code. It's a skill, not book learning, and you thought it beneath your effort, abilities and expertise to learn. After all, you were a Radio Professional, wasn't that enough? How dare those "Amateur" licenses require something you didn't already know? Your 1958 citizens band license didn't require a test at all, who did these amateurs think they were?"

AF6AY: "I went to a Chicago FCC Field Office and passed my First Class Radiotelephone (Commercial) license so that I could continue in civilian radio...IF (and only IF) I chose to do so. That was in early 1956. I'd had three full years of rather intense military-professional radio communications experience (beginning ON HF) then. Was I a "novice" in radio then? No."

You're proving my point, Len. You didn't want to admit you were a beginner in amateur radio then - or now.

AF6AY: "Did the FCC accept anyone "getting Extra out of the box" then?"

No, there was a two-year experience-as-a-General-or-Advanced requirement. You probably considered that an insult too.

Plus in 1956 a General license gave all operating privileges.

AF6AY: "Why should I have gone FIRST into amateur radio as a Novice class? You have NEVER explained that reasoning every time you brought it up"

Where did I ever say you should have gotten a Novice, Len?

AF6AY: "I never had an "1958 citizens band license." I got one in 1959...to put a transceiver in my restored 1953 Austin-Healey sports car. :-)"

A six-year-old car needed restoration?

N2EY: "Your animosity towards ARRL probably stems from the "incentive licensing" changes of the 1960s. Those changes meant that full privileges required an Extra license, not a General or Advanced. With its 20 wpm code test, that put full amateur privileges even farther away from you. And in those days an Extra, unlike General, could not be earned in a single test session; there was a two-years experience requirement."

AF6AY: "IN the 1960s, much like IN the 1950s, I just had NO interest in getting an amateur radio license of my very own."

I don't think that's the truth, Len.

N2EY: "Even when code waivers appeared in 1990 and the Tech lost its code test in 1991, you didn't get a license. I think that's because you wanted only the very top license, and didn't want to admit you had difficulty learning anything."

AF6AY: "Talk about trying to paint me Morally and Ethically CORRUPT! :-)"

I describe what you do, Len. Not who you are or what you are. You apply those labels to yourself.

AF6AY: "In 1990 the use of morse code in every other radio service in the world (except amateur) was continuing to decline."

So? What's that got to do with the discussion?

N2EY: "In January 2000, in a public forum, you said you were 'going for Extra out of the box.'"

AF6AY: "Did I swear an oath to do that, in front of officials, one hand on the Bible? Wow, you keep bringing that up so much, you ought to get a writer for National Enquirer to do a feature article on that! :-)"

Point is, you said you were going to do something, but it took you more than seven years to do it.

N2EY: "Obviously, you didn't succeed in learning 5 wpm."

AF6AY: "I got up to 8 WPM many years before 2002...."

You just proved my point, Len.

If you really did get up to 8 wpm at some point after 1951, you could have qualified for a Novice, Technician or Technician Plus license. Then you could have used that license as a way to improve your Morse Code speed to 13 wpm (which was your target speed back then, wasn't it?.

AF6AY: "It was a PERSONAL CHOICE. I didn't see any personal value in continuing that endeavor."

I suspect that one of the reasons for that "personal choice" was that you wanted only the top license, and 8 wpm wouldn't get you that.

AF6AY: "Hello? Can you say PERSONAL CHOICE and not make some moral-ethical crack about it? I don't think you can. You've had that not-doing-as-you-command-therefore-one-is-morally-corrupt attitude for a decade."

Len, I simply describe what you did. The moral stuff is a label you apply to yourself.

N2EY: "Now you've got your license, and some equipment. What will you do with them?"

AF6AY: "I will use my amateur radio license and my radio equipment AS I CHOOSE TO DO and within the laws of the land. It is my PERSONAL CHOICE. It is my accomplishment and you don't have one single moral-ethical judgement authorization over what I do."

Gee, Len, all I did was ask a simple question.

N2EY: "Your equipment is all store-bought, not kit or homebrew."

AF6AY: "Sunnuvagun! More resentment on your part? Would you like a copy of my AES on-line order where I paid for all of it via a single credit card purchase? :-)"

My point is that it's doubtful you'll be doing any homebrewing or kitbuilding of amateur radio equipment.

You seem to dislike DXing, contests and award-hunting, so those are out.

You seem to deny that radio amateurs provide any significant public-service communications, so that's out too.

Your inability to discuss things with those of differing views is pretty obvious here, so that's out too.

What's left?

AF6AY: "Would you actually be willing to look at an e-mail attachment that shows it?"

Why?

AF6AY: "Or would you just disregard it like you have in my previous private e-mailings to you?"

What private e-mailings, Len?

AF6AY: "No matter...YOU will ALWAYS FIND FAULT with anything I do or say...as you have for a decade. :-)"

Not anything, Len. Just some things. You can fix that, of course, by simply not posting so many errors of fact and logic.

N2EY: "Discussion does not mean everyone is going to agree with you, Len."

AF6AY: "Try to apply that to your own written communications. TRY."

You first, Len. Start by not calling people names.




 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KG4ZVA on July 5, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
BLAH BLAH BLAH
Same old crap.
MORSE is awesome, anyone not using it is a loser, a wannabe, a less than perfect individual!

OH SHUT UP ALREADY!

I DO NOT use CW and probably never will!
WHY? Well, lets see, I MUST be an underachiever, I MUST not have as many brain cells, I must be a loser!

You Know what?
It is just this simple:
I dont like it.
I want to speak to a HUMAN BEING. I want to hear a VOICE on the other end. I want to have a CONVERSATION with someone. I DONT want to listen to beeps and dits and dahs. There are no human inflections in a beep. No excitment, no pleasure, no nothing but a BEEP!

If I wanted to communicate without actually SPEAKING to someone, I would do what most of you on this site and others already do. Sit on my butt on the computer typing out all my opinions on everything as if it was proven facts!

Personally I would rather turn my radio on, turn my computer off, and have a nice conversation with a new friend on the airwaves.

Besides, judging from what most of you bonafied hardcore "REAL" ham radio ops post, most of you are using automatic keyers,computers,etc. So you are NOT so hardcore are you? Is that why you learned morse? So you could automate everything and do as little as possible?

And since I'm a NO CODE tech I'M the one taking the easy way out?? how hard is it to throw out a wire and hook up a keyer. By your own comments morse is the EASIEST way to make a contact!The EASIEST transmitters to homebrew! Using voice or other methods requires more work, right? Sounds to me like you are taking the easy way out. Not me.

So enough already about the code. Some people like it, others dont. Thats just life. So all you "REAL" ham ops who keep PREACHING about morse...ENOUGH ALREADY!
If you have to keep reminding yourself how "special" you are because you are profficient at ONE type of communications, then do us all a favor and just SHUT UP!

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N6HPX on July 5, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
well if dont like what he had to say then dont read it and just spin the dial..
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KG4ZVA on July 5, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
BTW, my comments were toward the commenters not the article. The article is a good one, but I would personally LIKE to see more articles on OTHER modes.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4KC on July 5, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KG4ZVA: I just did a search of topics in the Articles section of this site and returned at least two dozen articles each on subjects such as SSB, PSK-31, mobile, satellites, RTTY, and FM. The last article I wrote for this site was about SSB: http://www.eham.net/articles/19162

Forums on eHam show 1,123 topics in the digital category, 388 in satellites, 1,614 under VHF/UHF, 488 in APRS, 2,379 under mobile, and 483 in the QRP section. CW, by the way, has 1,024 topics.

Seems most modes are covered quite well. If you see something missing, I'm sure the editors of the site would be happy to consider publishing something you researched and wrote.

Again, the purpose of my article was to give some folks a few reasons why they might want to consider learning (or relearning) Morse code -- IF they are so inclined. With the exception of the Novice class license, no one involved in our hobby has ever been forced to use any particular mode while operating.

I hope it shall always be thus.

Don Keith N4KC
www.n4kc.com
www.n4kc.blogspot.com
www.donkeith.com


 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N6HPX on July 5, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
My apologises to you sir I figured the way it sounded was you was putting down the article.

73's from Oahu
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W8JII on July 6, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
one more reason Don-------------I know 2 Hams that had throat cancer and if it were not for CW they would obviously not be able to fully enjoy Ham Radio.

73,Ron
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 6, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N2EY previously wrote: "So deciding which HF antenna to buy, and installing it, has taken you almost a year and a half. OK, Len."

AF6AY: "No, it has not taken "a year and a half.""

I wrote *almost* a year and a half, Len.

AF6AY: "But, you are INSISTENT on remanufacturing your imagination to take some oblique negative swipe at WHATEVER I do."

Remanufacturing my imagination?

AF6AY: "I could explain everything, including all that I've done with my amateur radio license AND "antenna trials," but that would be wasted effort on my part."

Why?

AF6AY: "WHATEVER I would have explained would have been met with your NEGATIVES, things that I "should have done" but DID NOT DO AS YOU INSISTED I SHOULD."

Where have I ever said what you should have done, Len? Where have I "insisted" that you do anything?

"N2EY (and KF4HR):"... Who said you must learn Morse Code?""

"AF6AY: "YOU have. Repeatedly over the last decade.""

N2EY: "Where and when? Show us."

AF6AY: "The "show" would require, just from one source, MEGABYTES OF TEXT (!) and thousands of your postings on newsgroup rec.radio.amateur.policy from the last decade."

You're misdirecting, Len.

You claimed I wrote things which I did not write. I asked for proof of your claim. All you need to do is come up with a couple of examples, with actual links to the original postings, to prove your point.

