Manager


Manager - N2MG
Manager Notes

Survey Question

Question

This summer at the ITU World Administrative Radio Confernce (WARC) to be held in Geneva Switzerland one topic will be the elimination of the CW test as a requirement for HF operation. Do you agree that the CW requirement should be removed?

Results (5062 answers)

Take this Survey

Please Login (above) before taking this survey.

Survey Comments

CW

I have been off and on, interested in ham radio since my early teens. Now retired, I,m studying again for a Tech licence. I think I missed the best years of ham radio because of that g-d damned code requirement. Except for the code I would have been a licenced ham for the last 40 years. When I finished electronics school in 1965 I could have easily passed the written test. So now I'm trying to learn 5 WPM anyway. Wish me luck.
Posted by JOHND393 on 2004-03-30

CW

I have been off and on, interested in ham radio since my early teens. Now retired, I,m studying again for a Tech licence. I think I missed the best years of ham radio because of that g-d damned code requirement. Except for the code I would have been a licenced ham for the last 40 years. When I finished electronics school in 1965 I could have easily passed the written test. So now I'm trying to learn 5 WPM anyway. Wish me luck.
Posted by JOHND393 on 2004-03-30

CW

I have been off and on, interested in ham radio since my early teens. Now retired, I,m studying again for a Tech licence. I think I missed the best years of ham radio because of that g-d damned code requirement. Except for the code I would have been a licenced ham for the last 40 years. When I finished electronics school in 1965 I could have easily passed the written test. So now I'm trying to learn 5 WPM anyway. Wish me luck.
Posted by JOHND393 on 2004-03-30

cw

Sorry about the multiple posts. I was haveing trouble with my connection and tried refresh a couple times and that's what happened.
Posted by JOHND393 on 2004-03-30

Keep CW

Altough I'm not operating much cw myself, I had to learn it and pass a test. We should keep it that way. Else we just can give all the ham-bands away to some CB-freaks who don't even know how to make a dipole antenna!! Pse keep CB apart from ham-radio or our hobby will die!.
ON4MGY Nic
Posted by ON4MGY on 2003-04-21

What is the fuss about?

I never reall have understood why we only test on Morse code? Why don't we require an operating test for each mode? For example, before you can use SSB, you must take and pass a test showing you are proficient in the use and theory of SSB. Before you can use FM, same deal, written and practical exam. This seems to be the line of thinking that I get from everyone around here, let's just make sure that we hold the same standards across the board for everything. CW, Digital, SSB, FM; it's all the same.
Posted by KG4WCU on 2003-04-17

What is the fuss about?

I never reall have understood why we only test on Morse code? Why don't we require an operating test for each mode? For example, before you can use SSB, you must take and pass a test showing you are proficient in the use and theory of SSB. Before you can use FM, same deal, written and practical exam. This seems to be the line of thinking that I get from everyone around here, let's just make sure that we hold the same standards across the board for everything. CW, Digital, SSB, FM; it's all the same.
Posted by KG4WCU on 2003-04-17

Blah

CW is not being outlawed. Most of the bands have "CW only" segments, why not just enjoy them! Some say the old set of code requirements kept out bad operators and so on. Tune in to 80m sometime and you'll hear all the cussing, interference, splattering, and illegal power that has been there long before restructuring. Conversely I know several no-code hams who are engineers by trade, and never do these things on the air. What if digital mode diehards made the same argument. How about a typing requirement? Keyboarding forever!
Posted by WB1W on 2003-03-26

NEVER!

no I don't think so. I haven't passed the cw test yet... but I AM going to. this month. I think not requiring cw would be a big mistake. what if someone (not knowing cw) is ragchewing on a freq when inturrupted by a cw transmission... lets say it is a sos mayday with information. but the people that are on freq yell and complain about the "old timers" always breaking in and screwing with their qso.

meanwhile a ship sinks. or some other emergency. cw is a major part of HF and we can not do away with it cause it's the simplist mode and there is an emergency it's the mode that will be easiest and most reliable.
Posted by KD7EVS on 2003-03-13

Obsolete

CW operators also use other modes, and some of these are also commercially obsolete (such as AM, RTTY, SSB), but this is unimportant. Amateurs generally do not care whether the mode they like to use is considered useless by others.
Posted by LU1DZ on 2003-03-09

CW

Years ago CW was a good mode of communication ! Today it is good but many other modes are better!The old statement CW keeps out the unqualified is not true. There are old timers who run AM on 3880 so wide the splatter 25kc either way. So it sounds to me they need some requalification! When you are operating I thought you were supposed to monitor your transmissions so as not to cause interference to other operators not the case with the boys who incidently are Extras for many years running vintage AM stations! Well enough said ! I think that proper testing will keep out the undesirables. As for all the trash talk about CW it used to be a time when you used CW just like the time we used to build equipment! How many DSP RADIOS HAS ANY ONE BUILT LATELY?

K9PLK
Posted by KB9FMV on 2003-01-31

AEIOU & sometimes Y

The world according to CURMUDGEON.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-24

Some folks don't test well!

Baloney!
Posted by CURMUDGEON on 2003-01-20

One last thought

I passed my Elements 1 & 3 yesterday. As I was walking to my car from the VEC test site, a thought occurred to me.

Some people do not test well. That doesn't mean they don't want to learn the subject they cannot pass a test on, however.

This may sound totally out there, but perhaps- just perhaps- if a no-code person has HF privileges (be they limited to a band or two, or unlimited) maybe the fact that the test requirement *itself* was eliminated, would give them incentive to at least try out some code. I'm sure that many won't have anything to do with it, but perhaps doing away with tests for code will actually encourage some of the less-virulent anti-coders to try it out, just to see what the hullballoo is all about and because there is no pressure to perform for the VECs anymore.

Technician licensees in the US already have this ability on VHF/UHF. You don't "need" to test for the code for a Tech ticket, but you can use it all the same.

Some people just don't test well. I've seen this sentiment argued here on this forum, and on others as well. They tried to learn the code but could not pass the test. They could probably do fine and learn the code a lot easier and quicker if they didn't have to prove how fast they could copy for someone with the power and authority to deny them a ticket. In any event, I don't believe that doing away with the test requirement for code will be the death of code.
Posted by KC0ODY on 2003-01-12

No Offense But...

I know many older hams, unfortunately i am about as young as they get in my area. It just makes me think, after all the older hams i enjoy talking to pass on to ham heaven who the heck am i supposed to talk to?

Seriously, its been a rough road trying to get any new hams here. Two local clubs died, mainly because most of the members did! I have two local clubs left, and they are struggling so bad that one of them gave up on their repeater when it suffered lightning damage last summer. It is sorely missed, and the hams left in the area are wondering what it will be like without the only area UHF repeater gone with the wind. It's common to see attacks on our radio spectrum from commercial sources, and around here if they listened to UHF (70cm) they would think that it's free for the asking. I bet you could put up an antenna and broadcast music on 70cm for a month or even more before it would be noticed, i'm not saying that you should do something as illegal as that it's just a "for example" statement.

Honestly, above 2m is dead now where i live. You might hear the occassional simplex comversation, but set a scan for the repeater portion of the band plan and you will hear dead air for a year. So do you think that i am honestly worried about getting on HF when 6m and up barely holds any interest?? I would like to try digital modes on HF however, so a limited digital modes HF license would suit me just fine!!

I visit a local "old timer" every week or more, and he got me hooked on HF digital modes. He uses CW too in case you are wondering, but he admits that it has been a few years since he has used anything other than his computer to send and receive.

Anyway, i just wanted to point out that although i do get a bit hot under the collar sometimes when posting to these items on Eham, i am a reasonable fellow. Looking forward to the Minnesota VHF QSO Party this month, i enjoy 6m, 2m, and 70cm SSB, and i even tried CW using my computer. CW can be a bit stronger at getting through the noise at times, and i have yet to dismiss it as a useful mode of communication, and i highly doubt that if it was removed as a testing requirement that it would be forgotten forever. If it is so useful than why would it be forgotten?? Come on you Pro-Code Hams, if you are so worried about it being forgotten then get active in becoming an Elmer and pass on the tradition, even if they remove it as a testing requirement that doesn't mean that Elmers and Classes the world over will suddenly cease to teach it!

I only wish that it would be a more successful hobby where i live, i remember the good days when i was first licensed, we had a Extra Class ham that started out in Amateur Radio back in the good old days of the Novice license being CW only and only being good for a year, you could always count on him being on 146.52 or the local 2m repeater. He was the type of guy that would give you the shirt off his back if you needed it, and at age 78 he used the internet and the latest digital modes, and he even used an old straight key from his Novice days to work CW. Nothing but the best of the best, and i say that because he didn't care what license you had, he didn't care what the CW requirment was, and he also could care less if you were a no-code license, if your a HAM your a HAM.

73,

Scott, KBØNLY


Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-11

W8OB

Since you mention 9/11, how did cw assist in ways that other modes didn't? Hell, anyone can jump on here and talk about the 9/11 incident. Just saying it happened in no way means cw played the ONLY part in getting communications in and out of the affected cities. So the point is, what event took place in which cw and ONLY cw was our only saving grace? The answer is, "none". Your obviously ignorant to the technology used today in the battlefield so don't speak to me about foxholes and keyclicks. When you get some more knowledge come back and visit us again.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-11

Oh Come On . . .

Good lord, you can come up with a better slogan than "The Jedi Will Never Die" can't you? Oh, I forgot. You guys are superior.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-11

Time to let your opinions known to those that can actually do something are

==>ARRL BOARD TO TAKE STRATEGIC TACK AT JANUARY MEETING

The ARRL Board of Directors will mull options for the next cycle of League
activities and deal with fiscal issues when it gathers January 17-18 in
Windsor, Connecticut. With ARRL and International Amateur Radio Union
(IARU) positions established for most pending FCC and legislative issues
and for the upcoming 2003 World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-03),
the Board is poised to tackle strategic planning for the next three to
five years as one of its top agenda topics.

"We need to look at our basic assumptions," said ARRL Chief Executive
Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ. "We will do what we have to do to ensure that
Amateur Radio and the ARRL will be healthy 20 years from now." At the
January meeting, the Board will consider recommendations regarding how
strategic planning should be conducted later this year.

Posted by K9PO on 2003-01-11

Give it up People!

Geez, reading some of the posts here you would think the whole world is going to come to some horrible bloody end if the CW Requirement is removed.

The "CB" doom argument doesn't work for anyone with brains. All the older generation hams barked at having a no-code license when it was created, and they claimed that VHF and UHF was going to become "CB LIKE", well that never happened. At least i have yet to talk to anyone here in the Midwest that complains about CB like behavior on 2 meters.

If the CW Requirement is such a good filter than why is 99.9% of the garbage and vulgar language on HF?? Obviously even the bad mouthed hams of the world passed it already.

There is no valid argument for keeping the CW Requirement. Just because the requirement is removed doesn't mean that the next step is to make CW illegal, and it doesn't mean everyone is going to stop using it for christ sakes.

I think you ones arguing in favor of keeping the CW Requirement need to go cool off, have a cold drink, and let life move on.

And to the one who said if the CW Requirement is removed he will throw away his radios and tear up his license, can i get directions to your house?? I looked up your address on QRZ, so let me know what day you plan on putting those radios on the curb and i'll be happy to come get them!!

Other countries are already stepping forward and approving the removal of the CW Requirement. I talked to a Canadian Ham that is very excited about the fact that they will be having there licenses restructured, and will be beefing up the the theory on the tests and removing the CW requirement.

All branches of the Military gave up on CW years ago. Just recently i had an opportunity to check out the latest in what the National Guard unit near me is using to fill there communications needs, and talk about state of the art!

73,

Scott, KBØNLY

www.nocode.org


Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

Here it is in a Nutshell!

The IARU Council has adopted the following resolution!!!:

Considering the approval without opposition of ITU-R Recommendation M.1544, which sets out the minimum qualifications of radio amateurs,

recognizing that the Morse code continues to be an effective and efficient mode of communication used by many thousands of radio amateurs, but

further recognizing that the position of Morse as a qualifying criterion for an HF amateur license is no longer relevant to the healthy future of amateur radio,

resolves that

member societies are urged to seek, as an interim measure, Morse code testing speeds not exceeding five words per minute;
setting aside any previous relevant decisions, IARU policy is to support the removal of Morse code testing as an ITU requirement for an amateur license to operate on frequencies below 30 MHz.

Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

More...

US "Restructuring" Stands!
FCC Denies Petitions for Reconsideration of its Decisions in WT Docket No. 98-143, including "WAD II" which asked for the return of the 20 wpm Morse test for the Extra class license ...
The FCC released a "Memorandum Opinion and Order" on April 6, 2001, denying a collection of Petitions for Reconsideration which were filed in the wake of its December 2000 release of the Report and Order in WT Docket No. 98-143, which reduced the number of US amateur license classes from 6 to 3 and dropped both the 13 wpm Morse test for General class and the 20 wpm Morse test for Extra class to a single 5 wpm Morse test for both classes, stating at that time that no regulatory purpose would be served by maintaining the higher speed Morse tests, but also that it could not, at that time, eliminate all Morse testing requirements because of an obligation under the ITU Radio Regulations S25.5.


Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

More on ....

IARU R3 Conference Results - "Eliminate Morse Testing!"
THE IARU R3 Conference recently held in Darwin, Australia voted almost unanimously to support the elimination of Morse testing as an international requirement for all amateur licenses.
Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

Military

Military Continues Morse Code Ban
There have been recent reports that MARS, the ham radio auxillary for military communications, has allowed the use of Morse Code on military frequencies. That turns out not to be the case. Here's a message from the Chief of Army MARS asserting that the ban is still in place.


DE AAA9A NR 047
R 181740Z AUG 97
FM CHIEF ARMY MARS/AAA9A AZ
TO ALL ARMY MARS MEMBERS AND STATIONS
BT
SUBJECT. CAM 45-97 (CW BAN WITHIN DOD MARS)
REF ARRL LETTER VOL. 16, NO. 32, AUGUST 15, 1997
1. AN ARTICLE HAS APPEARED IN THE ABOVE REFERENCE CONCERNING CW
OPERATION WITHIN MARS. THIS ARTICLE IS INACCURATE.
2. AS SPECIFIED IN THE 28 JUNE 1995 LETTER SIGNED BY THEN ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE EMMETT PAIGE, AND EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 1996
"THE CW MODE OF COMMUNICATIONS WILL NO LONGER BE USED ON ANY
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) MARS CIRCUITS, NETWORKS, OR FREQUENCIES.
THEREFORE, CW IS TO BE RETIRED FROM USE WITHIN THE DOD MARS."
3. IT HAS BEEN VERIFIED THAT THIS POLICY IS STILL IN EFFECT AND WILL
BE UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. THERE HAS BEEN NO CHANGE TO THIS POLICY.
SGD CHIEF ARMY MARS
BT


Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

N2YZS

Most of us (the older 20 wpm pro-Morse types you complain about) would be more than happy to teach you about Morse. The problem is your attitude. Morse is outdated, Morse is too hard to learn, digital modes are so much better than Morse, I refuse to learn Morse, Morse has kept my off of HF...the list is endless. The Extra subbands on the bottom of the bands are usually pretty good. Nobody is running 5KW. However, today's modern receivers are easily overloaded. Try turning down the RF gain. Yes, I'd be willing to sit down tomorrow and take the entire battery of written tests as well as the Morse (I'd be willing to take one at 35 wpm) test. It would be easier today since there are fewer tests and only a 5 wpm Morse requirement. There has been no increase in difficulty of the theory tests either. The old Advanced test was probably the hardest. Some of the older hams remember having to draw circuits and having to have one minute of solid copy. This is a can of worms you don't want to open. I'm actually for renewal testing. But given the FCC's lack of resources, it will not happen. While I'd like to see the current standards remain, I'm sure the requirement will go this summer and the FCC will not be too far behind. If that happens, I'll be asking that Morse questions be added to the test pools. Why not an Extra? Is the nasty written test preventing you from upgrading? You guys who are here complaining about the Morse requirement would be better off learning it or studying for the Extra written and getting on the air. It works both ways. 73 de Tom, K4NR
Posted by K4NR on 2003-01-10

Military

Military Continues Morse Code Ban
There have been recent reports that MARS, the ham radio auxillary for military communications, has allowed the use of Morse Code on military frequencies. That turns out not to be the case. Here's a message from the Chief of Army MARS asserting that the ban is still in place.


DE AAA9A NR 047
R 181740Z AUG 97
FM CHIEF ARMY MARS/AAA9A AZ
TO ALL ARMY MARS MEMBERS AND STATIONS
BT
SUBJECT. CAM 45-97 (CW BAN WITHIN DOD MARS)
REF ARRL LETTER VOL. 16, NO. 32, AUGUST 15, 1997
1. AN ARTICLE HAS APPEARED IN THE ABOVE REFERENCE CONCERNING CW
OPERATION WITHIN MARS. THIS ARTICLE IS INACCURATE.
2. AS SPECIFIED IN THE 28 JUNE 1995 LETTER SIGNED BY THEN ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE EMMETT PAIGE, AND EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 1996
"THE CW MODE OF COMMUNICATIONS WILL NO LONGER BE USED ON ANY
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) MARS CIRCUITS, NETWORKS, OR FREQUENCIES.
THEREFORE, CW IS TO BE RETIRED FROM USE WITHIN THE DOD MARS."
3. IT HAS BEEN VERIFIED THAT THIS POLICY IS STILL IN EFFECT AND WILL
BE UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. THERE HAS BEEN NO CHANGE TO THIS POLICY.
SGD CHIEF ARMY MARS
BT


Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

RAC Position on CW

Canadian RAC Position on the Morse Code Requirement
From an RAC Position Paper

1.11 Morse Code
The ITU RR S25.5 reads as follows:

Any person seeking a licence shall prove that he is able to send correctly by hand and to receive correctly by ear texts in Morse code signals. The administrations concerned may, however, waive this requirement in the case of stations making use exclusively of frequencies above 30 MHz.

Of all the issues in the Discussion Paper, Morse code has taken precedence in discussions and was high on the list of membership feedback. However, many of the respondents were not addressing the matter of whether S25.5 was really appropriate as an ITU Treaty requirement, but were in most part, expressing their feelings towards the usefulness of, and traditions surrounding Morse code in the Amateur Services.

The committee felt that the arguments advanced by the IARU FASC Discussion Paper surrounding S25.5 are convincing, but do not remind the reader that the main reason (perhaps the only reason) for including in ITU-RR a requirement for knowledge of Morse code was to ensure that an Amateur Station operator could understand an instruction from an official station to close down or move frequency.

An official station would no longer use Morse code for that purpose. In spite of the arguments about the benefits of retaining Morse code within the Amateur Services, the ITU-RR Treaty provisions should not be used to look after the needs of the Amateur Services. Therefore, the committee accepts that RR S25.5 may be deleted.

Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

N2YZS

Most of us (the older 20 wpm pro-Morse types you complain about) would be more than happy to teach you about Morse. The problem is your attitude. Morse is outdated, Morse is too hard to learn, digital modes are so much better than Morse, I refuse to learn Morse, Morse has kept my off of HF...the list is endless. The Extra subbands on the bottom of the bands are usually pretty good. Nobody is running 5KW. However, today's modern receivers are easily overloaded. Try turning down the RF gain. Yes, I'd be willing to sit down tomorrow and take the entire battery of written tests as well as the Morse (I'd be willing to take one at 35 wpm) test. It would be easier today since there are fewer tests and only a 5 wpm Morse requirement. There has been no increase in difficulty of the theory tests either. The old Advanced test was probably the hardest. Some of the older hams remember having to draw circuits and having to have one minute of solid copy. This is a can of worms you don't want to open. I'm actually for renewal testing. But given the FCC's lack of resources, it will not happen. While I'd like to see the current standards remain, I'm sure the requirement will go this summer and the FCC will not be too far behind. If that happens, I'll be asking that Morse questions be added to the test pools. Why not an Extra? Is the nasty written test preventing you from upgrading? You guys who are here complaining about the Morse requirement would be better off learning it or studying for the Extra written and getting on the air. It works both ways. 73 de Tom, K4NR
Posted by K4NR on 2003-01-10

KB0NLY

Give us all a break. It all comes from the NCI website. Do you actually think this is news? Try having an original thought.
Posted by CW-FAN on 2003-01-10

No Written Slowing me Down!

I have taken the General written test and passed it four times now. I just passed it again a month ago, but never succeed in passing the CW test before the CSCE expires. The first time i took the General Written i missed one question, and the last three times i took it i passed it at 100%!

So for you nit-pickers that might ask about missing the one question, is was not CW related, and it was merely a simple stupid mistake of filling in the wrong answer because i was in a hurry to get it done.

Heck, i've taken practice exams for Extra, i could pass it easy enough. But the only Written test that i have taken so far at a testing session was the General, because i knew everytime that i would fail the CW test. And i failed it once again this year, so much for using the HF portion of my new radio.

And for anyone that has read my postings elsewhere in the forums on Eham, my hearing disability is still keeping me from distinguishing dits from dahs, i simply cannot make out any difference in the length of the tone. So its another trip back to my hearing specialist, i would like to operate SSB on HF at least once before i become to deaf to even care about it! HI HI

Anyway, don't misunderstand me, i'm not using my hearing disability as an excuse. I've taken and failed more CW tests than most would even put forth the effort to show up for. I've spent an horrific amount of money on study materials, and i even recently constructed some headphones that block out all room noise, they are probably better than the hearing protection used by construction workers under OSHA regulations, honestly! But perhaps maybe i am only doing more harm listening to practice software and CD's at what most humans would consider painful volume levels, even so i still can't tell a dit from a dah.

73,

Scott, KBØNLY

P.S. Anyone know a hearing specialist that might not be afraid to sign paperwork from the FCC?? I honestly think that doctors are to afraid of FCC action upon them after all the waivers they unknowingly signed and got criticized for when they were flocked to by others without genuine hearing problems.


Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

CW-FAN

Go to the FCC, and the RAC websites. As well as the ARRL website, and then tell me that the info i posted came only from the NCI. And by the way, get a life.



Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

CW-FAN

You honestly want me to take your comments seriously?? Why don't you try providing a callsign and a name on Eham, what are you afraid of being known?? Coward!


Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

CW-FAN

You honestly want me to take your comments seriously?? Why don't you try providing a callsign and a name on Eham, what are you afraid of being known?? Coward!


Posted by KB0NLY on 2003-01-10

There you have it . . . .

Well folks, there ya have it! The official proclamation is that cw operators are the only real amateur radio operators on the planet, and everyone else are just tag-along folks who are just a bunch of wanna-be's! Thanks so much for letting everyone know their place in amateur radio society. I know we all appreciate your self-proclaimed appointment in the hobby. I think most of us have went away with the impression that you wanted to make on the rest of us, which is if your not into cw then your only cb trash. And if you disagree with the superior race of people known as cw operators, then you're promptly shown the door because your not welcome in the cw clique if you don't agree with all their views.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-10

There you have it . . . .

Well folks, there ya have it! The official proclamation is that cw operators are the only real amateur radio operators on the planet, and everyone else are just tag-along folks who are just a bunch of wanna-be's! Thanks so much for letting everyone know their place in amateur radio society. I know we all appreciate your self-proclaimed appointment in the hobby. I think most of us have went away with the impression that you wanted to make on the rest of us, which is if your not into cw then your only cb trash. And if you disagree with the superior race of people known as cw operators, then you're promptly shown the door because your not welcome in the cw clique if you don't agree with all their views.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-10

yep there you have it

Sure nuf there it is written. If you cw guys don't want to go along with the no-coders then your nothing but prima donnas
know it alls, whinners and so on.give me give me give me all for nothing of course.
Morse is the backbone of radio, lose the req lose the ops. get your rear end in a jam
where CW is the mode that will work and watch these guys stand around with a finger up their you know what. wait and see
Posted by W8OB on 2003-01-10

Morse Waivers

From my experience as a VE, there are plenty of doctors willing to sign the waiver. The waiver was designed to help those applicants protected under the ADA. From what I've seen sometimes it works, other times it's abused. The worst one I ever saw was a guy with a back problem that could not sit for an extended period. He could not sit for 10 minutes to take the test--I'll bet he had no problems sitting with a mic in his hand call CQ DX on 20 Phone. If you have a disability, I'm sure any reasonable doctor will sign the paperwork. 73 de Tom, K4NR


Posted by K4NR on 2003-01-10

Same old story

Yes indeed, I wonder how many thousands upon thousands of times the human species is going to have to hear the story about "when something happens cw is the only thing that's going to get though". Tell me people, when is this big event going to take place? We've been hearing the same old whining cry of an excuse for over 100 years now, and I have to tell you it got old 20 or so years ago (you know, back when the rest of the planet got into gear and moved into the digital age). You guys remind me of ol' Paul Bunyan. I know you guys are senti"mental" about your old mode, and you've got every right to stand beside it, love it, use it, work it, and hell, even go to bed with it. But at the end of the day technology left it in the dust (a long time ago). So you can keep on supporting cw and all it has to offer because the bottom line is your only doing it in a desperate attempt to give it some kind of current credibility in a world where other modes took over along time ago. I mean really, when you have to keep using the same old fall-back excuse of "it's the only thing that'll get through when the crap hits the fan", then it's time to drop the licensing requirements or get some new excuses! You guys have run it into the ground long enough, and if you can't come up with anything better than that then forget about it!! The thing is this, cw folks are the ones who will NEVER be satisfied with licensing requirements because your stuck in a time warp or something. We're just saying it's time to revisit licensing requirements so folks can simply use a radio for hobby purposes. You guys on the other hand are too busy telling everyone how rough you had it back when it was 13 & 20 wpm. Your the one's doing all the whining. Get real!
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-10

Another Quote

This was taken from an earlier post: "Morse is the backbone of radio". Once again, that's the opinion of many cw operators out there. If I got on here saying my prefered mode was the "backbone of radio" you guys would have a fit! That statement illustrates the the utter conceit within the cw community. It tells all who read it that cw folks are superior to everyone else, no matter what the mode or preference, cw is the absolute end of the universe. You people are truly in a world of your own, and each one of you has established yourselves as the "mode in charge of all other modes". It's this "I'm GOD because I do cw" that truly puts you people in a clique that most people don't want anything to do with because one of the requirements of being in your little clique is becoming an Alpha-Hotel to those who don't do cw. You know, you guys are special. Perhaps you people need one of those little blue things you hang on your rear-view mirror so you can get the best parking spots, and to be the first one in line when checking out at the grocery store, and to have all the right-of-way in life . . . just because you operate cw!! Sounds like your "specialness" fits more into the category of a handicap than something that is generally yeilded to by others.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-10

No Code

Actually, if the code requirement was dropped for access to HF, the "no code" ops still would only have access to the voice portion of the bands. Approx. half of the HF spectrum would still be unusable to "no code" ops. So for the so-called elitist CW operators, their portion of the bands would be free from the so-called rebel rousing, CB trash talking rift-raff. Whats the beef? The two should never meet if each keep to their own segments of the band.

Personally, I don't see what the big deal is all about. 5 wpm code is not that big of a hurdle. Just about anyone can do it if they really care to give it a try.
Posted by W5GD on 2003-01-10

Same Old Story

KE4RWS, No whining here. I could care less if the new Extras did not have to pass the 20 wpm test and had easier written tests. The rules are the rules. Someone talked about how the tests have been made harder to compensate for the reduced Morse requirement. My point is that the tests are easier today than in years past. At one time you actually had to have a good understanding of electronics to pass the written exams. Today the question and answer pools are all available--all the questions are multiple choice. We have more appliance operators today than in years past because of it. One can argue that the need for a detailed understanding has changed since the vast majority of people have never built or repaired anything. On the other hand, because of our tickets we can work on and / or build our own equipment. We don't have to take it in for repairs, modifications, and service. Eventually we could lose that freedom. Morse IS our historical roots. Read "The Victorian Internet" and you'll begin to understand. All amateurs need to have a basic understanding of the mode. Does it require its own test? I could arge that 5 wpm is strictly a basic understanding. However, it appears that the requirement will change in the next few years. All we need to do is add some questions on Morse to the question pools and move on. One poster talked about how CW and SSB will still have their own sub-bands and the two groups will be fine. For a while. Eventually the new HF hams will want more space and there will be a plea to reduce the CW / Data sub-bands to make more room for phone. "Why can't you compromise?", will be their question. Nevermind that the entire structure will have been drastically changed in less than 10 years. Of course CW is allowed in any portion of the band--we stay at the bottom of the bands by a gentleman's agreement. The elimination of the Morse requirement combined with much easier tests changes the face of amateur radio. The Morse requirement is not the real issue, however it is symbolic of the drastic changes that our happening to our fraternity. Many feel the changes are for the worse--time will tell. 73 de Tom, K4NR ..
Posted by K4NR on 2003-01-10

Poll results

Why wouldn't this poll be an accurate indicator of how the masses really feel?

Seems to me, it is.

Polls taken by professional polling companies rarely survey more than 0.1% (1% is a huge sample) of people affected by an issue and the outcomes are about 90% accurate, e.g., the poll and the final real vote are nearly always in agreement.

"Exit polling" samples during elections, for example, poll maybe 20-30 people from a polling place that might serve 5,000 voters, creating a 0.5% sample. Using that, election results are predicted, and are predicted about 90% accurately.

I don't see why this poll would be any different. Are you saying that only "pro-code" people voted here? Maybe, but I cannot imagine why that would be....
Posted by WB2WIK on 2003-01-10

keep the code

Should have never changed cw from 20 to 5 but it happen .As far as i am concerned is way to easy .Does not take much to get 5 wpm
de ab7nc
Posted by AB7NC on 2003-01-10

keep the code

Should have never changed cw from 20 to 5 but it happen .As far as i am concerned is way to easy .Does not take much to get 5 wpm
de ab7nc
Posted by AB7NC on 2003-01-10

KE4RWS

I choose to be unknown because of threats from LIDs and there are LIDs on both sides of the issue. You would think that someone so educated and better than the rest of us could reply in a resonable manner rather than in an emotional outburst. It's kinda fun to watch.
Posted by CW-FAN on 2003-01-10

CW Ops are superior!