But I don't think you will, because you know I didn't write the things you claim. Not even once.

AF6AY: "E-ham.net would not approve of devoting so much storage space on their servers. All of that must be observed IN CONTEXT and IN CHRONOLOGICAL order to be fair."

Nope. All that's needed is a couple of examples.

AF6AY: "Snipping out parts of someone's postings elsewhere and "saving it for posterity" is nothing more than your own SUBJECTIVE EDITORIALIZING."

No, it isn't. It's called quoting.

AF6AY: "It is rather careful EDITORIALIZING so that you can present "evidence" of someone else's wrongdoings...or to show that YOU are "being victimized" by others who don't happen to agree with your opinions."

No, it isn't. It's simply pointing out things others have written in the past. Is that wrong?

AF6AY: "These forums are NOT courts of law, criminal or civil."

I know, Len. What's wrong with quotes and links to things others have written?

AF6AY: "Your "victim act" and demands of "show us" is nonsense."

I'm not doing any sort of "act", Len. You claimed I wrote something in the past, many times, but you can't seem to come up with even one link to where I wrote what you claim.

AF6AY: "All of that IS ALREADY PUBLIC AND AVAILABLE. None of it is "hidden.""

Then provide us with a link to prove your claim.

AF6AY: "There is just so much of it that most others just don't care to go back and review it. I can't blame them a bit. It is PAST history."

Then why did you bring it up?

AF6AY: "The dispute over whether or not USA amateur radio should have a code test to obtain a USA amateur radio license grant is over a half century old."

Where do you get that idea? And what does it matter now?

AF6AY: "On-off keying (by International Morse Code) is simply another mode of COMMUNICATIONS."

A unique and useful mode of communications in amatuer radio. That's the point, test or no test.

AF6AY: "Those who wish to learn it are free to do so. Those who do not wish to learn it are ALSO FREE TO DO SO."

Of course. It has always been that way.

AF6AY: "I'd like to say that the latter is true but it is obvious that those who are FOR OOK CW have consistently put down those who do not wish to do it."

No, it isn't. You're presuming your conclusion. Show me where I have "consistently put down" those who do not wish to use Morse Code.

AF6AY: "They have done so for as long as I can remember (which is a fairly long time)."

So?

AF6AY: "There is no rational reason, no validity in what those pro-coders exclaim...other than regurgitating old, tired cliches that were
supposed truisms back before WWII."

Wasn't Morse Code used in WW2, Len?

AF6AY: "There ARE some good things about having morse code skill in USA amateur radio. Don Keith has pointed them out in his kick-off article. I don't see any hints of his personal agrandizement in his article. Yet many of the respondents were openly identifying themselves with the use of OOK CW and a few have attempted to enoble themselves in plain, simple PERSONAL AGRANDIZEMENT over THEIR skill."

Is it wrong to be proud of a skill or accomplishment, Len?

AF6AY: "All should do as THEY do" is the general tenor of their commentary."

Is it wrong to encourage others to learn a useful skill?

AF6AY: "No valid reason is given for that minority's demands and the outside observer can simply not another case of too much ego causing the personal agrandizement statements."

What "demands", Len? I don't see anyone in this thread saying anyone *must* learn Morse Code.

AF6AY: "A year and a third ago, I was granted a USA amateur radio license."

That's nice, Len. Forty years, eight months and twenty five days ago, I was granted a US amateur radio license, too.

AF6AY: "That occurred approximately on the 51st anniversary of my being granted a USA Commercial radio license. I became a professional in radio communications 55 2/5 (approximately) years ago, BEGINNING directly in high-power HF tranmitter operation. Since then I've communicated by radio from land, from the air, and a few times from ocean waters. All on HF, VHF, UHF, MF, LF, microwaves, using jargon and procedure as required in each different radio service."

What difference does all that make, Len? You bring up your resume over and over again, but leave out what significance it has to the discussion.

AF6AY: "I don't claim to be any "expert" on such radio use."

But you sure do want to tell us how Amateur Radio should be, and how it should not be.

AF6AY: "I claim that I am NOT A BEGINNER in it as you have repeatedly stated."

I never said you were a beginner in radio, Len.

What I have said, and which was true, is that you were beginner in *amateur* radio. And it was true when it was written, soon after your amateur license was granted.

What's wrong with being a beginner in amateur radio?

AF6AY: "Nor did I have any need to use or be skilled in OOK CW modes in all those 55 2/5 years (approximately since February 1953)."

Because, all those years, you avoided any radio service that used Morse Code.

AF6AY: "I - personally - don't care to learn or use OOK CW mode but I reserve the right to take it up if *I* choose to. A decision on that is NOT mandatory nor is either way to go either "right" or "wrong." It just a plain, simple personal choice. For anyone."

That's how it's always been, Len.

AF6AY: "I am all for personal choice, of having as many options open to me as possible."

But what about *others* having as many options open to *them* as possible? You did request that the FCC deny an amateur radio license to anyone under the age of 14 years.

AF6AY: "So, WHY did I get a USA amateur radio license? I will reply with another question, "Why NOT?" It is a natural extension of what I've been doing for a living in radio-electronics for 55 2/5 years (approximately). It is a natural extension of my personal electronics hobby begun about 61 years ago. It was, and remains so today, open to anyone who cares to get such a license through plain, simple Preparedness, Planning, Perseverance...and some chutzpah to "go for broke." :-) PERSONAL CHOICE. An OPTION open to anyone in this wonderful nation."

If you say so, Len.

But the fact remains that you knew about amateur radio for decades, but never tried to get an amateur radio license until two days after the Morse Code exam was completely eliminated. Even after you'd allegedly learned Morse Code to 8 wpm, even after the Tech lost its code test, even after the testing was reduced to 5 wpm for all license classes, even after you wrote that you were "going for Extra out of the box" in January 2000, you didn't even try for any class of amateur license.

And you spent more than a decade arguing over that test in various online forums, and sending lots of stuff to FCC against the test.

So it's kind of hard to accept your why-why-not claim at face value.

AF6AY: Am I "SUPPOSED" to learn and be skilled at OOK CW morse code?"

That's totally up to you, Len.

AF6AY: "No. There is NO federal requirement to do so."

So you only do what the feds require?

AF6AY: "Was I "SUPPOSED" to get an amateur radio license FIRST? No. There was NO requirement that I do so, not even in my formative years as a teenager. Was I "SUPPOSED" to "work up through the ranks" like a "good worker should?" No."

It's all about choice, Len. Is there anything wrong with learning and using Morse Code, getting an Amateur Radio license as a teenager, working one's way up through the license classes?

AF6AY: "Amateur radio is NON-professional and clearly defined as such in USA law; it isn't a profession, union, guild, or craft."

So what? It still has standards, values, and traditions. It's non-commercial, that's all.

Is there something wrong with someone wanting to promote the standards, values and traditions of Amateur Radio?

AF6AY: "YOU have continually made negative comments to me in regard to all those things I "should" have done. For a decade. Everything I've expressed as doing has been the subject of your constant NEGATIVE criticsm."

Show us some examples, Len. But remember that others can easily point to many examples of *your* negative criticism.

AF6AY: "It took me 75 years to reach the person I am...WITHOUT your "help" or hindrance or negativism.
If you dislike that in any way, I will plainly, simply tell you to go FOXTROT UNIFORM yourself. Enjoy."

"If I am so insignificant, Len, why are you so hostile, so angry, and so critical?"

It seems to me that your idea of "discussion" is that you don't want to deal with opposing views, nor correction of your mistakes. You want to claim that others wrote certain things, but won't back up those claims with examples. You want others to treat you with respect, even though you don't treat them with any.

Why?

 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K3DGR on July 7, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
...I agree with Don, CW is and will still be the most reliable mode under weak signal conditions -inexpensive equipment and lots of fun. ..Been doing CW only since 1957!..Look for me around the 40m QRP freequency area 7.040 or 7.027 for QRO & QRQ..My bio and station pic on QRZ.com..73's Dave
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 7, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Previous comments posted by AF6AY:

"I'll just lock and load whenever another of Your Kind shows up (they are easy to spot). :-)"

"SIR, here's a 'suggestion' for you, and it ain't a callsign prefix: Kilo Mama Alpha."

"Those who actually WANT to learn manual telegraphy are very free to do so."

"Tsk, another sore loser... :-)"

"Tsk, sour grapes."

"73, Len...KMA"

"Heh heh heh...this anonymous non-ham is still trying to poison the well. :-)"

"I think that for SOME people, THEY are already emotionally dead. The only good thing is that they are made of biodegradable material. :-)"

"That isn't "discussion." It is just the usual invitation to attend an endless summer of Flame Fest."

"Not for me 73, Len...KMA"

""Mankind invented language to satisfy its need to complain." :-)"

"WOW! Talk about trying to paint me Morally and Ethically CORRUPT! :-)"

"Sweetums, NOTHING I've ever written in public is EVER taken at face value by yourself, not even when I present prima facie evidence to support it. :-)"

And AF6AY also states:

"Hey, I'm not bitter at all."


Uh..., right. In any case...

I've noticed other forums on the web take steps by utilizing moderators to filter out negative responses, responses that are a bit over the edge, or responses that contain less than suitable language (or acronyms that point in that direction). Perhaps it's time the eham.com starts the same filtering practice.

Differences of options are one thing, but bitter responses and terms like "lock and load" and "KMA" tend to point to bitterness, and I think most would agree, are not necessary to get a difference of opinion across.