I would never have made such a statement years ago, but in view of the latest crop of "malcontents", CW Ops are superior and there is comming a time when I'll operate only cw, regardless.
Posted by CURMUDGEON on 2003-01-10

No-code, No-SSB HF tickets

If CW is removed as a world wide requirement for HF usage, every country doesn’t have to have a non-CW, phone license for HF.

I see many people still assume that a non-CW ticket for HF means they will automatically have phone privileges on HF. It is possible to create non-CW, non-phone HF license; a PSK 10 watt license would be non-CW, non-phone.

It would even be possible to create a no-code ticket, and restrict people to the FM portion of 10 meters.

It is even possible to have a no-code ticket that restricts people to a CW ONLY on HF in the Novice sub bands. No reason why they couldn’t send and try to receive CW via a computer-might even learn code by listening to the in coming CW signals?

Personally, I think the best place to put no-code ops is at the beginning of 10 meters, by creating a AM only segment from 28.00 to 28.200. This would give the illegals who have infested that part of the band tons of QRM.

OR, FCC could create a non-ham, CB type ticket, requiring a written test for the 27.500-28.000 segment of 11 meters. I believe those who actually have assigned usage of that segment of 11 meters gave up trying to use it decades ago. If it turns into another “Hell Hole” like CB, then people would have more incentive to migrate from there into ham radio, by studying and passing CW.

I still have the believe that the less work one has to do to earn a privilege, the more likely one will abuse the privilege. And, there isn’t any reason to try an experiment, no-code hams on HF with phone privileges, to see if that group of people will cause more abuse than the current HF entry point, generals. It would be impossible to revoke phone privileges for an entire subset of hams, if the new no-code phone privilege hams create havoc in the USA and for those outside of the USA.


I think I have created enough threads to keep the bashers going for at least a few more days.

Who knows, maybe these threads could be used as a topic. That would keep the bashers going for a few weeks!

Have FUN
Bob


Posted by RobertKoernerExAE7G on 2003-01-10

AE7G

Interesting thoughts. Make the entry-level ticket much like the old Novice class. Restrict them to certain segments of the band with limited power. I always figured the new ticket would be phone, but I see your point. Thanks for sharing! 73 de Tom, K4NR
Posted by K4NR on 2003-01-10

the end

I dont know about the rest of you guys and gals but I am not gonna waste anymore of my time on this subject. Some of these posts with all the crying and blubbering from some who are on the outside looking in is really getting to be a turn-off big time. Hey RWS how 9/11 for starters but go a step further just think of yourself in a foxhole surrounded, I always knew the gentle click of a cw key carries less distance than a voice hollering into a microphone, of course it never will happen, hell either would 9/11. Gotta go the HF bands are open and I intend to have some fun there.
Posted by W8OB on 2003-01-10

Keep CW

I am a brand new ham. I am also 62 years young and have just fullfilled a dream of years. I do not have a radio yet but guess what. I am studing my code.

I have always associated Amateur radio and code as one. I know I have a license but it is only a sign that I have accomplished half of my goal.

I really look forward to talking with folks around the world on CW.

Keep the code and thanks for allowing me to vent.

Larry KD7TQW

Posted by KD7TQW on 2003-01-10

Thanks, KB1FWN...

Blessed be the smart young ones, there is at least one around here who sees.

CW Forever,
Godspeed...
The Jedi Will Never Die.

Posted by W3DCG on 2003-01-10

here is the big deal

The big deal is the regs say you have to learn cw to get on HF. These comments do little more than the Jerry Springer show. Just because WARC sez the cw req is no longer required does not mean the US is going to drop the morse requirement. Already a few countries have stated that morse will not be dropped regardless of what the WARC sez.So you guys have two choices right now either learn the damn code and get on hf or expend all your energy on this forum peeing and moaning, then go on 2m and listen to someones wife asking him to bring home a loaf of bread.
And NO I don't give a damn that you can write in C++ or design the space shuttle. Its really amazing how some educated people can be so stupid.
Posted by W8OB on 2003-01-09

Final thoughts

Since this discussion has become little more than an insult fest, I'm bowing out before it degrades further. My final thoughts:

WB2WIK: To repeat, I am not, and have not advocated eliminating the theory. How you have applied that stigma to me remains a mystery.

W8OB: Despite your insult, I'll reply rationally. The regs may say it now, but you've missed the entire point of the discussion, and that is the changing of the regs. Other countries may have stated they're not dropping it, but no one knows what the FCC will do until it happens.
Posted by Shane Vassar on 2003-01-09

What a Whiner

My word . . . that certainly did strike a nerve with this last guy! I thought we were discussing the issue in this forum. I guess some of you guys just want to call names and express your own anger at those who don't agree with your views. And as far as cw requirements being in the regs, that's how things get changed in life. Eventually enough people have their say, and if the voice is loud enough, things get changed. Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that but the end result is the same. By the way (to the previous post), I certainly didn't say anything about doing anything with C++ so what's up your . . . whatever? Once again, I thought we were talking about the issue. Your anger is most noted, and I hope it won't become a problem here because most of us would like to throw some level-headed opinions around this forum without someone biting their head off.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-09

KE4RWS

For the record, I do not program in C++. Why did it strike a nerve? Several reasons. First, I resent being labelled an idiot or a whiner because of my views. Second, I do happen to be educated with a four year degree in Computer Science, and I am an Information Center Analyst as my current position. Third, my views have been thoroughly twisted, turned, flipped upside down and thrown back at me. When I stated we should not be competing with computers, I did not imply that having a degree in CS or knowing how to code should be an instant requirement for admission into the ham bands. You still have to take the theory tests, learn about radio, before you can get involved. Through that process one learns Ohm's Law, and what a transistor is, ***that is what those tests are for.*** Despite what has been said, I still feel that Morse Code should not be a requirement for the HF bands. So the one who's head has been bitten off is mine. Since you asked, I have answered.
Posted by Shane Vassar on 2003-01-09

Data

What's really interesting is that, despite all the brickbats, the actual "score" on the eHam poll indicates that of 4,532 voters (an amazing quantity!), 62% favor retaining the code test as a licensing provision.

That 4,532 probably represents more than 10% of all actual American hams (I realize some votes were undoubtedly from "DX" hams, and some are probably from unlicensed parties) and is an astonishing turnout for a survey.

If FCC representatives read this stuff, they'll know how the "majority" feels.
Posted by WB2WIK on 2003-01-09

I don't know...

I'm not a big fan of CW. I passed the 5 wpm test back when there was a 13 and 20 wpm test, too. I could never get to the 13 wpm level and then it was eliminated. That's why I'm now on 17 and 12 meters most afternoons. If it didn't change I would have stayed on 10 meter and Satellites, I guess. Is it needed for HF operation? No! Should it stay a requirement? I don't know. What good or harm will come from a change? I have no way of knowing. I only wish that the exams had more questions about regulation, antenna theory and CW related topics such as abbreviations and prosigns. I talk to new HAMs often who have no clue about rigs, modes, antennas and regulations. If they could send code at 20 wpm it wouldn't change the fact that they are not ready to get on the air!

Mark
k1mkf@arrl.net
Posted by K1MKF on 2003-01-09

Give up already...know code.


Posted by W3DCG on 2003-01-09

AB8PR

My post was actually directed at W8OB and not you. You and I obviously posted our last comments at the same time, and yours got between my message and the message I was addressing (the reference to C++ in W8OB's little rant should have been the hint). We simply posted at the same time and this is the result!
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-09

Inaccurate Results

The poll results only reflect what those who even took the time to vote. Of that I'm sure a percentage of those respodents aren't even licensed operators. If you had a "real" poll on the subject whereby everyone responded you'd have more accurate results on the subject. But don't think for a second that the results you see here are even remotely accurate!
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-09

oh brother

Hey guys who was making names here. I just stated that right now if you want to get on HF then learn morse. you guys must have a guilty conscience or something. I am amazed at the amount of people who are pro-code and as stated earlier this survery is only the tip of the iceberg. I guess the thing that really grinds me is everytime this discussion comes up somebody always has to bring up the " I am a expect programmer" or " I am a design engineer" type of crap.
Posted by W8OB on 2003-01-09

oh brother

Hey guys who was making names here. I just stated that right now if you want to get on HF then learn morse. you guys must have a guilty conscience or something. I am amazed at the amount of people who are pro-code and as stated earlier this survery is only the tip of the iceberg. I guess the thing that really grinds me is everytime this discussion comes up somebody always has to bring up the " I am a expect programmer" or " I am a design engineer" type of crap.
Posted by W8OB on 2003-01-09

Something to consider

Here's another way of looking at this. There is something about CW that is very exciting. To work someone who cannot speak english in a third world country using left over WW2 gear while I sit over here in my warm house and fancy radio is a real thrill. I hear this constant bickering over this over and over again. I am not going to say keep it or trash it. But I will say for every CW op that slams other hams in the rudest way or calls themselves "real Hams" and everybody else is just a dummy with a mic, it puts a real sick feeling in my stomach and makes me want to go home and throw my CW key in the trash. This is ashame because i know it can affect new hams the same way. If you support CW and believe that it is the "true" form of ham radio that can break the langue barrer and reach out to all kinds of people in all parts of the world then show a good example and have respect to the rest of the Ham world. If you want what you say to get respect then show respect in what you say.
Posted by KE1MB on 2003-01-09

Something to consider

Here's another way of looking at this. There is something about CW that is very exciting. To work someone who cannot speak english in a third world country using left over WW2 gear while I sit over here in my warm house and fancy radio is a real thrill. I hear this constant bickering over this over and over again. I am not going to say keep it or trash it. But I will say for every CW op that slams other hams in the rudest way or calls themselves "real Hams" and everybody else is just a dummy with a mic, it puts a real sick feeling in my stomach and makes me want to go home and throw my CW key in the trash. This is ashame because i know it can affect new hams the same way. If you support CW and believe that it is the "true" form of ham radio that can break the langue barrer and reach out to all kinds of people in all parts of the world then show a good example and have respect to the rest of the Ham world. If you want what you say to get respect then show respect in what you say.
Posted by KE1MB on 2003-01-09

5 WPM

I'm not a CW nut. It's just not my thing.
For many it's the "only" thing. Many of my
ham friends hold with the latter statement
and we coexist peacefully.

I feel anyone can learn to receive CW at
5 WPM. Nowadays that's all one needs to do.
You aren't required to prove anything other
than that, "you can copy CW at 5 WPM". It
will not prove that you are a rocket scientist
or an idiot or anything in between.
I really can't believe that it will guarantee
that you will be a better radio operator also.

It is just a requirement that needs to kept
in my opinion. Besides if you learn CW at 5
WPM, you have learned something new and you
might just need to use it someday. What can
it really hurt? Use it if you want or don't.
Your choice.
Posted by NK5A on 2003-01-09

Know Code!

There is no free lunch, air is not free now and everybody wants something for nothing.
Is it any wonder were are a consumer nation and all of our radios are imported?
I would love to see the code kept and the bar raised back up for Extra's to at least 13 WPM.
You don't get spectrum by wanting it... you EARN IT
Posted by WD8CRT on 2003-01-09

5 WPM

I'm not a CW nut. It's just not my thing.
For many it's the "only" thing. Many of my
ham friends hold with the latter statement
and we coexist peacefully.

I feel anyone can learn to receive CW at
5 WPM. Nowadays that's all one needs to do.
You aren't required to prove anything other
than that, "you can copy CW at 5 WPM". It
will not prove that you are a rocket scientist
or an idiot or anything in between.
I really can't believe that it will guarantee
that you will be a better radio operator also.

It is just a requirement that needs to kept
in my opinion. Besides if you learn CW at 5
WPM, you have learned something new and you
might just need to use it someday. What can
it really hurt? Use it if you want or don't.
Your choice.
Posted by NK5A on 2003-01-09

Morse Requirement

I have been an occasional visitor to eham.net over the last few months but it is this subject which has made me register and say my piece.

I am a fairly inactive ham who occasionaly uses the local VHF/UHF repeaters. I hold a UK class B (no code) license and it allows me to enjoy my privleges when I choose to use them, with my limited equipment (a handheld). The requirement to be proficient in a particular mode for access to a particular, and large, part of the ham bands seems a little unnecessary. The international requirement for morse code proficiency for many other radio services has disappeared, it would seem sensible for the mandatory requirement for all access to HF to be removed to reflect the wider telecommunications community. Perhaps some access to the HF bands could be granted with the basic (currently class B in the Uk)license with full access granted after passing some other testing, maybe an HF specific technical test paper or similiar?

I do not see that it can be considered "unfair" to existing HF operators if the morse code requirment is replaced with a different type of testing. In the UK it is now possible to gain access to more bands with the new foundation license than with my Class B, however the class B gives me other privileges and also these new hams will have worked hard for their license even if its requirements seem easier in comparision. The important thing is that they have passed the tests laid down by the regulatory authorities to a sufficient standard to hold a license, just as I had to do seven years ago to acheive my license.

I do not think ham radio privileges should be given freely but ham radio MUST reflect the modern communications environment if it is to exist in the future. We must ensure that the hobby is of interest in the future. It is very difficult for hobbies such as ours to compete for, and hold interest, with young people especially and this will probably get worse.

The same problem affects many other hobbies and interests which invole a lot of work or commitment. I see exactly the same in model railroading, the hobby which takes most of my time and money.

I think the most important thing is that ham radio continues to exist as a interesting and challenging hobby, which refects the communications enviroment of the day, It can act, and did for me, as an extremly useful introduction to communications engineering and associated technologies.

If the requirement for code is removed it does not mean that hams will suddenly stop using or learning morse as we all know it has advantages over other modes in some circumstances.

Just for information ham radio was the catalyst for my current job as a Systems Engineer working on analogue trunked radio systems and technologies.

Also I consider myself fairly unusual as I am a ham and only 26 years old. I am an occasional visitor to the local radio club and although busy most members seem to be over 40. This seems to be a young club and is a trend the hobby as a whole must attempt to deal with if we are to continue to exist in the long term future.




Posted by G7UHE on 2003-01-09

Food for thought?

A ham that knows CW is a Ham Radio Operator!
A ham that doesn't know CW is a Ham Radio Operator! A ham that exercises his/her privileges, helps others with the hobby, and gets others interested in the hobby is a valuable asset to the hobby!

73 and have fun!
Posted by WA8YIH on 2003-01-09

Food for thought?

A ham that knows CW is a Ham Radio Operator!
A ham that doesn't know CW is a Ham Radio Operator! A ham that exercises his/her privileges, helps others with the hobby, and gets others interested in the hobby is a valuable asset to the hobby!

73 and have fun!
Posted by WA8YIH on 2003-01-09

WHAT? NO CW?

I'm 13 years old. Last summer, when I passed the element 1 5WPM Morse Code exam, I already had elemenet 3 general class written. I took the CW test about five times...each time failing. I went each month. I was sure I wouldn't be able to do it. Well, one day, I walked in to that hospital and passed. In fact, just barely. Since then, however, I have been VERY active on HF. I usually do SSB, but I also do CW. It wasn't that I hated CW, I just had to learn it. If it wasn't for the CW exam, I would never have ever learned this great mode, and thus would have been just a single side band guy. I think, even though I had trouble with it, the code test should be left the way it is, if not increased to 10WPM. Should we really admit 'technicians with general credit' onto our HF bands? Don't get me wrong, I was a technician once, too. There's nothing wrong with it. What I'm saying is that HF is a different world. The CW exam puts a 'line in the sand', a kind of hurtle. Plus, if we make this upgrade a 'free-bee', then Morse Code is in severe risk of being lost. It is an art, not a test. If you would like HF, you need the code. I think it should be left alone. And good luck to all of you who one day aspire to pass it! 73', de Mike, KB1FWN.
Posted by KB1FWN on 2003-01-09

Morse Code

After reading 270+ comments on the subject of this survey, I can only say this. Most of the posts are irrelevent, disgusting, biased, vial, threatening, and crude. You should be ashamed of yourselves, but you are probably not. To those 20 wpm+ people: can you still pass your theory test (take a look at the new Extra test. Then tell me you can still pass it!)? With the increased theory knowledge needed for the higher classes, 5wpm is plenty. If the requirement goes away, it goes away. Your time would be better spent on teaching a new ham Morse code than complaining about removal of the requirement. If the requirement for Morse code goes away, that doesn't mean Morse code goes away. You, the people who are so violently opposed to the elimination of this requirement should be out there teaching hams the benefits of Morse. Bickering about it here will only cause hard feelings. So all can properly chastise me, I am a General Class operator, who became a General Class operator after the requirement dropped to 5WPM. But I can say this: after listening to the Extra bands, the signal quality of some of the signals is terrible! Spatter, harmonics, 5000KW of power to talk across town. If this is what it means to be a 20wpm Extra, I guess I don't care to go there!
Posted by K2VJK on 2003-01-09

Turning into c.b. radio

Hmmmmm.........smells like C.B. radio...i'm still studying morse code so if they get rid of morse code i'm going to be crushed. Now 5wpm is easy to pass, and most of the times cw is the only way you can communicate using 5 watts.....because the pile ups on ssb get baaaaadddddd....I never heard a cw pile up byt i bet yall have.
Well 73
Posted by KD5PDA on 2003-01-09

code requirement

times are changing and we must change with them
Posted by ETOWER766 on 2003-01-08

Bottom Line

I think the original concept behind the Morse Code requirement for ham licensing from an ITU perspective was related to the concept of Ham Radio as a ready pool of radio operators in war time or other emergencies. Now that virtually all govermental agencies have dropped Morse operations, the concept is no longer valid.


The continuing requirement for Morse skills in ham licensing is really an embarasment to the hobby in general. It supports the efforts of those people who consider ham radio to be a dying enterprise and who also have a commercial plan for spectrum allocated to ham radio.


To most non-ham technophiles Morse Code is just seen as a quaint old modulation technique related to antique spark gap transmitters or associate it the telegraph operators in Western movies. Its requirement in modern licensing is seen as plain old stupid. To many potential new hams the Morse requirement says that ham radio is a hobby from the past and is not relavent to todays technology.


Many posters seem to feel that eliminating Morse as a licence requirement implies eliminating it as an operating mode. I really don't think eliminating Morse ham operations is on anyones agenda.


I expect CW will still be used on the ham bands as long as there are ham bands, but as a licensing requirement it really needs to go away.


73 de Jack KZ5A

Posted by KZ5A on 2003-01-08

Not a Hobby

Hello dear Scott, many thanks for your remarks on my conference post. / -...- / I invite you to read the 1999 GACW OPEN LETTER in our site. / -...- / The 2002 new one will be ready in english in a couple of weeks, but there is in spanish. / -...- / Please do not call the ITU Amateur Radio Service as a HOBYY, certanly it is not. -...- Best regards. / http://gacw.no-ip.org / ...- .-
Posted by LU1DZ on 2003-01-08

CW Still Needed

While it is true that there are fewer external users of Morse outside of Ham Radio, that does not mean that it is without relevance. I would say just the opposite is true. Most technologies that are being used to replace Morse require equipment that is far more complicated than the equpment it replaces. This is fine until something stops working at which point evryone looks at each other wondering what to do. Get out the soldering iron and multitester? Nope. Scrounge some parts and get on the air with a couple of watts and some wire? Nope. We, as hams, can still communicate without the problems of single point of failure and using the minimum of equipment.

If a sizable disaster occurs requiring our skills, knowledge of morse makes us more valuable rather than less. We need to have as many tools in our toolbox as we can. If we have nothing to differentiate us from other users of the bands, we really will be redundant.

KB1FLR,
Rick
Posted by KB1FLR on 2003-01-08

To WA4DOU

Hi there- I concur with your assessment that there are two "factions" of amateur radio operators; one staunchly pro-Code and the other anti-Code, and that their attitudes about the Code are diametrically opposed and highly polarized. How each of them treat the other is simply an issue of attitude problems and carrying huge chips on their shoulders. Both sides are responsible for this.

What really interested me about your post was this comment:

"International Morse Code is but a ruse, its the excuse. There will be others to follow after the code requirement has been abolished."

I'm just curious (as well as being a newbie to amateur radio)- what other issues in this hobby do you see arising that would be as potentially polarizing as the Code testing requirement? Maybe it's because I'm so new, but I don't see anyone arguing over other modes like they do over the Code, perhaps because we've never had to have our performance tested by three VECs in order to use them.

I surmise that Code won't go away, even if the testing requirement is done away with- people will want to use it for various reasons, such as ease of propagation, bandwidth conservation, or just the pure challenge of this communication mode. - Jackie
Posted by KC0ODY on 2003-01-08

Code again

I recall reading in a magazine, whose name I have forgotten, the following. "An F-16 has more firepower than a squadron of B-17s, but the pilot must still know how to use a rife."
The elegant simplicity of Morse code is what makes it real. Look at the small (minature) QRP radios that use CW, the first digital mode in the world, effectively to communicate.
"I don't need the code, I have a PHd ..." and the other excuses are just that, excuses. Morse once learned will be forever in reflex storage in the mind and enable utilization in the future for who knows what.
You know, I never operated microwave bands, or satellite or slow scan, but questions on this subject must be answered on the FCC exam. What in Sam Hill is wrong with answering questions on Morse, it's one of our allowed modes of operation?
If we are to be the self reliant communicator that many in the FCC and local OES offices refer to us as we should be knowledgeable in many methods of communications.
Short answer to the no code guys is get off the pot and do something, but don't tell me why your too smart to learn code ... that answer actually proves you don't know what you're talking about.

ed K0KL
Posted by K0KL on 2003-01-08

KZ5A

Jack, I agree that the current agenda is to eliminate Morse testing as a separate requirement. Once the Morse test is eliminated, I think we need to add Morse related questions to the written test pools. I think the majority of Technicians will oppose such a move, but I argue that adding Morse questions gives Morse the same weight as any other mode / topic. The next major issue in my mind will be the reduction of the CW / Data sub-bands to make room for all the SSB operators. I don't think that battle will start right away, but I honestly think that is the next big issue. 73 de Tom, K4NR
Posted by K4NR on 2003-01-08

KB1FLR, good comments!

...as are many of the others.

The analogy of an F-16 pilot needing to know (and having to demonstrate) how to use a rifle is a good one, too. My earlier statement that knowing how to program in C++ doesn't help much on the air was a similar analogy. I know lots of very bright people, but most of them don't know Ohm's Law and as such they shouldn't be hams.

The argument "I'm never going to use code, so why should I have to learn it?" holds about as much water as "I'm never going to use Ohm's Law, so why should I have to learn it?" or any number of other basic principles. The "next step" after eliminating the code requirement might well be to eliminate everything else, and just make the ham bands license-free, like CB. You know how well that worked out.

WB2WIK/6
Posted by WB2WIK on 2003-01-08

Anyone can change their mind.

I had a rather spirited discussion with a co-worker of mine on this issue. His opinion, and the more I think about it the more I agree, is that the reasons behind eliminating the requirement shouldn't be to make it easier for people to get licensed. I'm sure that when the issue is brought up at WARC, there will be other issues, that have been mentioned here, that will be used in the discussion. His suggestion, and I thought it sounded an interesting compromise, was to add a intermediate license between Tech and General. This license, with sufficient theory examination beyond Tech, would permit access to limited sections of the HF SSB sub-bands. The CW-only bands would be off limits, as well as the rest of the SSB bands. Limited access is granted to HF, but full access still requires the 5 WPM code. I figure this is going to open up the flak guns so I've donned my helmet. Flame away. To add a side topic, I feel that one of the main reasons younger people don't get into the hobby is due to monetary reasons. Especially teens, who must rely on their parents for finances. Luckily for me, I got my radio because my dad was a radio tech in the Air Force back in the early 60's and shared an interest in it with me, and as such provided a sounding board and cheering section as I proceeded to get my license. Others may not be so lucky, as indicated by the average person saying, "What's ham radio?" Perhaps it is the parents we should be focusing on, for this even continues into college. Unless you come from a well to do family, in college you're flat broke. The Bank of Mom and Dad is still your primary source of finances. Increase their awareness of what it is, so that if their kid sees ham radio in action (my college radio club had a station in the attic of the science building) and then seeks to do it themselves, their 'loan' won't get stopped in its tracks due to a lack of knowledge. Parents are more apt to spend on what they know about or think will help their kids, and if it doesn't fit that category their wallets are tighter than Scrooge's. To conclude, I don't think anyone is advocating eliminating the theory tests. Part of the primary goal of the service is advancement of the technology, and that's rather hard to do without a rudimentary knowledge of electronics. Unless they've been exposed to it however, most kids won't. I didn't know a great deal about electronics until I took it in college. What little I did know came from my dad as he helped me prepare for the license. To this day I haven't built any of my own equipment, mainly because I lack the equipment, time, or money to do it. A full-time job tends to interfere with it. I don't feel this makes me any less of a ham, nor do I feel it makes me any less of a ham to have achieved Extra without taking 20 WPM. That seems to be a prevalent attitude. I studied hard to pass that test, and you know what, I just happen to remember a good bit of it. The only thing that still bothers me is how not knowing Morse Code will prevent you from setting up your station. You still have to study the theory, you still have to read books to learn how it's done, before you can apply it to your station. That won't change, and I'd like to know how it was perceived that I was promoting such. I never have, and I never will. Talk about having words put in your mouth. Anyway, thus ends my ramble.
Posted by Shane Vassar on 2003-01-08

Not for Everyone

I agree with Michael (WN5T) So what if CW seems outdated to some. Even if it keeps some folks out of the hobby. Amateur radio is not for everyone. Even if the testing requiements included learning Greek those who are truly motivated will do it. I'm not a CW speed deamon by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm glad I learned at least enough to pass the 5 WPM requirement. We don't have to be modern and cutting edge. Ham radio is fun! And there will always be those who are willing to work to acheive the priviledge. My two cents --Randy McLain
Posted by KD5NZH on 2003-01-08

What is the big deal...

about learning Morse at the 5 wpm level? Many of the "no coders" in the thread could have learned the code in the past month if they had spent the time they used to yell at the "know coders" studying Morse instead. Re code being outdated... I'm listening to 7.040 Mhz right now after moving up and down 40 meters, and there are as many, if not more, CW QSOs than SSB voice. (Of course, the REAL crowd is on 20m PSK -- I think it's because PSK offers many of the psychological advantages of CW -- everyone has the same 'voice', age and gender are not immediately apparent, etc. -- yet takes less mental effort.) To the "no coders", one of the phrases I remember from my military days was "You don't have to like it, you just have to do it." That's life in a nutshell. Another phrase which was applied to the whiners was "Your mother's not here and no one else cares!" For criminy's sake, spend 30 minutes a night for the next WEEK, and then GO AND PASS THE TEST! It isn't that hard!
Posted by KD7KGX on 2003-01-08

Here's the big deal . . .

The big deal isn't that people can learn 5wpm, but rather it shouldn't be required for HF licensing. Hmmmmmm, are you people not reading these posts? They clearly state that many disagree with cw being a requirement, not that they can't learn it. Why do you folks have to try and turn it around everytime this debate comes up? Every single time the pro-cw folks respond with the mindset that all the non-cw people want to squash the tiny spectrum for cw when nothing could be farther from the truth! Most people in this forum who disagree with cw licensing requirements NEVER said anything about getting rid of cw, only in terms of licensing requirements. I've stated this fact numerous times in my posts, as have others but you guys just keep trying to turn it around that if you don't do cw or agree with it in terms of licensing requirements then you suddenly want to kill the hobby completely. I've always had trouble seeing the connection there . . .
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-08

KNOW IT IS TO LOVE IT

I have enjoyed seeing the comments about what a bad thing CW is... and would hazard a guess those posters do not even have a paddle on the operating desk.

CW's fans know the biggest mistake was lowering the code speed requiremnt from 14 and 20 down to 5 WPM.

Say what - if you do not get the last comment I will explain it.

I enjoy CW - why - because I do not see it as any sort of burden but a joy to use... how can that be so - because I use it at conversational speeds which are above 20 WPM.

CW isn't a problem when it becomes second nature to you - when does that happen? WHEN IT GETS USED. Once your mind reaches that moment when you do not find yourself deciphering characters but "knowing" words because you are OPERATING with CW you have it/

By saying 5 WPM is good enough CW became doomed - even though it is but a requirement for obtaining a license, for practical usage 5 WPM is ridiculous to call "knowledge" of CW.

Ask yourself this question - when you tune to the low edge of the HF bands and you hear CW clipping along do you really think the guy copying it is doing so by visualizing the alphabet printout showing each chracter and its equivilant... NOT!

As a quantifier of Worldwide usage of CW I ask you check out the single operator contest records in the CQ WW Contest USA entrants. The highest score was NOT made on SSB but on CW - yes, you can work more guys in an hour on SSB on an open band under ideal conditions but that is only a part of a 48 hour contest. During those marginal times when communication theoretically is not possible CW pulls through - rare Gray Line propagation events occur on CW when they won't on SSB because CW is the superior marginal communications mode.

To those who seek to eliminate CW since it is "old fashioned" do not think it will be replaced by SSB for anything other than Non Real-World clear channel communications... if you want an easy to copy mode try FM - you already know the words and there is no operating involved since it is "clear channel" communications.

Keep the requirement in and you will continue to expose OPERATORS (note I did not say simply license holders here) to a very efficient mode of communication... CW.

If you use it you will love it - if you don't you will hate it - as witnessed here in this family of posts there are quite a few who have never done anything other than what they had to do to pass an exam... what a shame.

73,

Jim, K4OJ


Posted by K4OJ on 2003-01-07

Know It Is To Love It

Jim (K4OJ), I'd have to agree with a number of your thoughts. In the early 70's I was really interested in getting my ticket, but I let Morse scare me away for almost 25 years. In the early 90's the SWL bug hit again. By 1995 I discovered the Technician ticket and was headed in that direction. I ran across Bill (WA8CDU) who became my elmer. He encouraged me to learn Morse. On a bet, I agreed to attempt it at the next test session. The next day I found out that session was only one week away. I earned my Technician Plus at that session. I hit the air on 40 CW making my first QSO with Bill. Scared to death, I called CQ on 40 CW and worked a couple of other stations. Bill would call from time to time and critic my Morse. A month later I was a General. Bill sent me a box of keys to try. I liked the single paddle Vibroplex. He told me to keep the Vibroplex and send the remainder back to him. The next month I upgraded to Advanced. I was happy and put the key away. Bill would call and tell me to tune to 14005 or 7005 and listen (but don't transmit--that portion of the band was reserved for Extras). It was usually some cool DX. I picked up the key and went back to CW. I upgraded to Extra the following month. About that time I was finally getting comfortable with Morse. I played in some contests and my speed improved. Soon I could do 30, then 35. Morse became easy and enjoyable. If it were not for the test requirement and Bill, I probably would not have bothered with Morse and I would not know what I do today about its effectiveness. I also agree that 5 wpm is just an introduction to the code. But I also think the test requirement is history. However I also think we will see a renewed interest in CW as the phone sub-bands become filled. I also hope to always be able to call CQ on CW and get a response. 73 de Tom, K4NR
Posted by K4NR on 2003-01-07

Conference

I thinks that during the next IARU conference the CW requirements will be canceled or lowered as a general rule to be followed for all IARU National Societies / -...- / There is a general consensus to do it no matter what we think / -...- / I dont have a representative in this conference, neither the 90% of the LUs / -...- / Then some representative of our National Society who never pass a CW test but he have the Superior class will vote / -...- / What is he going to do with his vote...? / -...- / May be he is going to vote in representation of less than 20 LUs who are the officers of the National Society / -..- / A National Society that never made any survey about anything / -...- / But he will count as 28.700 LU radio amateurs vote / -...- / Well, having a look of this survey today it seems that 62% wants to retain the CW test / -...- / Then, Who is going to vote for each of us? / ..--.. / The GACW is not worry about the AR Service future, but we are very worry about the future quality of our service / -...- / This is the last paragraph our GACW open letter that made us many enemies but a lot of friends / -...- / ""To conclude, in synthesis, you can do whatever you want, go on destroying, extending the BC, eliminating, massing, go on forgetting that the only aims of our existence is the experimentation, but make you responsible of this, so the history can point you and everybody know that the telegrapher go on being for several years more, much more than the national and international fraudulent people who are
temporally inside our Amateur Services"". / ...- .- /
Posted by LU1DZ on 2003-01-07

CW Gone, Maybe?

LU1DZ- "I thinks that during the next IARU conference the CW requirements will be canceled or lowered as a general rule to be followed for all IARU National Societies".

IARU has already had their meting where they have decided to continue the elimination of the code requirment. The final decision is likely to come at the WRC-2003 in Geneva this June. If that happens and the ITU standard on minimum performance requirements for ham radio operaters is changed then the individual regulatory agencies such as the FCC or MPT in each country then may remove the requirement for code as a condition of licensing.

The IARU National Societies (ARRL for the US, RCA for Argentina) have already been discussing this and if you review their meeting notes on www.iaru.org you will see the position they have adopted. However, to everyone, it is never too late to offer an opinion on this subject to your national society supporting or not supporting the resolution. What is definetly not going to be usefull is continual flame wars on the net or on the air.

Stay involved in your hobby an tell your national IARU societies what you want. It makes their jobs easier and you might find that they do something you want them to do.

73 Scott
Posted by K9PO on 2003-01-07

It's kept me out of HF

The code requirement has kept me out of HF. I'm trying to learn, but for some reason, it doesn't come easy to me. I've rebuilt 5KW AM broadcast transmitters after a flood and have swapped tubes and tuned 50KW FM transmitters. I've designed and built broadcast audio chains and tuned audio for great sound at exactly legal modulation. I've kept logs and performed field stength surveys. I designed, built and produced computer boards from the componet level. But I can't even QRP under 50MHz on the ham bands because of the damn dit-dahs. Screw the code requirement! How many of you old brass pounders know ASCII or BAUDOT? How many of you know how the MPU chip in your radio works? How many of you know your powers of 2 or binary math? These things have much more to do with current ham gear than being able to pound some brass. It's not needed for emergency communications, with a 12v battery, my 60w 2m and Ringo Ranger I can hit a repeater on every allocated pair. If something wipes out both Seattle and Vancouver, I really doubt that banging some brass is going to save my bacon.
Posted by W7COM on 2003-01-07

A matter of perspective

There's two sides to every coin, and there's two sides to this argument. Both have their opinions. Here's mine:

The Morse Code was a first in radio because of its simplicity. All you had to do to send it was switch a carrier wave on and off. As the technology expanded and new ways of transmitting information were developed, radio came into its own until it has reached the point where it is today. Morse code was a milestone in the trip, but it is by no means radio by itself. It is one form of it, but no more. Think of it this way. The Ford Model T was a milestone in the development of the modern car. Was it great in its time? Definitely. Are there still people who drive it today? A few, mostly collectors or those with a passion for antiquities. It's not a viable option for today's highway system; it's just too old to compete. It's a similar situation with Morse Code. It's still a viable mode of communication, and there are followers who enjoy the mode, but in today's world of the Internet, computer entertainment and television, it's unlikely that it holds any interest to youth. You might get one or two to go 'Oooooh' when you tell the story but a glimpse at their Playstation and they're goners.

What we as the ham community should be focusing on is how to make the hobby more interesting to the younger set. Computers are the way of the world now, and instead of competing with them, they should be folded in as part of the hobby and promoted as such. I'm part of 'Generation X', and I grew up with them. The technical aspects of radio interest me more than the modes of operation. I enjoy Morse from time to time but I am hankering to try some of the digital modes one of these days.

The bottom line, Morse Code is what kids learn about in history class these days. As has been stated, a large portion of the military has ceased using it. It's time to retire it as a requirement, but by all means still teach it. If someone wants to learn it, they will. If not, they shouldn't be barred from participating in all levels of the hobby. I do not agree with these arguments that it is 'dumbing down' the licensees. This is absurd. I also disagree with the sentiments that those who do not enjoy code are CBers. That is ridiculous. In my opinion, they are ramblings from people who felt that since they had to do it, so does everyone else. A sad attitude to take, in my opinion.

My $0.02.
Shane, AB8PR
Posted by Shane Vassar on 2003-01-07

I miss the old, original Novice

...class license. The one that existed for about 20 years, and was a one-year, non-renewable, code-only ticket with limited operating privileges on HF.

It was the ultimate proving ground for new hams and separated those who really wanted to continue from those who did not.

When it existed, most Novices upgraded directly to General class (or higher) and become real operators, having cut their teeth using only code with limited privileges.

Regardless of technology advancements, since this type license was first changed, then eliminated altogether, the quality of amateur operations in the States has diminished in notable ways.

It has nothing to do with code, per se, but has a lot to do with the experience and having exactly one year to hone one's skills in order to progress, or be out of the hobby. Like a boot camp.

The difference? In 1966, no new General ever asked me how to install a dipole, or how to wire their key or microphone, or connect their power supplies (even though in the tube era, power supplies frequently had twenty wire connections, not two). They knew, because they had the experience of Novice operation and had read books about these things. Today, it is different.

The simple stuff discussed above has nothing to do with modern technology. It doesn't help to know how to write C++ code if you can't connect your rig to work, on your own.


Posted by WB2WIK on 2003-01-07

Thanks Steve

..for adding that little bit of balance to the discussion. Amen.
Posted by CURMUDGEON on 2003-01-07

You know, I have enjoyed reading an article that appears on ARRL.org sometimes titled "The Amateur Amateur", usually written in a way where he is going into it full blast and learning as he goes. You can't seriously expect someone to know their rig inside and out the day they pick it up. You can learn how to operate the rig with either CW or SSB. Like any hobby, you have people who enjoy certain aspects. There are some out there who enjoy operating CW. No problem. There are some who prefer SSB. All the power to them. There are some who like to chase satellites, run digital modes, download weather maps, send SSTV, play with amateur television, and all the myriad facets of our hobby. The Morse code requirement forces applicants to learn a mode they may not want to learn and may never use. If they learn it to pass the exam, then never use it, what have you gained? Nothing. I happened to start out as a Novice in 1990. I learned the code, and I found it enjoyable, but getting over that 13 WPM hurdle was a nightmare that I am glad is over. It took me five tries to pass the 13 WPM test. I figured I'd never get to 20, so I am rather glad they cut the speed down. As to knowing C++ does you no good in hooking up a rig, of course it doesn't. Why should it? However, most modern rigs can be interfaced with a computer for a variety of tasks. Someone who knows how to program that is introduced to the hobby through that aspect may find it enough of a challenge to stick with it and proceed on. It's a doorway that may lead to him finding other aspects of the hobby that entice him, and in time he's hooked. Such was my point.
Posted by Shane Vassar on 2003-01-07

cw requirement

Well, since world's ham activity dramatically
has changed nowadays in different ways I would personally suggest not to force newcomers for CW ticket if they do not like it. They limit themselves enough without it
so everybody would have the choice. Leave it up to them to decide.
I personally being an oldtimer do enjoy cwing
a lot more than voice modes but it also fun to be able to ragchew using voice modes too.

73, Toly va2dw

Posted by VA2DW on 2003-01-07

The Great Debate !

I think I have finally figured out why this subject polarizes so many of us. In an earlier post of mine in this debate, I mentioned the fact that many of us simply couldn't have been dissuaded,turned aside or kept out of amateur radio. Even if "they" had wanted to, "they" couldn't have erected a sufficiently high barrier to do so. Now, fast forward to today. Theres an entirely new "breed of critter" saying, "I won't learn Morse Code; instead, I'll instigate and agitate until the damned Morse Code requirement is abolished."" I won't learn Morse Code and I won't upgrade to General or higher until the code is gone."
This isn't really about the International Morse Code at all. This is an arguement between two factions, one that couldn't have been dissuaded from amateur radio and HF privileges (which were the essence of amateur radio when it was HFcentric); the other that wants HF privileges but only if they can have them on their terms. This latter group essentially is saying, " we can be dissuaded but we will prevail over this issue and eventually we will have our way."
There can never be any fellowship between these two diverse attitudes. They are diametrically opposed. Amateur radio today is totally and permanently fractured. International Morse Code is but a ruse, its the excuse. There will be others to follow after the code requirement has been abolished.
Posted by WA4DOU on 2003-01-07

Good Lord . . .

Now wait a minute . . . I thought all you proud cw operators were "a cut above" the rest of the amateur community. I thought all you guys were level-headed people who would "never lose their temper or make threats against people". I thought you guys were educated adults who didn't do all the "foolish" things us Techies do. I'm only quoting a tiny percentage of the crap that you guys have said in the past. Of course, I realize you said these things in an effort to somehow degrade non-cw enthusiasts, and make yourselves appear like a real man. But the rest of these people out here don't know that and just think your the whining idiotic morons in this bunch. Wahhhhh, wahhhhhh, wahhhhh. That's what I hear from the VAST majority of all you pro-cw ops out there. I see a lot of cw bigots in this forum. People who think if your not into cw, and agree with all the old outdated idea's then your not a real ham. Wow, you guys know how to try and put a mind-job on people. But most of us know better and can look beyond your old ideologies. Be that as it may, I've got hand it to you cw guys . . . you sure know how to make people feel welcome in your little clique.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-06

KE4RWS / KE4GTI

You're letting a couple of LIDs stir the pot. Ignore them and they will go somewhere else to cause trouble. It's obvious they don't want to discuss the issues, they just want to bash the pro-CW operators.


Posted by CW-FAN on 2003-01-06

KE4RWS

Thanks for your opinion. Now go away.
Posted by CW-FAN on 2003-01-06

Cw fight

It didn't take long for this survey/topic to go from allot of "blow-hard" opinions, to a shouting match, to name calling, to thinly vailed threats. It is long past time for THIS survey topic to die and GO AWAY. I hope it will never return, but that may be a little much to wish for.
Certain persons were just not able to keep it "civil".
Posted by KK5DR on 2003-01-06

Reason for CW Requirement

OK Gang. Setting aside all our our personal reasons why the code should be done away with, or be retained; there is a reason why there is a code requirement that has been overlooked in this thread. By it's nature, HF radio has the potential of crossing international borders and signals are easily heard worldwide. Long before most of us where even alive, there where several incidents where radio operators could not pass vital radio traffic because some operators used standard wireline American Morse code; while others used the newer International, or Continental Morse as we have used for nearly 100 years. (Read the accounts in reference to the loss of the RMS Titanic. The operators on the Titanic used the International Code, but the US Navy was still at that time, using operators who only knew the old wireline American Morse code.) Becuse of this, the ITU mandated that all communications using telegraphy use the standard International Code...the same code we as hams have used to this very day. This was done to get us all to be playing from the same sheet of music, so to speak. Some have made the remark why aren't we required to know ASCII, or Baudot or other machine languages. Quite simply, these are digital codes which are designed to enable teletypes, computers and other digital devices to communicate with each other. They where not invented for the purpose of being copied by ear by humans; but rather intended to be used as languages which the machines we use interfaced with our radios as a medium to convay intelligence. Although it is possible to use computers to send and receive International Morse code, the code was designed to be by humans without any need of additional mechanical or electrical aid whatsoever. The only interface we need is a simple key or switch to key an RF signal on and off. The brain and our ears do all the rest of the work. If there was no standard code requirement, what whould keep an individual or group of individuals from making up their own code and use it on the air? That's why there is a rule (97.113) which prohibits to use of unauthorized codes and cyphers in Amateur radio, and is also the reason why an individual has to demonstrate ability to receive Standard Morse code by ear. Neither you nor I made up the rules we must abide by in order for us to exist in the radio world. Like it or not, the ITU and the FCC has far greater issues to deal with at the upcoming meeting than just doing away with a Morse Code Requirement. You can petition the powers to be to consider making changes in the rules, that is your right. But, before you do, be sure you understand the changes you are asking for...they might be in the end, detremental to the future of amateur radio. Although I have my personal preferences in favor of the code, for the record I will change my vote to Neutral. It seems no matter how much we argue about Code vs No Code; each of us are set in our ways. Nobody is going to change it; there is always going to be a great divide in the amateur community; and in the end it will probably destroy the fellowship and comradery that once held it all together. As for me, I am going to just set back a watch and see what the ITU and the FCC does with this issue. This is my final say in this matter. 73 & GL, Steve. W4MGY
Posted by W4MGY on 2003-01-06

CW Requirement

Steve (W4MGY),

I'm just finishing "The Victorian Internet". It's interesting that Morse originally used a machine to print the dots and dashes on a strip of paper that were later read and transcribed. Later, live operators discovered they could copy the code by ear. Many telegraph companies still required the printed tape to be kept until the operators proved that it could be copied correctly by ear. An interesting read on the historical impact and implications of the telegraph. I also noted the commerical operators used the term "hams" to describe amateur telegraph operators. I agree--it's time for this thread to go away. To VK5LA: Let's find a new survey--this one is out of control. 73 de Tom, K4NR




Posted by K4NR on 2003-01-06

CW Requirement

Keep the CW requirement. In fact, I think the speed requirement for General, Advanced and Amateur Extra should be higher, maybe 13wpm. When I got the Extra by written test and grandfathered in with a Tech Plus, I felt so guilty, that I studied the code and can copy and send 18 at 100% and would probably pass 20 with no problem. It took a while but once I overcame the fear, I found it to be a lot of fun. See you on CW.
tnx fer the comment space. -- WA4BWO Dave
Posted by WA4BWO on 2003-01-06

Morse code, not CW

The issue is not the CW (which FYI doesn't stand for Coded Words) operating mode, it is the testing requirement of the ability to receive 5 wpm in Int'l Morse Code. The test is not about *CW*. Those of you who keep on using CW as a reference to Morse Code are technically incorrect. Please show your knowledge and refer to *Morse Code*, not CW, when discussing this testing/licensing issue.
Posted by K7IHC on 2003-01-06

seen the light

All of these wonderfully logical pro code comments have totally changed my mind! We should require one to buy and bring their own pecking device to the first of a 3 tiered exam. One should only be allowed to take the 500 question written (for technician) AFTER they have proven perfect send/copy code at 45 WPM. The second phase should require perfect 70 WPM send/copy to be followed by a 1000 question test.(general) And finally for the privaledge of being an extra and hateful to all, the old pecker must be destroyed, replaced by a golden one and perfect send/copy at 150 WPM X three proofs should be required before taking a written consisting of 2000 questions taken at random from the library at the FCC, and these can not be multiple choice, only short answer that the applicant must score no lower than 98%. Of course to keep any class, the testing must be repeated yearly. Sounds like everyone should agree on this. Why not? BECAUSE IT"S JUST AS SILLY, STUPID AND IGNORANT AS CW ITSELF!
Posted by KE4GTI on 2003-01-06

Dump it!!

First off, I passed the 20wpm for my extra and operated CW QRP exclusively for several years.

However learning Morse Code delayed my entry into ham radio by at least a year when I was first licensed in 1964. It struck me as an arbitary requirement 40 years ago and almost caused me to abandon my efforts to get my license.

In this day and age Morse is definately past history.

I hope it goes away as a license requirement, it just is not relavent to today's world.


Posted by KZ5A on 2003-01-06

YES to CW remaining

CW "is" ham radio, like wings are to an airplane, Red is to an apple, Black is beautiful, hair on your head, wheels on a car, come on guys, get off the excuses, learn something meaningful, make your lazy no good lives better, learn the code. Get some Blood, get the heat, trim those ear hairs, buy some earphones and get with it. I just don't understand why some of you people can't understand CW operators are SPECIAL. Is it the work that scares you??? come on, some of you are brilliant people with high educations; and you just can't learn the little ole simple CW?? what a cop out to life and ham radio. Most of you can do anything you set you mind to. Why not be part of the "BEST"
Posted by K7LCS on 2003-01-06

What Conceit

The previous post demonstrates all the "I'm better than you" attitudes out there. What more can one say when someone say's I'm better than you just because I work a mode that you don't. But once again, you don't see PSK31 or Sat operators out here patting themselves on the back the way cw ops do. It's really pathetic the way many of you think your better than other human beings. You truly define cw-bigot by your actions and your words. How proud you must be of your small-time clique.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-06

What Conceit

While I don't agree with the previous post, I will address your comments on PSK31 and Sat operations. Just about anyone with a callsign should be able to hook up the cables and install the software required to operate PSK and most other soundcard-based modes. Sats take a bit more effort. Should the skills required be tested? Yes, I think they should be tested for. A few questions on the written exam and that will be fixed. Morse could be tested in the same manner after the IARU drops the requirement. Until then, the rules are the rules. 5 wpm should be really easy for you highly educated and skilled types.
Posted by CW-FAN on 2003-01-06

CW-FAN

Perhaps I used the wrong example. I mentioned PSK31 & Sat operations merely for the purposes of illustration. However, it appears it wouldn't matter what mode or form of communication I specified, as it too would be discredited and torn down when compared to cw. That is the way of forums like this I guess. I've simply been saying that I think cw is a great mode if that's what you like. I never stated it should be dumped or forgotten about, and I know cw will always be a part of amateur radio. I only stated my opinion, as humble as it is, that I personally feel it shouldn't be a required testing tool. Nothing more, nothing less. I think that's where and when the fire began! Now I'm declared as being lazy, ignorant, wanting something for nothing, uneducated, not able to distinguish a diode from a resistor, and many many other things! Hey guys, I admit I too have been rash but I've never seen this type of attitude towards someone posting their opinion regarding cw requirements. It appears to be a highly predjudiced topic, usually with results that separate amateur operators across the board. It's too bad it's like this. But I can only go back to my first post, which stated my humble opinion about licensing requirements concerning cw. It was an honest, non-attacking post that stated the facts. Then the flamers came out, and here we are! I can certainly concede to the cw ops out there that they deserve to operate their beloved mode if they could concede that it doesn't make them a superior human being because of it. That attitude is symbolic of the nazi era.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-06

Morse

KE4RWS The issue always results in a heated exchange. The Pro-CW side appreciates the mode and knows how effective it can be under the worst of conditions. The Anti-CW side thinks it's outdated and has no place in "modern" amateur radio. Anyone who thinks the test should be kept as a LID filter or some rite of passage is wrong. On the other hand, anyone who has never tried the mode does not have a clue about its effectiveness. We're not no-coders, not peckers, not outdated, not lazy, etc. At one time seeing a ham plate meant the simple HI exchange in Morse. Morse was one of the things that bound us together. It made us special. Many of us think those days are gone and we don't like it. Morse testing will end, but CW operators will endure. My hope is that 50 years from now you can call CQ on 20 Meter CW and get a response.
Posted by CW-FAN on 2003-01-06

Who Cares about Dinosaurs

This discussion has played out.
Its gone from hyper drive to ludicrous.
Old saying (Divide and conquer.)
We are sure ripe for conquering by the
commercial intrest.

Posted by KC0KJF on 2003-01-05

SO You Say You Don't Like the Code ?

Fellows I would like to tell a "little" story about a "non" ham wanting to learn the code. This is a true story about a young person age 27 confined to a County long term hospital stay and unable to communicate.

In the late Winter of 1981 I was asked by two people within my church if I might be able to offer any suggestions to improve the ability of a young person confined to a hospital setting. I at first did not know what would take place over the next 5 months or so. Upon my first ever visit with these two friends of the young person, I immediately knew that my knowledge of the morse code would be the only "last gasp" of communications to try. In this hospital bed was a person who had the degenrating disease known as "MS"... It at its later stages is not pretty. This young woman of 27 could no longer speak using her voice, could not hold a pencil or pen, nor use fingers on a keyboard. Her particular situation was that at age 20 "MS" had taken hold of her and it was downhill and would not permit her a normal life.

Well here we go you NO CODERS.... This person was very willing to learn and use the morse code which I was willing to teach. I will not elaborate here in this forum every technical detail but in a nut shell a simplified set up was put together. Using dedicated "air actuated micro switches" through palm mounted air bulbs an electronic keyer was used to feed an available commercial code decoder. The output of this commercial code decoder then put out a video formated signal unto a TV setup with a RF modulator.

For about a 10 - 12 period I gave my personal time twice a week to go up to this hospital setting and work with her to learn the code. We started out with very basic letters such as E I S H T M O and from there built up more complex letters and then into words. In my absence during the week, she could have the nurses bring over this dinner table mounted equipment and practice using her letters.

Remember she could not speak, hold a pen or pencil or use her fingers to type on a keyboard. Folks, this was her last chance to communicate and convey her questions or conversations.

I came into this persons' life very late stage as she passed away within the Winter time later that year.

TO THE AMATEUR RADIO COMMUNITY:

Don't you ever allow the International Morse Code to become a "forgotten" mode of use.

Think about the possibilities to which we amateurs might be able to help those who really need us. The professionals working with this young lady did not know that perhaps some unknown person like myself was out there and would try a "last chance" type of communications scheme.

The above information is being added to this forum to instill in those amateurs to continue using the morse code and possibly become involved in a similar situation.

THE SIMPLE "out moded" sytstem developed in the 19th. Century helped a person to communicate. Thank You for reading
Posted by K8MRS on 2003-01-05

It seems to me

Many gevernamental services formally ceased SSB operations, after many years of service. Several years previous, the mayority of the security services had also ceased all SSB operations in Argentina.
Since 1995 many other Government and commercial communications services have abandoned the use of SSB and RTTY.
Today, there are very few, if any commercial operations using SSB as a mode of communications in Argentina.
In a world of satellite communications, wide-band fiber optic, Internet and very-high-capacity digital networks, this is as it should be. Let's face it, SSB has no place in today's "Information Super-highways". In today's Amateur Radio, SSB competes with high-speed, 56 and 128-KB packet backbones, as well as Amtor, Pactor, Clover and other modes of digital transmission. We can transmit vast volumes of information keyboard to keyboard, computer to computer, faster than one can send a paragraph of text at 500WPM SSB.
Where we Amateurs used to be innovators at the forefront of the state of the art in communications, now we barely keep up. Other services covet our valuable frequencies, from HF to microwave. As well, the Amateur Radio Service faces pressures from governments to justify its continued existence.""-------------

It looks familiar or similar...???-----------

This is not the point.--------

The point is that the amatauer radio is a ITU Service, nothing to do with any HOBBY...!!!, justified only by the experimentation...!!!.------------

The point is not CW yes or CW not.----------

The point is:

Wich requirement is going to replace the CW test...???-------------

Are the amateur radio organizations looking for more money...???---------------

Are the ham radio magazines and factories looking for better bussines in a depressed market...???--------

Are they looking for the real interest of the amateur radio comunity or only for his own problems...???-----------

It seems to me that there IS a lot of DISCRIMITATION AND INTOLERANCE.



Posted by LU1DZ on 2003-01-05

Keep CW!

5 wpm is easy!! if your to lazy to learn code, tech has plenty of privlages. sure taking away the 13 wpm and 20 wpm reqs where unfair, but they are unnessisary with computers. plus cw is fun.
Posted by TOMM on 2003-01-05

Why not a compromise

Why not a compromise, say a no-code privledge for 20m through 10m ?


Posted by KF6KDA on 2003-01-05

Compromise is good

Why not a very small slice, say 10m from
28.1 to 28.5 so that we can learn and
practice CW on the air while being
No-Code Techs.
Posted by KB9YUR on 2003-01-05

CW Testing

I feel that if you have to take a CW test then you should have to use it. The way it is now, you go to Industry Canada, take your CW test, leave, and on the way out you can drop your key in the trash because you never have to use it again. Whats the point? Why does 5wpm better qualify you to TALK hf? With the widespread use of computers in the ham world why not take a typing test. I don't feel that CW should be eliminated, if you like it ..use it, if you don't like it, ok. I just don't think it should be mandatory. Everyone has their own thing. That is what makes amateur radio so interesting. Saying that doing away with the code will make it like CB is nonsense. There is still a lot of studying and an exam and the majority of CBers will not put the effort into it.As you can see, I am against code testing for the above reasons.My two cents worth.
Posted by VE9WWH on 2003-01-05

CW Testing

The sheer illogic offered by proponents of no code, if applied to grade school, high school and college, would abolish the curriculum on the basis that "we can breath air without any of this nonsense." Perhaps thats why so many have become illiterate through public education in the past few decades. We've already got "newbies" and wannabe "newbies" argueing that the theory exams should be abolished also. My mind is closed on this issue from this point on, as the only real issue here is that a group just doesn't want to have to work for amateur privileges at all. Just give it to us! "We want the privileges and we want them now."
Posted by CURMUDGEON on 2003-01-05

CW SURVEY

I seems we are back at it again. Most hams back in 48 when I got my ticket and worked two or three part time jobs just learned the CW and forgot about it and worked AM, later FM and Sideband, and now the more modern modes. Those who stuck with it found it fun. It was necessary to Start at 13 wpm back then. When Extra was restored, that required 20 -- close to conversational speed. Most all of us did it, whether we used it or not. Those who didn't or still won't, have no excuses except laziness. CW is your heritage, and as the years go by, it may well disappear as us older hams die - death wishes seem prevalent among no-coders - they will be so happy when we are finally all Silent Keys. In a few years, that latter term will have no meaning at all, nor will ham radio. It is not super-popular right now. The advent of packet where the battle over the merits of Morse Code really took root, and the Internet which is here to make debate (now reduced to mud-slinging) so easy, is really why ham radio has been reduced to a battleground. It is a rotten shame. The excuses over not having time hold no water at all. In the good old days, we still went to school, worked part time jobs, helped fight wars, studied the Bible, had drum corps competitions, collected pots and pans for the war efforts, worked hard at getting ourselves good school grades and a career, and we still found the time to learn the code, even if to many it was repulsive. Those of you who hate the mode may one day retreat to it. It is your heritage. Respect it and go back to barking into your microphones and keyboarding it. Nothing wrong with the latter.. what Will be wrong is the slow disappearance of a relaxed fun mode using very few characters and learnable and usable by the disabled - moreso than any other mode. I don't know where some of you were when there was some chance of stopping this no-code movement - many of you of course were too young. Well, try listening to your elders and try to tame your "I can't learn it, I don't have time" attitude and try it. If you don't like it, fine, but you will have learned it. I don't enjoy contesting. I don't enjoy a lot of things. But I give most all of them a fair try, and pick what I like best. But I do not sit and sling mud at the CW fans, and I think it would be nice if you all would reciprocate in kind. The die has been cast, and what will happen is what everyone reading this deserves, frankly. The greatest hobby and service I know is one with perhaps the greatest diversity, and that is good. How about letting it rest right there and stop the whining.. you're all too late to do anything but vent your spleen anyway, so we would do well to respect each other, don't you think? BTW, I enjoy operating on phone and some of the digital modes, in case you wondered. :-)
73,

Fred Adsit, NY2V - ex-W2ZOJ

W2ZOJ - ZUT Amateur Radio Club
Posted by NY2V on 2003-01-05

86 the code !

I personally think that the code should be eliminated for HF, but should be added as an 'endorsement' to an existing ticket much like endorsements on a Drivers License. If you take and pass this 'endorsement', then specific bands should be set aside for those who choose to use CW.
Posted by KC2FTN on 2003-01-04

86 the code !

I personally think that the code should be eliminated for HF, but should be added as an 'endorsement' to an existing ticket much like endorsements on a Drivers License. If you take and pass this 'endorsement', then specific bands should be set aside for those who choose to use CW.
Posted by KC2FTN on 2003-01-04

CW

I am learning CW now. It's a pain. It's been here forever, and I think it should stay. I'm no better than any other ham in the past.
If one does not have to work a little to get his / her ticket, Ham radio will be just another C.B. radio band in a few years.
Posted by KG4UIL on 2003-01-04

CW is STILL in use in Aviation

I think morse code should stay, it is still widely used in aviation to positively identify ILS (Instrument Landing System) VOR (VHF Omni Range) TACAN (tactical Air Navigation) and NDB (Non directional Beacon).. before shooting an approach or navigating by using the aforementioned aids to navigation positive identification is required by listening to the morse code identifier..