Unfortunately responses such as this only seem to cast a shadow over our fine hobby and do nothing positive to encourage the younger or future potential hams to join our ranks, (as the original thread points to).

While I very much enjoy reading the various eham.com forum subjects, on rare occasions I find myself wishing there was a way to filter out responses from certain individuals which seem to have a chip on their shoulder, argue just for the sake of arguing, postings indicating people are just bored or angry, or postings which serve no practical purpose in the forum discussion.

Perhaps a solution is to write the Eham.Net Team and ask that they please consider filtering some of the negative responses that get posted.

Or better yet, as a bonus to each paying eHam.com customer, offer the paying customer the ability to set their own filters, should they so choose.

I encourage any of you that feel the same way, to contact the eHam.Net Team and see if something along these lines might be possible for its paying customers.

Tnx & 73, KF4HR
 
RE: Censorship on E-Ham.Net?  
by K6LHA on July 7, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Posted By KF4HR on 7 Jul 08:

"Previous comments posted by AF6AY:"

<elided>

It is understandable that some have a simple personality conflict with certain others. :-)

However, bringing back certain comments and phrases taken out of context serve no useful purpose for the article that concerns itself with learning or re-learning morse code.

If anyone wishes to have another deleted from any posting, they can contact e-ham administration and state their case, giving applicable reasons for their grievance.
-----------

MODERATION of any forum is highly dependent on the sensitivity and desires and integrity of the MODERATORS themselves. It is also a disingenuous subject since the moderation desired by one may just be a simple personality conflict. If that is true, then it is simply CENSORSHIP and destroys any possibility of freedom of speech.

ALL comments made in public over a computer-modem environment WILL be objectionable to at least one reader. That has been true ever since the first computer-modem network (ARPANET) was created and allowed individuals to post opinions. That has not changed up to the present time.

Having participated in computer-modem communications for 24 years, and as a moderator on two large Bulletin Board Systems during that time, those that survive must have Very Thick Mental Skin and the realization that there are as many definitions of what is "good" or "bad" practice as there are participants. Is one participant "more right" than another? If so, what are their qualifications of such "more rightness" other than their own opinions of themselves?
..........

KF4HR: "I've noticed other forums on the web take steps by utilizing moderators to filter out negative responses, responses that are a bit over the edge, or responses that contain less than suitable language (or acronyms that point in that direction). Perhaps it's time the eham.com starts the same filtering practice."

In what way? Do you wish to have e-ham publish (almost weekly) a set of Rules that ALL must follow exactly to avoid censure? This is already done on Google newsgroup rec.radio.amateur.moderated. The end result after about a year is low participation and the participants largely being old-timers who have been on similar newsgroups for years. Very few of them seem to accept any newcomers and certainly not those who have opinions which are contrary to Group Think.

Consider that "Group Think." It is one of the things in Orwell's novel "1984." It is where ALL must be of like mind, follow the "accepted" tenets and never, ever depart from it. It creates a dulling sameness and is the seedbed of stagnation. No one is really allowed to be contrary to anything except on very minor things. Oh, and all MUST follow "Big Brother" (guess who that might be?).

Group Think is a nice emotional Happy Meal state where everyone can sit around placidly and give each other high-fives for being so good about holding to the sameness. It can be thought of as a mental salve, a comfort blanket to hold, emotional security in a life that some find uncomfortable, perhaps frustrating. Sameness. Everyone doing the same thing day after day, year after year, very little dispute in the Group. All very happy...or are they?
............

KF4HR: "Unfortunately responses such as this only seem to cast a shadow over our fine hobby and do nothing positive to encourage the younger or future potential hams to join our ranks, (as the original thread points to)."

That is incorrect. "Younger and future potential hams" ARE "joining the ranks" as evident by the various public statistics listings. There just aren't as many of them as there might have been nor are they all (or even partly) enthused by old standards and values. They have their OWN desires and have, for the last 17 years, been "joining the ranks" through the Technician class license...FAR more than any Novice class entries did before mid-2000. To hear them talk, up close and personal, they WILL make commentaries on the "old guard" which few of them would find satisfactory. Some, not just myself, are outspoken in their opinions and do not hesitate to state what they think...even to an obvious (chronological) oldster such as myself. I accept that, even encourage it.

If some of the newcomers or even mid-timers want to learn or re-learn morse code skills, I think that is quite fine. They are doing what THEY want to do and on THEIR terms, not "following orders" on being part of any Group Think.

In a speech to a graduating class at Stanford University years ago, Bill Hewlett (the "H" of H-P) stated that an orderly workplace and supervision was a necessity in business for 99% of the thinking that had to go on. He also stated that the 1% is "where the progress comes from." That was business, not a hobby activity. H-P certainly proved to be a world-class leader in advancement of metrology and technology in the half century before advent of the personal computer. WE are all the beneficiaries of that technological advancement whether it is owning a small H-P handheld scientific calculator or have had our health checked via equipment from H-P medical instrument division of Agilent.

"Pushing the envelope" (of performance in its etymology) is NOT a detriment. It brought radio out of the brute-force spark days into the vacuum tube era, brought the radio equipment out of its boat-anchor tube stratification into the solid-state era along with enormous increases in radio performance. Those who pushed that envelope were once considered mavericks, felt to be uncomfortable to those of the Group Think of various times. Some of those Group Thinkers thought those pushy people should have been shushed since they didn't fit the "pattern" of the times then. They made progress possible. Group Thinkers did not.

Those of us old enough can remember the introduction to amateur radio of single-channel single-sideband voice. Many group thinkers of the time did NOT want to be a part of it, thought it just a fad, inconsequential. Those radicals should have improved their telegraphic skills instead since "amateur radio was all about radiotelegraphy skills." Times changed and several years ago there was acknowledgement that SSB voice was the MOST used mode on amateur HF bands.

Back in 1990 many amateurs decried the "terrible" option of getting into USA amateur radio WITHOUT (!) taking any morse code cognition test. "Amateur radio was all about radiotelegraphy" they kept repeating. Today (this morning in fact) statistics show that Technician class is now 304,181 active licensees with just 4.46% of 318,391 total in their 2-year grace period. By comparison the next largest class General is 143,170 active licensees with 7.98% of 155,586 total in their grace period. MOST (not all) of those Technician licensees came in through the no-code-test class. Their grace period percentage indicates they are staying in that class. That is just one indicator that modern licensed USA radio amateurs of the younger generations are going their own way, thinking for themselves, and ARE joining the "ranks."
.............

KF4HR: "While I very much enjoy reading the various eham.com forum subjects, on rare occasions I find myself wishing there was a way to filter out responses from certain individuals which seem to have a chip on their shoulder, argue just for the sake of arguing, postings indicating people are just bored or angry, or postings which serve no practical purpose in the forum discussion."

The cure for such on-screen discomfort is on the keyboard or in movement of a mouse to get out of such objectionable displays. It helps greatly to have an open mind and realize that OTHERS do not all think as you do nor desire the same things as you do nor like the same things you do. USA amateur radio is not one large Group Think of clones longing for old times that may never come back.

There is NO REAL encouragement to the younger generations to adamantly demand that all "must" like what the old-timers like. ALL licensees have many OPTIONS open to them on-air and it is my honest opinion that ALL should have the same OPTIONS open to them in writing, speaking, or signing what THEY would like to have.

I say again, to me, anyone who personally WANTS to take up or re-learn morse code radiotelegraphy, that is perfectly fine with me. I have no objections to that. I have no reason to object.

I do express a great deal of dissatisfaction on seeing some laboring under what are obvious personality conflicts trying to silence anyone who desires OPTIONS and the freedom to think for themselves, the freedom to do what THEY like to do. Those personality-conflict burdened individuals are my forum targets. If I sometimes "lock and load" in response to those, then
all I can say is that they brought it on themselves with demands for being part of Group Think and advocating censorship, ignoring freedom of speech on forums for a large group of people engaged in a hobby radio service.

Those without open minds are never happy in large forums that were blessed by their owners to allow considerable freedom of expression of individual thoughts and desires.

73, Len AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on July 7, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR said "I encourage any of you that feel the same way, to contact the eHam.Net Team and see if something along these lines might be possible for its paying customers."

Good idea, but I have a better one...I encourage everyone that is offended by Len's comments to email the eHam.net team and request that he be banned from the site....
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on July 7, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY said "Those personality-conflict burdened individuals are my forum targets. If I sometimes "lock and load" in response to those, then
all I can say is that they brought it on themselves with demands for being part of Group Think and advocating censorship, ignoring freedom of speech on forums for a large group of people engaged in a hobby radio service."

English Translation - Len's can't stand anyone's opinion except his own, and he will do anything in his power to stop any other opinion from being expressed here by using harassment, name calling, and false accusations...

Len, everyone here knows your tactics, and everyone here knows you can't back up a single accusation you have made (and you've been given plenty of chances)....the only one here trying to censor anyone is YOU....and before you say I wanted you banned from eham to censor you, I'll make myself quite clear...it has nothing to do with your useless newbie level comments, it has to do with your offensive words you have used towards others....
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 7, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY said "Those personality-conflict burdened individuals are my forum targets. If I sometimes "lock and load" in response to those, then
all I can say is that they brought it on themselves with demands for being part of Group Think and advocating censorship, ignoring freedom of speech on forums for a large group of people engaged in a hobby radio service."

Yet it is Len who has told others to shut up, and blames the victims of his attacks for his own behavior. He doesn't consider that freedom of speech carries with it the responsibility to speak the truth.

Example of Len telling another to shut up:

http://tinyurl.com/3ygllb

RADIO123US replied: English Translation - "Len's can't stand anyone's opinion except his own, and he will do anything in his power to stop any other opinion from being expressed here by using harassment, name calling, and false accusations..."

Len, everyone here knows your tactics, and everyone here knows you can't back up a single accusation you have made (and you've been given plenty of chances)....the only one here trying to censor anyone is YOU....and before you say I wanted you banned from eham to censor you, I'll make myself quite clear...it has nothing to do with your useless newbie level comments, it has to do with your offensive words you have used towards others...."

I think I know why Len behaves the way he does. Here's what I've figured out:

Way back in the 1950s, Len formed the opinion that there should be no Morse Code testing for any US amateur license. The written exams didn't bother him, because he already knew enough to pass them, but learning Morse Code didn't come easy to him.

Len tried to get people to support his anti-Morse-code-test idea, but found little support among hams until fairly recently. Along the way, he heard a number of things said by hams that he disagreed with, but he could not effectively answer them. Nor could he effectively petition FCC; the process of doing so intimidated him, even though it was open to all from the beginning.

Then "the internet went public", things like Usenet and ECFS and eham.net appeared, and Len had a convenient soapbox.

Using a variety of screen names (at least seven different online ID's that I know of, and probably more I don't) in a variety of forums, Len engaged in a war of words with anyone who disagreed with him. He also inundated FCC with comments, reply comments and other stuff.

But much of what Len wrote was archived, and can be retrieved at will by simple Googling if someone knows how to search. Len doesn't always want folks to see what he's written in the past, for obvious reasons.

You may have noted that Len claims people or organizations said or did certain things, but then can't/won't prove his claims. Such as claiming I and others wrote things we didn't write at all.

What's going on there is that Len considers the many to be responsible for the actions of the few. Doesn't matter who said a particular thing to Len; he considers all who disagree with him to be saying the same thing. We who disagree with him are all the same to Len.

And it doesn't really matter what someone actually wrote; what matters is what Len heard. That's what you'll see quoted by him, and presented by him - subjective reactions, not objective reality.

IOW, Len doesn't let facts get in the way of a good rant. What someone really said, or what really happened in the past, isn't the issue for Len. It's what he remembers, and/or how it made him feel.

73 de Jim, N2EY




 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by NB8N on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Hmmm. Had this thread been titled, "10 Reasons to Learn Ragchewing on SSB," I would not have given it a second look, as I've had no trouble speaking since an early age. But, because I love CW, I read the article. Guess what? The article lived up to its title, WITHOUT slamming those of other camps.

To the slammers, then, I suggest you offer factual corrections to the article, or fire up your rig and carp in any mode you hold license and expertise. If I hear you on 7.010 MHz, say, I'll know you know code. If, on the other hand, you hear me on 7.260 MHz, you'll have no idea I also know code.



Bob --- NB8N
Harassing electrons since '78
 
Why this anger?  
by DL3ZM on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
After reading some of this comments I ask myself why is there such anger and aggravation in the comments from people like AF6AY?
I assume, it is because deep inside they know that as long as they do not master CW they will never be a "complete" ham, and that something is just missing. And maybe that is what bother them that much.

Best regards and 73
Hans-Georg (DL3ZM)
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KC8PPO on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Why does the old-timers feel the need to lob insults at younger, newer hams who aren't interested in CW? Just the other day I heard a station on 10m hogging the SSB calling freq (can't remember his call or I'd post it), and he made a comment to the effect that another station wasn't smart enough to learn code. That was one time since I've had my ticket that it was best that I not be able to contact him, because I would have told him in no uncertain terms that this college-educated ham with an IQ of over 140 doesn't appreciate having his intellect insulted by some fat old fart who can't get past his own ego. Can't you cranks see that your terrible attitude is driving younger guys away from the hobby?

CW is a mode. If you want to, do it. There's nothing in the original article in this thread that says that anybody who doesn't do code isn't a real ham. I think that the article was well written and solid info. In many ways, CW is a very good mode, especially for times when the band conditions are somewhat less than optimal. But, that doesn't change the simple fact that CW is a mode, just like SSB, Psk31, SSTV, and all of the other modes that we as hams use. Unfortunately, a very vocal minority feel the obligation to hurl insults regarding the intellectual capacities, verily even the validity of the moniker "ham", at those of us who don't use their pet mode.

So, to all of you older hams who love code, instead of poisoning the hobby with your bitterness, why don't you take it upon yourself to find a new young guy and teach him the great things about code.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N4NI on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
For starters, I know and enjoy cw. I find it intriguing and challenging. I am glad I learned it and passed the 5wpm test to earn my General license. And the article was nicely done. As usual, the asinine comments ruin it.

I am amazed at how many folks just refuse to accept the fact that some people just do not have an interest in learning it. They claim they are lazy, stupid, or just want things given to them. They try to convince them why they should learn it and ridicule them when they do not. Surely I'm not the only one to see that this is infighting is stupid.

So, while N0FQN's list does not anger me, it perpetuates the ongoing ignorance in our hobby. Yet, all of this has been said before, and it will all be said again. The only reason I bother on submitting this is that I have already typed it, so why waste it.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"Why does the old-timers feel the need to lob insults at younger, newer hams who aren't interested in CW?"

That's a good question, but you may want to use caution when using absolute statements, (particularly on this thread, hi).

Not all old timers feel this need. I certainly don't think lesser of someone who doesn't want to learn CW, and being licensed 40+ years probably qualifies me as an old timer.

I think it is unfortunate some have extreme views about CW; be it pro or con, but that's life. There are certainly advantages to using CW and those advantages have been well documented, But for those who have no interest, that's fine too (with me anyway). Although on the flip side, if someone is speaking about the advantages of using CW I think it's just as wrong to lob insults at that persons efforts to learn CW, or try to label the CW mode as something that should be done away with.

But getting back to your old-time insult problem; here's a suggestion. The next time an old timer lobs an insult at you for not knowing CW, you might want to read my previous posting (on this thread) about the REAL CW old timers who used to copy CW via "timed clicks", not the easier way (via on/off tone). That just may give those old timers something to think about.

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
N4NI posted on 8 Jul 08:

"For starters, I know and enjoy cw. I find it intriguing and challenging. I am glad I learned it and passed the 5wpm test to earn my General license. And the article was nicely done. As usual, the asinine comments ruin it."

"I am amazed at how many folks just refuse to accept the fact that some people just do not have an interest in learning it. They claim they are lazy, stupid, or just want things given to them. They try to convince them why they should learn it and ridicule them when they do not. Surely I'm not the only one to see that this is infighting is stupid."

I agree, Neil. But, people are people and some just have to have a hate object. <shrug>

Back in the 1950s we had a thing called "McCarthyism" where so many went looking for evil communists and were determined to eradicate them by any which way they could, regardless of evidence to the contrary. A few in the radio and TV business dared speak out against those witch-hunters, one in particular was Edward R. Murrow on CBS. He made one memorable statement back then that stuck with me all these years:

"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty."

Murrow would later shorten that to:

"Dissent is not synonymous with disloyalty."

Senator Eugene McCarthy was finally undone by an elderly civilian attorney named Joseph Welch hired by the US Army during the "Army-McCarthy" hearings. I was on Army duty overseas and could not watch the live telecasts, got to watch only parts of it on newsreels in the post theater. The junior senator from Wisconsin went the way all demagogues should go, disgraced out of Congress and to an early demise.

I've seen the parallel, a micro-analogue in cries of banning all dissent, in USA amateur radio right into this new millennium, all on this morse code thing. There is so much to offer hobbyists in USA amateur radio now that I remain astonished at the very real anger thrown out by others against those of us who are for personal choice on what we want to do. We have the options. We still have free choice. We should enjoy such options...while we still have them.

73, Len AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KC8PPO writes: "Why does the old-timers feel the need to lob insults at younger, newer hams who aren't interested in CW?"

Not all old-timers feel the need to do that. In fact most of the old-timers I know don't.

KC8PPO: "Just the other day I heard a station on 10m hogging the SSB calling freq (can't remember his call or I'd post it), and he made a comment to the effect that another station wasn't smart enough to learn code."

Let's consider that comment logically...

First off, intelligence isn't a single quantity, like a scalar, but a multiple quantity, like a vector. A person can be smart in some areas and not-so-smart in others.

Second, let's assume the person being insulted really isn't "smart enough" (whatever that means) to learn Morse Code. Why insult such a person? It only makes the insulter look bad.

Third, let's assume the person being insulted really *is* "smart enough" (whatever that means) to learn Morse Code. The insulter is then just plain wrong, and again it only makes the insulter look bad.

And what mode was the frequency-hog using? I bet it wasn't Morse Code!

KC8PPO: "That was one time since I've had my ticket that it was best that I not be able to contact him, because I would have told him in no uncertain terms that this college-educated ham with an IQ of over 140 doesn't appreciate having his intellect insulted by some fat old fart who can't get past his own ego."

I agree that such comments on the air serve no useful purpose except to make the insulter look dumb, mean, or worse.

KC8PPO: "Can't you cranks see that your terrible attitude is driving younger guys away from the hobby?"

Who do you mean? There have always been a few cranky curmudgeons in ham radio.

KC8PPO: "CW is a mode. If you want to, do it. There's nothing in the original article in this thread that says that anybody who doesn't do code isn't a real ham. I think that the article was well written and solid info. In many ways, CW is a very good mode, especially for times when the band conditions are somewhat less than optimal. But, that doesn't change the simple fact that CW is a mode, just like SSB, Psk31, SSTV, and all of the other modes that we as hams use."

I agree 100%!