It's a fact, CW is still among us and should remain.

Captain Pablo Lewin
American Airlines
WA6RSV
Posted by WA6RSV on 2003-01-04

CW Whining

I agree that cw actually stands for Constant Whining. And so what if it's been around for a long time. That doesn't mean it deserves to remain part of testing. That's merely a sentimental issue rather than having a real application in amateur radio. As far as the individual that made reference to cw coming in handy in Independence Day, let's get real. Are we really worried about aliens invading us? I mean really, people are really reaching when they have to use an alien invasion just to somehow legitimize cw requirements!

CW is merely another way of communicating, plain and simple. You can tell yourself whatever you want to justify it's existence but in the end it's just another mode of communication that has to share it's place along with all the other forms of communication. And all the alien invasions, and whatever rediculous excuses people can think of to try and make it look better than all the other modes available ain't gonna change the fact that it's just another mode that had its day. It's still used to this day but I guess sentimental issues can be a real mother for some.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-04

CW as a JERK filter?

I think the comments posted by K7DCG really sum it up quite nicely. "CW is not a JERK filter." It has indeed been (ineffectively) used as one for many years. I wish someone would invent a JERK filter that actually works. It would be a lot easier to sift lot back through it than to expect Riley to sort them out for us. Until then we will just have to live with the the likes of the Bin Ladens, Bill Clintons and hams that like to disrupt communications. 73, Johnny
Posted by W4XKE on 2003-01-04

CW SURVEY

I feel that they should not have changed the requirements for extra class 20 wpm. It was hard for me to get the 20 wpm code test passed, then we go and cut it back to 5 wpm. To me this seems unfair. I had to do 5, 13, and 20 wpm to get the upgraded liscense. Then in my eyes, there was no compensation to those of us that worked our butts off to get the general, advanced and extra ticket. These higher grades of tickets came with more band privilages, which gave us some additional operating room. The FCC should have allocated special bands privs for those of us who were legit 20wpm extras. I feel that a great injustice has been done. Call me old school, but this whole thing didn't seem fair. I signed off on extra class tickets for people who never would have had extra at all, by their own admission. This makes me sick and I had to quit ve'ing. They would say " I could have never made it at 20 " ..
Posted by W4RPM on 2003-01-04

CW SURVEY

I feel that they should not have changed the requirements for extra class 20 wpm. It was hard for me to get the 20 wpm code test passed, then we go and cut it back to 5 wpm. To me this seems unfair. I had to do 5, 13, and 20 wpm to get the upgraded liscense. Then in my eyes, there was no compensation to those of us that worked our butts off to get the general, advanced and extra ticket. These higher grades of tickets came with more band privilages, which gave us some additional operating room. The FCC should have allocated special bands privs for those of us who were legit 20wpm extras. I feel that a great injustice has been done. Call me old school, but this whole thing didn't seem fair. I signed off on extra class tickets for people who never would have had extra at all, by their own admission. This makes me sick and I had to quit ve'ing. They would say " I could have never made it at 20 " ..
Posted by W4RPM on 2003-01-04

The ignorant and the brave

I give up. The grasping at straws freakish love for and panic that CW (not international anything) is on it's it's way out as a requirement baffles me. I can't verify the ILS landing "argument" but I dare say that is NO reason to require the great knowledge of proficient pecking for the rest of us. As for invasion by aliens, that one does more for my side I'd say. Also, I'm sick of the constant whining about ALL technicians w/o the CW abombination coming from CB and/or trucking! I used CB when about 14 years old and quickly tired of and abandoned it.
The sum total of the CW lovers is that they do just that. Your ignorance stemming from sentiment is going to rear it's head and bite you in ways you just will not see. The comment about being "stuck" on 2 meters could not be less true. There are MANY modes open to us (you probably do not understand nor may not be aware of them). For whatever reason, you "brave" peckers are so far keeping those who just do not see the 21st century as akin to the 19th, from enjoying HF phone. That's it. That ALL. I hope you are proud. Peck away! One last comment, I believe someone mentioned CW as a universal language, prefered to broken English. Well, I find it offensive to CHOOSE a language at an ATM in MY country! So do I have no desire to work a station other than voice, in ENGLISH! When you think you've seen it all!
Steve
Posted by KE4GTI on 2003-01-04

Keep CW

I would like to see CW kept as a requirement for General and Extra. If you want a higher license, then WORK for it! If you are handicapped, there are ways to work around the requirements. If you are not, then learn CW! Remember, CW is the first digital form of communication! ON/OFF. It doesn't get any simpler than that. I am a new ham. I learned it enough to pass my test. I am now using Morsecat on my computer and I homebrewed a sounder, got a key, and I'm learning to send. I hope that when I finally get on the air, that there is someone out there patient enough to ragchew with me so that I can get proficient. Remember also that when all else fails CW will almost always get trough. That's my two cents. 73's
Eric
KB3IBV@arrl.net
Posted by KB3IBV on 2003-01-04

CW aka Morse Code

The key question here is this. Is there a regulatory reason to keep CW testing??? Right now yes. The ITU regulations require it PERIOD, END OF SENTENCE. The question the ITU should ask itself is "Is there a regulatory reason to keep CW testing???". Most of the Governments have said there is no regulatory reason to keep CW testing. The FCC when it set the code speed at 5 wpm said that it was doing so to meet the ITU regulation at the minimum level necessary to comply. CW will not go away just because there is no testing. It will go the way of the horse. It will become something that one learns for the shear pleasure of it rather than as a absolute necessity.
Posted by W2BSA on 2003-01-04

GOTTA PAY YA DUES, BEFORE YOU CAN SING THE BLUES!(20m PHONE)

Sorry to rip off a beatles song. It is Ringo Stars song. 5 wpm is not too much to ask. It might also save your life. CW can be sent with a flash light, laser, infrared link, ect.

99.47% of the world does not know CW. Only military,boyscouts, and hams. Interesting demographic! CW is actually the first digital mode if you think about it.

True Samual Morse, could have made a better
intuitive code.

CW must survive. In Viet-nam our POWs only way of communicating in the infamouse Hanoi Hilton was morse code.

One other factor. Many CB freebanders could pass the no code tech. Many of them have better rigs than some hams! The free banders can be legal with a no-code tech.
They will have 10M phone privledges, as well as 2M and up. Some free banders are too free
spirited with foul language, and bandwidth.

The HF bands have great range. Many freeband rigs are modified for full tx and RX
1-30MHZ. not good! The 5 WPM and FCC ticket is a good screen.

If you want to sing the blues, ya gotta pay your dues...and you know it don't come easy!
Posted by WA2JJH on 2003-01-03

Keep the code, but keep it simple

I'm a CW only operator, and have been since getting my first ticket in '92. So ... I have a bias, but I'm up front about it (grin!).

Right now, CW is the only thing that makes a ham different from the knuckleheads on CB. Not that so many actually use CW, but the effort expended to learn it makes hams appreciate their tickets.

Keep the code, but leave the requirement at 5 wpm. And pulleeeeez ... leave the code portions of the bands alone.
Posted by KD1JT on 2003-01-03

Yes

I don't personally do CW but still feel it is a needed part of the testing and licensing process. I couldn't do it as a child (too hyper!) but forced myself to learn it as a middle-aged adult. It is part of Ham Radio even if I don't use it.
Posted by KC0IUW on 2003-01-03

The Meaning of CW

One of the best articles I have ever seen on the subject!!!


The Meaning of CW

Is CW an Archaic Relic of the Past?



by Ed Sieb, VA3ES



On March 31, 1995, the U.S. Coast Guard formally ceased CW operations, after 94 years of service. Several months previous, both the U.S. Navy and Marines had also ceased all CW operations.

Since 1995 many other Government and commercial communications services have abandoned the use of CW. Today, there are very few, if any commercial operations using CW as a mode of communications. In a world of satellite communications, wide-band fiber optic, Internet and very-high-capacity digital networks, this is as it should be. Let's face it, CW has no place in today's "Information Super-highways". In today's Amateur Radio, CW competes with high-speed, 56 and 128-KB packet backbones, as well as Amtor, Pactor, Clover and other modes of digital transmission. We can transmit vast volumes of information keyboard to keyboard, computer to computer, faster than one can send a paragraph of text at 60WPM CW.

Where we Amateurs used to be innovators at the forefront of the state of the art in communications, now we barely keep up. Other services covet our valuable frequencies, from HF to microwave. As well, the Amateur Radio Service faces pressures from governments to justify its continued existence.

In the spring of 1995, the government of New Zealand made a decision to actively seek the suppression of the pertinent ITU regulation that requires Morse code proficiency for Amateurs licensed to operate below 30 MHz. The ZL government was repeatedly "briefed" at great length by "ORACLE" an organization actively seeking to abolish CW requirements for Hams in New Zealand.

And yet, through all this, ARRL and the International Amateur Radio Union continue to back the retention of CW as a requirement for licensing! Can you imagine? In this day and age!

Well, those good 'ol hide-bound Amateur organizations are right!

Yes, CW is archaic. Yes, it is slow and cumbersome compared to modern digital modes. So what? All these facts are irrelevant. The facts of CW's speed and traffic handling capacity are irrelevant to the whole argument. Those who would continuously harp on these meaningless statistics, simply miss the whole point of CW. The continuing relevance of CW today and on through to the next century has NOTHING to do with it's actual utility in sending traffic!

CW (or Morse Code, if you wish) is absolutely essential to the Amateur Radio service and is an essential part what gives Ham radio it's meaning. To learn the Morse Code, is to open one's heart (and mind) to the essence (yes I keep using this word) of Ham Radio and to grasp it's soul. (I believe that CW is fundamentally necessary for Amateur Radio and that it is also its' heart and soul.)

Ham Radio would be just a cold, calculating hobby without it. The Ham Radio language, it's jargon, wouldn't exist without it. Oh sure we might have some other kind of radio slang, but I bet it would be borrowed from truckers and other users of "personal radio". We wouldn't have Q signals or 73. And we definitely wouldn't have a history. Simply put, CW is the source of and forms the basis for the culture of Ham Radio.

To be a "Radio Amateur" is be a "lover" of radio, one who studies it and appreciates it as an art. Other "amateurs" of art, of music, become lay experts in their fields. They study the subject historically, philosophically, even sociologically and develop a true appreciation of the subject in its entirety. To reject a single important historical aspect of an art or a culture, because it is "archaic" is to lack even the most basic comprehension of the subject one purports to love! To learn CW is to make a connection with Ham Radio's past and it's history. Learning CW means that one has learned the basic reference points of the hobby. An analogy: to acquire my University degree, I had to take a few courses that I considered at the time quite irrelevant. I took some Humanities courses that studied the role of Women in Blues Music! I studied railroad hoboes of the '30's in my sociology classes! I studied Nietzsche, Hegel and Kant in my "Poli-Sci" courses. At the time, I wondered what the usefulness of all this was and what it had to do with Communications and Media, my major. Today, I appreciate that those "irrelevant" subjects made me a more literate, more well rounded person. Well, not to put too fine a point on it, in my opinion, a Ham with out CW is simply, "illiterate"!

Today, in those countries, which have "no-code" licenses, (mainly Canada and the U.S.) among the more "veteran", long-time hams, there has developed a mildly cynical attitude, bordering on contempt for the newer "no-code" VHF operators. They're derisively referred to as "2-meter CBers". This view stems from the perception that these new Hams lack the fundamental understanding of the roots of the hobby and that without code, they're "stuck on 2-meters", unwilling or unable to expand their radio horizons. (In fact, those no-coders who came from the CB ranks, without CW upgrading, often continue to operate on 11 meters. Those who've upgraded and have HF privileges, tend to abandon 11 Meters completely.) For their part, some no-coders complain that they feel like second-class citizens within the Amateur community, neither fully accepted, nor able to fully participate in Amateur Radio. They claim that the increasingly irrelevant need for "proficiency" in CW places an arbitrary and artificial obstacle in their paths. They suggest that being "stuck on 2 meters" is boring and is causing some to lose all interest in the hobby.

Traditionally in Canada, once licensed, Hams always had the opportunity get involved any aspect of the hobby without limitations. Veteran Hams are convinced that "no-coders" are short-changing themselves, by failing to upgrade. This saddens many veterans as they see this as a drastic change in the sociology of their beloved hobby; a change for the worse.

Here's my suggestion for an appropriate CW requirement for the late '90's and beyond. I'm not suggesting that one must know 15 WPM or even 10 WPM to get a Ham ticket. What I'd like to see is that every prospective Ham, whatever band they will operate, above 30 MHz or below, be required to comprehend all the letters, numbers and punctuation. The CW receiving exam might be something simple such as 100% copy of all characters sent at a slow speed, say possibly 5 WPM or so.

The speed itself is not critical, so long as there is 100% copy of all letters, numbers and punctuation, sent during a "reasonable" period of time. The successful candidate would then acquire a "scheduled" license allowing HF phone operation in certain segments of the bands, or possible restriction to certain bands only. Full band privileges would be acquired by upgrading the qualifications through either a more strenuous CW exam or a tougher technical exam, whatever the candidate's choice.

To those who wish to become Hams, but adamantly reject CW and stubbornly refuse to learn the code, I say too bad! These persons have failed to appreciate the meaning of Ham Radio and its’ culture and neither do they understand it. Ham Radio is not just some fancy, high tech means of communication. It's a community, a service and a tradition with deep roots and a long history. Ham Radio is the whole reason for modern communications technology. Hams invented wireless communications; without us, there might not be any Internet today! Let's not destroy the very spark at the soul of the hobby.

Am I being to "orthodox" in my views? Or am I being an extremist? What do you think?

I encourage your comments and feedback on this subject. You can reach me at P.O. Box 8377, Ottawa Terminal, Ottawa, Ontario, K1G 3H8. Or at: esieb@gmsiworld.com

Ed Sieb, VA3ES

Posted by KZ0ZZ on 2003-01-03

KZ0ZZ

Lets hear a round of applause for the previous post.
Posted by CURMUDGEON on 2003-01-03

CW?

International Morse Code - not "CW"
Posted by K1AVE on 2003-01-03

Whining . . .

Looks like it's the one's who want to keep cw that are doing as much whining to keep it as those who don't.

I guess you have to tell yourself whatever makes you feel warm and cozy inside about the value of cw. But in the end it too will be history, and then all the pro-cw people will have something else to whine about.
Posted by KE4RWS on 2003-01-03

CW= Constant Whining ? :)


The endless diatribe on CW makes one wonder
if CW= Constant Whining ( from both sides ):)

While I embrace all Technologies I can't
help recalling that scene in " Independence
Day " where the aliens are foiled by a
bunch of military straight key cw ops ! :)

Sometimes the KISS principle to the extent
of that wonderful American expression " if it
ain't broke don't fix it " applies here :)
Posted by G3SEA on 2003-01-03

VA3ES said it all

Impossible to add to that! And I wholeheartedly agree.


Posted by WB2WIK on 2003-01-03

Agree on Curmugeon, Applaus, KZ0ZZ.

CW Forever.
The Jedi will never die.
Posted by W3DCG on 2003-01-03

Devaluated Amateur Radio

FROM THE GACW 1999 OPEN LETTER
-o-o-o-o-o
With all our respect, the CQ Magazine of USA, Icom, Yaesu, Kenwood, the W5YI organization and others who can push and to re-claim more activity, don’t blame to the radioamateur, and if some of these organizations disappear some day, nothing is going to happened to us, we are going on working in our bands sharpening our intelligence in order to keep in the air whatever mode we choose and their
disappearance will affect very little to the activity, and at least, much less than is would affect the disappearance of the
operative genuine exigencies like a Morse examination.
-o-o-o-o
To conclude, in synthesis, you can do whatever you want, go on destroying, extending the BC, eliminating, massing, go on forgetting that the only aims of our
existence is the experimentation, but make you responsible of this, so the history can point you and everybody know that the telegrapher go on being for several years more, much more than the national and international fraudulent people who are
temporally inside our Amateur Services.
ARGENTINA - July 1999.-
The GACW Coordinators:
Alberto U. SILVA, LU1DZ - Raúl M.
DIAZ, LU6EF - Jorge F. Vrsalovich,LU7XP (SK)
GACW WEB SITE
http://gacw.no-ip.org

Posted by LU1DZ on 2003-01-02

CW Requirement

I am a CW operator, Retired CG Chief Radioman. CW is not a JERK filter and I object to the requirement of any MODE being a "Requirement" to become a Ham. How would you feel if DMV required you to show profiency in driving an 8 horse team in order to obtain a Vechicle License? If you want a modern requirement how about typing 45 WPM or Computer literate? CW requirement has kept many a young person out of a wonderful hobby. I am 59 and when I walk into a ham club I lower the average age. I want my hobby to survive, keep CW as a requirement and it will be gone and very soon! CW will survive because those who love it will continue to operate it. Protect the CW portion of the band but shrink it to fit its operating prominance, so that there arent large portions of silence in the CW portion of the band or require a ham to get a "CW" endorsement if he wishes to operate in the CW portion of the bands! But do not give preference to any one MODE of communications over another. Also I am willing to bet that those who want to keep it as a requirement DO NOT operate it and couldnt pass a TEST again if their life depended on it. I say if you no play the game you no make the rules. Let only CW operators vote! PS. I know a lot of hams that are JERKS and passed the CW test!
Posted by K7DCG on 2003-01-02

Requirements

I'm 99% CW, rich uncle (HI) taught me long ago. When I studied for my Ham tests, I had to learn about satellites, UHF, digital modes, etc. so I could get full HF privledges. It made me look beyond CW, and I'm glad I was forcefully exposed to modes I don't use (yet). I think 5 WPM is "exposure" to my favorite mode.
Posted by N8UW on 2003-01-02

CW Requirement

K7DCG,

CW testing will end, I think that's a given at this point. The next battle cry of the "no-code" operators will be to expand the phone sub-bands. I'm sure we can reallocate the Novice / Technician Plus sub-bands for phone. We should also do away with the with the class-based frequency restrictions (we might as well have just one ticket). on phone and CW / Data sub-bands. I cannot support a reduction in the CW / Data sub-bands--there's plenty of activity on the low ends of the bands.

73 de Tom, K4NR
Posted by K4NR on 2003-01-02

Wow ! Nice results so far ! Seems that silent majority is expressing itself, at last ! CW is intrinsic to ham radio and should be keeped ! Strongly prefer know code to no code ! Whatever the discipline, the reduction in the access requirements never will improve the overall level.
CW forever !
73 de F5SGI


Posted by F5SGI on 2003-01-02

Keep the 5wpm test!

Keep the CW test. 5wpm isn't hard if you are willing to put 5 hours in over a week and study. More important, CW is the 'heart and soul' of ham radio. It is what ties us back to the earliest hams who used spark gap radio. It is the ONLY mode that, via Q-symbols, allows hams who don't speak the same language to communicate. It is the mode that will work when all others won't, including the fancy new HF digital modes. It is the mode that will let you take $10 worth of parts and a 9v battery and talk to someone halfway around the world. The reason we as hams have spectrum reserved for us is not so we can bypass the telephone company... it is so we can use that spectrum in an enjoyable manner as we teach ourselves how to communicate in case the telephone DOESN'T work. To those hams who say that we should replace CW testing with HF digital mode testing, I say that any ham who can send and receive CW will have no problem setting up a computer to run PSK... and any ham who wants to be able to run HF digital modes needs to be able to send and receive CW at 5wpm without a computer. Keep the code, or else we will lose amateur radio.
Posted by KD7KGX on 2003-01-02

Exclamation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow ! Nice results so far ! Seems that silent majority is expressing itself, at last ! CW is intrinsic to ham radio and should be keeped ! Strongly prefer know code to no code ! Whatever the discipline, the reduction in the access requirements never will improve the overall level. CW forever ! 73 de F5SGI \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\Let me get this over with !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ok, I think the results are nice also. Myriads of HAMS, not "no codes" but full fledged amateur radio operators who KNOW they will be attacked by the ramblings of the other licencees who pecked for their obviousely "MUCH SUPERIOR" license(NOT!) if they dare express the truth in this "brotherhood". Why of course, whatever the reduction of requirements (of course we ALL know the only requirement the enemy feels needed is "pecking"); but WHATEVER the reduction it will not improve the overall ?level? WHAT? Pass the JD and post.
Is it time? OK !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What it is time for is ONE license (NO pecking required), make it as tough as you like. Include practical things that actually relate to radio as it is today. Perhaps even installation of your station,wiring, SWR tuning, safe use of amplifiers and when we "inferior" NON peckers pass all that can be thrown at us sans pecking; that's ALL. Let us enjoy the SAME more personal HF phone conversations ANYWHERE it is presently allowed. No harassment, no discrimination and blackball style weeding out against those who simply DO NOT agree with the poor souls who did peck for their license. Simple. After the fallout, maybe we can come together and try and hang on to our precious bands for this licencee thinks the FEDS LOVE to see infighting to use as another excuse to auction off more and more of OUR spectrum! Stop pecking and start thinking!
Posted by KE4GTI on 2003-01-02

Training Vs NO Training

I am wondering, which exigency is going to replace the capacity to operate CW?, ...writing in a keyboard?,... touching a clarifier?,...or speaking in front of a microphone?.

Posted by LU1DZ on 2003-01-02

Get Real!

Geeze Loueeze... How hard is it to memorize 26 charactor patterns, a few punctuations and a simple pattern for 10 digits?! If nothing else, by becoming a ham, you can say you know the Morse Code. Whether or not you use it is your option, but at least you have proven you are not totally brain dead!
Whenever I had trouble on a ham exam, it was NOT because someone decided to add a new letter to the Morse Code alphabet. ;-)
Posted by NB6Z on 2003-01-02

???????????????????

To KE4GTI. Yes, you are right: start thinking ! Think of the operators worldwide who can't speak English and who are much more comfortable with a keyer than with a mike or a keyboard.. Think of the value-added of mike-yelling when compared to that of CW for EME, QRP, MS or DX operations.. Think of the inevitable disappearance of the CW subbands, sooner or later (sooner, unfortunately). Think of emergency communications. Those "no-code" guys with such unshakeable assurance are just pathetic.. Is radio just technology ? Yes, you're right: start thinking and stop sectarian rantings !
"Truth is rarely pure and never simple" (Oscar Wilde).
73 de F5SGI

Posted by F5SGI on 2003-01-02

5 WPM, Please!

Morse code represents a fundamental method of placing information on a radio wave. It is important and 5 words per minute will not deter any amateur truely interested in operating HF.
Posted by K8AG on 2003-01-02

Know CW or No CW !

These exchanges seem pointless. What practical purpose do they serve beyond reminding us that there is a gulf in amateur radio today, "us" and "them".
In the '50's, crystal radios, broadcast band dx'ing and short wave listening were "traditional" ways that many of us "found" amateur radio. Once "found", they couldn't have built barriers high enough to keep most of us out. Even if CW had been a "filter", it wasn't enough of a barrier. In those cases where we saw folks that attended classes, who dropped out shortly thereafter, it was obvious that they were not sufficiently motivated to apply themselves to the task of learning enough theory, rules and regs. and morse code to pass the test. The amateur service was a tight knit cohesive fraternity that welcomed everyone with open arms. Today that tight knit fraternity is largely gone. It fractured into a lot of splinter groups, just as the society it mirrors became fractured. Many of us then had no interest in cw, we just learned it to fulfill the requirement to get our licenses. A lot of us never made a cw contact, preferring phone instead.
I held a Novice license for 7 months before upgrading and didn't get on the air as a Novice. When I did get on, I went straight to 20 meters with all of 30 watts output on AM phone and a low dipole antenna, probably 20-25 ft. high. I made lots of phone contacts but many of them ended abruptly when QRM/QSB squashed them. While relating my experiences to an oldtimer one day, he suggested I try cw. I scoffed at the idea but he insisted, even loaned me a J-38 straight key. I tried cw. My qso success rate skyrocketed and I began working dx with ease. Then it occurred to me that I was transfering the very same information that I would have been on phone, albeit at a somewhat slower rate. I saw it differently then, I was hooked. I never returned to the phone band with the same interest or enthusiasm that I had previously. To this day I work perhaps 95% cw,5% phone. CW enjoys an advantage over SSB of 6 db, so goes the popular wisdom. In my observations, that figure may be low, perhaps its as high as 10 or more db. Some argue that some digital modes can outperform cw. It just isn't so.
There are many who quietly come into amateur radio today that go about learning the code. Whether they ever use it or not is immaterial. Its their choice. And for those of you who constantly whine and complain about cw and how you're not going to upgrade until the requirement is gone; you're only hurting yourselves. Our parents called it, " cutting your nose off to spite yourself." Whether you ever upgrade is totally up to you. No one else cares. Theres even a faction now that advocates elimination of any technical knowledge whatsoever. Maybe,if you wait long enough, you won't even have to memorize that; just some rules and regs.
There used to be a saying that you could tell the inmates from the "keepers" of the assylum by who had the keys. It appears that the inmates now have the keys. And so it goes.

Posted by WA4DOU on 2003-01-02

Keep the Morse Code

CW remembers us that we're "hams", "radio-amateurs", "radioaficionados", and our origins are the old radio. Keep the CW requirements and enjoy the new modes.
Posted by LW8DGV on 2003-01-02

Do you agree that the CW requirement should be removed?

Hell NO!!!
Im a Technician class ham and might always be a Tech, BUT! I do respect the origins of Amateur Radio and believe that the code should stay. I am a tech now and might always be a tech as i have no interest in CW at this point in my life...thats not the point though.
If CW goes by the way-side it will open the door for all kinds of people, the good and the bad. The code was lowered to 5WPM and i think that is quite far enough.
A few years ago I might of went the other way but im still seeing in the other bands (11M)a problem that will leak over to our bands even more than it is now.
Posted by W5YNF on 2003-01-02

CW or not

I am a tech and I have a mixed opinion on this matter. One part of me feels that CW is the origins of ham radio and it should be maintained. However, there is the other side that says that we live in a different time now and I am a very busy person. I would love to sit down and learn CW. But with work, family and college, I just don't have the time. Maybe they could make a compromise. Open up a small portion of the HF band to "no code techs" so that we can get a taste of the HF bands and then maybe our interest and curiousity will spur us to take the extra time to learn CW. I do want to say that I do appreciate them making the Technician Class available to us or I wouldn't be a ham now. I hope that someday I will be able to learn CW, but if I don't I still have the VHF/UHF.
Posted by KC0LRM on 2003-01-02

Waiting For The Miracle?

Some of the people posting here say that there is not enough time in "today's world" to learn cw.I started in amateur radio 23 years ago and worked 11 hours a night 6 nights a week.I was also raising my family and still managed to learn the theory and pass 13 wpm code.Nothing has changed,there are still only 24 hours in a day,people still work 11 hours a day and you certainly can allocate the time to learn 5 wpm code if I managed to get the 13 wpm working 11 hours a night. It is all about motivation,if the reward is great enough people will take the time to learn the code. Others will simply wait to be "Miracled" to more privileges. Some of us chose not to wait for more privileges,we just dedicated what little free time we had left after work and managed to learn the code and so can you!. Yes...there is time to learn cw,give up an hour of tv each night and you will have those new privileges in just 6 weeks. Or you can wait another Two years and enjoy the newly "crowded band conditions" after the great Miracle has been bestowed on you and countless others.Be careful what you wish for,after waiting so long for the so called "miracle" it might not turn out to be all that you had dreamed it would be.In the end you may find yourself learning CW just to get away from the crowded SSB activity! What will you have gained by the elimination of the code requirement?.....Nothing!
Posted by W8VOM on 2003-01-02

CW Requiremente KILL Ham Radio


Here in Italy many many operators do not take exainations due to difficulties in taking CW examinations.

I'm sure that CW requirements are one of the main reason why potential operators do not get the licence.

Here in Italy interest for Ham radio has decreased considerably, do not know exact numbers, but in my section on over 250 members less that 5 members are under 25 years old.

Removing CW will certainly permint new licences...

Ask Radio related companies what they think of it ! :)

Save Ham Radio, remove or keep symbolic CW requirements.


Posted by IW5EDI on 2003-01-01

This better

I signed up some time ago and really have no idea why I seperated the call. Just did.

Steve
Posted by KE4GTI on 2003-01-01

CW

Interesting comments both for and against CW. I'm a retired CWO4(COMMS) from the Coast Guard and it was a sad day when they dropped the code requirement in 93. The quality of operators went way down after that. Now just about anyone can get through "Telecommunications Specialist" (TC) school (they're not Radiomen and I understand that they plan on taking the sparks off the rating badge for TCs). Can they communicate? Not like we did. When RATT or voice comms stunk, you could always go up on the HF CW Bands and send your traffic. It was slow (and outdated even 20 years ago) but it was reliable. Many an underway watch, when RATT or voice comms were poor, we could always QSO NMR or NMO via CW and let them relay or at least help set up a RATT or voice circuit with our primary termination.

I say let the no coders have their way. Drop the requirement. We CW hounds will continue to chase DX in the CW subbands. BUT, and this is a very big BUT, the FCC/ARRL must make sure our CW subbands are protected until the last fist falls silent. You guys want to rag chew on phone? Go for it. You want to drop the code? No problem. Just stay out of the CW subbands with a microphone and let us old dinosaurs continue to communicate.
73,

Tom
WQ5O
Posted by WQ5O on 2003-01-01

CW

Interesting comments both for and against CW. I'm a retired CWO4(COMMS) from the Coast Guard and it was a sad day when they dropped the code requirement in 93. The quality of operators went way down after that. Now just about anyone can get through "Telecommunications Specialist" (TC) school (they're not Radiomen and I understand that they plan on taking the sparks off the rating badge for TCs). Can they communicate? Not like we did. When RATT or voice comms stunk, you could always go up on the HF CW Bands and send your traffic. It was slow (and outdated even 20 years ago) but it was reliable. Many an underway watch, when RATT or voice comms were poor, we could always QSO NMR or NMO via CW and let them relay or at least help set up a RATT or voice circuit with our primary termination.

I say let the no coders have their way. Drop the requirement. We CW hounds will continue to chase DX in the CW subbands. BUT, and this is a very big BUT, the FCC/ARRL must make sure our CW subbands are protected until the last fist falls silent. You guys want to rag chew on phone? Go for it. You want to drop the code? No problem. Just stay out of the CW subbands with a microphone and let us old dinosaurs continue to communicate.
73,

Tom
WQ5O
Posted by WQ5O on 2003-01-01

CW

Interesting comments both for and against CW. I'm a retired CWO4(COMMS) from the Coast Guard and it was a sad day when they dropped the code requirement in 93. The quality of operators went way down after that. Now just about anyone can get through "Telecommunications Specialist" (TC) school (they're not Radiomen and I understand that they plan on taking the sparks off the rating badge for TCs). Can they communicate? Not like we did. When RATT or voice comms stunk, you could always go up on the HF CW Bands and send your traffic. It was slow (and outdated even 20 years ago) but it was reliable. Many an underway watch, when RATT or voice comms were poor, we could always QSO NMR or NMO via CW and let them relay or at least help set up a RATT or voice circuit with our primary termination.

I say let the no coders have their way. Drop the requirement. We CW hounds will continue to chase DX in the CW subbands. BUT, and this is a very big BUT, the FCC/ARRL must make sure our CW subbands are protected until the last fist falls silent. You guys want to rag chew on phone? Go for it. You want to drop the code? No problem. Just stay out of the CW subbands with a microphone and let us old dinosaurs continue to communicate.
73,

Tom
WQ5O
Posted by WQ5O on 2003-01-01

CW

Interesting comments both for and against CW. I'm a retired CWO4(COMMS) from the Coast Guard and it was a sad day when they dropped the code requirement in 93. The quality of operators went way down after that. Now just about anyone can get through "Telecommunications Specialist" (TC) school (they're not Radiomen and I understand that they plan on taking the sparks off the rating badge for TCs). Can they communicate? Not like we did. When RATT or voice comms stunk, you could always go up on the HF CW Bands and send your traffic. It was slow (and outdated even 20 years ago) but it was reliable. Many an underway watch, when RATT or voice comms were poor, we could always QSO NMR or NMO via CW and let them relay or at least help set up a RATT or voice circuit with our primary termination.

I say let the no coders have their way. Drop the requirement. We CW hounds will continue to chase DX in the CW subbands. BUT, and this is a very big BUT, the FCC/ARRL must make sure our CW subbands are protected until the last fist falls silent. You guys want to rag chew on phone? Go for it. You want to drop the code? No problem. Just stay out of the CW subbands with a microphone and let us old dinosaurs continue to communicate.
73,

Tom
WQ5O
Posted by WQ5O on 2003-01-01

Keep CW In

When I learned the code in 1961 I cried like the rest of these cry babies. My Elmer, Weck W8AK said, "Do you want to be a ham or not?" That convinced me! I learned it.

Ham radio won't die. The cry babies will just be gone. (I hope!)
Posted by KG4OOA on 2003-01-01

Reply to KE4-GTI

To KE4GTI; Well excuse me! This will be my only reply to your comment. It seems to me you are the one who has become quite defensive about your anti-code sentiments. Thats fine that you feel CW is antiquated, and ought to be done away with. You are entitled to that openion. Yes, in all probability, the CW reqirement will unfortunately be dropped next summer by the ITU. The No coder hams will eventually take over the HF bands. And ham radio will just become another hobby. No big deal. It also apears that you are trying to justify the 'oppressed' people who cannot, or will not even try to learn the code. I stiil stand by what I said about the anti-acheivers among us who have a CB mindset that is hell bent on destroying the traditional forms of amateur many of us still enjoy. Maybe you are upset because I painted the kettle black? BTW Look who is talking about 'class' when reference is made to where a microphone should be placed. Have fun...bye.
Posted by W4MGY on 2002-12-31

Change the requirements in other ways

Knowledge of, and even proficiency in, CW appears unimportant in the grand scheme. I love CW and use it all the time, but can certainly understand those who don't.

What's more troublesome to me is that so many licensed hams wouldn't recognize an FET from an onion; or, more importantly, have no idea how to set up any sort of a working station if they had to do so without help.

Before our glorious Internet, hams read books. We even purchased them. In the earliest days of wireless, everyone built his own equipment and antennas, as there was no other choice. Those were "hams." I'm not old enough to have experienced those days first-hand, but still completely relate to them, and still build stuff. Not from kits, or from published plans, but from my own designs, good or bad.

I cannot ever recall having to ask anyone how to connect a dipole, wire a key or microphone, install a new 230V circuit in my home, or much of anything else relating to the hobby. I read books, learned things, and tried them out. This is sadly missing, today.

Rather than focus on the CW requirement (or not), I'd focus on requiring prospective licensees to demonstrate their ability to construct and operate a station, since in an emergency, this may be called for and may prove our only real validation for existence.

I don't care if new hams memorize 300 questions, or 3000 questions; if they cannot take a bunch of stuff and make a station out of it, and contact somebody with it, what's the use?

A small but proficient group of hams is more valuable to society than a large bunch of people who wouldn't know what to do if their HT batteries all failed.


Posted by WB2WIK on 2002-12-31

Another License?!

If the rest of the world thinks this is a good idea for them, then it will happen. But that doesn't mean every country will have No-Code HF tickets.

We, and much of the world already have a No-Code combined with No-License HF spectrum below 28Mcs. Many of the NO-NO ops, world wide, are infesting 28Mcs.

I don’t see what we gain by having no-code licenses. But, what we risk, is another CB Hell-Hole, with NO FCC enforcement.

Currently, the FCC can’t even shut down the truckers on 28.535!

Perhaps we can have No-Code tickets without CW and without phone privileges, limited to 10 watts out?

Give ‘em calls with two numbers, like NC01AAA.

Personally, I feel sorry for all hams that don’t start out with CW ONLY tickets restricted to Novice sub bands. I had a lot of fun with 100 watts and home made wire antennas on 80, and 40, looking for states.

May be others can have just as much fun with a digital ONLY ticket in the same spectrum?

Ultimately, asking the FCC to handle the results of more testing by VECs, issuing more licenses, with more license changes, is probably DOOMED to a resounding NO.

Lets ask the FCC to get rid of more of the illegals on the ham bands, instead of spending more limited resources on a new ham license.

Have FUN
Bob

Posted by RobertKoernerExAE7G on 2002-12-31

from Steve to Steve

To KE4GTI; Well excuse me! This will be my only reply to your comment. It seems to me you are the one who has become quite defensive about your anti-code sentiments. Thats fine that you feel CW is antiquated, and ought to be done away with. You are entitled to that openion. Yes, in all probability, the CW reqirement will unfortunately be dropped next summer by the ITU. The No coder hams will eventually take over the HF bands. And ham radio will just become another hobby. No big deal. It also apears that you are trying to justify the 'oppressed' people who cannot, or will not even try to learn the code. I stiil stand by what I said about the anti-acheivers among us who have a CB mindset that is hell bent on destroying the traditional forms of amateur many of us still enjoy. Maybe you are upset because I painted the kettle black? BTW Look who is talking about 'class' when reference is made to where a microphone should be placed. Have fun...bye.
////////////////////////////////////////////
I had to clear this up w/ you. Yes, I personally feel CW is outdated. My God, if you could see what I am seeing around me NOW at work! However, my point is CW is past it's time as a REQUIREMENT for HF phone, any band, any power. It just has no relationship. I really wish you WOULD post again to help me understand how amateur radio will be "just another hobby" w/o CW and thus more than that with it? This old investigator's mind just can't see it.Also, no one, least of all me wants to "destroy" anything you presently enjoy doing with radio! Can you not understand that I just can not see spending or being forced to spend even ONE minute learning Morse in order to use HF phone. The world is w/ me. I would think when the USCG dropped it that would have been the final nail? And just what IS a "CB mindset"? I'm trying to learn. Is there a FRS mindset? Perhaps a GMRS mindset? I suppose I have a "public service/land mobile" mindset :-) Yes I defend what I believe in strongly. As for the microphone placement, if your mind is in the gutter??? Nah, that was a little low class. I admit it ;-) 73,
Steve
Posted by KE4-GTI on 2002-12-31

KNOW CODE

Keep the code. I am sorry that it has come to those that wish not to participate in CW to be mad at those of us who still use the mode. How can 5 wpm be so hard to master. Think of it as a letter every 2 to 2 1/2 seconds. Man that is really tough. I guess the manufacturers didn't make enough money off the last cut in the requirements. You just don't know what you are missing. What's next, no license for Ham Radio and go where you please on the bands. Go FCC and ARRL, put it to the troops. Happy Holidays and see you all tonite on Straight Key Night!!!
Posted by K3MP on 2002-12-31

Practical Tests?

Maybe instead of spending so much time debating the code/no-code issue, we should be talking about how easy the Tech and General written test are. You don't really have much of a technical challenge until the Extra test.

I am more concerned about the guys who pass a test but have no practical knowledge.

A CW test is appropriate for access to HF CW sub bands, in fact I think that there should be some type of practical requirements for each mode. Tuning a transciver to operate on SSB, correct cabling and software installation for digital modes, etc.

Perhaps if you want a license you should have to demonstrate how to build a dipole--or even properly use an antenna analyzer to adjust a mobile VHF antenna.

My 2 cents, refunds available on request.

73's de Dave, W6DPS
Posted by W6DPS on 2002-12-31

if.......

Keep the code. I am sorry that it has come to those that wish not to participate in CW to be mad at those of us who still use the mode. How can 5 wpm be so hard to master. Think of it as a letter every 2 to 2 1/2 seconds. Man that is really tough. I guess the manufacturers didn't make enough money off the last cut in the requirements. You just don't know what you are missing. What's next, no license for Ham Radio and go where you please on the bands. Go FCC and ARRL, put it to the troops. Happy Holidays and see you all tonite on Straight Key Night!!!
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Probably not very hard if you were wearing a little white uniform and using CW for PAY! :-) That's not the point, however. The point has been made by me and others. Would you like to include fast rappelling and forced entry shoot/ don't shoot scnerarios in the test? I'd like that, but IT MAKES NO SENSE. Just as does requiring code for HF phone. BTW: Not that the wife and I would care, but is there a such thing as a GAY key night? LOL :-) Steve (Hey, I may as well offend everyone while I'm at it!)
Posted by KE4-GTI on 2002-12-31

Changes

The CW requirement in international law was never intended to filter-out the unfit or to serve as a great hurdle to prove the individual's willingness to work hard for on-air privileges. Those connotations were conjured up in the minds of some amateurs long after the fact. Quite simply, CW was the prevailing mode of two-way radio communications at the time the ITU voted on the issue. Two facts were evident back then: CW was the king of modes and if you were going to get out on the highway you had to know how to drive. Another fact: VHF was of no consequence to international communications, no CW driving license required. Neither of those are true today. Things do change no matter how we feel about it.

On this survey it's clear the no-code bunch ain't winning. But I agree with the speculation that no-code will prevail sooner or later. I am not convinced that no-code amateur examinations will open the flood gate and put hundreds of thousands of new amateurs on the HF bands. I hope so.
Posted by W8CVE on 2002-12-31

CW; Real Ham?

Based on everything I've read here it appears as though most pro-CW are saying if you don't have to or want to do CW then your not a "real ham". Or rather, their definition of what they perceive a real ham is (not everyone's of course). This one basic attitude of "If you don't learn CW then your not an amateur operator" is precisely what keeps the wedge between those who do CW and those who don't. I used to give cw enthusiasts the recognition every amateur radio operator deserves. But after being accused of "wanting my license handed to me on a silver platter" because I'm not interested in CW, that changed the way I look at CW enthusiasts. This general attitude of what they think a real ham is has been twisted into a highly distorted opinion of themselves. It always comes down to CW enthusiasts making references to non-CW enthusiasts as not being able to identify electronic components, or building a radio from scratch, or referencing the wanting something-for-nothing ploy. This approach has always been inaccurate and is one of the guaranteed fall-back claims CW enthusiasts always use in order to make non-CW users appear/feel as a tag-along in the amateur community.

As long as that attitude exists there will always be this division between CW enthusiasts and those who have other amateur radio related interests. CW is not the center of the radio universe, despite what those who support it try and force upon you.


Randy Evans
KE4RWS
Posted by KE4RWS on 2002-12-31

KE4-GTI

I don't know the reason behind why you separate your call, none of my business. I DO have many friends that are No code Techs and do not have a problem with that. My wife is a no code. Many Techs are into other things in ham radio and that is great. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and as for knockng straight key night,evidently you wont be on tonite. One good thought about CW. We could always eat and talk at the same time ( hi hi)....Happy New Year and hope you get your wishes....I was a radioman in the Navy and I hated CW, but 19 yrs later licensed as a ham it still is the best mode of communication and will bust through at all times. GO NAVY RMS
Posted by K3MP on 2002-12-31

CW or not

I read most of the replys, again, and see the no-coders still argue the same excuses. No valid reason. If, I'm in a remote location and in need of assistance, I pick up my cell phone. Not my PSK31 or RTTY or some other digital mode of operation. I live in a mountainous region and my 3 watt, with external antenna, cell phone does the job. As far as hands on, You have to listen to a CW coverstion at 5 WPM, no hands on and answer questions. Again, show me a valid arguement against testing for a mode of operation available to the operator, whether they choose to use it or not. And yes, there are questions on digital modes. If they remove code, I want my testing taylored to my way of operating. And I'll raise holy( you know what) about it. Fairs, fair. You want code gone, I want digital and SSTV and control operator questions removed from my testing. I have no interest in them and they are a waste of my time. They serve no useful purpose, to me and, should be removed. After all, someday they will be outdated and not used by other authorites. So, lets start the arguement now and get it over with. I want a easy test and, not have to study for it. Ban testing of PSK31,RTTY and other digital modes, NOW!!!!(Duhh???)
Posted by N0FQN on 2002-12-30

Keep the Code

Here we go again..Code VS No Code. After much consideration, I have decided to weigh in on this with my thoughts. For the record, Although CW is not my forte; 100% of my operation on HF is strictly phone. However, I can still copy CW, and I support the usage of this important skill. A couple of commenters on this thread think code should go away. Sorry, but CW is not going to go away just because of the wishes of a few among us who can't cut the mustad. I am one of the 62% who voted to keep the code requirement.

Why??

If the code requirement is dropped by the ITU Regs, soon thereafter the FCC will follow suit. Look out, there is going to be a severe need for more frequency space for the tens of thousands of new 'no-code' phone operators that will be invading the HF bands. The ITU isn't going to expand our existing HF frequency bands in 2003. Presently; narrow-band digital voice communications has not yet been developed to the point where it is a viable communications mode. For the present, we are dealing with 3 Kc wide SSB. What will be the solution? Cut the exisiting exclusive CW only sub-bands. If you are currently a phone DXer..better get all the needed HF phone DX contacts you can now because the pileups are really going to be murder just trying to talk to everyday DX.

I for one am getting sick and tired of the whining by a bunch of lazy non-acheivers who think the FCC owes them a favor by making the licensing requirement easier. These are the under educated low class mediocre people who probably enjoy freebanding on the CB. Indeed, some of the Freebanders also have Technician Claass tickets. Most of them will remain so untill the CW requirement is dropped. Forget about recruiting CBer's into ham radio. A lot of them wouldn't try to get a license if they thought they could operate without one.

This is a hard statement for me to state, considering the fact I am the County EC, and a VEC. But, as I see it, The ARRL is going to sell out amateur radio as we know it to keep the imported makers of ham gear happy; by swelling the number of new hams when changes are made in the licensing requirement to obtain HF privilages. It's the old "safety in numbers rhetoric. Do we really need more hams?

Ham radio is not an endeveour that is for everybody, never was, never will be. The liberal 'inclusiveness' Horsecrap mindset is another example of the'dumbing down' of ham radio to take it to the masses. Let's be honest folks, we as Americans have become some of the laziest, dumbed down people on this planet.

Forget it! At one time, the ham radio community was considered to be the elite of the radio hobby world. It didn't matter if you held a Novice or an Extra ticket; you had worked hard and earned your way into this special fraternity. The public at one time, looked upon hams with a great deal of respect. Today, the average person thinks we hams are another form of CB.

People who have fallen into this 'we need more hams' rhetoric have not taken into account that the popularization of amateur radio may actually kill this hobby. Popularization means mass appeal. Mass appeal means mediocracy. Mediocre equipment, mediocre operating habits. The magic dies, the gee whiz factor fades. Oh well, it's just another hobby.

Before I close, I strongly urge every reader to find Ed W5HTW's website and read his comments. He plainly tells it as it probably will be. Worth a serious read.

By the way, when the ITU drops the CW code requirement, and the no-coders are enjoying a chaotic mess on the phone bands. I will throw out the mike, and keep on working DX...on CW.

Posted by W4MGY on 2002-12-30

Keep The Code

To: W4MGY-------------------

Amen!
Posted by CURMUDGEON on 2002-12-30

Don't want it easy!

Worshipers of the Eternal Continuous Wave think think the CW droppers want it dropped because we want easy exams. Well Not this dropper! Technician exams should be at least 100 ?'s long (and no gimme's). General should be 150, and Extra 200. No gimme's there, either, and yes, with written questions about every mode, even CW. Again, i say: If CW is so great, it will stand on it's own like other non-voice modes.
Posted by KV4CP on 2002-12-30

The End....

CW/ham radio is only as "Dead" as these gloom and doom threads make it to be.

Armageddon and the end of ham radio are here for sure, so send all unused-unwanted ham gear to may CBA and rid yourselves of all that pent-up stress.

(Relaxxxxx....I'll even take keyers)

Blake N4GI
Posted by N4GI on 2002-12-30

Same old tired arguments

I see the same old tired arguments, and we're never all going to agree.

To N4GI: Sorry, but you're wrong. CW won't die as long as people enjoy it and share their pleasure of Morse with younger people. CW is essential to the QRPer and VHF weak signal enthusiast. I worked Japan on 6m QRPp on CW. I could never have done that on SSB. I personally don't enjoy CW that much, but I will continue to have it as a tool in my arsenal, and I do encourage others to learn it.

KC7MM has it right. Look, I don't want to "dumb down" the entry requirements to the hobby any further, nor do I want to give away licenses. I just want the license exams to reflect what people need to know to be good hams. That means operating practices, rules and regs, and lots of technical theory. CW is an aspect of the hobby that's there is you want it. It needed to be a requirment when it was an essential communications tool. Now it really should be optional.

Finally, to those who disagree with me and want to keep the status quo: Japan has had no code HF for years. The UK does now too. It's coming, whether we like it or not. We can spend endless time complaining about it. If you enjoy complaining, that's fine. I don't. OTOH, we can encourage the new, codeless hams and show the all ham radio has to offer, including CW. Many will choose to learn and use Morse code because they'll see it as a way to enhance their enjoyment of the hobby. Perhaps if CW was no longer seen as a burden then more people would be willing to see what it's all about.

Look for me between 7030 and 7040 QRP when the mood takes me, or in the CW portion of the 17 and 15 meter bands.

73 de Caity, KU4QD
Posted by KU4QD on 2002-12-30

Two questions:

For the pro-code folks:

One of your arguments for retaining the code it the "massive numbers" of no-coders who would invade the HF voice bands. If this is the case, why can't I find a QSO on a 2 meter repeater anymore? Could it be that the no-code bunch doesn't use their privledges?

And for the anti-code bunch:

One of your arguments for removing the code is the great influx of new operators that would result. Right now the ham population (in the US at least) is the highest it has been in history, and everyone complains of HF overcrowding. Where would these new operators be allowed to operate?

It's amazing how, when one looks at the generally accepted facts in ham radio, one only finds a bunch of contradictions...

Steve, KE4MOB

PS..I voted no.
Posted by KE4MOB on 2002-12-30

62% vs. 32%

Wow. How predictable a result. And how predictable a diatribe of "opinions." As if anybody (ITU, FCC) cared... Get used to it: it's going to be eliminated *AS A TEST REQUIREMENT*. That doesn't say anything about its practical usage, however.

Doesn't matter to me either way. Get out of that shack and live! -Alain, NI0Z.
Posted by AC0LT on 2002-12-30

lack of class

"These are the under educated low class mediocre people who probably enjoy freebanding on the CB."
//////////////////////////////////
Many opposing and non-sensical words can be excused. Most ramble at times when they begin to realize nothing posted (oops! too late ) makes their intended point.

However, to assume among other things that just because a large group disagrees w/ you they are under educated, low class and ?liberal? Me thinks you know not your enemy. YOUR lack of class, forget class; common COURTESY shines clearly. This little forum has instilled many questions in my "under educated (LOL)" mind. I think above and beyond the issue at hand is where has the friendship, fun and fellowship of the good people I've met along the way gone? This post I refer to does not ring liberal or conservative but akin to a little man named Adolf who just KNEW who belonged where! UNBELIEVABLE! BTW: How do you think it possible for YOU to know what any group of people have achieved in life or if they are "lazy"? I'll clue you in on this aspect. Your enemy (chosen by you) just may have FORGOTTEN more achievements than you managed to smart mouth about ;-) And when that microphone goes out the window think of other locations it might fit before tossing it.
Posted by KE4-GTI on 2002-12-30

Keep the code!

Keep the code! CW rigs are the easiest to build and operate, giving newbies the opportunity to get their hands "dirty" building stuff. If they remove CW as a requirement, the next step will be to open up the CW portion of the band to SSB, and we wll lose what we have.
Posted by WA1GJF on 2002-12-30

Don't Blame CW

Those who USE CW are in favor of its retention...

Why? Because they prefer to use it - something someone who has not yet mastered the skills just cannot understand... it is like someone trying to explain to me why those reactors rods are linked to bombs.

So why get rid of it? Could it be that society as a whole is in a quagmyre and
ANYTHING that requires effort is a bad idea? Lets get rid of anything hard, like Geography and Ethics classes in elimentary school, so we all can play on a level playing feel and not be discriminated against because we are "code" challenged?

Yup, if you wanna understand why CW should NOT be eliminated you have to know CW and since that is hard for some of you you will of course take the easy way out and say just eliminate it, never understanding WHY it is not only the flavour of ham radio but the element that makes non-clear channel communication possible.... (hint eliminating it as a requirement is the first step to eliminating it from usage.)

In the time we have left before the bleeding hearts take away that mean "hard" code requirement (which is a joke at 5 WPM) I will enjoy my communications that simply would not be possible on SSB be it gray line marginal propagation, or a rag chew with another person who doesn't even realize he is "using the code" since it is second nature to him because he KNOWS IT.

Any HF radio equipment you no longer need and do not wish to give to N4GI - well, I will gladly receive...CBA works just fine.

From an olde farte licensed over 30 years that still loves operating on the low end.

73,

Jim, K4OJ
Posted by K4OJ on 2002-12-30

This is the end my friend

The requirement to pass a CW test is silly. We have moved into the digital age and CW is just another digital format, even though it is the oldest digital code around. With a computer and sound card any one can send and receive CW at 60 WPM.
Japan and the UK have already moved to low power no code HF licenses that just have simple familarization with the history of Morse code.
I think if you want Extra then you should pass the 5 wpm test, Tech and general should be 100% no-code. We will also need to expand the 80 Meter band to about 90% voice to accomodate all the new comers to 80 meters.
I have been a ham for twenty years and I think the requirement for morse code is no longer neccessary.


Posted by WOR7AVC on 2002-12-30

New Requirement

I don’t think code should be a requirement for HF, it is out of date. Why not have a new requirement instead of CW, maybe an advance theory test that is not multiple choice. Maybe you should have to pass a test on any two digital modes. Code is not an indicator of skill. I am in favor of some sort of test to access HF but code is outdated. I am not saying CW should be never be used I am saying some alternate standard should be used, if you like it use away.

Also most pro-code arguments seem to say that the anti-code are just a bunch of unintelligent memorizes as they use question banks. I take insult from these arguments, when I got my basic I did not use question banks I memorized the theory.


Posted by VE3JYP on 2002-12-30

A comment from down under . . .

I have read many and not all the comments here. I have been licensed since 1985, and hold a Limited or Tech Licence here in ZL. I have never had an interest in CW, but have had an interest in many other of the communication modes available to Ham Radio. I have returned to Ham Radio after 10-12 years or inactivity, being driven away by the very people who are say NO to the no code. They wouldn't speak to new hams on the repeaters, spoke only to other full call holders and the like; basically having worked hard to pass the exam I was annoyed to be ignored in a hobby I had worked to get into. Since then I have returned this year and found a whole different approach to ham radio. I joined the local radio club, where I am aged 41 years, and I am the youngest member!!! The club is very progressive, with new modes like IRLP etc... it is a pity that CW is still holding people back. I have no interest in CW and never have. Therefore I cannot get onto the HF bands; my solution would be to make CW part of the exam process, but offer other ways to get onto HF as well, such as exam on digital modes. Most full call operators I have spoken to recently have stated they cannot remember the last time used CW. I think we need to modernise to keep the hobby alive or else it will die along with the general aging population. Just a few thoughts.
Posted by ZL2UFI on 2002-12-29

FCC Enforcement is the answer.

After reading many of these comments several things become apparent.

1.) The vast majority of people, whether "for" "against" CW requirements don't want this hobby to become the chaotic, low class mess that CB is.

2.) (and this comes from a guy who operates about 90% CW) CW will not eliminate foulmouths and people with no sense of responsibility or respect for others. (An evening listening on the lower HF bands or deliberate interefence to a DX station will quickly confirm this: you will hear some pretty poor language and poor operating from guys who passed 13 WPM and even 20 WPM CW tests!)

The FCC COULD eliminate these people. However,for whatever reason, they make a minimal effort to enforce clearly stated regulations. THIS is one of the serious threats to the hobby. If we want to keep this hobby healthy, pushing ARRL and the FCC to more aggressively go after the "bottom feeders" of the hobby will do more to preserve it than anything. A "minimal" licensing requirement with strict enforcement and harsh fines would quickly deter the anti-social undesirables more than a tough license requirement and no enforcement. You can quickly tell from some of the postings on this subject that there are likely some "technically intelligent" people who are NOT the kind of people who will help or benefit amateur radio. As they say, they can pass a CW test and many do....but they will exhibit operating practices using the same kind of trashy language and disrespect for others that you see posted on here. We don't want these people; they are a liability to ham radio's future.

If most of us would spend as much time and effort trying to get better FCC enforcement of existing rules as we do arguing about the pro's and con's of CW requirements, it is highly likely operating on HF would be a lot more pleasant and productive than it now is.

When was the last time YOU wrote the FCC or ARRL asking for more enforcement of current rules?

With the above said: we are very lucky to have Riley Hollingsworth at the FCC who is trying to deal with this....he just needs more resources and a bigger "stick". We need to help him get more resources to track/trace and BUST the undesirable minority who are a liability to the hobby.

Keeping licensing requirements moderately high, whether via CW or challenging testing will help; people tend to take care of thing that are hard to obtain...but it is only a partial answer.

For those of you who have not been there, I can assure you that as we head toward the bottom of the sunspot cycle, the benefits of CW will become more apparent....especially if you want to work any DX. No doubt, PSK-31 is as good or better, but the reality is, most "ordinary" stations and most DX stations will not be on PSK-31, which leaves CW as the next best alternative. CW is simple technically, financially cheap and will be useable when other modes are not. As this sunspot cycle nears its low in a few years, CW will grow in use and popularity whether it is required or not, simply because it will allow contacts when voice modes won't. "Plan accordingly".

73, K0ZN
Posted by K0ZN on 2002-12-29

Keep the CW!!!

I find it very humorous those operators who will condemn CW on one of the most popular two meter CB repeater in the area.
They are to busy yakking, yakking and ....
Posted by WD8MGO on 2002-12-29

Can't drop it?

James, I never said anything about your knowledge or IQ. I did say that "generalizing makes you look ignorant." Your point is "Code is Dead"--I say support your position with facts rather than blasting the rest of us. Generalizing about the "peckers" was not needed. It's obvious that you don't want anything to do with Morse and have a bad taste in your mouth for those of us who know the code. Try leaving out the emotion next time and use facts to support your ideas. If you would rather have this discussion in private, feel free to email me at tom@k4nr.org. 73 es HNY de Tom, K4NR
//////////////////
Tom, I unlike you , do not mind your having the last public "jab" UNLESS you post anything further about me personally. That IS what you have done, no matter how you try to convince yourself otherwise. I've managed some three message forums and personally I deleted off topic individual attack. Apparently, the pro Morse sentiment is so strong at this URL, people no longer matter.
Your invited mail is on the way.
Sincerely,
Steve
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Posted by KE4-GTI on 2002-12-29

LIKE IT OR NOT...

Like it or not, CW is not going to solve the problems that lie within Amatuer Radio.
It may increase the inflow of new people, which originally was the intent of the restructuring a few years ago. I think many people are afraid that if we cut out CW, we open the door for every CB'er in the country to take over the bands and ultimatly turn it into what the CB band is currently.
By the same token, I think CW is keeping alot of very technically oriented people out of Amatuer Radio.
Before the door opens any further, I think there needs to be a major increase in enforcement on the Amatuer bands.
The old thinking of if they are interested enough to learn the code, they will be good Hams is not working.
Have you ever heard a group of novices cussing like sailors on cw?
I've heard many an EXTRA class operator cussing like a sailor on voice.
THESE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE MOST PROFICIENT AT CW, SO THEY ARE THE BEST HAMS THERE ARE. NOT!!!
IF YOUR GOING TO HAVE RULES, YOU HAVE TO ENFORCE THEM.
IF YOU ENFORCE THEM, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO COMES IN, THEY ARE BOUND BY THE RULES TOO.
Posted by N8LUX on 2002-12-29

If an honest effort is made, YOU WILL LIKE CW MODE.