KC8PPO: "Unfortunately, a very vocal minority feel the obligation to hurl insults regarding the intellectual capacities, verily even the validity of the moniker "ham", at those of us who don't use their pet mode."

Yep. Thanks for recognizing that it is a very vocal minority.

Note also that there is a very vocal anti-code minority who make similar remarks to those who use and promote Morse Code.

KC8PPO: "So, to all of you older hams who love code, instead of poisoning the hobby with your bitterness, why don't you take it upon yourself to find a new young guy and teach him the great things about code."

All of us who love code are not older, nor are we bitter. I know I'm not.

We're individuals, with individual thoughts.
More than a few of us are college-educated, some with IQs over 140, too.

73 de Jim, N2EY


 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KC8PPO on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Certainly not every older ham is bitter, nor is every CW-loving ham older. However, as a younger person in a hobby that is largely dominated by those over fifty, it gets quite old hearing people complain on one hand that those who don't learn code aren't "real" hams, and on the other hand that the hobby is dying.

Unfortunately, this discussion will keep going, most likely indefinitely. Thankfully though, the FCC got rid of the code requirement so I don't have to learn a mode I'm not interested in just to upgrade.
 
Censorship and Banishment  
by K6LHA on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
An Anonymous person using the handle of "radio123us" posted a demand of my banning from e-ham.net on 8 July 2008. The "charges" were vague, unspecific, done by someone fearful of revealing his (or her) own identity. This individual, joined by a few others, seeks a banning because of not liking a free and open choice in USA amateur radio, trying to paint another in atributes incorrect...or just because of their own personality conflicts with others. Those attitudes of "hate" mentioned are just reflections of the accusers, pointing right back to them. This "radio123us" is acting like a small demagogue who tries to remain invisible, faceless yet strident and demanding.

The USA has had its share of demagogues, most notably in recent history, that of Joseph R. McCarthy. "McCarthyism" affected the lives of tens of thousands of Americans, forced them out of gainful work, made them villains in a society that accepted unproven opinions held by a few seeking the spotlight, seekers for their own gratification in holding power over others. But, there were others who thought deeper, with more integrity and honor and saw what was going on and didn't hesitate to speak their minds. On a historic CBS-TV half hour show of 9 March 1954, a regular "See It Now" episode focussed entirely on this Senator McCarthy. Hosted by CBS news analyst Edward R. Murrow, Murrow summed up the show at the end with:

"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men -- not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend USA causes that were, for the moment, unpopular."

Well-crafted words that ring true with honorable men, beautiful in their sincerity. I quoted only the first sentence in my comment to N4NI in an earlier message.

Perhaps this is going far-afield insofar as amateur radio is concerned. After all, what is amateur radio?

Amateur radio is a non-professional radio activity, done for personal pleasure solely without pecuniary gain. In short, it is a HOBBY. Because of the nature of radio waves to not recognize man-made boundaries, a regulatory agency has been legislated to regulate all radio transmission. As part of that regulatory process, the agency licenses stations and individuals. In the amateur radio service of the USA, the agency defines the individual and station one and the same. To obtain the grant of an amateur radio license, individuals have to test for it under terms defined by the agency.

I have been licensed by the FCC, for more than 52 years ago and more than 1 year ago, as an operator, tested voluntarily, by myself and with full identification to my government each time. No pseudonyms ("handles") allowed. I have worked for the purchase prices of my radio equipment. No one has "given me anything" insofar as my licenses are concerned.

Now an ANONYMOUS person DEMANDS my "banning" from a forum because I dared to talk back to a faceless being and voice different opinions?

I am not angry OR fearful about anything I've written, spoken, or associated with. If a banishment from one forum for a hobby activity happens, then it happens. E-ham.net is a private concern and all must follow their rules. But, there are more forums about this hobby than what a faceless voice can control.

If ONE person is banned because of having different opinions about this hobby, then it is an easy step to banning ANYONE who does not join the Group Think led by "Big Brothers" who wish all to obey them. It could be ANYONE who dares to talk back to unidentifed spectres making demands. That is totalitarianism. That is the witch-hunting McCarthyites trying to take over any activity. That is anathema to freedom-loving people.

The best "censor" is the individual, NOT an individual's ego. The best defense is to recognize that most of us are individuals who CAN think for ourselves and have individual desires and opinions about our hobby activities.

Sincerely, Leonard H. Anderson (amateur licensee AF6AY)
citizen of the United States of America






 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KC8PPO writes: "Certainly not every older ham is bitter, nor is every CW-loving ham older."

Agreed.

KC8PPO: "However, as a younger person in a hobby that is largely dominated by those over fifty, it gets quite old hearing people complain on one hand that those who don't learn code aren't "real" hams, and on the other hand that the hobby is dying."

Not only does it get old, both statements are flat-out wrong.

A "real ham" is any licensed amateur who got his/her license according to the regulations in force at the time, and who operates in accordance with the applicable regulations and good amateur practice.

While amateur radio isn't growing as fast as many of us would like, the number of FCC-licensed amateurs has been growing slowly for about a year and a half now. Not as fast as the US population but growing nonetheless.

KC8PPO: "the FCC got rid of the code requirement so I don't have to learn a mode I'm not interested in just to upgrade."

Note, however, that getting a license and upgrading usually involves learning a lot of things one may not be interested in.

For example, in order to use Morse Code on the HF amateur bands, a ham has to pass a test that includes lots of questions about SSB, FM, RTTY, TV and other modes, satellites, VHF/UHF, repeaters, and a lot of other stuff.

Even if a ham only wants to use low power, s/he has to pass a test that includes lots of questions about high power and RF exposure limits.

If an amateur only wants to use simple vacuum-tube based equipment, s/he has to pass a test that includes lots of questions about BJTs, FETs. ICs and other solid-state devices, PLLs, DDS, etc., but practically nothing about tubes or simple receivers and transmitters using them.

73 de Jim, N2EY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY said "An Anonymous person using the handle of "radio123us" posted a demand of my banning from e-ham.net on 8 July 2008. The "charges" were vague, unspecific, done by someone fearful of revealing his (or her) own identity."

Len, once again you selectively EDIT the truth to suit your needs...I NEVER demanded anything...I said "I encourage everyone that is offended by Len's comments to email the eHam.net team and REQUEST that he be banned from the site"...that's quite a bit different than a DEMAND..isn't it ???

AF6AY said "Now an ANONYMOUS person DEMANDS my "banning" from a forum because I dared to talk back to a faceless being and voice different opinions? "

Len, I'm still want to know how you get DEMAND out of what I said ???

AF6AY said "If ONE person is banned because of having different opinions about this hobby, then it is an easy step to banning ANYONE who does not join the Group Think led by "Big Brothers" who wish all to obey them. It could be ANYONE who dares to talk back to unidentifed spectres making demands. That is totalitarianism."

Give us a break Len....you shouldn't be here because you are insulting folks for no other reason then they disagree with you...If anything, you are GUILTY of trying to ban a positive discussion of a great MODE.....
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KC8PPO on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Part of the requirements for acquiring an amateur license is a basic understanding of the rules under which the service operates, as well as the band limits, different modes of operation, and various other issues. There is a substantive difference between having a basic understanding of the most common modes, and learning to operate in each of them. I contend that it is necessary for license applicants to have an elementary understanding of the more popular modes, but not be required to demonstrate proficiency in any ONE particular mode.


 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by AK7V on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I'm perplexed -- if '6AY and '2EY have been arguing about this for a _decade_, that means '6AY was arguing about ham radio way, way before he had a ticket.

That's bizarre. Regardless of how one feels about the code requirement, it's odd that someone would spend years on a ham radio newsgroup and type "megabytes" worth of text on a hobby/service they're not even engaging in. The amount of work and energy required to do that is gargantuan compared to what it would take, with 8wpm proficiency, to sit through a 5WPM test. They're not mutually exclusive, of course -- you can get a ticket and still argue about it. You can even argue without a ticket (even though it's weird). But if you already have the interest, skills and knowledge, why not get a license?

It's mind boggling, honestly. It's apparent that 6AY cares deeply about ham radio. It's sad and more than a little strange that someone so passionate wouldn't or couldn't just get a ticket and join the hobby.

Some people are more interested in talking about things than actually doing them. And some people are more interested in arguing than anything else. We all have our hobbies. I think '6AYs is arguing. Ham radio obviously took a back seat to it.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on July 8, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AK7V boggled his mind on 8 Jul 08 with the following:

"I'm perplexed -- if '6AY and '2EY have been arguing about this for a _decade_, that means '6AY was arguing about ham radio way, way before he had a ticket."

Yes and no. I've had a ticket for 52 years now, but it is Professional not amateur. Not only that but I spent three years before that operating (then) state of the art RF communications equipment with NO license required. I have discussed as well as argued a great number of things in different radio services other than amateur in the last half century.
..........

AK7V: "That's bizarre."

To you it might be. You have the right to feel any way you want about it. You just have NO right to define me as you want to. Others think they have that 'right' but they are wrong.

The discussion of whether or not an International Morse Code test HAD to be done by each ITU-member administration affected those who MIGHT want to enter amateur radio much more than those that were already IN it. Those who had ALREADY taken a code test just HAD to enforce their wishes on countless others and stalled the revision of ITU-R Radio Regulation S25 interminably. Fortunately, the IARU realize the error of this code test requirement (despite the opposition of the ARRL) and got S25 rewritten to make the code test OPTIONAL for each adminstration member nation. So, the FUTURE was served rather than a minority of those demanding that everyone else MUST do as these old-timers did.