Well, the new year is approaching, and the talley so far indicates a large majority(60%) who say "No" to Morse code test elimination. Morse code, indeed, CW mode operation remains a fastinating skill for those who are willing to invest a little time and effort to learn this art. From an engineering point of view, the simplicity of the hardware is beautiful. CW remains the most reliable, efficient, and effective mode of radio communication. I will never forget the comments of the Astronaunt Alan Shepard in the preface of the code tape that I used to learn Morse code. "CW is a special language and skill." Those words are truth. I do not understand why some people are so afraid to try. Considering all of the comments that have presented here, I read a very meaningful statement recently in a very technical article on building a tube transmitter (another dying art.) The author said, "Get on the air and operate. Communicating -- that's what amateur radio is all about, isn't it?" Yes, even though we like the technical aspect with designing, experimenting, and building, actually communicating is the end. Certainly, it is the relationship we build in communicating that remains valuable, and many, both young and old, have made and maintain those relationships in the enjoyment of CW, a special bond amongst operators. The statement to no-coders is "Fine if you had rather operate another mode, but you really don't know the fun that you are missing." Now, from a technical view point of the test, if code testing is thrown out, then it would not be fair to test on the technical aspects of any other mode of operation, would it? When I took my advanced and extra exams, I had to know a good bit of the goings-on with more sophisticated modes to pass the test, whether I planned on operating with those modes or not (which I didn't.) So, CW tests get thrown out. What's next? Personally, I don't care one little thing about ATV. That sounds like a good choice to me. But -- I am not setting the standards. The standards should not change to accomodate a special-interest class in the population. Recall that this country begin licensing amateur radio operators originally in order to maintain a pool of technically trained radio operators. When the EMP occurs and NONE of the fancy communicating devices work including E-mail, it will be the CW operators with a simple tube rig that will be the star of the show (as ugly as the show may be.) How many of that class is left in the population of North America? Relatively few and far between, but still alive and well, thank you very much. I would like for those who SAY that there exist this great majority who would fill the ranks of amateur radio only if CW code test requirements were eliminated. I have introduced several to the idea of involvement in amateur radio. Unanimously, the problem remains that life is too complicated as it is and there is not enough time and an unwillingness to commit to anything that does not instantaneously gratify. Throwing out CW testing, honestly, is not the answer to the percieved problem. It will only make the 'problem' worse. Who said the established bands were threatened anyway. I dare say that no-body will ever be succesful in taking 160, 80, 40, 20, 15, 10, 6, and 2 meters. Amateur radio is a long standing tradition that provides an important service to this country and world. It is not going to go away. What is the panic? So, maybe the ARRL will have to tighten the belt and keep it there. Maybe some other supplimental funding may be needed. So what?
Posted by N4KZO on 2002-12-29

codes nodes abodes and comoads

to use CW as a reason for low participation and to use CW as a way of keeping "who" from joining the wonderful world of communication, well certain things should be looked at.
For one thing when a group of the same kind gets together they want to be number one on the list, they never think out loud there are to many of "those others" coming in to the shack, they use a different agenda, but they also have unbelievable reasons as what they are all about, and they even start blamming the "other kind" for having to do these things for all sorts of reasons, to keep all the free riders out, to keep those who would "darken" the outlook, or they would be allowing those who are not as loving of this country as they are, and that makes them dangerous, or they do this to protect what they have built or to keep non American types from over running the neighborhood.
These people always have a reason (excuse), and about me they will be calling me a ___
___ lover.
As long as they are around they will always make it impossible for others to come into the club, and those that make it into the club will be shunned, they will be put down for their ideas, or they will never be invited to affairs where the so called good ole boys are hanging out.
The shame is many but the one that bothers me is they are using the CW as an excuse, and they will keep this up as long as they live because they don't have to change any of their ways because no one has figured how to get around this last one which has been around for years.
Morse code, what fun it would be if we had contests which would entale members of one state or county to have these contests, the fun would be the prizes that we could have the companies support, and with these types of contests we could have a lot of fellowship, which is one of the main reasons this hobby is dying.
If these people cared for humanity, for this hobby, for this country, for brotherhood and for the way Americans should be than we would have some great times, if thats what we truley are looking for, but these old pis ants would rather the whole thing die except maybe the part they were standing on, they would rather this would happen, and why do I say these things, well I have only beenaround here for awhile, and I see this dragon raise its ugly head, as I have seen this dragon do before.
There may be a few nasty remarks in my behalf, given by those who would no more like this hobby to grow and represent all of us, they would rather it die.
They say things like the cb flood gates would break and those who like to cuss other people or each others or do it when the kids are around, have no problem doing it when no one is around except the ones who think like them. As I said before the only thing that will die is our hobby, they have this thing as if they are in control of whats going on in this country and they control it and thats good, or there will be all sorts of people claiming to be Americans, cussing and drinking, and stealing, and lieing and cheating and doing away with our American values.
They have nothing in their heart but the cold blood that flows through their veins, and they have learned how to make it look like its not their fault its those other kinds, that come to this country and try to tell us what to do.
It won't end because they are professional in their movements, and the only way we could do something about this problem is to start another group that speaks for us, that makes up our rules and tells us what our morals should be, and what our values will be tomorrow, and make the goverment our friend and maybe the churches our friend and other groups that have power our friends and what we have to do is put us in power, I never did like their ways it always excluded everyone that wasrn't on their friend list.
They talk only within their circles, andd when its time to vote they count the votes.
The Morse Code is a beautiful thing, and they claim reverence toward it and all it stands for.
We have to get off our butts and do, or they always win.

__
NO WAY, lets come up with an idea that is totally stupid "BUT" we protect our wants and needs by demanding certain things, this will keep them out, and as long as there is no way to discuss this insanity with an open mind what will happen is every time it comes up we can put it down because we have it so confused there is no way out of the bag.
When I listen to those who fight for the right to keep CW as important, so important that it actually keeps alot of people from coming aboard.
The arguement is weak, practise CW in case the what, the cubans come over to fight us or iracq wants to come over with ten thousand or tenm million idiots to fight with us and we will need CW to use so that we can protect the shores from the who, the Russians. This idea that it is very honerable to use CW every chance we get so that we can show our true colors and we can show "them" who is in charge of this country, and that no one with a slight color or even their nose a little different won't be able to come and sit in our rooms and go with us to places where we all get together
Posted by ROCCLOOP on 2002-12-29

cw

i agree with ke1mb. like it or not its going to go by the wayside. look at all of the tec
we got going on right now.u think some joe or jane is going to care about cw in the future.and if this summer the itu doesnt drop
it then i guess me and other ham out here will never get on hf i have heard alot of u fisters out there and i swear it sounds like to me that u are not using a key (hint hint)
my wife is currently going for her ticket
and she doesnt want have to deal with it
so i say let it go .there are already illegial ppl on there now the fcc is not doing there job that good anymore with all of the gov cutbacks they would have to spend a million years to track everyone who does not have a ticket.futhermore if they do keep it then all u know who u r will stop there complaining and if they do remove it all u other ppl out there will do even more complaning so stop yure whining and get on with the times its a changing wheather u like it or not .
73s
w1mer
Posted by W1MER on 2002-12-29

CW ON TEST...YES

I THINK THAT THE HAMS WHO COMPLAIN THE MOST ABOUT CW ARE THE ONES WHO DON'T WANT TO WORK TO LEARN IT.AFTER ALL, AFTER A COUPLE OF MONTHS OF REAL EFFORT, 5 WPM SEEMS SO SLOW, IT ALMOST PUT YOU TO SLEEP.IF A LITTLE WORK KEEPS THE RIFF RAFFS FROM TURNING HAM RADIO INTO CB RADIO, THEN LET KEEP THE TEST WHETHER YOU USE IT OR NOT.
Posted by KG4PIL on 2002-12-29

CW dies, Ham Radio Lives!

Where is the hands-on test for operating PSK-31? RTTY? AMTOR? Hellschriber? If CW is so efficient, Why did the USCG dump it (Don't give us that "politics" cop-out)? Imagine you just hit a deer with your car 12 miles south of nowhere. You are injured, and so is your car. You won't still be so stubborn as to reach for your key, will you? If CW prof exams were dropped when the USCG dropped CW, there could be more hams today. But fair is fair, isn't it? If CW is so efficient and worthy of plattitudes, it will stand on its own without prof exams, right? And if it doesn't that will be progress for ham radio, like it or not. BTW, anybody seen my Model T ignition coil?
Posted by KV4CP on 2002-12-29

slowly but surely

My comrades in arms it appears the truth has gained a percent! I'm joking of course. We all know this type poll is not scientific and in the real world the *get rid of its* are prevailing. BTW, to he who almost has my prefix and finds 5WPM boring, worried about riff raff and such; IT IS CONSIDERED SHOUTING TO TYPE IN ALL CAPS! :-)73
Steve
Posted by KE4-GTI on 2002-12-29

Ham radio operators - the civilian "special forces" of communications

It is not worth training all coast guard and naval personnel the Morse code.

However, special forces folks DO learn it. Why? Because it works in situations when a bunch of other modes do not.

The special forces people are just that - special. They get called in whenever the situation warrants expertise beyond what "normal" people are capable of.

Ham radio? Essential? Dream on. We are "volunteer civilian special forces." When the rest of the population is humbled with power outages, and cell phones and the internet aren't working, we are called on to help specifically because our self-imposed training has given us skill sets that permit us to communicate at a level "well above and beyond what normal civilians can do."

For this reason alone, Morse code should be retained as a minimum qualification for HF licensing and operation. As nonessential personnel, we NEED this universal language to ensure that we remain "SPECIAL" in the civilian communications world.
Posted by N7JI on 2002-12-29

It is really sad....

To think that they are even contemplating getting rid of CW... Think about this- if we went to war, and our power grid was taken out, how long would your station last? If you homebrewed/built a QRP CW rig, with batteries and a solar power option, you could be up in minutes, lasting for a LONG time. It's VERY efficient.
Amateur radio is all about being prepared in the event of disaster. After all, this is what we should be training for. Field day, contests, ARES, should I say more? CW is a mode where one could build a transceiver from very few parts. It is also known for getting through when all other modes fail. This is still my favorite mode, as I had to learn it to even GET my ticket. Not making someone "work" for their ticket will cause the HF bands to be infiltrated with boatloads of CB'ers. Granted listening to 10 and 20 meters we kinda have this problem now...
It's really an issue of respect. Because I had to work hard at getting the code as a young man, I respect the hobby and the people surrounding me on the bands. Others must agree with me, as I have NO trouble making QSO's on the CW bands. Besides, it is easier to understand a DX station sending CW than to try to understand broken English. Some can send CW better than they can speak! (me included at times)
I have to give it to the old op's out there. CW is FAR from dead. I guess I am showing my age too, as I just turned 30 today.
Long live CW as a requirement. Get off of your lazy cans and learn it. IT'S NOT THAT HARD!
Mick



Posted by KB9ERU on 2002-12-28

Tradition or Exclusion?

I have not been a Ham long. I got my ticket in November. So take what I say with that in mind. I know many of the arguments for keeping CW. I will get my CW and Gen. soon. The problem is my age. I'm 48, my brain patterns are set. It is VERY hard for me to learn a new language (yes it's a Language!) at my age. I WILL learn it however, and I will pass my test. What hurts me to hear are some of the older Hams out there that have come in to the hobby late (like me) and just CANNOT pass that 5wpm test. They have tried 4 & 5 times and they just can't get there brains to funtion with CW. Are we to leave them out of the world of HF? Can we not restrict SOME HF bands for these guys?

My 2 cents.

73, KD5UJX
Posted by KD5UJX on 2002-12-28

Maybe time for a little change..

Hey.. for the longest time i thought CW shouldnt be dropped as a requirement.. because i worked hard on learning the code and CW is a major part of amateur radio.

But.. nowadays in a more computerized world, maybe instead of having to learn the code.. we should focus more on the computer aspects of amateur radio. That way it will be more appealing to more people and might spark more interest in the hobby. If someone says wow, radio sounds pretty interesting.. but when they hear about CW.. people get turned off really easy.. but.. most people are more drawn to computer stuff.. they wouldnt be turned off and might make radio seem more appealing to them.. i could go on.. but im late for work.
Posted by VE3GIB on 2002-12-28

Tom Branch, who is ignorant?

James / KE4GTI, Read this: CW is far from dead. While I think the no-coders will win the "CW Test" battle, CW will live on. I'll argue it will see a greater following as soon as the phone sub-bands are packed. I listened to some guys on 160 phone the other night complaining they could not finish WAS-160. I found that surprising as I manage to work all States during every 160-meter contest. When I asked them about the contest, their response was "I don't work CW." If you want to discuss or debate, try leaving out the generalizations--they make you look ignorant. 73 es HNY de Tom, K4NR
Posted by K4NR on December 27, 2002
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Tom, You have a perfect right to your opinion. I do not feel you have the same to attack me personally. I do not believe I mentioned you or anyone by name. It is courteous to generalize rather than attack.

I can clearly see that I have pushed a button which, BTW makes your "point" less valid by your response in the form of placing yourself as judge of my knowledge or IQ. Trust me, I'm secure of my mind and faculties.

I have seen more ignorance on this page than could be imagined. Morse code is useless. It should be allowed of course but not required. The power/telephone/cellular failure examples are really entertaining. The technology in modern mobile command centers is not restricted to riots or high risk warrants. But I wouldn't expect those grasping for weight behind their positions to be aware of anything past their "peckers".

Finally, I shall not lower myself to your level and attack you, your intelligence or anything about you personally. I do request that you cease and desist with this behavior, however. Thanks,

Steve

Posted by KE4-GTI on 2002-12-28

Code,NoCode

Here we go again, the no-coders vs the coders. For all those who love and adore CW, do you really think CW is going to go away if the CW test is removed? If you can do better than 30 WPM you surely did not get that fast from a simple test, chances are you like CW and that is why you are so good at it. For those who think that you have to know CW to be a "real Ham", how much can you tell me about how your radio really works?, could you fix it if it broke? Removing the CW portion will only help bring more needed people into the hobby before we lose space. I do think the written test should offset this by becoming more harder requiring more study.
Posted by KE1MB on 2002-12-28

Who is Ignorant?

James,

I never said anything about your knowledge or IQ. I did say that "generalizing makes you look ignorant." Your point is "Code is Dead"--I say support your position with facts rather than blasting the rest of us.
Generalizing about the "peckers" was not needed. It's obvious that you don't want anything to do with Morse and have a bad taste in your mouth for those of us who know the code. Try leaving out the emotion next time and use facts to support your ideas.

If you would rather have this discussion in private, feel free to email me at tom@k4nr.org.

73 es HNY de Tom, K4NR
Posted by K4NR on 2002-12-28

Code "A Calling?"

It's funny... Ever since I was a child I have always been fascinated with code... When I would watch old war movies and some guy would listen to dits and dahs and be able to understand it... I was always captivated with it. Of the 28 different avenues of Amateur radio, Morse code is still popular.
If you practice you WILL learn it. If you do take the time to learn it you will never regret the time spent learning it. It is like a right of passage. If the code requirement was lifted maybe I would have never learned it. I'm glad I did. You will be too! Strange thing that code...
Posted by N2STX on 2002-12-28

We don't need to lower the entry level to HF just to up our numbers. In a different thread on this site it is being stated that there are to many people on the HF bands and that there is to much QRM. We need to recruit quality not quantity. HAM RADIO IS NOT DYING! We should not lower the standard just to recruit people who only wish to become licensed hams if it is givin to them. Learning the code at 5wpm is very easy. Personally, I feel that if an individual won't put forth the effort to learn code at a mere 5wpm then that person has no real desire to be a ham. Giving the ticket away is like giving everyone welfare because it is to hard for them to work. I have nothing against welfare but look how bad it is being abused these days. People are to lazy to work and why should they when OUR taxes pay their way thru life. Why should future hams have to learn code when the requirment will be eliminated anyway because it is to hard for them to learn code!
Posted by AD6WL on 2002-12-27

SameO' SameO'

I hate hearing the arguement that CW is outdated. I feel that as long as it is a mode of operation available to the operator, whether they choose to use it or not, should be contained in the testing. I don't enjoy digital operation and SSTV. Should I then raise the issue I don't want those questions on my test because I don't use them? I feel that's fair if you want the code gone, I want those questions eliminated. How far do we carry this? Personalized test to each operators whim? That's my 2 cents worth.
Posted by N0FQN on 2002-12-27

CW "Filter"

Why do we have to give everything without any effort? What's wrong with earning something. Anyone, repeat anyone, can learn 5wpm if they get serious about it. If you decide to use it or not is up to the individual but at least you will have the satisfaction of knowing you learned something new and earned your new privileges. Just my opinion.
73
Posted by K8UPA on 2002-12-27

Great US Giveaway

Since the USA is determined to become a
Socialist State and give away everything
that the people of the world might need
without regard as to the outcome and effects
of this giveaway and without regard to whom is paying for these things, it is only
fitting that we give away yet another
something to the ungrateful,undeserving and
unmotivated.
I DON'T THINK SO !
Posted by WA4PTZ on 2002-12-27

cw and test ?

while the debate seems to roll on on the cw to be or not to be question,
lets look at this from a different perpective. the pro cw side beleives we need to "earn" the ticket, i agree
is cw the way to do it? i am not so sure. i would say this lets add say c++ and maybe machine languge to the test as well as keeping cw.
To ensure that we have "earned" our ticket lets retest every 10 years, so the extra class who were designed to be the elmers and experts
are in fact up to the job. while i do not see a need for cw as a testing requirement, i can see a need for something to replace it.
lets get back to the real reason we have our licenses in the first place.
" a trained pool of operators and instructors"
why not add emergence communications a a pool question on all exams, say 3 questions?
we would all benefit from this approach,
not the cw to be or not to be.

Posted by KB9ZB on 2002-12-27

It's a lock

It's only a matter of time and God willing I have more natural years left than the average "pecker lover".
For crying out loud many of these that so love the migraine inducing noise CANNOT even spell their arguments! Well see if you can READ this. CW is an archane, dead but not buried mode and DIE IT WILL! I want to TALK to people, world wide! I would never grab my single action revolver and badge on the way to work. NOW, we have things called GLOCKs, HK SMGs, and digital trunked communications! As slow as the army is to change, they are adopting semi auto shotguns among their arsenal. You can bet there is no need for "pecking" in their communications either.
My point is every dog has it's day, everything has it's time. It's a shame the stupid old trembling hands that couldn't peck out 3 WPM if their life depended on it are determined to SLOW the elimination of this lunancy :-(
As for "earning" something, what could one possibly earn that they would not use? You can be assured, on HF, I will never "peck" in an improper manner! I just hope there is an amateur hobby when CW is buried, for surely it is already dead!

Posted by KE4-GTI on 2002-12-27

It's a lock



James / KE4GTI,

Read this: CW is far from dead. While I think the no-coders will win the "CW Test" battle, CW will live on. I'll argue it will see a greater following as soon as the phone sub-bands are packed.

I listened to some guys on 160 phone the other night complaining they could not finish WAS-160. I found that surprising as I manage to work all States during every 160-meter contest. When I asked them about the contest, their response was "I don't work CW."

If you want to discuss or debate, try leaving out the generalizations--they make you look ignorant.

73 es HNY de Tom, K4NR







Posted by K4NR on 2002-12-27

CW is very cool.

CW is an art-form.
Morse Code Rocks and Rolls.
CW is THE Ancient RF language.
CW is THE ROOT of Wireless.
It is THE MOST BASIC way to communicate, and so therefore, is useful.
Digital is great, and the CW proficient could communicate with flashlights, or LEDs... no RF signal to trace...
When the chips are down, [pun intended] what will you do?
May as well not require handwriting, because the world is going PDA, Notebook computer, wireless cell phone...oooh how cool.

And see how a hospital is affected, when cellular systems are down, and paging is OFF LINE, or the ISP is down for maintenance, telephone lines out of commission...

When the only things that work are the basic ones, what will you do?

The Jedi Will NEVER DIE.
Posted by W3DCG on 2002-12-27

CW Required

There are two things that keep the amateur radio community from degenerating into a CB type hobby - technical knowledge, experimentation, licensing and CW.

Posted by VE7AOP on 2002-12-26

CW Required

There are two things that keep the amateur radio community from degenerating into a CB type hobby - technical knowledge, experimentation, licensing and CW.

Posted by VE7AOP on 2002-12-26

Dropping CW Won't Help Ham Radio

I have yet to see evidence that anyone has abandoned a plan to become a ham because of the code requirement - after all you have plenty of freedom to practice many facets of our hobby above 29MHz without cw proficiency. So I don't think that dropping cw will increase our numbers, it will just cause a little more crowding on the HF voice bands. If you propose to drop a pro-forma requirement like 5wpm you may as well propose to drop most of the technical contents in the written exams: knowing Ohm's law and understanding a few basic circuits doesn't get you very far in trouble shooting a commercial rig and has little practical use if you just want to operate a piece of equipment that is too complex to understand for most of us anyway - so why not do away with that, too? And what good is a knowledge of HF propagation theory - just listen in and you'll know whether the band is open... So it would probably boil down to a test of rules and regulations - but much of that knowledge could be built into the design of commercial rigs by automatically restricting operational modes and power as required and outlawing homebrew equipment. What I'm trying to say is that dropping the cw requirement would be one more step on a road where eventually you won't have any test at all, and being a ham just means to have enough money to buy another appliance. We've come pretty far along on that road already. I recently took all elements 1 through 4 for an Extra class licence in a single 3-hour morning after about three weeks of preparation, and I didn't feel that was a particularly taxing exercise. Yes, I have to admit that I head a head start and have been a ham for many years and my W2/DJ8GO was just getting to cumbersome for this dedicated cw operator in DX pile-ups, so I wanted a shorter call, AE2US - but still I can assure you that todays license examn including that perfunctory cw requirement, even the Extra Class examn, has become a fairly low barrier that anyone with a minimum of determination should be able to pass. Even though I'm a dedicated cw operator I would never try to argue for cw on its merrits as a mode of communication - like I would never try to position any other mode in ham radio as the best means to communicate the maximum amount of information in the shortest possible time under possibly adverse circumstances (my cell phone tends to be much better and cheaper at that). But I think if we whittle away at traditional elements of ham-dom like cw, which at 5wpm is not a serious obstacle regardless of what I've read in some comments here, we will eventually change our hobby beyond recognition.
Posted by N2DE on 2002-12-26

I told you so . . . .
Posted by KE4RWS on 2002-12-26

Dropping CW Won't Help Ham Radio

No Code = No Theory

Guys! We already have no theory!

Do you realize if you miss EVERY technical question on the exam you can pass? Only the Extra requires an electronic background because only the Extra has enough theory questions you can't pass if you don't know.

What is the EXTRA? Nothing!!

The Extra is a nothing exam guys. Don't ever apply for a tech job and tell them you have an Extra. It's the kiss of death. ANY commercial tech has to know a LOT more than that.

I hate to tell you guys this, but the ham exam is really meaningless, and all this controversy is even more meaningless...

Hams = CB'ers.

We are both radio enthusiasts and the sooner we join forces the better off we will be. Both of us are suffering from CC&R's... Probably the biggest nemisis facing us...

www.radions.net/amateur.htm

Vy 73,

TR@radions.net
WB6TMY CFO #1000


Posted by K6GC on 2002-12-26

cw elimination

I passed my code test when I was ten years old, though I am mostly on phone modes. I do very little with CW, but I am glad I know it.

1) I think whether or not we want CW to be eliminated, it will be soon.

2) I don't agree with this concept of "let's keep people out." If they violate the law, then legal actions should keep these people off the air, not a test, and if you don't like people, don't be a ham. I don't like the idea of "keeping radios expensive" and other filtering ideas either. Granted, you keep a few foul-mouthed truckers from using a "less crowded channel" but you also keep broke engineering students, who ARE the future of ham radio, from getting on. Ham radio shouldn't be something for only those who can afford it; that's why licensing only costs the amount of the test.

3) Passing technical exams proves that you can memorize 500 questions, not that you could build an amplifier, test an antenna, or operate a soldering iron. In fact, very few people bother to understand the theory behind the test questions, which is quite unfortunate.

4) I REALLY don't want to see the frequency spectrum be rewoked to account for the influx of codeless HF operators. This, will of course, be hard to do though, since the new arguement will be what to do with all the new HF operators. I don't want to see CW fall the way of a "gentleman's agreement" on frequencies, as this will surely be the death of CW, and we cannot let CW die out completely.

History is important. Sure, CW isn't the mode of choice for long distance communication anymore. But you cannot forget your roots. I went to a hamfest with electrical engineering student and when we past a vendor of vacuum tubes, he says "what are those?" we have fogotten our past and some day it might come back to haunt us.

----------
Seth Price http://www.n4st.com/seth
Posted by N3MRA on 2002-12-26

Morse code

We already have progressively dumbed down Ham radio. How many Hams build their own gear these days or do not own at least some commercially made kit? The amateur element is largely missing save for the construction of antennas. Unless your occupation involves electronics it is unlikely that you have managed to keep up with developments.

I started with the exam whilst still at school in 1964 - no multiple choice questions then, but essays and diagrams. No money either! So It wasn't until 1969 when I could afford to get on 2 metres with a much modified Pye ranger commercial rig - but what fun was that first QSO with with a few sparks and arcing here and there!
I stayed a (non-cw)VHF and above G8 for many years largely playing with microwave or working in a bank before taking the cw plunge in 1985. It was hard work for me. I dragged myself up to 22WPM for the test which was only 12 WPM and was very nervous but passed. I felt a very great sense of achievement.

But now do the new licensees have any sense of achievement? I wont say that I have earned my Class A, but I do feel proud of getting there.

So what future for Ham Radio? Send in three serial packet tops and a cheque, or are we going to make it something worth achieving?

Bob Kerby G0CHK QTHR
sleepers56@btopenworld.com
Posted by G0CHK on 2002-12-26

Re: Morse code

To G0CHK: I am a Technician class operator (without Morse code). I consider myself a VHF operator, and enjoy operating six and two meters, all modes. Regarding your comment ... I have been licensed for eight years, and have actively been collecting antique "boatanchor" radios. I often restore and repair them for others as well. Around 85% of my ham shack is pre-1960, and I do build my own equipment. I am currently working on a two meter transmitter and matching amplifier. I enjoy VHF operations, and enjoy working the world on six meters. I have no interest in CW or HF. It is too easy to pick up a mic and work another country on 20 meters. It is much more of a challenge to do it on six meters. Someday I may upgrade, but as of now I am perfectly content.
Posted by W8MMQ on 2002-12-26

Yes to CW!

It's not a matter of dumbing down amateur radio requirements...it's not a matter of dedication, either. However, when I flip through the utilities on my R75, I still hear CW abounding. CW has low bandwidth, and is GREAT in a communications emergency. Five words a minute is nothing...even a dummy like me learned it :) CW is still a very important part of not just amateur communications, but communications in general.
Imagine being in the middle of nowhere and sending out a distress with a QRP rig. Too bad, nobody knows CW. Sorry...keep the code.
Posted by K2KOH on 2002-12-26

CW Forever

The Jedi will never die.
Posted by W3DCG on 2002-12-26

Different perspective


I've been reading the various responses to the survey question, and I'm going to take a slightly different tack here regarding CW testing.

I was first licensed 10/02 as a Technician and I am ready to take my CW test as well as my General (just waiting for the next exam date to arrive). I've done a bit of listening on HF and it seems that SSB is more used than CW, at least it was when and where I was listening- but I realize that CW is still used on HF, and that some people really like it. Great, however you choose to communicate and what's the most fun for you is what is really important.

I've heard a bit of CW on VHF, too- at 144.1 MHz and below, there are some folks around here that do weak-signal work. Any Technician could conceivably use CW on the VHF/UHF bands if they wanted to, and theoretically, one does not need to have passed the CW exam to use code on these bands.

I think the crux of the pro- and anti-CW arguments that I've been reading seem gravitate around the fear that if we were to let people on HF without them having taken the CW exam, these bands will automatically degenerate into something akin to 11 meters. Somehow, I doubt this; I'm not stating either a pro- or anti-CW position, I am just being observant of a couple of factoids that I've been witness to since I've been on the air:

1) Even though many of the folks on the local repeaters are no-code Techs using FM, I personally have not heard foul language or abuse coming from any of them, such as one might hear on 11 meters- this kinda shoots down that "no code bands will degenerate in CB bands argument"; and

2) Apparently, passing the CW test does not keep people from being foul-mouthed and abusive on HF, either.

As far as doing away with the test itself goes, I'm not sure about it. Really, I may be the odd one out here, but I won't have an opinion about it either way until I actually get on HF and start using CW. I will say that I just don't see any evidence that CW should be the end-all, be-all litmus test for whether you will be a good operator on HF (or any other band) or a lid.

Ham radio has standards of conduct that are spelled out for us in the license study manuals and the FCC rule book, and when we want to get on the ham bands, we are essentially committing ourselves to a standard of conduct where we will ostensibly set a good example for others on the ham bands. This, more than what mode of communication you prefer to use on those bands, is what sets us apart from 11 meters.


Posted by KC0ODY on 2002-12-26

Different Perspective

Jackie / KC0ODY, I'm not sure what on which band you're listening, but there's plenty of CW activity. Check out the bottom end of 40 meters on any evening. I wish you all the best with your tests. Once you pass, get on-the-air! Start making CW QSOs and your speed will improve quickly. Don't be afraid to ask someone to slow down! I usually call CQ at 25 wpm. If someone calls in I'll adjust my speed to match their speed. I think many CW operators do the same, so try not to send any faster than you can receive. You are correct about CW usage on VHF. Anyone can use it. I call CQ on 50.100 all the time. Still hoping to work WAS on a 6 meter omni-angle. CW works well for weak-signal stuff. I have to agree with you that CW is not a filter for a good operator although I would argue that learning basic CW does teach basic operating skills that follow the operator into other modes. If you can print RTTY, watch the basic exchanges and you'll see tha same patterns as used on CW. While it's harder to see, I'd argue those same skills make a decent phone operator as well. Asking "is the frequency in use?, proper signing, saying "over" are good examples (QRL?, call DE call, and K). GL es HNY de Tom, K4NR
Posted by K4NR on 2002-12-26

Real Reason for No Code?