The debate among the ITU member nations had been going on longer, since before 1990, beginning in the 1970s. The USA was one of the last nations to follow suit with the no-code-test Technician class licensee.
..........

AK7V: "Regardless of how one feels about the code requirement, it's odd that someone would spend years on a ham radio newsgroup and type "megabytes" worth of text on a hobby/service they're not even engaging in."

It is done all the time. Prime example: The FCC. No one at the FCC is required to hold any radio license (of any kind) to work there...yet the FCC regulates ALL civil radio in the USA.

If you look in the index for Ham Radio magazine for the later part of the 1980s you will see my byline on a few articles, even see my name on the masthead (list of all staffers) for two years as Associate Editor. No license required to write about radio technology. At any one time there were at least two unlicensed editors on the masthead, plus the illustrator.

The code test issue in the USA took at least 8 years to resolve, beginning with NPRM 98-143 and ending with NPRM 05-235 that ended in late 2005. The announcement that the code test would be eliminated happend on late December 2006. That in itself is a very long time for a largely POLITICAL 'discussion.' Don't forget that there were no less than 18 Petitions for re-restructuring USA amateur radio in between those two NPRMs. That in itself was a LOT of work to participate in, but it was a Good Fight and ended in a RIGHTNESS of OPTION and FREE CHOICE for all in the future who might want to enter USA amateur radio.
..........

AK7V: "The amount of work and energy required to do that is gargantuan compared to what it would take, with 8wpm proficiency, to sit through a 5WPM test."

Sorry, that is a subjective opinion and has no basis in fact.

Oh, and the code test ended at midnight local on 22 February 2007. NO ONE has to "sit through any code test" NOW.
..........

AK7V: "But if you already have the interest, skills and knowledge, why not get a license?"

Had I stayed in the Army for a twenty or thirty, NO license would have been required. No branch of the military is regulated by the FCC. [amazing but true...:-)]

After I was released from active duty, I *DID* get a license as a civilian...First Class Radiotelephone (Commercial). No problem. It is still mine even if the FCC changed them to General Radiotelephone and then made it lifetime without necessity for renewal. I spent a whole working career in southern California aerospace electronics, retired as an electronics engineer. Used that First 'phone license just three times in California.
.........

AK7V: "It's mind boggling, honestly."

I don't agree. Many things in life are "mind boggling." Live long enough and you will see lots of different examples. :-)
.........

AK7V: "It's apparent that 6AY cares deeply about ham radio."

Not really, but thanks for thinking that way. :-)

I "care deeply about" my wife. Amateur radio is now one of my hobbies. I have many hobbies and can afford them. Is that "mind boggling?" :-)
.........

AK7V: "It's sad and more than a little strange that someone so passionate wouldn't or couldn't just get a ticket and join the hobby."

I find it "sad and more than a little strange" that some licensed amateurs have NO other life than amateur radio. That is very limiting to what technologically-minded people CAN do. 'Radio' extends far more in the EM spectrum than just the HF ham bands. Really.

Factually, I've been a hobbyist in radio-electronics since 1947. All this while and "only" getting a (ptui) pro "ticket" until 60 years later. :-) The ONLY time a license was required in the hobby of radio-electronics was if (and only if) the RF radiation exceeded FCC requlations.

"Passion (other than sexual):" LIFE itself can be a passion. Politics is a passion for those who are in it. Law has a passion all its own. Anyone who CARES about anything can be passionate about whatever they are doing. Absolutely NO licenses are required to have passion about things. <shrug>
.........

AK7V: "I think '6AYs is arguing. Ham radio obviously took a back seat to it."

My USA amateur callsign is AF6AY; i.e., Alpha Foxtrot Six Alpha Yankee in NATO phonetic pronunciation. Are you one of those cutesy 'modern' with-it types who calls a PC a "puter?"

Jason, amateur radio never took a front seat with me but I am now a part of the USA 'amateur community' like it or not. Many old-timers (but chronologically younger than I) definitely despise that but I am not beholden to them in any way, nor am I required to serve them (because of their self-defined greatness). Many of those old-timers have NO other passion BUT amateur radio. I am not that way. I am simply enthusiastic about whatever I do and learn what I have to learn to do that. In many radio services I've learned much of what they are about, what they do, the technology involved in those without first working
IN those radio services. 'Radio' hasn't been confined to just amateur activities since before WWII. Really.

Thanks (but no thanks) for your psychological insight (which isn't at all deep). If I wanted more information on psychological insights I would simply ask my wife, a retired Social Worker who was granted two Masters Degrees by the University of Illinois and was licensed in two states for private Social Work. One of those states was Washington. :-)

"Arguing:" You seem to define arguing as just being against the olde-tyme religion of USA amateur radio as is preached in the Church of St. Hiram. Sorry, but that is just one 'sect' in USA amateur radio, actually a minority one. The largest 'sect' might be all those Technician class licensees who once had to ride the back of the RF bus in USA amateur radio. As of this morning (FCC database of 7 July 2008) there were 304,204 active individual Technician class radio amateurs, by far the largest of any class and over twice as many as active individual General class(143,159), the second largest class in USA amateur radio. The Deacons in Newington don't seem to realize those exist. <shrug>

I am trying to DISCUSS subjects involving amateur radio. As usual, these other radio amateurs insist on being amateur psychologists or just plain unidentified nutsos who want to demean, defame, and disintegrate anyone speaking contrary to their (not so) divine personal judgement. Many of them just CAN'T discuss...they have to RULE. <shrug>

73, Len AF6AY

PS: NO radio license in the world begins with a single quote mark. Really. Try to get with the International Telecommunications Union Radio Regulations that all administration members agree on.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KC8PPO writes: "Part of the requirements for acquiring an amateur license is a basic understanding of the rules under which the service operates, as well as the band limits, different modes of operation, and various other issues."

Agreed. But the written exams go far beyond that. Those exams are the same for everyone, regardless of their actual interest in amateur radio. A person who is not interested in many aspects of amateur radio still has to learn a considerable amount about those aspects just to pass the existing tests.

KC8PPO: "There is a substantive difference between having a basic understanding of the most common modes, and learning to operate in each of them. I contend that it is necessary for license applicants to have an elementary understanding of the more popular modes, but not be required to demonstrate proficiency in any ONE particular mode."

Morse Code is one of the more-popular modes. On the amateur HF bands, its popularity is second only to SSB.

A basic understanding of voice modes requires that one be able to talk and understand voice communications. A basic understanding of text modes like PSK31 requires that one be able to read and type written communications. Both are pretty common skills.

I contend that the 5 wpm Morse Code test was a test of basic understanding, not proficiency. The sending test was waived more than 25 years ago, and a number of accomodations added for those who requested them. So it really was a basic skills test.

However, all that is a 100% moot point now. At least in the USA, there is no more Morse Code testing for any amateur radio license, and there's no indication that any such test will be added in the future.

Yet the use of Morse Code in amateur radio continues, which is a Good Thing. Those of us who enjoy and use it need to promote it on its merits, help others learn and use it, and keep the *use* of Morse Code front-and-center in Amateur Radio - just as the proponents of other modes are doing. That's what this thread is really all about, and what a lot of us are doing.

73 de Jim, N2EY

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AK7V writes: "if
[AF6AY}

and

[N2EY}

have been arguing about this for a _decade_, that means

[AF6AY] was arguing about ham radio way, way before he had a ticket."

I first encountered Len Anderson online in late 1997. I have replied to his and many others' postings in a variety of forums since then. Sometimes there were gaps of many months when I did not respond to him at all. The discussions were not limited to the Morse Code test.

One of the reasons I have responded to Len is that he sometimes (not always) makes mistakes of fact and logic in his postings. For example, back in January 2005, in a discussion about license numbers, he claimed that all amateur radio licensees in the USA could continue to operate in the grace period of their licenses:

http://tinyurl.com/23ccjt

(quoting): “All licensees are perfectly legal to continue operating in their grace period. There is no necessity (nor sense) to eliminate those in the grace period from those in the normal 10-year license period from any class totals.”

In reality, a US amateur cannot operate with a license in the grace period unless a renewal application was received by FCC before the license expired.

All this is clearly spelled out in Part 97.


In another discussion, Len claimed that Technicians were the majority of US radio amateurs:

http://tinyurl.com/ywwxtn

(quoting): "Don't you realize that Technician class is now bigger than ALL other US license classes combined?"

My reply:

http://tinyurl.com/28fskc

There are lots of other examples. I don't know whether Len makes those mistakes intentionally, as a way of getting attention, or whether he really believes what he writes. In any case I correct some of them. That doesn't make Len happy, though.

AF6AY: "I've had a ticket for 52 years now, but it is Professional not amateur."

Actually, the license Len refers to says "Commercial" not "Professional". I have one too.

AF6AY: "You just have NO right to define me as you want to. Others think they have that 'right' but they are wrong."

Len, you've "defined" others in many ways in various forums. Why don't others have the same right?

AF6AY: "The discussion of whether or not an International Morse Code test HAD to be done by each ITU-member administration affected those who MIGHT want to enter amateur radio much more than those that were already IN it. Those who had ALREADY taken a code test just HAD to enforce their wishes on countless others and stalled the revision of ITU-R Radio Regulation S25 interminably. Fortunately, the IARU realize the error of this code test requirement (despite the opposition of the ARRL) and got S25 rewritten to make the code test OPTIONAL for each adminstration member nation. So, the FUTURE was served rather than a minority of those demanding that everyone else MUST do as these old-timers did."