Eliminating the code will have little impact on enhancing the hobby or bringing in new comers. What it will do is create a slight spike in EQUIPMENT SALES and ARRL MEMBERSHIPS that might last a few months or years. Nothing wrong with that, someone has to try and make some money in this very difficult sector.

When the WHINERS succeed in the elimination of the code, they will shift their focus on licensing exams. After all, why should we need licensing exams, no one homebrews any more? Why not bring back the Novice class as No code and No test with a FEE? Can’t wait to hear those conversations……

The whole purpose of the code requirement in the digital age is to FORCE someone to WORK for an upgrade in privileges.
Posted by OBSERVER on 2002-12-26

No code HF Privilleges

There are many articulate comments entered here discussing both sides of the issue regarding the granting HF operating privilleges to non-code licensees. This is a valid issue however we need to remember that our numbers are getting smaller in terms of individuals actively involved in amateur radio. My greatest concern is that amateur radio is a dying hobby. Whether it is from the Internet or other sources we are loosing active hams in large numbers greater than we getting active participants in amateur radio. Numbers are often misleading. Just listen and there are fewer active amateurs nowadays. I think that we owe it to amateur radio to attract more ACTIVE participants. I think that whatever restrictionss would be placed on no code HF operators (and I do believe that this group of operators have some restriction of privilleges) it will still serve as a something to get more individuals actively involved in the hobbie. We lost the bottom of 220MHz, for example, years ago. Perhaps if there were more amateurs on that band we would have kept it. The point is that we must actively seek out new amateurs and encourage them to participate ACTIVELY, learn and enjoy amateur radio. For over fifty years I have been involved in SWL and amateur and it is a wonderful and exciting pastime. I would like to see others have the enjoyment I have had with amateur radio. Let us welcome and do all that we can to gain more active amateur radio operators. We have to increase our active numbers of licensees. We must embrass and attrack them into the amateur community. I always welcomed new amateurs and I think that we need to make a more positive entry into amateur radio for newcomers. The best part of amateur radio, is that we can select who we talk to! (QSY!) We need to keep our numbers up and acr Finally, let us enjoy our hobbie and not discount what no code persons can offer to amateur radio.

Seventy-three,

Philip K4AAR
Posted by K4AAR on 2002-12-26

KEEP CW

Look the problem with most today is they want something for nothing..YOU OWE IT TO ME is the type of mentally we face today, Not saying cw is a cure FOR better OPS or AGAINIST Everyone joining in, but why must we change things just cause someone can't or won't learn a little cw?.All the hoopla about the for and againist folks,Its just that those wishing a more techincal test and more questions ...well if you can memorize more questions why can't you memorize 26 letters? because it's hard work thats why and YOU OWE IT TO ME,it just is a way of showing that you want something bad enough,Its called pride I did something for ME no one Gave it to me because I whined or Cried it was too hard and outdated,KEEP CW if you can't grasp it then go back to cb or 2 meters(about the same anymore). Once we let just anybody in, you had better bet we will start losing parts of the radio spectrum for sure. and as we know once its gone we will never get it back. KEEP AT LEAST THE MINIMUM CW
Posted by W9FU on 2002-12-26

Let us remember why we're here...

Morse code, plain and simple, works.

We're given the bandwidth to communicate, often in less than optimal conditions.

Learning Morse puts everyone on the same page and makes truly available a mode that everyone can use/copy in the type of conditions one could reasonably expect on the high frequency bands.

It's not a filter - it's actually potentially important. And just because the coast guard and Navy don't use it anymore doesn't mean nobody does - US special forces do know Morse code because of its simplicity and lack of a requirement for computers and other high-tech gadgetry (even a microphone could be high tech compared to tapping your finger on a wall and sending information) which might not be available.

Anyway, I digress.

Happy holidays, and may we work each other in the following year.

Scott N7JI
Posted by N7JI on 2002-12-25

To paraphrase a certain popular song "I can't get no CW action. Though I try, and I try, and I try. I can't get no. no. no no."

Tapes, computer programs, whistling, Koch, hypnosis, etc. Nothing seems works for someone with zero sense of rhythm and who can't carry a tune to save his life.

I first tried when I was in Junior High School (1960). Couldn't get it then. No more attempts till 2000, still couldn't get it. I finally went ahead and got the Technician ticket in early 2002 at age 55.

I would love to operate HF but, if CW is the magic elixir, it may never happen for me. I would gladly take a MUCH more stringent technical test in lieu of CW testing.

I really can't see that CW has improved the operating habits of many Hams I listen to on HF. In fact, judging from some of their comments, some of them seem to have absolutely no knowledge of how their gear does work!

All right, I am ready for you 'brass pounders' to stone me to death.

Dennis - KG4RUL
Posted by KG4RUL on 2002-12-25

Zut!

Always the same question : the CW should must removed ?

Each time the same answer : NO

The only one time you'll get Yes, you'll stop to ask.

It is the same manners for European Community in the Countries' Referendum...

If you remove the CW requirement, the number of Ham Radio will not progress, around the world. It will just help some guys to become more lazy (again and again)...

Radioamateur is not Citizen band!

We have an exam to complete, and CW completes the HF access!

We must to keep it!

73's de Steph, F5NZY
http://www.qsl.net/f5nzy
Posted by F5NZY on 2002-12-25

The Answer is Yes, according to the IARU

To F5NZY the question was asked and answered by the IARU. At their last meeting they are pushing ahead to remove the morse requirment from the minimum amateur requirements.

I quote "8. The Council affirmed its policy on Morse code as adopted in Guatemala City in October 2001, supporting the removal of Morse code testing as an ITU mandatory requirement for an amateur license to operate on frequencies below 30 MHz. "

Please let your feeling and thoughts be heard by those that attend the IARU and the WARC. Go to http://www.iaru.org for more details.

73
Scott
Posted by K9PO on 2002-12-25

NO!!!!

I think CW should NOT be removed from the tests because, if they do more and more people will get their HF ticket and not want to or even think about doing CW. Also if that happens Ham radio will slowly turn in to a CB type deal, and I don't want that to happen. I think CW should stay on the tests. I learned CW and I now operate 25 to 35 wpm why can't other people do it to. I think if people want the ham ticket they must have to learn CW, and earn the privilage to be a Ham radio operator, not take a written test and get the HF bands without CW. 73's Eddie KG4LFZ
Posted by KG4LFZ on 2002-12-25

ITU and CW

The ITU item is, should code (send, receive) capability be an international requirement for HF operation. The manner of testing and WPM requirements will not be considered. Each country will still be able to require a code test if they want it.
The posted answers are the same as for having a no code tech ticket. In fact, they are the same as for the transition from spark transmitters to tube transmitters, AM to SSB etc. Just look over old QST magazines. Some how, the changes do happen, even though the majority of hams are against it. It seems to be the behind the scenes political factors that count the most.
73 ad6lr
Posted by AD6LR on 2002-12-25

Drop the theory requirements too.

Go ahead, make it CB. Thats what it is all about isnt it? More people, er "hams" equal more money spent and ham radio has become an industry. Its funny that people cannot learn 26 letters of the alphabet but can cram the 500 question exam pool. Maybe ham radio needs to die and let the howling CBers have it. So sad nobody is willing to put forth MINIMUM effort for a lousy ham ticket. Just give'em a license.. mail them one because they probably too lazy to go somewhere to pick one up. Technology will kill ham radio, not keeping CW alive.
Posted by WB4M on 2002-12-25

He Can't Get No

Dennis KG4RUL: Your post is interesting and provocative. Bet if you were willing to earn a degree in Electrical Engineering as an alternative to passing a CW exam, that still wouldn't be acceptable to the boys who just won't let go of yesterday. I for one hope to work you on HF just as soon as possible.
Posted by W8CVE on 2002-12-25

CW Examination

I came across this sight by chance and expressed my view on the need not to continue a CW examination to get on HF. What a great surprise to see the running results; more wishing to keep the CW exam than those looking in my view towards the future!

Amazed by this result I joined up and here are my thoughts.

Here on the Isle of Man we follow the requirements of the UK licensing regulations and for the last 12mths we have had a new examination called the Foundation License. This requires about 12hrs of tuition and about 10-15 mins. appreciating CW. The candidates have a sheet with letters and numbers printed next to the dots and dashes for Morse code. The tutor sends a character and the student looks it up from his sheet and writes the character down. A few mins. of this and the roles are reversed, with the student sending the characters to the tutor. This appreciation of CW is all that is required for the new MD3s (or M3s in England) to operate HF (10-watt commercial rig). A multiple choice exam paper also has to be passed.

There are now well over 5000 new hams able to operate HF as a result of the Foundation License. They are generally good operators and their ability to obtain full benefit from the hobby is not effected by their lack of CW. A great number of these new hams are now learning CW and spend plenty of time listening to it on the air, the requirement to listen and learn is very effective.

So lets all breed new blood into the hobby and allow people to learn about Ham radio whilst enjoying the opportunity to transmit themselves.

John GD0NFN (Foundation Tutor – Isle of Man)


Posted by GD0NFN on 2002-12-25

He Can't Get No

Mike / W8MW,

Give me a break. 5 wpm Morse is child's play. My oldest son passed 1A at age 12. I never got him through the technical and he has since lost interest (he's 17 now). Now my youngest is showing some interest. I'll bet he can pass 1A in less than a 2 months.

Codeless ARS is around the corner. Will it be better? I doubt it. Will there be more interest? Nope. A bunch of people will upgrade. Just take a look at the NCI site--a bunch of new Extra-class amateurs.

The hell with it--just have one level of ticket. Call it whatever you want. Full access to everything--all bands, modes, and power levels.




Posted by K4NR on 2002-12-25

CW

Let them do away with CW it makes more room for us whom like CW. I have loved CW since 1948. Maybe we should expand CW section upwards in the band.
Posted by KC7UP on 2002-12-25

I think you should be able to get on hf for without cw, but only for six months on a non-renawable license, then if you want to upgrade you do. I think this is how the old novice licenses worked
Posted by KD5SCG on 2002-12-25

Time for a change

It is past the time for a change in the
testing requirements. INSTEAD of CW, ADD
new questions about digital modes of communications, etc. Make the new testing
questions relative to today's operations.
Not those of 70 years ago......
Posted by K9KJM on 2002-12-24

code or no code

its been around this long, why not just keep it some of us still use code,KD4FTB
Posted by KD4FTB on 2002-12-24

COED/NO CODE

Well here we go again! I have a simple Tec (no code) lic. and am glad to say that I will NEVER, EVER upgrade! #1-I do not see any of the 'OLD SCHOOL' prove to me that learning 5, 10, 15 wpm of code will make me a better op. #2-How many of the 'OLD SCHOOL' have operated on Sats. (UO-14, AO-27, RS-10-11, RS-12-13, etc) and if they have, why is it that you do not hear anyone say that it should be included on the basic lic. exams? #3-I know of some 'EXTRA CLASS' lic. holders that can not even manually tune a radio to get on the air (lic. was handed to them as a favor and loyalty to the VEC that did this is expected in return)! #4-I do enjoy 'HAM RADIO' until I hear all of the 'CRAP' on the HF bands-stations tuning up over each other in hopes to shut down so that they can have thier favorite freq. for that all important and cannot move over 5-10 kHz QSO. #5-The hams will lose parts or all of the brand freq. if we do not start speaking as one and to welcome the 'NEW BE's' into the hobby and stop cramming down their throats the fact that code or no code is not the issue. #6-That all important HF AMP is used as a status more thatn all of those 'EXTRA CLASS holders want to admit and used to clear out the freqs. for 10-15 kHz on both sides of them. That is why I listen to the Sats. and make contacts and enjoy the pleasures of not having someone tell me that I don't know what I'm doing or that I'm QRM on their freq. etc. WAKE UP!!!
Posted by N1ZKB on 2002-12-24

A new test idea?

I only operate CW but don't feel that there should me a mandatory Morse proficiency test to gain HF privileges.

The sole purpose of a licensing test should be to help insure that a prospective amateur radio operator is minimally equipped with the knowledge to operate safely, legally, and courteously.

Ham radio has become much more technically complex and diverse over the past 40 years so there are many areas of interest or technology that can be pursued. Although CW can be fun and challenging, and is a very important part of amateur radio’s heritage, it is an archaic mode in that it is no longer used except as a form of amusement for some hams. I would propose that the licensing test be changed to have one core test on rules, procedures, and basic radio electronics, and some number of other tests on specific areas of interest, such as; RF electronics, antennas and propagation, digital modes, emergency communications, ...including one on CW. To get licensed, a prospective ham would have to pass the core test and some number (maybe 2 or 3) of the interest area tests. The license obtained would not be restricted to only those areas tested, as it would be assumed that if the ham had the wherewithal to pass the given tests, they would be capable of pursuing other areas on their own.

I believe this type of testing would help the hobby grow with new qualified operators.

Lou W7DZN

Posted by W7DZN on 2002-12-24

Background



The FCC cannot remove the code requirment from Amateur privelages arbitarily. The code requirment is part of our treaty with the rest of the world and the body that decides what the minimum requirments are, the UN (the ITU is and orgainzation in the UN). That happens at the WARC and the Internation Amateur Radio Union (IARU) of which the ARRL is a members is considering having the code requirement removed.

If you have an opinion on this now is the time to be heard. Whether you are for it or against you should be letting your appointed officials know what you want for ham radio. For the ARRL let your division directors know, their job is to take your desires to the ARRL and for this issue it is Dave Sumner who will be the delegate to the IARU and WARC.

Almost 2000 people have responded to this poll so far. Whether you voted pro or con let the ARRL or your national organization know what you want so that they can serve you the membership.

73
Scott
Posted by K9PO on 2002-12-24

WOW!!!

Holy Cow. Having read many of the comments on this subject it is plain to see that most who would like to see the CW requirement abolished are very angry. Many even seem to epitomize the very type of operators they gripe about.
Some comments remark about CW no longer being a necessary requirement for communications. There are still times when ONLY a CW signal will get through. If we are to provide emergency communications we should be trained and ready to be able to meet those needs under all circumstances. Therefore I would not advise the removal of the requirement. Actually, I did not think it wise to lower it in the first place. So be it.
Simply put... if you are happy with the operating priviledges your current license provides, then stay there and be happy. If you want to increase the frequencies available to you, pass the code test. It is not hard and just takes practice. I would be happy to help anyone I can.
For those who are so angry and can't, or have not tried to pass the code test, take heart! For it is possible. There are many like you who have already done so. It only takes one to observe the change in attitudes on the bands over the past couple years to know this is true.

Another reason NOT to abolish the code....
If the requirement were to go away, that would just be a foot in the door for them to say to do away with the CW sub-bands. Why have them if there is no longer a requirement. That would be intollerable!

Everyone have a very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
AB7R
Greg
Oak Harbor, WA

Posted by AB7R on 2002-12-24

CODE/NO CODE

N1ZKB,

If you chose not to upgrade that's your decison. I'm willing to bet as soon as the Morse requirement is lifted, you'll hit the books and upgrade.

I miss RS-13. I was in the shack getting ready to demo it to some people. The Keps were current and I was tuned to the beacon frequency...not a sound. I was hoping to complete WAS on RS-13...oh well...

There are appliance operators at all levels--from Technician to Extra. There is less weight given to electronics theory these days. I know a few really good operators who can't solder a PL-259 (a torch is the best tool BTW). If we had an emergency they would be an asset but you'd have to make sure you had a few people who are technically oriented to set up the stations. Probably not the real intent of the ARS, but we have to work with what we have.

Poor operating exists at all levels as well. It's not limited to 75 meters, but exists on all the bands to some degree. I noted a DX station calling for US/VE stations on 12 phone on 24.989 last weekend. With USB being about 3 KHz wide, the US hams there were out of band. I put out a packet spot and the DX moved down. Nobody had to get rude--just a reminder. As a young ham I made the same mistake tuning up on 7000.2. Another ham came along told me I was out of band. I sent TU es 73, signed, and moved. We have to police ourselves as much as possible.

You have to really overdrive an amp to get a signal 15 KHz wide. Perhaps your front end is being overloaded by a strong signal? My IC-746 is easily overloaded. I just back down the RF gain, turn off the noise blanker, and kick in the narrow filters and all is well. I have a serious station. Gain antennas on 80 - 10 meters, wires on 160 and 30 meters, and a halo on 6 meters. I can run 1.5 KW on any band or mode. If my signal was bad, I would hope that someone would tell me so I could correct the problem.

While I personally think the need for 5 WPM Morse still exists, all you have to do is wait as I think the requirement will be eliminated in the next few years. In the meantime, enjoy the bands that you have.

73 de Tom, K4NR


Posted by K4NR on 2002-12-24

ITU 40 meter band

I assume all of the folks I hear on HF have passed their code. It apparently hasn't helped their manners or morality much, regardless of how fast they are on a straight key or paddle. That said, it doesn't matter that much to me one way or the other, since "I've got mine." Perhaps I should insist that the code is retained since "I had to do it, so everybody else has to do it too." (?) More important to me, would be to acquire 7.100 - 7.300 for the rest of the world so we wouldn't have to operate split on DX and we wouldn't have the +30 dB hetrodynes off of any mega-watt broadcast station. This is a much more important issue that worrying about who adopts code/no-code into their licensing requirements (which each country will decide for itself anyway).
Posted by W4XKE on 2002-12-24

Keep the CW test

No matter how you try to rationalize it, you just want to erradicate CW from the spectrum so there's more space for *your* favorite mode. Greed, pure and simple.

I've only been a ham for 5 years, however my only mode of interest is CW and I want it kept both as a mode and as a license requirement. CW is the common bond on HF and and should remain so.

Merry Christmas and --... ...--
Posted by ADAM12 on 2002-12-24

CW

CW is not my preferred mode of operation but it is intriguing. I believe it serves many functions. Yes it will keep someone off the HF bands if they are not willing to buckle down and learn it. Yes it is a good mode to make contacts when conditions are bad. Yes it is part of tradition. But, worse case should be separate the test. Not eliminate them. If you want to work CW you have to pass the Element 1& 2 but if you want to work just phone you should only have to pass element 2. or 3.and only are allowed on the phone bands. Now I believe the highest-class licenses should know all. They should have to demonstrate a working knowledge of all amateur radio has to offer. Extra is just that going that Extra step.
There are all different kinds of modes because we are all different. Just my two cents and now I’m broke…TNXS Keep the code.

Posted by N3YPI on 2002-12-24

Why is CW testing such an issue?

I agree with the other posters that feel that operating privileges should be based upon testing. If I pass the code test, then grant me CW mode in the appropriate bands. Heck, 30 meters may become an elite band! I am a no-code tech and am working toward my 5WPM. It's more of a time challenge than an intellectual challenge to learn to receive the code. Sending is not very hard (as everyone knows), but picking out code from free air is something that most people are not familiar with. Sure it "proves" my desire to upgrade, but it reminds me a bit of the frat hazing that so many of us may know of. I'm afraid to say that I'm amongst the younger crowd to join the ranks of ham radio at the age of 41. This seems a bit scary for the future of the hobby. By the way, this is a hobby that I'm passionate about, but it is still a hobby. Perspective on this issue seems to be lacking. I think the code requirement should be applied where necessary and dropped otherwise. In my perspective, the future of the hobby will be more assured with the strict code requirement dropped. --- Happy holidays to all and a prosperous new year! '73 KC9AOP
Posted by KC9AOP on 2002-12-24

Why is CW testing such an issue?

I agree with the other posters that feel that operating privileges should be based upon testing. If I pass the code test, then grant me CW mode in the appropriate bands. Heck, 30 meters may become an elite band! I am a no-code tech and am working toward my 5WPM. It's more of a time challenge than an intellectual challenge to learn to receive the code. Sending is not very hard (as everyone knows), but picking out code from free air is something that most people are not familiar with. Sure it "proves" my desire to upgrade, but it reminds me a bit of the frat hazing that so many of us may know of. I'm afraid to say that I'm amongst the younger crowd to join the ranks of ham radio at the age of 41. This seems a bit scary for the future of the hobby. By the way, this is a hobby that I'm passionate about, but it is still a hobby. Perspective on this issue seems to be lacking. I think the code requirement should be applied where necessary and dropped otherwise. In my perspective, the future of the hobby will be more assured with the strict code requirement dropped. --- Happy holidays to all and a prosperous new year! '73 KC9AOP
Posted by KC9AOP on 2002-12-24

Why is CW testing such an issue?

I agree with the other posters that feel that operating privileges should be based upon testing. If I pass the code test, then grant me CW mode in the appropriate bands. Heck, 30 meters may become an elite band! I am a no-code tech and am working toward my 5WPM. It's more of a time challenge than an intellectual challenge to learn to receive the code. Sending is not very hard (as everyone knows), but picking out code from free air is something that most people are not familiar with. Sure it "proves" my desire to upgrade, but it reminds me a bit of the frat hazing that so many of us may know of. I'm afraid to say that I'm amongst the younger crowd to join the ranks of ham radio at the age of 41. This seems a bit scary for the future of the hobby. By the way, this is a hobby that I'm passionate about, but it is still a hobby. Perspective on this issue seems to be lacking. I think the code requirement should be applied where necessary and dropped otherwise. In my perspective, the future of the hobby will be more assured with the strict code requirement dropped. --- Happy holidays to all and a prosperous new year! '73 KC9AOP
Posted by KC9AOP on 2002-12-24

Code or No code ?

Eliminating CW would be a mistake, but if elimination of CW is progress then who are we to stop it ?

It seems to me that it's getting easier and easier to get a license. All the new guys want it all given to them without working for it. Over the years I've heard many complaints/excuses for not learning CW. The sad fact is that the overwhelming majority of them were just too lazy to learn. CW kept me out of ham radio for 18 years, but I learned it and am proud of that accomplishment. Has it made me a better operator ? Maybe.

Perhaps upon removing the CW requirement, a battery of psychological tests should be added to weed out those lacking the tact, manners and good operating habits. Those found unfit could be sent to "re-education centers" or relagated to the good buddy band with the lower forms of radio life.
Posted by N9AVY on 2002-12-24

CW requirement

Keep the 5wpm requirement. Hams are supposed to be a national resource pool for skilled operators, not necessarily a recreation pool for alledged skilled operators. CW, while somewhat out of step with the times, does provide us with a hurdle or challenge and additional skills, useful or otherwise. Additionally, it provides us with a screening device which gives us yet one more degree of separation from the 11M band behaviors.
With CW, we know what we have. Without it, we may not like learning what we will become.
Posted by KA0SOH on 2002-12-23

experienced ops...........

to CURMUDGEON....... I wasn't comparing CW to PSK31 as it applies to experience. I was comparing it to when the signals for CW are unreadable. I have copied PSK31 when it wasn't even audible to me and yet I got a solid printout. Good experience or not, if the op can't hear the CW he/she cannot copy it. Now PSK will get through when CW will not. I think that was the old argument when CW was boosted " when SSB/AM won't get through, CW will". So now that PSK31 has the edge, what is the reason to keep CW as a requirement?
73
Frank
KL7IPV
Posted by KL7IPV on 2002-12-23

It doesn't matter

Should the CW requirement be kept? YES. ham radio is not broken, so why mess with it? Having the CW requirement for licensing has worked for 70 plus years, so why get rid of it. No, the internet won't replace ham radio. There is still the challange of making contacts. Why do you see people fishing, when you can go to the local grocery and buy fish in less time at a cheaper cost? Because they like the challange. Besides, show me one award that is issued to talking to people on the internet.

That being said, the CW requirement will probably be removed. Why? Because of the whining mentality that has taken over our country. Equal opportunity for everyone now has become give me everything without working for it, so I have what everyone else does. Does the CW requirement pose a barrier to ham radio. Absolutely! And one is needed. Does it discriminate between good operators and poor operators. No. But it does involve effort, and that does keep some of the potentially worst operators out of the mix. No matter how bad 75 meters gets, I am sure that it is still one notch above the CB bands.

Also, we don't need more people on HF. We need more people on VHF!! When is the last time someone tried to take away an HF amateur band? They don't want them. The propagation is too uncertain. They want our VHF and UHF bands instead. If we open up HF to everyone-then Technician class licenses will all go to HF, leaving VHF more empty than it is today, and a greater threat to loose our bands.

We don't need ham radio welfare. One of the best Clint Eastwood lines ever was "A man has got to know his limitations." That is so true. If you will not learn CW (noone cannot learn CW)then get over it. Enjoy yourself on VHF and UHF. 6 meters is a great band, with good DX potential during the sunspot peaks. Recognize that you do not want to take the effort to learn CW, so find other things to enjoy besides HF. I don't have the patience nor the skill to build amateur gear. I have learned to live with this, so I buy all of my gear. Some hams probably look down on me because I don't assemble kits or homebrew. Big deal! I don't care what they think. Am I missing out on a fun and exciting part of amateur radio? Probably, but I have learned to live with it. I know my limitations.

As I said before, amateur radio is not broken. Lets not fix it. As to the AARE-where did they get the position that we need to double the number of hams we have now? What is their reasoning for this?
Posted by NE0P on 2002-12-23

Ham radio dying??

Where do we get this idea that ham radio is dying? Listen to the HF bands sometime. There are more active hams than ever, and the license totals also say that. We are not losing out to the internet and things like that. Why just a couple of weeks ago we have a survey about how contester were taking up all of the HF space. Hardly sounds like a dying hobby to me. Just check to contest results (except in QST) where we have more entries and higher contact totals than ever.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Posted by NE0P on 2002-12-23

The CW Requirement

I love CW, and see it as an acquired taste, and an acquired skill. It requires patience and work, but so do all the good things in life that you get better at the more you do. It reminds me of taking up a new sport, or learning to play a musical instrument, or learning a new language. You have to get your skills up to a basic level before you can relax and enjoy yourself. It isn't normal to enjoy being mediocre at anything, and in that sense, if having a CW requirement even of only 5wpm to get in the door, if it gets you going and on the air, that is a start. It's a skill to be proud of, and speaking for myself, I feel I am a much better Ham as a result of the ability I have developed doing CW.
Posted by N5XM on 2002-12-23

Does it matter?

I had to pass a 10 wpm exam to get my license and at the time I thought having the CW requirement was a good thing. But in the age of digital communications, is it really neccessary anymore? I enjoy a good CW QSO every now and then, but listening to some of the fists out there, some you can't even copy. PSK on ther other hand is error free. I spend more time on digital modes than anything else. I don't think the code requirement should be dropped altogether, but rather limit those who don't take the code test to a small voice or digital portion of the HF bands. Don't open up the entire voice sub-band, just a little slice where that license class can QSO together. Sooner or later they will want more and then they should have to take either a CW test or an advanced theory & regs exam. Here in Canada 5 wpm gets you on all HF bands. Is the day in sight when no-code on HF comes to Canada? I think it will be sooner than most people think. I got my ticket to get away from the idiots on CB, but now they are making it easier for them to join us. The exam portion must stay so it isn't a simple case of putting your money down and walking away with a license.
Posted by VE3TMT on 2002-12-23

To N4ZOU

"Without CW, it's just another CB radio."

Is that Cw Bonehead radio?

Technical ability counts for more than "45 WPM coping ability" to further this hobby!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Posted by N2MR on 2002-12-23

To CW or not to CW

I passed my tech test and my general theory the same day, I'm currently working on learing cw... I see both sides of this argument. I would like to see no-codes allowed some operation in HF, but limited to digital modes, and FM operation in the 10 meter band. Keep the CW requirement for SSB and AM phone emissions in the HF bands. Let them experience some of the HF bands with modes that they are already familiar with using (yes I know there are ssb and am in the vhf/uhf bands but that's not what most techs get immediately into); with the added excitement of some real DX contacts. Make them hunger for the upgrade. I saw that someone wanted the technical exams watered down, to which I disagree. Keep them the same or make them harder. There are practical reason for learing theory and practical application of the theory. Especially when some people have KW amps, and high gain antenna's... I think you should really know what you are doing and what's going on when you start pumping over a 100KW plus ERP into the atmosphere... or your neighbors bedroom. :-)

They'll do what they want, but I don't think the code requirement should die, just ease some modes of operation away from code. Like I said, digital/RTTY modes and FM in 10M. To me that's is a decent compromise.

73,
KC8UZK
Posted by N8AML on 2002-12-23

To CW or not to CW

I passed my tech test and my general theory the same day, I'm currently working on learing cw... I see both sides of this argument. I would like to see no-codes allowed some operation in HF, but limited to digital modes, and FM operation in the 10 meter band. Keep the CW requirement for SSB and AM phone emissions in the HF bands. Let them experience some of the HF bands with modes that they are already familiar with using (yes I know there are ssb and am in the vhf/uhf bands but that's not what most techs get immediately into); with the added excitement of some real DX contacts. Make them hunger for the upgrade. I saw that someone wanted the technical exams watered down, to which I disagree. Keep them the same or make them harder. There are practical reason for learing theory and practical application of the theory. Especially when some people have KW amps, and high gain antenna's... I think you should really know what you are doing and what's going on when you start pumping over a 100KW plus ERP into the atmosphere... or your neighbors bedroom. :-)

They'll do what they want, but I don't think the code requirement should die, just ease some modes of operation away from code. Like I said, digital/RTTY modes and FM in 10M. To me that's is a decent compromise.

73,
KC8UZK
Posted by N8AML on 2002-12-23

keep the 5 wpm

Look It is not going 2 be a big CB free for all I have listened to shortwave for a long time and many times I have heard some rather foul conversations (good and bad ppl on all modes) BUT keeping the code is a good idea IT is a challenge to get it down I am almost there. There are many code learning programs out there, If you want to get on the bands bad enough then you will make the effort.But I do agree about 1 thing the cost of hf gear is huge I am not a billionaire I am on a budget I pay on a house a car and child support So if we really want to keep ham radio alive BRING THE COST OF RADIOS DOWN this will kill ham radio before CW.
Posted by KB9PET on 2002-12-23

To N4ZOU

"Without CW, it's just another CB radio."

Is that Cw Bonehead radio?

Technical ability counts for more than "45 WPM coping ability" to further this hobby!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Posted by N2MR on 2002-12-23

CW

ZUT!
Posted by WQ5O on 2002-12-23

CW

May CW live forever!
Posted by WU2M on 2002-12-23

WHO CARES?

A lame-o 5wpm code test does not magically create a better operator or stimulate any extra interest in the mode.

CW is just one of the many "Either ya get it, or ya don't!" facts of life....


Blake N4GI




Posted by N4GI on 2002-12-23

Time for a Change

I have held a B class licence for 8 yrs & without the foundation licence I would have gone QRT years ago. As a shift worker VHF / UHF in daytime is dead with evening operations restricted by family life. l Love Dxing on 6m with worlwide contacts when conditions are right. Not always easy when you flick the radio on when you have a spare 10 minutes or so with a young family to look after. I simply do not have the time to learn cw. Without Hams talking to people in different lands how are we going to make radio exciting to our children & share the pleasure with them. Certainly not by calling CQ for hours without a response. My father got me hooked , now its my time.73's G7TUG / M3TUG
Posted by G7TUG on 2002-12-23

SOMEONE GETS RICHER..WANNA BET?

Hey folks GET REAL! Do you really think that
what we think matters here? Remember? What was
the old saying..."Money talks bulls..t walks"
Who do you really think stands to profit from this
move? The FCC? HAMS? aw now.. you know..
KENWOOD+YAESU+ICOM+TENTEC anyone who makes HF
rigs stands to make a nice FAT profit when the
NO-CODE HF comes online..and WHO do you think
REALLY has the most pull with the FCC? ..
remember NEXTEL ??
73's phil
Posted by KU4AB on 2002-12-23

Why???

How many ways can the issue of code,no code be presented? There have not been, to this point, any real answers as to whether cw remains a needed test element,just many strong opinions. Change is on the way. Either make the best of it or go qrt,please. You know what they say,"If you are handed lemons,make lemonade".I guess we'll see in 2003.

By taking the position of not accepting change,one could make the argument that all driver's tests issued after the discontinuation of hand signals are not real driver's licenses. Same lame logic I seem to hear on the amateur bands."I had to do it"mentality. I respect the tradition of cw,I feel we need to be more realistic about the importance of it as opposed to an earlier time. I mean it used to be the only game in town. Now there are many other modes. If we as hams do not utilize what we have,there may be a different argument one day. We are our own worst enemies when it comes to getting new people involved in amateur radio. When a potential ham hears all the bickering among code proponents and those with opposite views, well who would want to be in something like that? The biggest obstacle getting more hams active in amateur radio today is hams themselves,not the cw requirement.
Posted by KB5LPA on 2002-12-23

Compromise

KC8UZK,

Compromise? A couple of years ago the FCC eliminated the 13 and 20 wpm tests required to upgrade to General / Advanced and Extra.

Was that not enough of a compromise?

Despite my opinion, I think the "CW" requirement will be eliminated. Perhaps not this round, but soon. (Once that happens all the new hams will want space for SSB operations and we'll be seeing the new battle cry--the reduction of CW / Digital subbands) Even if the requirement is eliminated, I doubt that CW usage will decline.

I think a good number of the 5 WPM hams are already trying some CW operations. I've noted many slower fists on the bottom ends of the bands.

73 es HNY de Tom, K4NR
Posted by K4NR on 2002-12-23

Keep The 5 WPM!

I also do not wish to see the elimination of the Morse code requirement.The Skill should be preserved and 5 wpm is very basic and not too much to ask of anyone who has an interest in our hobby and service.
Posted by W8VOM on 2002-12-23

CBer's verses Ham Radio

The higher price you pay for anything the more respect you will have for it. To work hard for the privileges you have earned is a good thing. The No code tech's thing brought more CBer's into ham radio. CBer's take a radio and 2000 watt amp and do the very least with it. Hams take a 1 watt radio and do the very most with it. CBer's and Ham are total opposites of each other. In 1965 I was 11 years and tried CB radio for two weeks. Even in 1965 at only 11 years old I found that CBer's to be angry, emotionally sick, verbally abusive, selfish and self-centered people only looking to crap on each other with as much illegal power they can afford. If you make it easy for just anyone to get a ham license then you have just crapped in your own plate.

Bernard Hahn n6zoa
Posted by N6ZOA on 2002-12-23

Changed

I have changed the last line of the question from "Do you agree that this requirement should be passed? "
To "Do you agree that the CW requirement should be removed? "I hope that makes those that whined about the question happy...
Merry Christmas and Happy new year to all online at eHam 73's
Your humble Survey manager...
Posted by VK5LA on 2002-12-22

CW requirement WILL be removed

I believe the CW requirement should be removed...and it will be.
Several factors support this:
a) The ARRL recently joined the American Association of Radio Enthusiasts (AARE), a nonprofit industry trade group formed to promote Amateur Radio and emergency communications outside traditional amateur circles. The ARRL subsequently joined AARE, which says it wants to serve as "the voice of the manufacturers and dealers in radio." Its stated goal is to help ham radio grow and to double the number of hams in five years.
Having more prospective hams who may otherwise not become hams because of the CW requirement to operate HF, would help the ARRL/AARE joint efforts of doubling the number of hams in five years, and help manufacturers sell more gear.
b) More General and Extra licensees would "justify" our use of ham spectrum and would give hams, and the ARRL, a greater voice in FCC spectrum defense issues.
c) No evidence exists that Morse proficiency is an indicator of a better qualified radio communications operator, and serves as an advancement barrier to many otherwise qualified operators.

Wether you support or disagree with the CW test requirement, we must respect each other's opinions, but the requirement will be removed, and we must learn to accept that, not as code/nocode hams taking sides, but embracing change together as one community of fellow ham radio operators.

73
Tommy
KG4TDM


Posted by KG4TDM on 2002-12-22

I beg to differ!

KL7IPV, PSK31 cannot compete with cw when the op is a skilled cw op! PERIOD!
Posted by CURMUDGEON on 2002-12-22

Changed

Well now the question has been re-worded, the result looks different. I voted no to the question the way it was worded originally, but now the question has been re-worded I would vote yes... Think this survey should be scrapped and started again beginning of next year due to the two different questions which will lead to inaccurate results.
Posted by G7VOT on 2002-12-22

Changed

Well now the question has been re-worded, the result looks different. I voted no to the question the way it was worded originally, but now the question has been re-worded I would vote yes... Think this survey should be scrapped and started again beginning of next year due to the two different questions which will lead to inaccurate results.
Posted by G7VOT on 2002-12-22

Here we go again

The FCC is going to do whatever they want to do, regardless of what we post on the "boards". Now for my opinion: I have no problems with keeping the CW test active, if they will consider some modifications to the requirements. Some hams aren't interested in CW, so some change is needed. They had a Tech & a Tech+ license, so offer a General & a General+, Extra & Extra+. What I'm getting at is this- Allow a Tech to upgrade to General for voice ops without code, or to Extra without code. Allow for a class upgrade to gain HF voice priveleges without code priveleges until a code test is passed. Having passed the code test doesn't mean that you are a better ham, or more knowledgeable in electronics. It just means that you have completed the requirements to operate in a different "mode". Keeping hams out of the HF bands because they haven't passed a code test is purely discrimination, regardless of who made this rule. I personally could care less about CW, but I shouldn't be prohibited from upgrading, and gaining voice priveleges on the HF phone-sections. Some have said that if the CW test is eliminated, that ham radio would be nothing more than CB, however I disagree. Anyone can be a CBer, but you still have to pass a test to become a ham, and the rules for operations are strictly enforced, as they should be. I'm not whining because I can't learn code, but upgrading is not currently possible because of the current licensing structure. I know of several people that would make great hams, but aren't interested, because of the current requirements, and the high cost of equipment, mainly HF radios.
It is not my intent to offend anyone, I just feel it is time for a change, if ham radio is to advance.
Flame-proof suit is on!

'73 de KD7EZE
Posted by KD7EZE on 2002-12-22

YES

YES YES YES. Many dont want to learn CW.
And why should they?????
Let the future pass! Dont be stupid!

73's de Chav, lz1abc
Posted by LZ1ABC on 2002-12-22

Who Cares!

Good Grief, yet another space-wasting diatribe on the code / no-code issue. I think the majority of you people need to get a life.


Posted by N3ZKP on 2002-12-22

Why eliminate code?

The code requirement has already been dumbed down to 5WPM. Anyone who is not even willing to take the trouble to learn code at 5 wpm does not have the discipline to be a responsible ham in the international arena of HF.
Posted by WA2DTW on 2002-12-22

Will theory be next?

Why should applicants have to learn electonics theory?
They can simply purchase expensive commercial equipment, follow the manual (on line tutorial??) and get on the air.
Good for the economy.

Posted by WA2DTW on 2002-12-22

Few words

no code, no ham radio
IF the morse requirements will be abolished, HAM radio is dfinitely going to die. If I hadn't had to learn CW for my licence, I wouldn't have done it, and I would probably already be QRT now.
Posted by DJ1YFK on December 21, 2002
////////////////////////////////////////
This just about sums up the STUPIDITY of CW! I (forgive me) have an IQ to pass any test you wish to throw at me. I have seen not ONE logical argument for forcing anyone to learn a STUPID, ARCHAIC, OUTDATED and DISCRIMINATORY mode of OP just "because".
I thought by now either the old "wind breakers" would be dead or in wheel chairs and not continue to allow computers and the internet kill this hobby! I am a man of principal. My principal regarding this is I CAN pass CW, but WILL NOT. In the 20's perhaps being able to recognize emergency CW was helpful but for the love of God the military/USCG do not even use it! I will NOT be forced to "prove" something I would NEVER use and gives me nothing but a headache. This is ignorance at it's most highly developed state! I know this is unkind but may you old farts live to see the damage you have done or contributed to doing to *your* hobby; THEN be buried with your cherished peckers(oh, I mean keys)! I only hope there is a hobby left until the last of you quit pecking away. BTW: As for pro communications, I do it night and day on my job and on my "alloted" bands. There is no "CB chatter" from these lips. Crudely, SCREW CW!
Steve

Posted by KE4-GTI on 2002-12-22

Keep CW

I found that the code test requirement was, well, extremely low and easy. Perhaps everyone won't become a code warrior, but I feel that the CW requirement maintains more than an operational capability: it is a cultural connection to the past.

Michael
WN5T, ex-KD5QZB
Posted by KD5QZB on 2002-12-22

Its free now

Why dont we just charge 10 bucks for the lisc. and be done with it? What joke if they try to dump the 5wpm testing now. I know a number of whiners and lazy people that have been trying to get the code for 2 years around here. BS 5wpm come on people you can learn your ABCs and learn how to tie your shoes or run a computer you can learn 5wpm. It comes down to being lazy and wanting something for nothing.
Posted by W9JCM on 2002-12-22

Code Vs No-Code

Why is it that everytime this question or
subject comes up, there's never any talk
of compromise. It's as though 5WPM is a
make or break entry to HF. And as others
have already posted, knowing CW doesn't
mean you'll be a better operator.
How about allowing No-code Techs a very
small slice of only the 10 meter band at
100 watts or less using any mode.
This gives them the opportunity to work
some DX as well as the incentive to learn
the code. BTW, I'm still learning the code
and will eventually get there. Having the
time and money to buy additional antennas
is another matter.
George ...


Posted by KB9YUR on 2002-12-22

Code Vs No-Code

Why is it that everytime this question or
subject comes up, there's never any talk
of compromise. It's as though 5WPM is a
make or break entry to HF. And as others
have already posted, knowing CW doesn't
mean you'll be a better operator.
How about allowing No-code Techs a very
small slice of only the 10 meter band at
100 watts or less using any mode.
This gives them the opportunity to work
some DX as well as the incentive to learn
the code. BTW, I'm still learning the code
and will eventually get there. Having the
time and money to buy additional antennas
is another matter.
George ...


Posted by KB9YUR on 2002-12-22

Code Vs No-Code

Why is it that everytime this question or
subject comes up, there's never any talk
of compromise. It's as though 5WPM is a
make or break entry to HF. And as others
have already posted, knowing CW doesn't
mean you'll be a better operator.
How about allowing No-code Techs a very
small slice of only the 10 meter band at
100 watts or less using any mode.
This gives them the opportunity to work
some DX as well as the incentive to learn
the code. BTW, I'm still learning the code
and will eventually get there. Having the
time and money to buy additional antennas
is another matter.
George ...


Posted by KB9YUR on 2002-12-22

What will removing the requirement achieve?

Hey ho, here we go again...

One thing I'm curious to know. What is removing the Morse requirement intended to achieve? If it's to revitalise the hobby, I think we'd get better results actively promoting AR to the public, instead of collectively hiding in our shacks. (If there is some other intent behind the push to remove it, please tell me.)

Ask 100 members of the public what they think of the hobby, and more than 99 will say "huh, ham radio? what's that?" rather than lament the code requirement. Removing it won't bring about any long term benefit, and will only bring the hobby closer to CB.

And if you can't bring yourself to enjoy the hobby above 29 MHz, you're fooling yourself if you think you'll find more joy below...

73, Merry Christmas/Hannukah/Saturnalia/whatever Richard VK2SKY

Posted by VK2SKY on 2002-12-22

YES

I operate CW and have for 40 years. But I voted yes to this survey. Even with great respect for the historical significance of this mode, I can't logically conclude that the future well being of amateur radio pivots on demonstrated skill in 100 year old technology. May there always be CW ops who do it because they love it. I'll be one of them as long as I can sit upright in the chair. But I won't use CW to pass judgement on the potential of someone else to become a proficient amateur radio operator.

The greatest damage that's been done to amateur radio to date was confining certain license classes to VHF. New licensees limited to HTs can't help but have their view of ham radio shaped by prevailing attitudes on local repeaters. In many cases they don't fit in to the social structure and exit the hobby before ever experiencing it fully. If that was the way I got into Amateur Radio in 1962, I would have been out in 1962.

I think the future will be shaped in a positive way by providing HF access to all licensees regardless of the mode(s) he or she chooses to operate. Nobody knows whether someone is good "ham material" until the beginner has hands on experience. Content of an exam doesn't determine the kind of operator someone is going to be. The character of the individual does.
Posted by W8CVE on 2002-12-22

KEEP THE CODE REQUIREMENT

Just, shut up, and learn the code.

How else ya gonna be a REAL ham?
Posted by K3UG on 2002-12-22

KEEP THE CODE

I'm not the best CW operater by any stretch of the imagination. That said, I struggled to pass first the 10WPM test we used to have here in Canada, then really busted my chops to get to the 15WPM speed required to be an Advanced operater. It was a great feeling of acomplishment.
I don't use code very much now, but I'm still in awe of those that can operate it with ease.
I feel that if you pocess the knowledge to write complicated computer programs and have a working knowledge of physics, surely to God you can muster up the skills to pass something as simple as a dash and dot language. It has been my experience that many who don't want to learn code, don't value the ham ticket they have.
Code won't make you a better operator, but it will IMHO make you feel you've earned something.
Posted by VE7ABC on 2002-12-22

Remove Code Requirement and Keep our Numbers Strong

I know the opinion to remove the code requirement is in the minority and I open myself up to a large amount of chastizing for supporting it. Relaxing the CW requirement will bring more hams to the hobby and keep our numbers strong. Basic physics and electronic knowledge should be tested as it stands today. This will help insure quality of operators on the air.

Speak of the word "internet" is taboo, but it is a real threat that cannot be ignored. Anyone with an internet connection can log on and talk via chat rooms, instant messanger programs, and live video conferencing worldwide with no licensing requirements or equipment other than a computer people already own. Unfortunately, the medium of ham radio is suffering with the changing technology.

If Ham radio is to survive in the long run and if we want to hold the ground on frequencies we currently enjoy use of, we need more Ham operators on the air. I know several "younger" potential hams who have been interested in HF, but the code requirement is holding them back because it is easier to use the internet instead.

Times are changing, and if we are not flexible enough to change with them, the hobby we all know and love may fall to the way side. CW is no doubt a respected mode of operation, but is it worth keeping CW as a requirement if it is at the same time partly responsible for the reduction of the number of Hams and demise of the hobby?

73
KC2IXR
Posted by KC2IXR on 2002-12-22

Keep Cw

Why is it that cw should be not a step towards there ticket..I think if I can get it at 12 wpm 5 should not be so hard. I would have to think the Ham Dealers would love to see it gone and boost there buisness but I hear enought 10-4 good buddies on there now that have no ticket...So feed your dog a bone and if he don"t know any better he will eat it and suffer results!!! Tim
Posted by VE1FZ on 2002-12-22

The Ol' Code Arg Again

If you are a QRPer or just want to get through and have a DX QSO when conditions stink you'll need CW.

If conditions are good and you run 100W or less, but the pileups are filled with QRO stations - you have a real chance getting that rare DX station with CW. CW pileups are more fun because the QSO's are much faster than voice QSO's - less repeats and phonetic spelling of calls and whatnot.

I'm up to entity #330 and about 65% were CW - all as a 100W "lil' pistol. You can work "ESP" stations with CW - but not with phone.

Learn CW, upgrade to Extra and then you'll really understand why CW is still needed.

The commercial radio arg doesn't hold water. Commercial radio should switch from CW to digital and other modes (i.e satellite), but amateur DX-ing still needs CW.

Oh - CW IS a digital mode by the way!
Posted by KY6R on 2002-12-22

NO!

No, I do not wish to see the elimination of the Morse Code requirement. I say keep the status quo. 73 Merry Christmas & Happy New Year to all (regardless to your "side" of this issue.) de Clinton AB7RG -- "If one does not stick to their opinions they might as well go into politics." -- Clinton Herbert

Posted by AB7RG on 2002-12-21

KEEP CW IN!

I also vote with Clinton (AB7RG)for Morse Code to stay!! Are the code requirements really that tough nowadays? All is much easier and more convenient than it had been. I don't buy the deal that today's code requirement is keeping anyone truly wanting more privileges away. Just my two cents worth. Happy Holidays to all, 73 from Murph..........NF2C.
Posted by NF2C on 2002-12-21

AMBIGUOUS QUESTION !!

The question reads like it was written by a liberal pollster..
Posted by KC8TLQ on 2002-12-21

Keep CW Requirement

If someone can't learn 5 WPM code, that person hasn't earned the privilege of operating on HF. Eliminating the CW requirement would make the HF bands one big CB-like free-for-all. One should have to do more than just memorize a bunch of test questions and answers to get on HF. I never used CW (and probably never will), but I learned enough of it to pass the 5 WPM code requirement. If I can learn code, anyone can. I didn't find it easy, but I did it. There are many No-Code Techs that downright refuse to upgrade because they refuse to learn code. They are waiting for the requirement to be dropped so they can have an easy road to General. I hope that the resolution to drop the CW requirement never passes.
Posted by AG4RQ on 2002-12-21

NO to No Code

The 5 wpm code requirement IS no-code. Anyone who will take the time to just memorize the code can copy at 3 wpm. It's a small jump from there to 5wpm. That's not much of a challenge.

Steve
Posted by N5EOE on 2002-12-21

Not again

Here we go again, they wont be happy until they have "rammed" this LUCKY BAG LICENCE down our throat's
Posted by EI5FK on 2002-12-21

Kill the code Requirement

There is no similar requirement for operating PSK31, RTTY, satellites, etc. Why hang onto this old dog? Personally, I enjoy CW, but to hold it up as some kind of filter to keep CBers out is balderdash. Listen to some of the language from supposedly CW proficient ops on 75 and 20 meters some time. CW didn't keep them off the air.

Let's try to get more peopel involved in amateur radio using the modes that they are interested in. Today, that seems to mean the computer based digital modes. Great fun, and hopefully the newbees will learn good operating techniques from those that they hear on the air. Heck, they may even try CW! Once they see how much fun CW can be, they will then have a reason for putting in the time to learn it.

BTW, I finally got a 40 antenna back up in the air again, and worked South Korea on CW using grayline. A new one for me on CW!




Posted by KC7MM on 2002-12-21

Yes and No to code.

Yes, it should be a requirement in keeping with a tradition that has been in ham radio since it began in 19??. Also, code may be needed at a time when voice operations are impossible to copy. Then again, there are those out there who want to upgrade but just simply cannot comprehend those darn dits/dahs combinations and it's all a blur to them. I'm a General class and I can still relate to that problem. I don't work code at all, but I'm glad I have it under my belt in case I hear a SOS call. I may be able to safe a life someday if they send it "real slow".(hi) 73 and Happy Holidays
Posted by KC5NOD on 2002-12-21

CW Requirement yet again

The CW requirement has already driven too many nails into the Ham Radio coffin...and it is probably too late to do much about it.
I fail to understand the irrational position that being able to pass the/any CW test is related in any way to electronics/radio ability or good operating practices. What I do understand is that the intransigence of the vocal "CW or go away" crowd has accomplished what they set out to do: They have withered the hobby to geezerdom. As is often said: "Be careful what you wish for, as you just might get it".
Good grief...can't you see the problems we face ?? 73, Malcolm Ringel, K3KZ (yes, "real" Extra Class).

Posted by K3KZ on 2002-12-21

CW Requirment.

Without CW, it's just another CB radio.
Posted by N4ZOU on 2002-12-21

CW Requirment.

Without CW, it's just another CB radio.
Posted by N4ZOU on 2002-12-21

Keep CW - add more mode requirements

As a matter of fact, I do think demonstrated knowledge of all modes including PSK, SSB, RTTY, SATS and CW should be a requirement for a General license. Proficiency in all modes should be a condition for Extra. If you want to object to irrelevant and BS requirements, object to the useless technical questions such as the polar coordinates of a complex impedance. The dread of memorizing a lot of cryptic formulas and obscure technical jargon scares away more potential hams than CW.
Posted by K4IA on 2002-12-21

Keep CW Requirements

Without any doubt it would be a mistake
to change the current requirement for
CW for HF operators world wide.
Your survey question is poorly worded.
I suggest you re-write the survey question
and do the survey over again and see if
the results change. A better wording of
the last sentence would be..
Do you agree the present cw requirements
should be eliminated?
Thanks & 73, Bill WS4Y
Posted by WS4Y on 2002-12-21

so , who gains?

I see no reason to retain CW as a requirement for HF any longer. The old argument that CW always got through when voice wouldn't may be true, but CW doesn't always get through when PSK31 will. If we retain the CW requirement, who gains? If it is dropped, who gains? I believe if it is dropped and the testing becomes more technical, then the hobby we know will grow. If it is retained JUST to be a FILTER, no one gains and we lose the growth we all want. We don't need that kind of filtering. Merry Christmas and happy new year to all.
73
Frank
KL7IPV
Posted by KL7IPV on 2002-12-21

QUESTION

This is the worst worded question I have seen. I'm still not sure how to vote, reminds of a song: Yes we have no bananas!
Posted by N9YBP on 2002-12-21

Keep CW

License requirements have been watered down too much already. But no matter how we all feel...the ARRL will proceed with its plan
to continually lower the license requirements
....despite objections from the membership.
Just read this months "It Seems to Us" column
in the front of QST. It reads like "no code"
isn't enough. We are probably in for more
dumbdowns of the written exams as well.
So much for a "representative" organization.
Please, let's not strip every last fiber of accomplishment out of an Amateur Radio license. jc

Posted by N5KY on 2002-12-21

Lets kill ham radio

Let’s give all the old farts what they want... Let’s kill this great hobby because a minority of people want to keep a mode as a form of qualification to HF that is outdated. Let’s look at the competition to HAM radio, you are on it... Yes the internet is the biggest threat to HAM radio because anyone can do it. I mean it's not as if what we are talking about is a total ban on any form of qualification. Any one can go on the internet and have instant world wide communication, and what do you need to pass to do that???? Nothing, Ah I hear you all say, that’s because the internet can't cause interference... WRONG, how about little Johnny sat at his computer messing about suddenly finding him self at the heart of a big mainframe military system, you know the film, War Games... OK I may be taking thing a bit far but I personally am now no longer very active on the Ham bands, it is just too much hassle with regard to rules, regulations, cost and the old farts that annoy me because they won’t embrace change. So come on let’s kill Ham radio and keep the CW requirement.... Long live the free and easy internet....
Posted by G7VOT on 2002-12-21

Lets kill ham radio

Let’s give all the old farts what they want... Let’s kill this great hobby because a minority of people want to keep a mode as a form of qualification to HF that is outdated. Let’s look at the competition to HAM radio, you are on it... Yes the internet is the biggest threat to HAM radio because anyone can do it. I mean it's not as if what we are talking about is a total ban on any form of qualification. Any one can go on the internet and have instant world wide communication, and what do you need to pass to do that???? Nothing, Ah I hear you all say, that’s because the internet can't cause interference... WRONG, how about little Johnny sat at his computer messing about suddenly finding him self at the heart of a big mainframe military system, you know the film, War Games... OK I may be taking thing a bit far but I personally am now no longer very active on the Ham bands, it is just too much hassle with regard to rules, regulations, cost and the old farts that annoy me because they won’t embrace change. So come on let’s kill Ham radio and keep the CW requirement.... Long live the free and easy internet....
Posted by G7VOT on 2002-12-21

Just say "NO" to no-code!
Posted by AD6WL on 2002-12-21

Just say "NO" to no-code!
Posted by AD6WL on 2002-12-21

no code, no ham radio

IF the morse requirements will be abolished, HAM radio is dfinitely going to die. If I hadn't had to learn CW for my licence, I wouldn't have done it, and I would probably already be QRT now.

Posted by DJ5CW on 2002-12-21

Hmmmm

Quite frankly, I don't care much what happens to the international requirement as each administration can still retain a requirement if they so desire.

BTW, why are all the pro-code guys posting on this board. The low end of 40m sounds kind of quiet right now.

:-)
Posted by N0NB on 2002-12-21

WHY NOT?

Sure, why not drop the code, hell while we're at it lets get rid of the general and extra exams, and change the tech exam to ten of fifteen simple questions. HUH? Whad' da' ya' mean I gudda' study and woik for dis'. Hey, we gotta' keep dis' instant gratification ting goin' ya' know. I don't care for CW, but I did it and I'm proud of my acomplishments. It's a shame, seems like today nobody's willing to make any kind of effort for anything, everyone wants a free lunch. Just my opinion, and with that, seasons best to everyone, pro or con. Rusty KE1EH
Posted by KE1EH on 2002-12-21

Here we go again...

It's the same old argument, over and over again. EVERY thread, here and at QRZ, always devolves into a "Code/No-Code" argument, or a "contester/no-contester" argument... or sometimes both. It doesn't matter what the topic started out about. Why not just have a whole week or two's worth of survey about it, huh? Let's just stir up some more heated (but poorly articulated) debate, and surely many insults and flames can be hurled about. I think that maybe we need to amend the old line, the one that say's "all they ever talk about are their medical problems and their lunch plans", and add how "having the code/not having the code" is the ruination of ham radio. Fire and brimstone aplenty! TALK ABOUT SOMETHING POSITIVE FOR ONCE! Please? :)
Posted by N1VLQ on 2002-12-21

the code once again

I don't think we have much to do with it. I got my ticket Tech in 1978 and took the test required then. I up graded finally in 2001 to general(grandfathered) then extra in the first week of Feb a week and a day apart. I have years of experiance in electronics, but I became inactive due to the code requirement. I now have full priveleges and don't remember most of the code. I work satalites, psk 31, ssb on HF, fm and weak signal 2 meter. I have hf and vhf mobiles and run wher and what I want. The code was always keeping me from up grading, and it took me a solid 5 months to pas the 5 wpm. I was inactive for 20 years due to the code. I love Ham radio and don't see the ned for code. Just my opinion, but I value it quite highly... 73 Tom N6AJR
Posted by N6AJR on 2002-12-21

the code..

sorry about the poor typing.. I even proof read it.. oh well.. 73 tom N6AJR
Posted by N6AJR on 2002-12-21

NO! Keep The Code, what of it that is still left, that is...

I hope WARC doesn't drop the code requirement. If it weren't for the international requirement, the FCC would have assuredly dropped it altogether with the structure change of 2000. I somewhat agree with dropping General to 5 wpm but Not keeping Extra at at least 15 or so was an outrage, IMHO. I don't begrudge the new hf ops that take advantage of the new speeds, I just disagree with the change, for what it's worth...admittedly not much. For those who equate the code requirement with having to become proficient with PSK 31 or APRS or whatever, while your point is taken, there are some big differences in your examples and in Morse proficiency. With the "other" digital modes, you need complex add-on gear to make it work. This add-on gear may be a considerable drain on limited battery power sources needed for emergency equipment as well as unreliable in harsh field or emergency environments. Morse can be sent with the simplest of equipment and may even work when the phone feature of a transceiver is out, perhaps due to a faulty mic wire or problems in the xmit audio section. A working knowledge of Morse may make you a more valuable ham / operator one day. I, too, was anti-code in my younger days as a Novice in the 70's. Having had to learn it twice, I have developed an appreciation for it and have had to use it several times when phone wouldn't reach through the noise. I am now glad to have learned it. For those who say it is not a filter, you are right.....partially. Yes, some real dipsticks manage to pass the code tests, the old higher speed tests and especially the 5 wpm rate. However, think of all the countless dipsticks who are too lazy or dumb to pass even the 5 wpm test thawe don't have to suffer with on the bands. Some repeaters are loaded with these guys who indeed, sound just slightly above the intelligence level of the "mercy me good buddy, great day there good buddy" types from 11 meters in the 70's. Hey, they DID pass the written exam so give them due credit, however small. This is in no way meant to slur the many excellent oerators that I have the pleasure of knowing who are "no-code" Techs and who are a joy to talk to, listen to, and to have as friends. Just about all of them have chosen, for a myriad of reasons, to remain at their current license class, indefinitely and I respect their decision as much as I do these fine hams. 73, Ray KV4BL
Posted by KV4BL on 2002-12-21

Don't Matter to me

It doesn't matter to me if it's a requirement any longer or not. I still enjoy using CW, along with the newer modes. Do you want to learn something new ? Learn code. Play with PSK. Do some satelite work. Repair your own rig. Build an antenna. Play, experiment, learn, share.
Posted by KE3GK on 2002-12-21