One problem with that line of thought is that it ignores the fact that those who have earned a license, and who are actively involved and invested in amateur may be negatively affected by rules changes. Another problem is the implication that those who have earned licenses do not have the same rights to have their views considered as those who have not earned licenses.

One need only read a sampling of the comments on any amateur radio NPRM to see that the vast majority of them, on all sides of an issue, are made by already-licensed amateurs. With very few exceptions, those who are interested tend to just get licenses.

Here's an analogy to the situation:

Most residential areas in the USA have zoning codes and other ordinances that define how the land may be used. Lot sizes, setbacks, kinds of structures, etc. are all spelled out in detail. Zoning essentially defines different neighborhoods. Anyone can propose a change to the zoning, but such changes are not done lightly.

Suppose there were an existing neighborhood zoned a certain way, say for single-family homes of a certain size on lots of a certain size. And suppose there were a piece of undeveloped land in that neighborhood, which was undeveloped for various reasons such as steep slopes, rocks, etc.

Suppose a newcomer to the neighborhood bought the undeveloped land and proposed a minor zoning change so that the land could be developed in a way the newcomer wanted, rather than the way the rest of the neighborhood was developed. Such changes might be a reduction in lot size, or allowance of twin homes, or allowance for "in-law suites".

Should the newcomer's proposal be considered as more important than the existing neighbor's ideas?

Would it be reasonable to claim that the existing zoning laws affected those who might want to develop land in the neighborhood much more than those that were already in it?

Would you consider it wrong if those who had already met the zoning requirements tried to enforce their wishes on countless others by wanting to keep the zoning as it was, and stalled the revision of the zoning code interminably?

Would you accept the argument that the zoning code should be rewritten, over the opposition of the neighbors, to make certain provisions of the zoning code optional?

Would you accept the idea that the future was served by relaxing the zoning code for newcomers, rather than a minority of those demanding that everyone else must do as those old-timer neighbors did?

See the analogy?

AK7V: "it's odd that someone would spend years on a ham radio newsgroup and type "megabytes" worth of text on a hobby/service they're not even engaging in."

Of course. But it's not illegal or wrong. And over a period of years, a few kilobytes here and there adds up.

AF6AY: "It is done all the time. Prime example: The FCC. No one at the FCC is required to hold any radio license (of any kind) to work there...yet the FCC regulates ALL civil radio in the USA."

It's the FCC's reason to exist - it's their job. That's very different from an individual who does not work for FCC and is not licensed in the affected radio service.

AF6AY: "That in itself was a LOT of work to participate in, but it was a Good Fight and ended in a RIGHTNESS of OPTION and FREE CHOICE for all in the future who might want to enter USA amateur radio."

Would anyone accept that argument if it were applied to the zoning of their neighborhood?

AK7V: "The amount of work and energy required to do that is gargantuan compared to what it would take, with 8wpm proficiency, to sit through a 5WPM test."

AF6AY: "Sorry, that is a subjective opinion and has no basis in fact."

Why? If someone really does have 8 wpm Morse Code skill, they could easily pass a 5 wpm test. That's not a subjective opinion; it's an obvious fact.

At least two USA amateur radio licenses have been available with just a 5 wpm test since 1951. All classes of USA amateur radio licenses have been available with just a 5 wpm test since 1990 with a doctor's note, and since 2000 without such a note. And in 1991 the existing Technician class license lost its code test.

I think what happened in Len's case was obvious: He wanted a full-privileges US amateur radio license for a very long time, but did not want to pass a Morse Code test to get it. So he just waited until that test went away.

AF6AY: "Oh, and the code test ended at midnight local on 22 February 2007. NO ONE has to "sit through any code test" NOW."

Not for a USA amateur radio license. However, the USA continues to offer Commercial Radiotelegraph licenses, which do require a Morse Code test. And while some other countries have dropped their Morse Code test requirements, others have chosen to keep them.

AK7V: "It's sad and more than a little strange that someone so passionate wouldn't or couldn't just get a ticket and join the hobby."

AF6AY: "I find it "sad and more than a little strange" that some licensed amateurs have NO other life than amateur radio."

Who are they, Len?

AF6AY: "amateur radio never took a front seat with me but I am now a part of the USA 'amateur community' like it or not. Many old-timers (but chronologically younger than I) definitely despise that but I am not beholden to them in any way, nor am I required to serve them (because of their self-defined greatness). Many of those old-timers have NO other passion BUT amateur radio."

Who are these people, Len?

AF6AY: "I am not that way. I am simply enthusiastic about whatever I do and learn what I have to learn to do that."

Enthusiasm takes all forms. It does seem odd - some would say obsessive - that you would argue so much about amateur radio without becoming a radio amateur.

AF6AY: "I am trying to DISCUSS subjects involving amateur radio. As usual, these other radio amateurs insist on being amateur psychologists or just plain unidentified nutsos who want to demean, defame, and disintegrate anyone speaking contrary to their (not so) divine personal judgement. Many of them just CAN'T discuss...they have to RULE. <shrug>"

Well, considering the terms you use and have used to describe others, Len, it's certainly an odd form of "discussion" that you engage in.

I mean, your own words do seem to be an attempt to demean, defame, and disintegrate anyone speaking contrary to your (not so) divine personal judgement. It often seems that you just can't discuss...that you have to rule.

Like this:

http://tinyurl.com/27fbwe

which was eventually followed by this:

http://tinyurl.com/2tpq2l


And here's the Big Question:

The Morse Code test for US amateur licenses is gone completely. It's over, done, history, for more than a year, and it's not coming back. You got the rules change you wanted, your license, and some equipment. You've repeatedly said you have no interest in using Morse Code, nor in learning it.

So what are you "trying to discuss" now?

73 de Jim, N2EY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"And here's the Big Question:

The Morse Code test for US amateur licenses is gone completely. It's over, done, history, for more than a year, and it's not coming back. You got the rules change you wanted, your license, and some equipment. You've repeatedly said you have no interest in using Morse Code, nor in learning it.

So what are you "trying to discuss" now?

73 de Jim, N2EY"

Jim, this is just one more question that will be responded to with some off the wall silly answer, or not answered at all.

I've come to the conclusion certain people argue just for the fun of it and the more people they drag into their act, the more they like it. Perhaps old age and/or just being bored has a lot to do with it.

The only good thing I see coming out of the negative comments in this thread is, more and more people are becoming aware of who not to respond to on-the-air. I see that as a plus for the hobby.

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by AK7V on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
AF6AY, it's just my opinion. If I'm the only one puzzled, that's fine with me.

I don't think Technican class licensees "had" to be at the back of the RF bus. Anyone could upgrade - a tech has already agreed to take at least one test for privileges (and prior to taking that test, he wasn't even allowed on the ham radio bus). All of the ham radio tests I took were trivial. Staying at the back of the bus is a choice.
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
An Anonymous person using the handle of "radio123us" posted a demand of my banning from e-ham.net on 8 July 2008. The "charges" were vague, unspecific, done by someone fearful of revealing his (or her) own identity:

Invisible Ham: "Len, once again you selectively EDIT the truth to suit your needs...I NEVER demanded anything...I said "I encourage everyone that is offended by Len's comments to email the eHam.net team and REQUEST that he be banned from the site"...that's quite a bit different than a DEMAND..isn't it ???"

Not really according to law...you would be "an accessory before the fact" and a conspirator in a crime.

But...this isn't a court of law and this invisible (CB-er?) tries to weasel out of what he (or she) said.
..........

"Invisible CB-er (or ham): "Give us a break Len....you shouldn't be here because you areinsulting folks for no other reason then they disagree with you...If anything, you are GUILTY of trying to ban a positive discussion of a great MODE....."

"GUILTY?" Of what? Of NOT heaping praise on OOK CW telegraphy? Yes, I don't heap praise on it or describe it as "the greatest mode" in amateurism. Neither do I "hate" the mode.

"I shouldn't be here" you say? Oh, yes, because I don't heap praise on OOK CW telegraphy...

Is that an "insult?" To some it must be to devote such hate and anger against those who do not eagerly take it up.

Well, that is subjective, isn't it? If OOK CW radiotelegraphy is such a "great MODE," why haven't OTHER radio services kept on using it? Why haven't those other radio services that never used OOK CW radiotelegraphy put it into practice?

The only answer you can come up with (outside of YOU wanting it to be so "great," obviously) is the tired old cliche' of "this is amateur radio, not other radio services." That's dancing around the subject since you really can't answer that it is so "great."

Go back to what I've actually written in here. You WILL find that I AGREED that, for amateur radio purposes, Interneational Morse Code DOES have advantages over other modes. Those are rather limited technologically but are very good when neither side of an amateur radio contact have the same native language and only abbreviated casual contact is done.

From there on, though, there isn't much that oOK CW radiotelegraphy has to offer other than extreme simplicity applicable to QRP rigs.

"Positive discussion:" A true positive DISCUSSION is looking at ALL sides of an issue, then proving that the issue Should Be. In the spirit of the original article that should include some ways to LEARN or RE-LEARN the skill, shouldn't it? I think it should even though I don't care to do so now. I saw very few in the beginning of Don's article...then it segued to all the stupid in-fighting of coders v. we-don't-care-to-be-coders.

For DECADES there has been (what amounts to) propaganda on the (false) "positives" of OOK CW radiotelegraphy. Of course that was when code skill HAD to be tested for in order to obtain a USA amateur radio license having below 30 MHz privileges. [guess who the major propagandist was that promoted that? :-) ] That was a period of 1914 to 2007, a mere 93 years. Just the same, not everyone "converted" and became afficionados of this "great MODE." [amazing but true] There are NO statistics on who got turned off by the requirement and all we have are the heaping portions of praise liberaly served up by its (minority) of afficionados that mostly claim it is a "GREAT" mode.

Now, WHY must we who do not care to take up the mode (however great it is) be sent out of the room when all this ONE-SIDED "positive discussion" happens? Especially by FACELESS, INVISIBLE HANDLE-IDed VOICES OUT OF THE DARKNESS who cannot dredge up any ways to LEARN or RE-LEARN radiotelegraphy skills but only demean those who are not enthusiastic about it? The only valid reason that comes to mind is that the individual afficionado likes it...and thus "everyone" should like it.

In truth, I haven't requested, hinted-at, or even obliquely made a pass at BANNING ANYONE from e-ham.net other than mentioning that I thought fearful CB-handle holders refusing to make their callsign public should NOT be allowed to post. I say that because anyone who feels strongly on contentious issues should NOT TRY TO HIDE BEHIND PSEUDONYMS; if you don't have the guts to name yourself, you don't have any validity to conspire or ban OTHERS who DO identify themselves.

I will say it again, as I have for a decade, I am NOT against using OOK CW radiotelegraphy.

If those who like it want to do so, I say "enjoy" and make NO effort to stop them.

Examine your own "positive discussion," invisible thing. Do you really think you are being "positive" when you insist on ORDERING-AROUND others? No, you are just being dictatorial while hinding in some mental alleyway, afraid to come out into the bright sun of a new day.

That is NOT being "brave" about "fighting for your cause." It is just delivering yourself in a "plain brown wrapper" as if afraid of being identified to any letter carrier or neighbors, lest they talk about you. Not to worry, they ARE talking about you...

AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR writes: "Jim, this is just one more question that will be responded to with some off the wall silly answer, or not answered at all."

Maybe, maybe not. One thing is certain: It's not reasonable to expect someone to answer a question that wasn't asked!

KF4HR: "The only good thing I see coming out of the negative comments in this thread is, more and more people are becoming aware of who not to respond to on-the-air."

But in order to respond to someone on the air, the person in question must actually *be* on the air....

73 de Jim, N2EY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by K6LHA on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR wanted to boycott certain others on 9 Jul 08 with:

N2EY: "So what are you "trying to discuss" now?"

"Jim, this is just one more question that will be responded to with some off the wall silly answer, or not answered at all."

Tsk, tsk, one doesn't "answer" N2EY's interrogations using so many questions, one fills out a form that has already been organized to eventually show that Jimmie is "always correct." :-)

Too many "forms." Too little time to waste with petulant elitist aristocrats who cannot change.

If you had been observant instead of so touchy about being talked-back-to days ago, you would have seen my answers to others desiring banishment of myself, possibly of anyone who is "not one of you." <shrug>
..............

KF4HR: "I've come to the conclusion certain people argue just for the fun of it and the more people they drag into their act, the more they like it."

N2EY is one of those by long, long practice, visible to anyone.

KF4HR: "Perhaps old age and/or just being bored has a lot to do with it."

Jimmie is now in his mid-fifties. Perhaps "old age" IS a factor with him? [he was born about the time I had begun HF radio communications as an adult]

A day before, AK7V made a comment about "bizarre behavior." I submit that anyone who takes the time and trouble of selectively pulling out postings of one person and "tiny URL-ing" them, then trying to "prove" something with those later in other venues, is just as bizarre. Especially when the original messages ARE available to anyone who bothers to look...in this case Google archives of rec.radio.amateur.policy.

Anyone who DOES look is confronted with tens of thousands of postings from/to many others, listed in-context, chronologically dated, everything out in the open, nothing hidden. It is a MASS of stuff but those who really wanted to, had the time to do it, could glean a meaning of who said what to whom, how they said it, and who really thought what about a particular thread. One thing common about N2EY's threading is that he perpetually wanted to misdirect a thread into a whole new thread if he couldn't give a valid answer to real questions on amateur radio regulations. I'm not talking about small typos or details that weren't important...I'm talking about modes and the necesssity to have tests for them, broader policy questions posed to him, not just by me but by others.

One thing from newsgroup rec.radio.amateur.policy is that Jimmie MUST ALWAYS BE RIGHT. He has three standard modes of answering questions concerning things that He likes: Either misdirect the thread (and avoid direct answers); repeating old League-speak maxims as if they were golden truths (self-evident, never to be questioned); demeaning the challenger one way or another ("profiling" of others was tried, found ineffective, so he dropped that sub-mode)...which wound up with the "tiny-URLing" of "saving [SELECTED] posts of others for ease and edification" but really pulling them out of context to say not-nice about his perceived enemies. He HAS a vengeful, persistent streak.

Bizarre? To me his actions ARE so. Others mileage varies.

It is common in this computer-modem communication means for some to get thoroughly pissed off at some persistent challengers who directly challenge those golden maxims of TRVTH (that were born many years before). Some show their anger and hate directly. Some try to hide it, rationalizing their responses as "good for ham radio" (AS IF they were the ultimate judge)...then try to force others away by many and various ways.
.............

KF4HR: "The only good thing I see coming out of the negative comments in this thread is, more and more people are becoming aware of who not to respond to on-the-air. I see that as a plus for the hobby."

Wow, just like a mighty producer here in movieland! :-)

Radiotelegrapher, angry as heck and not taking any more: "If you don't like my words, you'll never QSO in this town again!" :-)

Is BOYCOTT of those who think differently "good for the hobby [of amateur radio]? I don't see anything useful coming out of that. Having different opinions, different desires is not an offense in law. It may be an "offense" to those who are just one-sided, those who cannot change, nor accept change happening in front of their eyes. Those want ONLY those of like minds, a (growing smaller) clique who all think alike. That is isolationism, an alienation of one of the shining tenets of USA amateur radio that is SUPPOSED to exist, that of trying out NEW things rather than venerating only the OLD.

As if this morning (9 Jul 08) there are about 658 thousand individual active-period licensed USA radio amateurs. Of those, about 304 thousand individual active-period Technician class radio amateurs (most of whom continue to operate above 30 MHz still). It is practically impossible to attempt a boycott in such large groups, especially in a large group that does not favor radiotelegraphy modes.

You cannot boycott OPINIONS. The English crown tried that in 1750 to the 1770s, only to become undone in a very large way (Hello USA!). In recent times McCartyism did come close to that but the leader was eventually undone, disgraced.

BOYCOTTING is against freedom of choice, all enjoying the many OPTIONS the FCC gives all USA licensees.

Those who wish to learn radiotelegraphy skills HAVE that opportunity now, even if so few had shown some good ways to learn it beyond the article's first day. Radiotelegraphy DOES have some advantages for radio amateurs over other modes. It just isn't (proven by history of radio) so "great" that it must continue to be the primo skill that ALL USA radio amateurs MUST have. It isn't de jure, it isn't de facto. It is just de fact o' life.

Good luck in your BOYCOTT. Just erect more walls, try to keep out those who aren't like you. Remain elite, aristocratic, and unmindful of what others say. Demean those who have different opinions. Way to Go. Out.

AF6AY
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"Jim, this is just one more question that will be responded to with some off the wall silly answer, or not answered at all."

... and I rest my case! :^)

KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N2EY on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
KF4HR writes: "Jim, this is just one more question that will be responded to with some off the wall silly answer, or not answered at all."

... and I rest my case! :^)"

Of course! Fits the profile prediction perfectly.

Say, what did you think of my real-estate-zoning analogy?

73 de Jim, N2EY

 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KF4HR on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
"Say, what did you think of my real-estate-zoning analogy? 73 de Jim, N2EY"

That was excellent Jim! But what are the odds he understood it? didididit didit

73, KF4HR
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by RADIO123US on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
You know, Len sounds alot like a broken record....maybe it's just senility ?
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by KA8NSG on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
Sheesh....bitch,bitch bitch! To each their own! Go back operating and leave it alone. Glad I learned CW coz after 2000 and lost my voicebox. CW is the best way for me operate! Like I said to each their own ok. Please act like gentlemen. We already have enough negativilty in the world.
73s KA8NSG
 
10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by W4JMO on July 9, 2008 Mail this to a friend!
I remember when I first got out of high school and decided to join the Army in 1960. After basic, I got orders for a school called ISROC. ISROC? What the heck is ISROC I asked several members of the staff that trained us in basic training. No one there knew what ISROC was. When I finally reached my new assignment, there was a big sign out front. Big letters saying ISROC with a smaller print below saying, Intermediate Speed Radio Operator Course. Went inside the nearby the bldg and asked what was this school all about? A sgt there said, We're gonna teach you Morse Code. We call it CW. Being from a very small town, I'd never heard of Morse Code or CW.
I was a happy camper once the course started and I started getting the hang of CW. Beats the heck out of being a Grunt any day.
Long story story short. My job in my next assignment in Germany wasn't a job at all. It turned up to be a hobby. I didn't mind the 10 to 14 hour shifts in the field.
I know CW's not for everyone. But I still enjoy it just as much today as I did way back then
de George W4JMO
 
RE: 10 Reasons to Learn Dahdidahdit Didahdah  
by N3PZZ on February 19, 2010 Mail this to a friend!
Yes I started in CB, and not ashamed of where I started.
After reading your garbage, you got LID all over you.
You are just an idiot who likes to annoy. Most likely you have no friends,
who would want you for one?
So go ahead and quote me again. Say something stupid like you always do.
I look forward to your stupidity..
BLAH! BLAH! BLAH!
Oh and I forgot, MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Related News & Articles
A New Sound for Morse


Other Operating Articles
A New Sound for Morse